DRAFT TEXT CALLING FOR REVIEW OF NUCLEAR DOCTRINES, INTRODUCED IN DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE
Press Release
GA/DIS/3126
DRAFT TEXT CALLING FOR REVIEW OF NUCLEAR DOCTRINES, INTRODUCED IN DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE
19981102 Eleven Other Drafts Introduced Concerning, among Others, Nuclear Testing, Middle East, Regional Disarmament, Small Arms in AfricaThe Assembly would call for a review of nuclear doctrines and, in that context, for immediate and urgent steps to reduce the risks of unintentional and accidental use of nuclear weapons, according to one of 12 draft resolutions introduced this afternoon in the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security), as it concluded its thematic discussion and consideration of all disarmament and security-related draft resolutions.
By further terms of the new text, entitled "reducing nuclear danger" and introduced by the representative of India, the Assembly would request Member States to provide the Secretary-General with information on the measures taken to implement the resolution or on their efforts to promote the objectives envisaged in the draft.
Under a draft resolution on nuclear testing, introduced by the representative of Canada, the Assembly would express grave concern over and strongly deplore the recent nuclear tests conducted in South Asia. It would note that the countries concerned had declared moratoriums on further testing and had expressed their willingness to enter into legal commitments not to conduct any further nuclear tests, and would reiterate the need for such legal commitments to be expressed in legal form, by signing and ratifying the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.
The Assembly would urge the nuclear-weapon States to stop immediately the qualitative improvement, development, production and stockpiling of nuclear warheads and their delivery systems and, as interim measures, to immediately de-alert and deactivate their nuclear weapons, by the terms of another nuclear disarmament text, introduced by the representative of Myanmar.
By its further terms, the Assembly would call on the nuclear-weapon States, pending a total ban on nuclear weapons through a nuclear weapons convention, to agree on an internationally and legally binding instrument not to be the first to use those weapons. It would reiterate its call to those States to undertake the step-by-step reduction of the nuclear threat and to
First Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
carry out effective nuclear disarmament measures with a view to the total elimination of those weapons within a specified timeframe.
The Assembly would call upon the only State in the Middle East that was not party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) to accede to the Treaty without further delay, by the terms of a draft text introduced by the representative of Egypt. It would call upon that State not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons, to renounce possession of nuclear weapons, and to place all its unsafeguarded nuclear facilities under full-scope International Atomic Agency (IAEA) safeguards.
The Assembly would urge all concerned States to continue making it possible to have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of the non-nuclear-weapon States of the region of Central and Eastern Europe, according to a draft resolution on regional disarmament, introduced by the representative of Belarus.
The representative of Pakistan also introduced a text on regional disarmament, by which the Assembly would decide to give urgent consideration to conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels and request the Conference on Disarmament, as a first step, to consider the formulation of principles that could serve as a framework for regional agreements on conventional arms control.
According to the text concerning African security, introduced by the representative of Mali, the Assembly would encourage the Secretary-General to curb the illicit circulation of small arms and to collect such arms in the affected States that so requested, and encourage the establishment in the Sahara-Sahelian subregion of national commissions against small arms proliferation.
By the terms of one of five draft resolutions introduced by the representative of South Africa, on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, the Assembly would urge the international community to devote part of the resources gained from disarmament agreements to economic and social development, with a view to reducing the ever-widening gap between developed and developing countries. According to the second draft, the Assembly would reiterate the importance of United Nations regional activities, which could be promoted substantially by the maintenance and revitalization of the three United Nations Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament.
Under the third Non-Aligned Movement-sponsored draft resolution, the Assembly would decide, subject to the emergence of a consensus on its objectives and agenda, to convene a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament, and recommend that the item be included in the 1999 agenda of the United Nations Disarmament Commission, which should promote agreement on the agenda and timing of the special session.
First Committee - 1b - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
By the terms of a fourth Non-Aligned Movement-sponsored text, the Assembly would call upon States to adopt unilateral, bilateral, regional and multilateral measures to ensure that scientific progress was applied to international security and disarmament without detriment to the environment.
According to a fifth draft, the Assembly would renew its call to all States to strictly observe the principles and objectives of the 1925 Geneva Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gasses, and of Bacteriological Method of Warfare, and reaffirm the vital necessity of upholding its provisions.
Statements were also made by the representatives of Nepal, Brazil, Austria, Ecuador, Philippines, Germany, Liechtenstein, Peru, Viet Nam, China, Israel, Chile, Poland, South Africa, Iran, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iraq and the Russian Federation. The representatives of both the Russian Federation and Poland spoke again in exercise of the right of reply.
The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. Tuesday, 3 November, to begin taking action on all disarmament and security-related draft resolutions.
Committee Work Programme
The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this afternoon to conclude its thematic discussion and consideration of all disarmament and security-related draft resolutions.
The Committee is expected to hear the introduction of draft resolutions concerning: reducing nuclear danger; nuclear testing; nuclear disarmament; risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East; special session of the General Assembly on disarmament; conventional arms control at regional and subregional levels; regional disarmament; United Nations Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament; assistance to States for curbing illicit traffic in small arms and collecting them; United Nations Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa; and relationship between disarmament and development.
By the terms of a draft resolution on the United Nations Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa (document A/C.1/53/L.4) the Assembly would reaffirm its support for the promotion of regional and subregional confidence-building measures aimed at furthering disarmament, non-proliferation and the peaceful settlement of disputes in Central Africa. States members of the Standing Advisory Committee that had not yet done so would be invited to sign and ratify the Non-Aggression Pact, whose entry into force would effectively contribute to the prevention of conflicts in Central Africa.
The Assembly would reaffirm its support for the programme of work of the Standing Advisory Committee, adopted at its organizational meeting in 1992, and welcome with satisfaction the Advisory Committee's activities for the period 1998-1999, which focused on, among others, strengthening the subregional participation in peacekeeping operations through joint military exercises and establishing an early warning mechanism for Central Africa, based in Libreville. The Assembly would appeal to Member States and to governmental and non-governmental organizations to contribute to the Advisory Committee's trust fund.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Gabon, on behalf of the States members of the United Nations Standing Advisory Committee in Security Questions in Central Africa.
A draft text on assistance to States for curbing the illicit traffic in small arms and collecting them (document A/C.1/53/L.7), would have the Assembly encourage the Secretary-General to curb the illicit circulation of small arms and to collect such arms in the affected States that so requested, with the support of the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa and in close cooperation with the Organization of African Unity (OAU). Also, the Assembly would encourage the establishment of
First Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
national commissions in the Sahara-Sahelian subregion against the proliferation of small arms, and it would invite the international community to support their smooth functioning.
The Assembly would note that, as part of its efforts to halt the flow of small arms into Mali and the Saharo-Sahelian subregion, the Mali Government oversaw the destruction, at the 1996 "Flame of Peace" ceremony at Timbuktu in Mali, of thousands of small arms of ex-combatants of the armed movements of northern Mali. It would also take note of the conclusions of the ministerial consultation on the proposed moratorium on the import, export and manufacture of light weapons in the region, held at Bamako in March, 1997.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Japan, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal and Togo.
By the terms of a draft resolution sponsored by India on reducing nuclear danger (document A/C.1/53/L.16), the Assembly would call for a review of nuclear doctrines and for immediate and urgent steps to reduce the risks of unintentional and accidental use of nuclear weapons. The Assembly would request Member States to provide the Secretary-General with information on the measures taken to implement the resolution or on their efforts to promote the objectives envisaged in the draft. It would further request him to report on the draft's implementation at its next session, and it would decide to include the item in its provisional agenda.
By the terms of a draft text, sponsored by Egypt on behalf of the League of Arab States, on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/53/L.21), the Assembly would call upon Israel, the only State in the region that was not party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to accede to the Treaty without further delay, and not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons. It would also call on Israel to renounce possession of nuclear weapons, and to place all its unsafeguarded nuclear facilities under full-scope International Atomic Agency (IAEA) safeguards as an important confidence-building measure among all States of the region and as a step towards enhancing peace and security.
The Assembly would request the Secretary-General to report to the Assembly at its fifty-fourth session on the implementation of the draft and decide to include the item in that session's provisional agenda.
Under a draft resolution on nuclear testing (document A/C.1/53/L.22), the Assembly would express grave concern over and strongly deplore the recent nuclear tests conducted in South Asia. It would note that the countries concerned had declared moratoriums on further testing and had expressed their willingness to enter into legal commitments not to conduct any further nuclear tests. The Assembly would reiterate the need for such legal commitments to be
First Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
expressed in legal form, by signing and ratifying the Comprehensive Nuclear- Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT).
The draft resolution is sponsored by Australia, Canada and New Zealand.
A draft text sponsored by Belarus on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.23) would have the Assembly urge all the concerned States to exert efforts so that it remained possible to have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of the non-nuclear-weapon States of the region of Central and Eastern Europe. It would call upon those States and other concerned States to abide by their nuclear non-proliferation obligations under existing multilateral and bilateral agreements. The Assembly would decide to include the item in the provisional agenda of its fifty-fifth session.
A draft resolution sponsored by South Africa, on behalf of the Non- Aligned Movement, on the United Nations Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.25) would have the Assembly reiterate the importance of United Nations activities at the regional level to increase the stability and security of its Member States, which could be promoted substantially by the maintenance and revitalization of the three regional centres.
The Assembly would reaffirm that it was useful for those regional centres to carry out dissemination and educational programmes aimed at changing basic attitudes with respect to peace and security and disarmament. It would appeal to Member States, as well as to international and non- governmental organizations and foundations, to voluntarily contribute to the regional centres in their respective regions. It would request the Secretary- General to provide all necessary support, within existing resources, to the regional centres and to report to the Assembly at its fifty-fourth session on the implementation of the present text.
Another draft resolution sponsored by South Africa, on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, on the relationship between disarmament and development (document A/C.1/53/L.27) would have the Assembly urge the international community to devote part of the resources gained from disarmament and arms limitation agreements to economic and social development, with a view to reducing the ever-widening gap between developed and developing countries.
The Assembly would invite all Member States to communicate to the Secretary-General, by 15 April 1999, their views and proposals for the implementation of the Action Programme adopted at the International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development. It would also request the Secretary-General to continue to take action, through appropriate organs and within available resources, for the implementation of the Action Programme.
First Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
A draft resolution on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.34) would have the Assembly call upon States to conclude agreements for nuclear non-proliferation, disarmament and confidence-building measures at the regional and subregional levels. The Assembly would stress that sustained efforts were needed, within the framework of the Conference on Disarmament and under the umbrella of the United Nations, to make progress on the entire range of disarmament issues, and affirm that global and regional approaches to disarmament complemented each other and should, therefore, be pursued simultaneously to promote regional and international peace and security.
The Assembly would support and encourage efforts aimed at promoting confidence-building measures at the regional and subregional levels in order to ease regional tensions and to further disarmament and nuclear non- proliferation measures at those levels. It would decide to include an item on regional disarmament in the fifty-fourth Assembly session.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Armenia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bolivia, Colombia, Egypt, Indonesia, Mali, Nepal, Niger, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tunisia and Turkey.
According to a text on conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/53/L.35), the Assembly would decide to give urgent consideration to those issues and request the Conference on Disarmament, as a first step, to consider the formulation of principles that could serve as a framework for regional agreements on conventional arms control. The Assembly looked forward to a report of the Conference on that subject and would decide to include the item in the provisional agenda of its fifty-fourth session.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Bangladesh, Czech Republic, Italy, Mexico, Nepal, Norway, Pakistan, Spain and The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
By the terms of a draft resolution on nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.47), the Assembly would urge the nuclear-weapon States to stop immediately the qualitative improvement, development, production and stockpiling of nuclear warheads and their delivery systems and, as interim measures, to immediately de-alert and de-activate their nuclear weapons. It would call on those States, pending a total ban on nuclear weapons through a nuclear weapons convention, to agree on an internationally and legally binding instrument not to be the first to use those weapons.
The Assembly would reiterate its call to the nuclear-weapon States to undertake the step-by-step reduction of the nuclear threat and to carry out effective nuclear disarmament measures with a view to the total elimination of those weapons within a specified time frame. It would call for the conclusion, as a first step, of a universal and legally binding multilateral
First Committee - 6 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
agreement committing all States to the objective of the total elimination of nuclear weapons, and for the convening of an international conference on nuclear disarmament at an early date.
By further terms, it would reiterate its call upon the Conference on Disarmament to establish, on a priority basis, an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament to commence negotiations early in 1999, aimed at concluding a nuclear weapons convention. It would welcome the establishment in the Conference of an ad hoc committee to ban the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons, and urge the speedy conclusion of a universal and non- discriminatory convention in that regard. It would also welcome the establishment of an ad hoc committee to negotiate negative security assurances for non-nuclear-weapon States and urge the pursuit of those efforts on a priority basis.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Algeria, Bangladesh, Burundi, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Kenya, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Thailand, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
A draft resolution sponsored by South Africa, on behalf of the Non- Aligned Movement, on a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.50) would have the Assembly decide, subject to the emergence of a consensus on its objectives and agenda, convene the special session. It would endorse the report of the 1998 substantive session of the Disarmament Commission and recommend that the item be included in its 1999 agenda, which should promote agreement on the agenda and timing of the special session.
By further terms, the Assembly would decide to include the item in the provisional agenda of its fifty-fourth session and, subject to the outcome of the deliberations at the Commission's 1999 substantive session, set an exact date for and decide on organizational matters relating to the special session.
Introduction of Draft Resolutions
MYA THAN (Myanmar) introduced a draft resolution on nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.47), which, he said, had been tabled annually since 1995. Its wide support was reflected in its co-sponsorship, which was at 51 States and growing. The resolution adopted at the Assembly's fiftieth session was the first resolution that had introduced, among others, the concept of a phased programme of reductions in the nuclear arsenals of nuclear-weapon States, leading to total elimination of nuclear weapons.
First Committee - 7 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
He said the draft had also been the first to introduce the concept of the need to commence multilateral negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament, as a parallel complement to bilateral negotiations, and the concept of de-emphasizing the role of nuclear weapons. Those main concepts formed the core of the text, whose strength lay in its: comprehensiveness; reflection of the positions of the Non-Aligned Movement; vision of a nuclear- weapon-free world through the implementation of a phased programme of nuclear disarmament; and flexibility.
The text represented the views of the Non-Aligned Movement, although it was not a formal Movement draft, he said. Differences persisted between the positions of the Movement and other like-minded countries and the nuclear- weapon States. Mindful of the fact that the Committee, unlike the Conference on Disarmament, was a deliberative forum where Member States projected their political positions, the text attempted to project the position of the overwhelming majority of Member States and the aspirations of the international community. Their views were presented in a realistic, rather than "watered-down", manner.
DHRUB P. SHARMA (Nepal), said the traditional focus of disarmament had been on weapons of mass destruction. But, the international community could not ignore the fact that small arms and light weapons had caused greater devastation and misery. Those weapons obstructed economic development and the reconstruction of post-conflict situations. Moreover, their indiscriminate use also constrained regional disarmament programmes, such as the demobilization of ex-combatants and reductions in military industrial complexes.
He said the close relationship between the illicit proliferation of small arms and other criminal activities clearly underscored the need to focus on those weapons. A holistic approach was necessary in dealing with the problem and concurrent regional and international efforts were required. He was appreciative of United Nations efforts in creating awareness about the evil consequences of the proliferation of those weapons.
His delegation, he added, was encouraged by the decision of the Secretary-General to establish the mechanism entitled coordinating action on small arms (CASA), charged to coordinate the use of small arms, including their illicit manufacturing and trafficking. The regional seminar devoted to small arms, which was held in Kathmandu last year, made a very useful contribution in mobilizing public support for checking the proliferation of those weapons. His country looked forward to the convening of an international conference on the problem.
He said his country recognized that some progress had been made in checking the small arms scourge, but a far greater concerted effort was needed. To that effect, it would welcome an in-depth United Nations study of
First Committee - 8 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
the feasibility of restricting the manufacturing and trade of those weapons strictly to the selected manufacturers and dealers authorized by States.
HENRIQUE R. VALLE (Brazil), spoke on behalf of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) and the associated States of Bolivia and Chile, concerning regional disarmament and the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and of Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention). He said the political declaration of their region as a zone of peace, free from weapons of mass destruction, was an essential element for the continuation of their process of development and integration.
Continuing, he said the members of MERCOSUR were committed to strengthening the mechanism of cooperation in defence and security matters. They were also committed to supporting the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and of other weapons of mass destruction. Their collective aim was to consolidate international agreements in nuclear disarmament and non- proliferation. They were also in the process of declaring their region a zone free of landmines, with the hope of extending that regime to the entire western hemisphere.
With regard to the Chemical Weapons Convention, he said he was pleased that as many as 120 countries had signed the Convention. The international community should, however, make every necessary effort to ensure its universality. He supported the efforts of the Director-General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Still, more remained to be done, including the destruction of about 8 million munitions. To promote the implementation of the Convention among Latin American and Caribbean countries, he said a seminar was recently held in Rio de Janeiro to stress the element of verification, with particular emphasis on cooperation among the regional States.
DILIP LAHIRI (India), in introducing the draft resolution on reducing nuclear danger (document A/C.1/53/L.16), said that despite all the talk of assured second-strike capability in cold war nuclear doctrines, the actual configuration of nuclear weapons was for launch-on-warning. Since the intercontinental ballistic missiles of the two main super-Powers took 30 minutes from lift-off to detonation, and while submarine-launched ballistic missiles took as little as 10 minutes, the decision time was approximately three minutes for intercontinental missiles, to virtually zero for submarine- launched missiles.
That was the true nature of the horrendous risk of unintentional or accidental use that the hair-trigger alert of nuclear weapons posed to humankind, he said. That dangerous operational configuration posed risks that were completely unacceptable and totally divorced from the political realities of the post-cold war world.
First Committee - 9 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
He said that the numerical reductions under the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START) had not begun to address that issue. Indeed, those participants were "budding Dr. Strangeloves", eagerly scanning for all sorts of hypothetical dangers lurking over the horizon. On 25 January 1995, a United States space launch lifted skywards over Norway and was detected by a Russian installation some 400 miles away. To Russia, the trajectory resembled that of a Trident missile launched from a submarine. Within minutes, Russia placed its nuclear weapons on a high-level of alert and its President had activated his "nuclear briefcase" in order to issue launch orders, if necessary. The fate of humankind hung in the balance.
He said there was broad support today for immediate steps to reduce the shadow hanging over mankind's future, through such measures as de-alerting nuclear forces and the adoption of no first-use policies. De-alerting would immediately bring other nuclear-armed countries into the dialogue on reducing nuclear layers. Whatever one might think of the refusal by the United Kingdom, France and China to participate in numerical reductions until the United States and Russian arsenals were brought below a certain threshold, it would be very difficult for them to refuse to participate in discussions on steps to reduce nuclear dangers through de-alerting and other related measures.
Those matters were of legitimate concern to the international community as a whole, he said. The nuclear-weapon States could not claim the right to discuss those issues in a "cabal of their own", when the consequences of nuclear accidents flowing from their nuclear doctrines could have disastrous effects throughout the world.
Despite the fact that the concerns addressed in the current text were widely shared, he said consultations were still ongoing, particularly on the question of the States to which it should be addressed. As a State possessing nuclear weapons, it would scarcely have been appropriate to call on the five nuclear-weapon States of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) to submit to disciplines in the matter of nuclear dangers, while India stayed out of accepting similar obligations.
On the other hand, he added, a number of delegations had indicated that the draft, which was aimed at urgent action to reduce nuclear dangers, should be addressed, for the present, only to the five NPT nuclear-weapon-States, because those countries possessed the largest arsenals and some of them also maintained nuclear doctrines rooted in the cold war mindset.
If broad support was found for the latter view, he said his delegation would have no difficultly reflecting that in the context of those first operative paragraphs. At the same time, he emphasized that the first operative paragraph, which required concrete action to reduce nuclear dangers, was the crux of the draft resolution.
First Committee - 10 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
MAHMOUD KAREM MAHMOUD (Egypt), introduced the draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/53/L.21/Rev.1). He said that due to the need to accommodate the different concerns of many interested delegations, there were intensive consultations on the draft, leading to the submission of the revised text. Based on last year's draft on the same subject, which was adopted by the General Assembly, this year's draft took into account the prevailing realities in the Middle East. Those realities underlined that Israel remained the only State in the region that had not acceded to the NPT. That was precisely stated in the seventh preambular paragraph of the revised draft.
He said it was important to underscore that he was neither indulging in name calling, nor "singling out". What he just said was simply a clear and accurate reflection of reality, "stated in a carefully measured and descriptive manner". It was, in point of fact, an invitation for Israel to join the NPT. In so doing, a neutral language had been used that was not subjective in any manner whatsoever.
Reflecting on his country's statement during the Committee's general debate, he said only one country in the Middle East was widely believed to possess a significant arsenal of nuclear weapons. Only one country in the Middle East operated unsafeguarded nuclear installations. Only one country in the region refused to adhere to the NPT or even to discuss the nuclear issue. That country was Israel, which had singled out itself. Yet, the reaction of the international community to that "dangerous, provocative" situation remained mitigated and muted, at best, relative to other examples.
He said the achievement of a universal adherence to the NPT remained a cardinal priority, not only for the Middle East region, but also for the international community as a whole. That had been underscored by the Treaty itself and by the provisions of the resolution on the Middle East adopted by States parties to the Treaty by consensus. It was for those reasons that they considered Israel's refusal to accede to the NPT as impeding the realization of the objective of attaining a universal adherence to the Treaty.
The continuation of such an imbalance between the legal obligations and commitments of Middle East countries would further aggravate serious security concerns over the risk of nuclear proliferation in the region, he said. It would also undermine efforts at the establishment of confidence-building measures, in particular efforts aimed at the establishment of a nuclear- weapon-free zone in the Middle East. Regional States that had renounced the nuclear option and acceded to the NPT were now questioning the wisdom of their actions, in relation to their own national security.
Continuing, he noted that a few years ago, the title of the draft he was introducing was changed from "Israeli nuclear armament" to "The risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East". That change highlighted the
First Committee - 11 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
conceptual change from confrontation to reconciliation. It was now Israel's turn to make a positive gesture, by joining other States of the region in acceding to the NPT. Egypt, on behalf of the States members of the League of Arab States, hoped the draft resolution would receive the overwhelming support of the Committee, as had been the case last year.
PETER GOOSEN (South Africa), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, introduced five draft resolutions on: measures to uphold the authority of the 1925 Geneva Protocol; United Nations Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament; convening a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament; observance of environmental norms in disarmament agreements; and the relationship between disarmament and development.
Concerning the first text on measures to uphold the 1925 Geneva Protocol (document A/C.1/53/L.28), he said in the fifth preambular paragraph of the draft the word "recent" in the first line should be deleted.
He said that the second text on Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.25) was a new draft that was intended to underline the importance of all regional centres as mechanisms to inform, educate and generate public understanding and support in the field of arms control and disarmament. It had emanated from the Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement held in Durban, South Africa at which the heads of State welcomed the Assembly's decision to revitalize the three regional centres in Nepal, Peru and Togo. He noted a technical error in the first preambular paragraph of the draft, namely that the date on which the Assembly adopted resolution 52/220 was 22 December 1997.
The activities and programmes conducted by those regional centres, he said, had contributed to changing basic attitudes to peace and security, identifying pertinent issues and approaches, and promoting regional and subregional dialogue on disarmament. The centres sought to provide useful insights to the common problems and thereby facilitated progress towards greater security at lower levels of armaments. They also served as a useful forum for considering relevant issues and new approaches to arms limitation.
In introducing the draft resolution on a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.50), he said that it had been a longstanding objective of the Non-Aligned Movement to work towards convening the session. At the recent Durban Summit, the heads of State of the Movement had, once again, expressed their support for the session, which would, among other things, mobilize world public opinion for the elimination of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, as well as the control and reduction of conventional armaments.
First Committee - 12 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
Concerning draft resolution on environmental norms in disarmament agreements (document A/C.1/53/L.26), he said that the international community had long been aware of the detrimental consequences of uncontrolled radioactive sources and the risks associated with military activities involving nuclear materials. The dismantling of certain weapons required techniques that would augment the prevailing environmental standards. While the draft did not refer to specific disarmament agreements, it nonetheless called upon States to take fully into account the relevant environmental norms while negotiating those treaties.
He said that the draft concerning the relationship between disarmament and development (document A/C.1/53/L.27) underlined the importance of reallocating valuable resources released as a result of disarmament for development purposes, thereby reducing the gap between developed and developing countries. In the Movement's view, that relationship had gained momentum and relevancy against the backdrop of the diversion of a large proportion of financial, material and technological resources to armaments. The stark contrast between expenditures for armaments and the paucity of aid for socio-economic progress was self-evident.
Speaking in his national capacity, he said that given South Africa's strong support for the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones, it supported the quest for Mongolia's nuclear-weapon-free status as envisaged in the draft resolution on the item. Indeed, the heads of State at the Durban Summit had supported Mongolia's policy to institutionalize its single State nuclear-weapon-free status. His country would also support the draft resolution on regional disarmament, which was submitted by the representative of Belarus.
THOMAS HAJNOCZI (Austria), speaking on behalf of the European Union, commented on the draft resolution on the convening of a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament. He said the Union welcomed the work of the Disarmament Commission on the issue during its last meeting. The compromise paper presented by the Chairman of the Commission's working group II gained a near consensus on the objectives and agenda of such a session. In that regard, the Union contributed actively in the Commission's efforts and the failure to reach a consensus was regrettable.
He said the Union would continue to support the convening of a fourth special session, which was justified by the fundamental changes in the international security situation consequent upon the end of the cold war. Past confrontation was replaced by new approaches based on cooperation. At the same time, however, international arms control efforts faced new challenges. Since the last session of the Disarmament Commission last spring, the international security environment had changed further.
First Committee - 13 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
Continuing, he said the Union considered the objectives of a fourth special session to include: the review of developments relevant to disarmament and non-proliferation; the assessment of the present international situation, in order to identify new opportunities in the field of arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation; and the establishment of consensus on methods and priorities for a new and balanced programme of future action on arms control and disarmament reflecting today's realities. The importance of holding a fourth special session was widely recognized in all groups and in 1997 the draft resolution on the subject was passed without a vote. The Union hoped that consensus in that regard would again be achieved this year.
He added that this year's draft resolution recommended that the issue be taken up at the 1999 session of the Disarmament Commission. That would be the fourth year in which the Commission had addressed the subject. Nonetheless, the Union would support further efforts to secure a consensus. Should that be achieved, the next General Assembly session could set a date for the special session and could also launch a preparatory process. The Union was ready to join the consensus on a draft resolution recommending that the Commission promote agreement on the objectives and agenda of a special session. It was important that the draft did not in any way prejudice the Commission's deliberations.
EMILIO IZQUIERDO (Ecuador), speaking as Chairman of the Latin American and Caribbean Group, said that the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament for Latin America and the Caribbean, headquartered in Peru, afforded clear evidence of the continent's determination to promote all measures of peace and security. In that connection, a close examination of recent regional events would make it apparent that the regional countries were deserving of such a Centre, as they had signed and ratified all of the major disarmament treaties. That important critical mass testified to the region's interest in conforming with international norms for peace and security.
As such, those countries had called for strong support by the international community and the United Nations for its Centre, he said. Established more than a decade ago, it could become a genuine vehicle for disarmament initiatives, with the necessary financial resources. The Centre was definitely capable of providing important academic inputs. Moreover, it was a regional confidence-building measure, which also promoted bilateral initiatives and could also support and consolidate relationships among the people of Latin America and the Caribbean.
CARLOS D. SORRETA (Philippines), commented on a number of draft resolutions on nuclear and conventional weapons. He said the Committee now had a greater number of States, cutting across regional lines and group affiliations addressing the issue of nuclear proliferation and disarmament. His delegation supported Myanmar's comprehensive approach to nuclear disarmament, because the resolution it introduced in that regard represented
First Committee - 14 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
the "action benchmark" for many States. It also reflected the determination, and in some respects the disappointment, of the Non-Aligned Movement on the issue.
He said the initiative of the group of eight also deserved everyone's support, because it sought to provide a practical and realistic bridge to link "all of our sincere desires to rid the world of nuclear weapons". His delegation fully supported Malaysia's timely and comprehensive draft resolution, based on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on nuclear weapons. From a legal point of view, however, it was regrettable that attempts to include nuclear weapons as prohibited weapons in the statute of the International Criminal Court in Rome this year had failed.
The Philippines, which had declared itself a nuclear-weapon-free zone over a decade ago, supported Mongolia's resolution on the single-state nuclear-weapon-free zone concept, he added. His country also supported the idea of a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere. However, it had to withhold its co-sponsorship over the inclusion of formulations that sought to extend the right of sea passage to ships carrying weapons of mass destruction. The seas and oceans were no longer as free to be used and abused as some might wish. His country would, however, like to stress its position that nothing in any of the nuclear-weapon-free zone agreements in existence should limit the right of passage for ships that were essential for trade and commerce.
Unlike the difficulty the international community had experienced with nuclear disarmament, his country was convinced that it would not be as hard to contain the problem posed by small arms. The tragedy being caused by the proliferation of small arms must be stopped. The Committee had before it two realistic draft resolutions co-sponsored by the Philippines. With regard to the containment of anti-personnel mines, the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Ottawa Convention) had demonstrated the determination of the international community. His country was pleased to co-sponsor the draft resolution on those weapons introduced by Canada.
WOLFGANG RICHTER (Germany) said that as a member of the group of governmental experts, he wished to contribute to the thematic debate on small arms and light weapons. It was satisfying that the international community was ever more aware of the growing problems associated with the excessive accumulation and uncontrolled circulation of those weapons, which threatened peace and security even of the neighbouring countries to those battling the problem. Such an accumulation also reduced the opportunities for development in post-conflict situations.
There were many regional and subregional initiatives to tackle the problem, he said. His country had contributed actively various forums and through the group of interested States on the basis of last year's Assembly
First Committee - 15 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
resolution on the subject. Although regional and subregional activities were appreciated, those were deficient. Indeed, none had taken a unified approach, as yet, to reducing the uncontrolled stockpiles of those weapons in affected countries and preventing their future accumulation. Moreover, there was no internationally agreed and globally applied and legally binding instrument in place to counter the problem.
Against that background, there was an urgent need for States to adopt a dual-track approach to reduction measures, he said. Reactive reduction measures alone would fail if countries did not tighten their controls against the further influx of small arms and if suppliers went on unrestricted in their activities. In turn, focusing only on preventive measures would not help the affected countries. Indeed, the existing large and uncontrolled stockpiles in those countries constituted the most important source of the illicit circulation. Failure to address those stockpiles would mean a failure to solve the problem.
One important lesson learned concerned the value of practical disarmament measures, particularly in post-conflict situations, such as arms collection and destruction and the de-mobilization of former combatants. Those measures had to be undertaken in the context of consolidating peace, building confidence, and integrating security and development. Against that background, it should be possible to develop guidelines. Such a useful tool would facilitate the engineering of subregional programmes, while ensuring the coherence and consistency of international efforts. The Disarmament Commission, which was working for its third year on that concept, should strive in 1999 to adopt a set of meaningful guidelines.
He said his country saw the urgent need for global and concerted action, in view of the global nature of the problem and of the many differences between regional and subregional initiatives. It had co-sponsored the draft resolution on small arms (document A/C.1/53/L.13) and would underline the need for the General Assembly to convene an international conference on the illicit arms trade in all its aspects, not later than 2001.
He said the scope of the conference must be wide enough to cover all relevant issues. Limiting its scope to combating the illicit arms trade would not tackle the relevant issues, but only duplicate work being conducted elsewhere. Criminal breaches of export controls in producing countries, for example, was just one of the many reasons for the excessive and destabilizing accumulation of those weapons. Since most small arms began "legally", other factors, such as the covert supply, also had to be considered.
The scope of such a conference, as defined in the operative portion of the draft, appropriately suggested that it concern the illicit arms trade in all its aspects, he said. That allowed for proper reflection of all the relevant aspects. While he supported the conceptual role being played by the
First Committee - 16 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
new group of governmental experts in preparing the recommendations for an international conference, he would underline that the preparatory process must be open-ended and reflect the various views of all interested States. The draft resolution, prepared by the South African delegation, was pointed in the right direction and deserved the broadest possible support by Member States.
CHRISTIAN WENAWESER (Liechtenstein) commented on the draft resolution on the prevention of the violent disintegration of States. He said his country did not really believe that the First Committee was the appropriate forum to deal with that issue, although it was convinced that the resolution on that subject addressed one of the most timely and burning issues confronting the international community. Also, while he was grateful to the main sponsor and co-sponsors of that draft, he thought that the text, in its current form, did not properly address the problem and, therefore, constituted a lost opportunity.
The draft fell short of what it could and should actually achieve, because it held that conflicts within States presently constituted the majority of armed conflicts, he said. In a context dealing with prevention, however, it should have added that the United Nations system should promote efforts aimed at preventing such conflicts. As was generally known, such conflicts were often rooted in tensions between the central government and communities within the affected States or among the communities themselves.
He said his delegation had made suggestions that generally underlined the need for the United Nations system to address such problems. In that context, he did not share the viewpoint of those who saw a contradiction or competition between the principles of territorial integrity and self- determination. Existing international law, in fact, provided a solid basis for considering those principles as mutually reinforcing. His delegation remained open to further discussions with the co-sponsors of the draft.
JUAN MIGUEL MIRANDA (Peru) spoke on the danger posed by conventional weapons, with particular emphasis on small arms. He noted that there was a clear link between the increased traffic and proliferation of those weapons and other criminal activities, such as drug trafficking. Those weapons were now the primary tool of violence and also constituted a grave obstacle to the security of the civilian population in affected countries and regions. They simply placed national security and economic development at risk. In terms of international efforts at the prevention of armed conflicts, the producers and importers of small arms should take the necessary measures to guard against the proliferation of those weapons.
In order to combat the problem, international cooperation was essential he said. To strengthen the international machinery in that regard, his Government recently passed a law against the possession of small arms that could be used to incite violence and instability. His Government had also
First Committee - 17 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
signed the Inter-American Convention Against the Manufacturing and Illicit Trafficking in Weapons, Munitions and Explosives and other Related Materials and was now in the process of ratifying it. In addition, her country supported the idea of an international conference to draft a modern convention to control small arms.
Continuing, he said his Government co-sponsored last year's resolution on the problem, which was adopted by the General Assembly, and also supported this year's draft texts introduced by Japan and South Africa. His Government was fully committed to the ideals of general and complete disarmament and was a party to the principal non-proliferation instruments. It participated in the Ottawa process and had ratified the Ottawa Convention as well, which demonstrated its stand in favour of the international disarmament process.
The fact that the Convention would soon enter into force, not long after its adoption, was evident of the seriousness of the international community in combating the problem posed by anti-personnel landmines, he added. The international community must work together to consolidate the progress made in that regard. His Government also looked forward to the future entry into force of the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed To Be Excessively Injurious or To Have Indiscriminate Effects (Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons). The region of Latin America and the Caribbean as a whole was committed to the disarmament process.
HOANG CHI TRUNG (Viet Nam) said nuclear disarmament must be the highest disarmament priority and, in line with that, his country supported all initiatives aimed at promoting the elimination of all weapons of mass destruction. There was a renewed vigour in tackling the nuclear disarmament issue. Although significant progress was yet to be made, the world community was forging ahead to a better and more secure environment. The end of cold war tensions had presented new opportunities to formulate effective nuclear disarmament measures.
Nuclear disarmament was a complex and difficult endeavour that called for innovative initiatives by both nuclear and non-nuclear-weapon States, he said. His country had co-sponsored a number of draft resolutions presented under the so-called nuclear cluster. It placed particular emphasis on the draft, introduced by the representative of Myanmar, on nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.47). The text presented a comprehensive approach and he favoured a time-bound framework for nuclear disarmament. His country, together with 27 others, had proposed a programme in the Conference on Disarmament for the elimination of nuclear weapons, which should serve as the basis for future negotiations.
He said his delegation had also traditionally co-sponsored the draft on the follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice.
First Committee - 18 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
That unanimous decision had reflected the common view of the international community of the obligations of nuclear-weapon-States towards nuclear disarmament. Yet, a clear-cut commitment to the total elimination of nuclear arsenals had still not been made. Clearly, those States must commit themselves to an international legally binding agreement against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. Those common concerns had been reflected in the draft on negative assurances for non-nuclear-weapon States, which had his strongest support.
MARK MOHER (Canada), while introducing the draft text on nuclear testing (document A/C.1/53/L.22) co-sponsored by Australia, New Zealand and Norway, emphasized that the draft had been carefully constructed to focus specifically on the recent nuclear tests in South Asia. It strongly deplored those tests "in a straight-forward manner". The draft echoed the expressions already made by many regional organizations and groups, and by several United Nations disarmament bodies, all of which reinforced the norm against such tests in the framework of the NPT and CTBT. The Committee and the General Assembly should confirm and further reinforce those norms.
He said two basic comments had been brought to the attention of the sponsors of the draft. The first asked why the draft did not deal with the issue in the broader framework of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. The response remained that there were many other drafts in the Committee dealing with that broader framework. Thus, there was no need to do so yet again in a draft text designed to address one specific matter.
The second comment, he said, held that the draft should focus on the future, in terms of outlining a process for the enhancement of peace and security in South Asia. In that regard, there were other resolutions before the Committee that could be directed to that end. Attempting to do so in a draft dealing only with nuclear testing was not necessary and would only dilute its central message.
Concluding, he reiterated that the international community had clearly established a norm against nuclear testing, in the context of both the NPT and the CTBT. The recent nuclear tests, whatever the rationales advanced to justify them, went against that norm. Many regional and cross-regional mechanisms had strongly deplored those tests. The sponsors of the draft had consulted widely in preparation for the draft and those consultations had revealed very broad support from all regions. There was, therefore, no legal or procedural matter preventing the Committee from acting. His country urged that the draft receive the broadest support possible and that any attempt to amend it and dilute its message be strongly opposed.
MOCTAR OUANE (Mali) introduced the draft resolution on the assistance to States for curbing the illicit traffic in small arms and collecting them (document A/C.1/53/L.7), with Bangladesh, Cameroon, Canada, Fiji and Nigeria
First Committee - 19 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
joining the list of co-sponsors. He noted that since the General Assembly's adoption of a resolution on the subject last year, substantial progress had been made. This year's draft was amended to reflect that.
A notable step forward was the initiative of his country on a moratorium on the importation and exportation of arms, recently adopted by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), he said. Through that measure, States could consolidate action in combating the problem, in aid of economic development. The challenge now was for the international community to follow suit with similar measures that would be effective in tackling the problem. In that regard, his Government welcomed the Oslo process and the Brussels appeal, and hoped that they would yield desirable results.
He said the draft had also been expanded to reflect adequately on the report of the group of governmental experts on small arms. The co-sponsors encouraged greater cooperation and coordination on the matter and the draft invited the international community to take the process further.
MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan), in introducing the draft resolution on regional conventional arms control (document A/C.1/53/L.35), said that the problems posed by conventional weapons must be dealt with at the global and regional levels, both in their quantitative and qualitative aspects. Most arms races, especially in the conventional field, were the result of regional and subregional disputes and political competition -- all the more so after the end of the cold war.
He said that a most important condition for arms control was the resolution of conflicts and disputes. At the same time, a conscious endeavour was required to ensure against the creation of serious arms imbalances that could threaten security and stability. That could occur if States in a region resorted to large acquisitions or production of those weapons, while other States in the region were denied that opportunity. Regrettably, the Conference on Disarmament had been unable to establish a framework to address such problems, as the General Assembly had requested.
As a co-sponsor of the draft resolution on nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.47), he said that it was the one text before the Committee that genuinely and comprehensively addressed the goal of nuclear disarmament. The threat of nuclear war had actually increased since the end of the cold war, due not only to the nuclear tests conducted in South Asia, but to the indefinite retention of nuclear weapons by some nuclear-weapon States. Their doctrines envisaged the use and threat of use of nuclear weapons even against non-nuclear-weapon States. Even the implementation of the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START) II would leave more than 10,000 nuclear weapons in the hands of the major nuclear-weapon States. Those, and not the nuclear tests, were the real danger.
First Committee - 20 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
Concerning the draft resolution on nuclear testing, introduced by the representative of Canada, he would say to him and his co-sponsors that the nuclear tests that took place in South Asia and, in particular, the nuclear tests conducted by Pakistan, did not happen in a vacuum. Those were not the first, but were perhaps the last nuclear tests to take place. They took place after 2,000 nuclear tests had been conducted by others. It was, therefore, unfair to focus attention for castigation on those tests only. A norm was only violated when a norm was accepted, and the norm of nuclear testing was not accepted by his delegation.
Continuing, he said that his country had deliberately not accepted any obligation under the CTBT because it knew it might have to respond. Indeed, article IX of the CTBT recognized the right of a country to respond when a nuclear test was conducted by its neighbour. His delegation had also stated during that Treaty's consideration in Geneva that if there was a test by its neighbour, Pakistan would test. Indeed, it did so to defend its security and to establish nuclear deterrence. It would do so again, if it had to, and it did not accept criticism by Canada, which had contributed to the capacity of Pakistan's neighbour to conduct those tests.
The Canadian representative had referred to a number of organizations that had criticized the South Asia tests, he went on. His country was not a member in most of them. Particularly appalling was the adoption by the Security Council of resolution 1172 (1998), which had far-reaching consequences for Pakistan's security, but upon which Pakistan had not been consulted. The participants of the Non-Aligned Movement Summit at Durban, South Africa, however, had adopted a decision on the South Asia tests that was balanced and took into account history, as well as current developments. His country had accepted that decision and was prepared to work towards normalizing the situation on the basis of that approach.
The resolution on nuclear testing was very similar to the one adopted two years ago, which had not named any country, but only deplored the nuclear tests, he said. Why was different treatment being applied to the current situation? It was not a responsible resolution if it just put on the table a condemnation and expected countries to accept it. The supporters of the draft "can't have it both ways" by making Pakistan a target and a partner at the same time. "We are not tamed dogs on a leash; we are responsible sovereign States and we expect to be treated as such", he said.
He said he strongly opposed the draft on nuclear testing and reserved the right to introduce amendments. Moreover, his delegation expected all those fair-minded countries, especially the Non-Aligned Movement members, not to support that discriminatory text.
First Committee - 21 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
LI CHANGHE (China) said there were distinct problems with the draft resolution on nuclear danger (document A/C.1/53/L.16), introduced by India. The contents of the draft had already been covered by other drafts, such as those on nuclear disarmament and on the opinion of the International Court of Justice, which were more comprehensive. Thus, his delegation considered the draft on nuclear danger unnecessary, since it merely repeated what others had said.
Besides, the issue of nuclear danger was not confined to nuclear weapons, but also related to civilian nuclear activities, he said. Yet, the sponsors of that draft had limited its contents to the danger posed by nuclear weapons. Furthermore, the draft omitted other essential elements, such as those concerning nuclear proliferation. The draft, in fact, brought to mind the events of this year, which was resolutely rejected by the international community. Taking on board the language used in formulating the draft, one was tempted to ask if there were NPT nuclear-weapon States and non-NPT nuclear-weapon States. If the draft was being used to establish nuclear- weapon status, the international community should definitely not support that.
GIORA BECHER (Israel) said that, once again, the draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/53/L.21/ Rev.1), submitted by Egypt, was at best, redundant and inflammatory. Moreover, the language was more severe in comparison to last year's text on the subject. The political motivation had been made clear by the singling out of Israel. No other resolution, even the new draft on nuclear testing, had mentioned any State by name.
He said that the text focused entirely on one region, while ignoring nuclear proliferation in others. It had neglected the fact that the real risk of nuclear proliferation was motivated by certain States which, despite their accession to the NPT, were engaged in efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. The somber experience gained by the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) on the disposal of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and the IAEA in Iraq and other signals of dangerous proliferation in the Middle East were well known to the General Assembly. None had involved Israel. To the contrary, his country had never been a threat to any of its neighbours or defied any international norms.
RAIMUNDO GONZALEZ (Chile) commented on the draft resolution on the convening of a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament. He said his delegation fully supported the draft, but would like to clarify some points. His country was concerned that since 1994 the international community had been discussing and adopting by consensus resolutions on the subject. Those had led nowhere, due to the lack of an agreement on the content, procedure, format or anything relating to such a session.
First Committee - 22 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
There was no doubt that the convening of the session was useful and desirable, he said. It should, however, be borne in mind that besides the first special session, neither the second nor the third special session was able to produce a final document. It had been 20 years since the first special session in 1978, yet practically nothing had happened, despite drastic changes in international relations. He believed that the declaration made by Austria on behalf of the European Community with regard to the need to convene the session was extremely important. His delegation also felt that the only logical, systematic and balanced way of dealing with the issue was through a multilateral approach, which would ensure the participation of all States.
It was not enough to adopt resolutions by consensus, he added. There was urgent need for that to be backed by action. From that perspective, one major element of concern was the financial implications of a special session, which could not be justified if it did not produce a solid and coherent document. Nonetheless, his delegation would continue to emphasize the need to convene the session.
ALEG LAPTSENAK (Belarus) introduced a draft on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.23) and read out the additional co-sponsors, as follows: Bolivia, Fiji, Mali, Barbados, Bahamas, Democratic Republic of the Congo and Malawi.
He said that the preambular portion of the draft referred to the well- established principle of nuclear-weapon-free zones, while noting the need to tailor those initiatives to the specific characteristics of the regions concerned. It also welcomed the withdrawal of nuclear weapons from the territories of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine. As a result, there were no more nuclear weapons stationed in the territories of Central and Eastern European States, thereby providing inspiration to all Member States.
He said the draft was based on the recent factual situation in the region and on the practical nuclear disarmament measures undertaken by those States, as well as by the declarations made by other States. Given the subject's importance, the co-sponsors would urge the widest possible support for the text.
EUGENIUSZ WYZNER (Poland), on behalf of 12 Central and Eastern European States (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia), commented on the draft on regional disarmament introduced by Belarus. He noted that the structure of the draft lacked clarity which made it difficult for one to understand its purpose. In the light of previous and similar initiatives by Belarus, it was obvious that the draft was yet another manifestation of the country's desire to pursue the idea of establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central and Eastern Europe.
First Committee - 23 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
The countries he was representing had individually and collectively expressed a favourable attitude towards the establishment of such zones in various parts of the world, having recognized them as complementary instruments to the NPT, he said. To that effect, they had welcomed the treaties concluded on those zones. At the same time, however, they held fast to the position that the establishment of any such zone must not interfere with existing or evolving security arrangements, to the detriment of regional and international security. It was their belief that such zones should not adversely affect the inalienable right to individual or collective self- defence guaranteed by the United Nations Charter.
Against that background, he said they considered the concept of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central and Eastern Europe, as proposed by Belarus, to be incompatible with their sovereign resolve to contribute to, and benefit from, the new European security architecture, including cooperation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). They believed that internationally recognized nuclear-weapon-free zones could be established only on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among the States of the region concerned.
In the absence of such an arrangement among the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, he said the initiative of Belarus did not meet the principal criterion which would allow for its consideration. He would, therefore, urge the withdrawal of the draft, as it would be inappropriate to take up the issue at the General Assembly. Above all, the countries he spoke for wished to reaffirm their commitment to the NPT and the international non-proliferation regime as a whole. The draft had tended to call their commitment in that regard into question, and they rejected that.
PETER GOOSEN (South Africa) wished to address the comments made with regard to the draft on nuclear testing, particularly concerning the position of the Non-Aligned Movement. The positions adopted by the heads of State of the Movement at the Durban Summit had been correctly characterized by the representative of Pakistan, in that they attempted to take a positive approach to the nuclear testing issue in South Asia. The views were based on a recollection of their principled position on nuclear disarmament and nuclear proliferation, and nuclear tests, which were elaborated in the document adopted at the 1995 Cartagena Summit, in which they had firmly rejected all kinds of nuclear testing.
He expressed concern about the language in operative paragraphs 6 and 9 of the draft resolution on bilateral nuclear arms control (document A/C.1/53/L.49). Its authors had this year deleted the concept of the continuous efforts aimed at eliminating nuclear weapons and strategic offensive arms. The deletion of the phrase in operative paragraph 9 concerning the concept of the elimination of nuclear weapons, which was previously agreed by the Assembly, was a matter of concern. His delegation
First Committee - 24 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
would encourage the drafters of that text to re-introduce that element. An argument that Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine no longer had nuclear weapons and, therefore, did not need to be included in the language was fallacious, because that was also the situation when the resolution was introduced last year.
Concerning the draft resolution, introduced today by the representative of India, on reducing nuclear danger (document A/C.1/53/L.16), he welcomed that representative's indication that it was still discussing certain amendments to that text. The South African delegation had severe difficulties with operative paragraph 2 as it was currently drafted, requesting Member States to inform the Secretary-General of measures they had undertaken to implement the current text, or the objectives it envisaged. The only States in a position to provide the Secretary-General with such information, however, were those States which possessed nuclear weapons.
He said he would agree with the representative of China that the draft had opened the door to recognizing other States that possessed nuclear weapons. As a State party to the NPT, South Africa had destroyed its nuclear weapons. It would regard it as very serious if it supported an initiative that opened the door for recognizing any other States, in that regard, beyond the five nuclear-weapon States. On the other hand, the draft resolution on a new agenda towards a nuclear-weapon-free world (document A/C.1/53/L.48) was aimed at not only reducing nuclear weapons to zero, but to reducing the number of nuclear-weapon States, rather than adding more of them.
MAHMOUD KAREM MAHMOUD (Egypt) said the representative of Israel did not have his facts right and had spoken to uphold Israel's "theory of delusion" with regard to the proposals to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. All Arab States had fulfilled their obligations to the NPT and still remained under threat from Israel, due to its refusal to join that Treaty or even to discuss it. It was obvious that there was no parity in the region in terms of nuclear non-proliferation obligations.
Whereas the concerned Arab States had taken solid steps in that regard, including the conclusion of additional safeguards agreements with the IAEA, Israel had decidedly declined to subject its nuclear programmes to similar full-scope IAEA safeguards, he added. There were several clear reasons why Israel's nuclear capacity and uncooperative position as regards the non- proliferation regime posed a clear threat to the region. That was one of them.
In conclusion, he asked if it was not high time the international community became seized by the issue of Israel's policy. Why did certain proliferators attract attention where others did not? he asked.
First Committee - 25 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
Ms. KUNADI (India) said that the draft resolution on nuclear testing (document A/C.1/53/L.22) was discriminatory, distorted and completely unhelpful with regard to the objective it sought to address. It would only divert the Committee's attention from its priorities. Such an effort was made at the recent IAEA conference, and the results were known to all. Some of the draft's co-sponsors were beneficiaries of alliances or security arrangements that were underpinned by nuclear-weapon States, some even by documents of first-use, which should reflect the double standards inherent in their initiative.
She would also ask the co-sponsors of the draft how they had responded to the more than 2,000 nuclear tests already conducted. Did the tests by States of South Asia belong to a separate category to which discriminatory standards must apply? Were those discriminatory standards geographical, political or something else? Was it their position that nuclear weapons were acceptable for some but not by others? Were the South Asian States being asked to conform to treaties without being parties to them? Should India then call for universal adherence to the Convention on the Law of the Sea? The universal norm for the prohibition of nuclear weapons existed in the United Nations Charter, in humanitarian law and in the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice.
A resolution on nuclear testing which was discriminatory would be counter-productive and impact on the forthcoming disarmament agenda, she said. Efforts must be directed more productively and purposefully. A sensible course of action for the co-sponsors of that draft would be to reflect on the purpose of the draft. In the event that they pressed ahead, her delegation would table amendments to bring the text in line with the generally accepted principles of nuclear disarmament, nuclear testing and non-proliferation.
GHOLAMHOSSEIN DEHGHANI (Iran) reiterated his support for the draft resolution on nuclear disarmament introduced by Myanmar. He said the initiative was of the highest priority, and the Conference on Disarmament had responded constructively by creating an ad hoc committee to consider the issue. His delegation would like to express its support for the drafts on a nuclear-weapon-free world and on Mongolia's nuclear-weapon-free status.
With regard to the situation in the Middle East, he said his delegation considered the relevant draft resolution to have adequately captured the situation. He called upon Israel to join the NPT and to adhere to the full scope safeguards agreements of the IAEA. Despite repeated calls to that effect, there had been no change in Israel's position. He firmly believed that Israel's accession to the nuclear non-proliferation regime would facilitate the creation of a zone free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East.
First Committee - 26 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
IGOR DZUNDEV (The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) began to discuss the resolution on regional disarmament submitted today by the representative of Belarus (document A/C.1/53/L.23). The representative of Greece, on a point of order, said that in accordance with Security Council resolution 817/1993, the name of the State mentioned, for all intents and purposes within the United Nations, was "The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia".
Mr. DZUNDEV (The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) then proceeded to state his country's support for the statement made by the representative of Poland on behalf of 12 like-minded States concerning the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among the States of the region concerned. He understood that Belarus had its own position. Its desire to be nuclear-weapon-free contributed to the objectives of the NPT and should be appreciated by all Committee members.
ROKAN N. HAMA AL-ANBUGE (Iraq) expressed his full support for the resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/53/L.21/Rev.1). He said the draft represented the absolute minimum that could be presented on that issue in the Middle East, where Israel posed the principal danger and was the main cause of instability in the area, owing to its well-known possession of a tremendous arsenal of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction.
He said that all that had been said by Israel's representative against his country was false. Each year in the Committee, Israel had echoed the same fabrications. He would confirm the statement made by his own delegation on 20 October concerning Iraq's compliance with its disarmament obligations under Security Council resolution 687 (1991). The Israeli representative sought to escape his obligations pursuant to international treaties in force in the disarmament field, especially in the area of nuclear disarmament. Its dismal failure in that regard was well known to all.
Mr. LAPTSENAK (Belarus) said the important contribution of his country to the nuclear disarmament process must be underlined. He was delighted that the initiative of his country on the need for the creation of a nuclear- weapon-free zone in Central and Eastern Europe had won the support of many delegations. His country introduced the draft text on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/53/L.23) in recognition of the positive part played by the idea of nuclear-weapon-free zones in the nuclear disarmament process, especially with regard to the regional treaties in existence. The draft was oriented towards the prevention of new conflict situations that might threaten regional balance and security.
Responding to criticisms by some delegations that the draft did not reflect the need for a new European security architecture, he said it precisely called for that. It also expressed satisfaction about the results
First Committee - 27 - Press Release GA/DIS/3126 21st Meeting (PM) 2 November 1998
of the historic events in international relations which had led to the withdrawal of nuclear weapons from Central and Eastern Europe. The draft also acknowledged the results of the 1996 ministerial meeting of the North Atlantic Council, which was confirmed by the member States of NATO. The building of a new European security architecture should be based on shared values.
The representative of the Russian Federation, in right of reply to the comments of the representative of South Africa with regard to the draft resolution on nuclear disarmament, said the United Nations was often accused of adopting resolutions that vanished into thin air. It was important to note the contributions of the nuclear-weapon States in the nuclear disarmament process, which was highlighted by paragraph 6 of the draft. It was worth noting that all the republics of the former Soviet Union that had inherited nuclear weapons as independent States no longer had those weapons. They had also all joined the NPT.
The representative of Poland, in right of reply, said the representative of Belarus had appealed to delegations to carefully read his regional disarmament text. He could assure the representative that all the 12, and now 13, like-minded delegations had read it carefully. The representative had raised only semantic differences between a zone and space, and the text began by recognizing nuclear-weapon-free zones, not spaces.
He said the representative of Belarus had also referred to the support of others. The fact was that Belarus could not muster the support of even a single country in the region for his draft, while the Polish delegation was speaking on behalf of 13 countries, most of them from the region.
The representative of Poland added that there were some obvious things in the text to which everyone could subscribe, such as welcoming the Treaty of Tlatelolco. Delegations subscribed to that, and also expressed their satisfaction that nuclear weapons had been withdrawn from the territories of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine, and so forth. Should delegations respect those references which had already appeared in nearly five other draft resolutions, where they belonged? he asked. It was unnecessary, he said, to repeat endlessly the same points that served nothing more than a political purpose.
* *** *