WAR MUST NOT BE ACCEPTED AS HALLMARK OF NATURAL HUMAN CONDITION DISARMAMENT UNDER-SECRETARY-GENERAL TELLS FIRST COMMITTEE

Press Release
GA/DIS/3140

WAR MUST NOT BE ACCEPTED AS HALLMARK OF NATURAL HUMAN CONDITION DISARMAMENT UNDER-SECRETARY-GENERAL TELLS FIRST COMMITTEE

Committee Begins General Debate, Hearing 10 Speakers

The world must refuse to accept that war, weapons of mass destruction, or the excessive accumulation or illicit transfer of arms were hallmarks of the natural human condition, the Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, Jayantha Dhanapala, told the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) this morning, as it began its disarmament and security debate.

Perhaps the most difficult issue on the Committee’s agenda over the years had been the goal of nuclear disarmament, he said. Though nuclear-weapon stockpiles had declined significantly since the cold war, tens of thousands of such weapons remained in existence -- many on high alert status, many ready for first-use in future conflicts, and many available for tactical battlefield use. Moreover, the shocks from last year’s nuclear tests in South Asia continued to reverberate throughout the global non-proliferation regime.

Mr. Dhanapala also reiterated the concern expressed by Secretary-General Kofi Annan over the threat to international peace resulting from the testing of longer-range missiles and the development of missile defence. If, he said, the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty) -- a cornerstone of strategic stability between the United States and the Russian Federation -- crumbled under the weight of new pressures to deploy national missile defence systems, the world might soon lose another cornerstone as well: its long-sought goal of preventing an arms race in outer space.

Also, concerning the growing trend towards the deployment of missile defence systems in outer space the representative of Mexico urged the adoption of measures to prevent the transformation of space into yet “another theater of confrontation”. Indeed, he said, recent events had dimmed the post-cold war expectations of ridding the world of nuclear weapons within a foreseeable period. Today, there was an increasing tendency to use force in international relations, accompanied by an increased dependency on nuclear weapons and the

First Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/DIS/3140 3rd Meeting (AM) 11 October 1999

advent of new technologies related to the use of outer space for military purposes. Heightened strategic tensions had paralyzed nuclear weapons negotiations. Overcoming the impasse required an unequivocal commitment by nuclear-weapon States to the total elimination of nuclear weapons within a foreseeable period, he said.

The South African representative said that the inability of multilateral forums and the international community to substantively address the most central issues of the day had reflected a deepening crisis in international relations, non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament. The nuclear tests in South Asia last year and the release of a draft nuclear doctrine in India this year should have been a wake-up call, especially to the nuclear-weapon-States. New or expanded rationales on the use of nuclear weapons had exacerbated the prospect of the indefinite possession of those weapons and might lead others to acquire them. South Africa, together with its partners of the “New Agenda Coalition” would again present a resolution urging a realistic agenda for the achievement of nuclear disarmament.

Speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated countries, the representative of Finland called for a continuing commitment on the part of the international community in the fight against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery. All the members of the Union whose ratification was essential for the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear- Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), including the two nuclear-weapon States – France and the United Kingdom – had ratified the Treaty. All other States that had not yet done so should sign and ratify it without delay. The lack of progress made by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in implementing the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was of particular concern to the Union.

In opening remarks, the Committee Chairman, Raimundo Gonzales (Chile), said that weapons of mass destruction rightly preoccupied the First Committee. Serious setbacks in the area of nuclear non-proliferation and missile development could have “grave repercussions” for strategic stability and nuclear disarmament. The international climate, however, was not propitious for creating substantial nuclear disarmament measures. The absence of agreement on the priorities of the disarmament agenda had severely hampered the work of the United Nations machinery. In order for the international community to advance its disarmament goals, it would have to agree on what constituted legitimate national self-defence and establish a sustainable balance between defence and economic needs.

Statements were also made by the representatives of New Zealand, Bangladesh, Chile and Algeria, as well as by the Observer of Switzerland.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. Tuesday, 12 October, to continue its general debate and to elect the remaining members of its bureau.

Committee Work Programme

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this morning to begin its full scope disarmament and security debate. The issues to be debated include nuclear disarmament and the delayed entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), missile development and defence, and verification in all its aspects. A new agenda towards a nuclear-weapon-free world would also be discussed.

The Committee is also expected to consider the excessive accumulation of and illicit traffic in small arms, the prevention of an outer space arms race, the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament, the relationship between disarmament and development, as well as the entire spectrum of conventional arms control and limitation.

The Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, Jayantha Dhanapala, is expected to address the Committee at the opening meeting of its general debate. (For additional background, see Press Release GA/DIS/3139 of 8 October.)

Statements

RAIMUNDO GONZALEZ (Chile), Committee Chairman, said that weapons of mass destruction rightly preoccupied the First Committee. There had been “very serious setbacks" in the area of nuclear non-proliferation and missile development that could have "grave repercussions for strategic stability and nuclear disarmament". The international climate did not appear propitious for substantial nuclear disarmament measures in the near future. The world community's failure to agree on priorities to carry out its disarmament agenda had severely hampered the work of its institutions. For example, deep differences on perception and approach had rendered the Conference on Disarmament unable to agree on its programme of work.

The General Assembly had renewed calls not only for nuclear disarmament and the elimination of weapons of mass destruction, he said, but also for effective control of the proliferation of small arms and light weapons. More attention was likely to be given in the future to "preventative disarmament" among the strategies for peace-building. He expected that the Committee would recommend to the General Assembly preparatory arrangements for the international conference on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects in 2001.

Races to acquire costly sophisticated arms placed an enormous burden on society, he said, one that often fell on the shoulders of those who did not have the means to meet their basic human needs. In order for the international community to continue its struggle to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, it would have to reach a common understanding of what constituted legitimate national self-defence requirements and a sustainable balance between defence and social economic needs. It could not avoid confronting the implications of the changing nature of conflict -- from violence waged between States to violence waged primarily within States -- and the need for new preventative strategies.

JAYANTHA DHANAPALA, Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, said the Committee’s consideration of some timely and very complex issues on the international security agenda had been rendered all the more formidable by a number of developments over the past year which had jeopardized existing disarmament agreements. At the same time, military expenditures were once again on the rise in many countries. Those events -- which included a significant increase in 1998 in intra-State wars -- further underscored the vital role of the United Nations in upholding existing norms of international peace and security and in forging the necessary political will to establish new agreements.

Together, the world must refuse to accept that war, weapons of mass destruction, or the excessive accumulation or illicit transfer of arms were now just hallmarks of the natural human condition, he said. Perhaps, the most consistently difficult issue on the Committee’s agenda over the years had been the goal of nuclear disarmament. The global trends in that area were once again mixed. Though nuclear-weapon stockpiles had declined significantly since the cold war, tens of thousands of such weapons remained in existence -- many on high alert status, many ready for first use in future conflicts, and many available for tactical battlefield use. With respect to strategic nuclear weapons, the Treaty on Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offense Arms (START II) had still not entered into force, and negotiations had not yet begun on START III.

Other important treaties had not yet entered into force, including the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Pelindaba Treaty) and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), he continued. Last Friday in Vienna, participants attending the Conference on facilitating the entry into force of the CTBT issued a declaration renewing their determination to work for universal ratification of the Treaty and its early entry into force. While the shocks from last year’s nuclear tests in South Asia continued to reverberate throughout the global non- proliferation regime, hopes remained that India and Pakistan would soon join the Treaty.

He said the need for greater progress on global nuclear disarmament was specifically addressed last May by many representatives attending the third session of the Preparatory Committee for the 2000 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The session concluded without an agreement on any substantive recommendations. On 23 September, the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the five permanent members of the Security Council issued a joint statement reaffirming their commitments to nuclear disarmament, as well as to general and complete disarmament under article VI of the NPT. They also reaffirmed their commitment to the decisions of the 1995 NPT Review and Extension Conference. Prospects for the success of next year’s NPT Review Conference would depend, to a considerable extent, upon whether those countries could agree beforehand on concrete measures to implement such commitments.

The record was also mixed on the subject of other weapons of mass destruction, he continued. Membership was growing in the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention) and the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (Biological Weapons Convention), but those still fell short of universality. The States parties to both Treaties were nevertheless continuing to recruit new members, while efforts were under way in Geneva in the ad hoc group to strengthen the Biological Weapons Convention through the elaboration of verification and confidence-building measures.

He said the Secretary-General had noted in his annual report on the work of the Organization that the development and testing of longer-range missiles -- and the development of missile defence and the fact that large numbers of missiles were available for launch on warning -- seriously threatened peace and security. If the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (the Anti- Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty) -- which leaders from the United States and the Russian Federation had called a “cornerstone of strategic stability” -- crumbled under the weight of new pressures to deploy national missile defence systems, the world community might soon lose another cornerstone as well: its long-sought goal of preventing an arms race in outer space. The Secretary-General had recently reiterated that multilaterally negotiated norms were needed in all those missile areas.

Perhaps the most welcome development of the past year, he said, had been a significant increase in international awareness and concern over the tragic human toll from the excessive accumulation of and illicit traffic in conventional arms, especially small arms and light weapons. A major international conference would likely be held in 2001 to address that problem, yet serious challenges remained, especially with respect to transparency. For example, more countries needed to submit data to the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms and the standardized instrument for the reporting of military expenditures. Obtaining accurate data on small arms and light weapons transfers remained a difficult task. The arms industry was undergoing a rapid globalization process, which was complicating both national and international regulatory efforts. Difficult challenges also remained in strengthening the enforcement of United Nations arms embargoes.

There were several noteworthy developments, including the expanded membership to 66 of the Conference on Disarmament and the consensus reached in the Disarmament Commission on international guidelines for establishing nuclear- weapon-free zones and for implementing practical disarmament measures involving conventional weapons, he said. The Commission’s inability to reach a consensus on a fourth special session of the General Assembly on disarmament, however, and the inability of the Conference to agree on a programme of work constituted a “major setback”. In his annual report, the Secretary-General called those two setbacks “a source of grave and ongoing concern”. The inability of the Conference members to agree on a programme of work, however, was not the failure of the Conference, itself. Rather, progress had been hampered by the lack of a propitious international environment for major arms reductions. The deadlock in the Conference was a symptom -- not the cause -- of the global stalemate on nuclear disarmament.

ANTONIO DE ICAZA (Mexico) said that recent international events had gradually dimmed the expectations arising from the end of the cold war that it would be possible to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons within a foreseeable period. At the approach of the new millennium, there was a new propensity to use force in international relations, relying on military hardware that allowed the use of force to be without risk or cost in material and in lives for the party that employed it. There was also an increase in the dependency on nuclear weapons, as doctrines of deterrence had been resuscitated.

Nearly seven years after its signing, START II had still not entered into force and, for the third consecutive year the Conference on Disarmament had achieved no results in substantive negotiations, he continued. The Preparatory Committee for the upcoming NPT Review Conference had failed to agree on substantive recommendations for the meeting next spring. Amid that background, the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, New Zealand, Sweden, South Africa and Mexico met on 22 September to review the progress of their joint initiative: “Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world: the need for a new agenda”. They noted the complacency with respect to nuclear disarmament efforts and urged that such a posture must be overcome, mainly through an unequivocal commitment at the highest levels to the early and total elimination of nuclear arsenals.

He said that important gains had been made in nuclear disarmament in the years following the end of the cold war, but those were not sufficient and did not make up for the paralysis that had set in since the General Assembly adopted the CTBT in 1996. On 5 October, his Government had deposited with the Secretary- General its instrument of ratification of that Treaty. This year, it was Mexico’s turn, on behalf of the traditional co-sponsors, to present a draft resolution on the CTBT and, once again, a draft resolution would be submitted on the need for a new agenda to achieve the goal of a nuclear-weapon-free world. The basic function of nuclear weapons should be limited to deterrence from nuclear attack and, consequently, a policy should be instituted of no-first use against nuclear- weapon-States and of non-use against non-nuclear-weapon States.

Also essential, he went on, was the demonstration by nuclear-weapon States of an unequivocal commitment to the total elimination of nuclear weapons within a foreseeable period. Those countries must also put in place a series of measures to reduce the nuclear threat, such as: to de-alert and deactivate nuclear weapons; withdraw non-strategic nuclear weapons from the locations where they were currently deployed; and continue the process of steady and systematic reduction of nuclear arsenals.

Despite the NPT’s extension for an indefinite period, the Treaty could not be considered a permanent framework for the existing impasse, he continued. Rather, the NPT was the framework of a dynamic process which pointed firmly towards the ultimate objective, namely, the total elimination of nuclear weapons. His country had reserved the right to introduce, at the upcoming NPT Review Conference, a resolution on nuclear disarmament outlining a programme of action that provided for specific measures enabling the disarmament community to move towards a nuclear-weapon-free world.

He said the growing trend towards the development and deployment in outer space of missile defence systems and the reports that substantial funds were being allocated in that regard had underscored the urgent need to adopt measures to prevent any attempts to utilize outer space for military purposes. The Assembly last year had adopted by consensus a resolution inviting the Conference on Disarmament to conclude a review of the mandate contained in its decision of 1992, with a view to reconstituting negotiations of a multilateral agreement to prevent an outer space arms race.

Global action must also be taken to counter the threats posed by small arms and light weapons, he said. The recent high-level meeting of the Security Council to consider that problem had underscored the need for measures aimed at reducing their worldwide proliferation. The convening of an international conference on the illicit arms trade in all its aspects, no later than 2001, was an opportunity to take measures to prevent and reduce excessive accumulations of such weapons and their destabilizing effects. Concerning landmines, his Government reaffirmed its commitment towards making the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Ottawa Convention) universal. He said the aspirations of disarmament would be unattainable if a State or group of States maintained military supremacy and a readiness to use force to promote their interests. How could security -- the condition in which States considered that they ran no risk of military attack, political pressure or economic coercion – be reconciled with strategic doctrines based on threats, the rebirth of archaic concepts of just wars and presumed rights of interference not recognized by international law? he asked. The First Committee must seek to provide answers to those questions as the century drew to a close.

MARKKU REIMAA (Finland), speaking on behalf of the European Union, as well as the associated countries of Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus, Malta and Iceland, said that the Union emphasized the importance of a full and speedy implementation of the Ottawa Convention, including the deadlines laid down as to the destruction of anti-personnel mines, as well as assistance to the mine victims. The Union had carried out a number of démarches, underlining that the further production of anti-personnel mines could no longer be justified and urging mine-producing countries to strictly refrain from exporting those weapons.

Another area of great concern, he said, was the destabilizing spread of small arms and light weapons. The Union was of the view that the international conference on small arms, to be convened in the year 2001 at the latest, should be the main focal point in efforts to combat the problem of the excessive and destabilizing accumulation of those weapons. Such a conference should address the issue in a comprehensive manner.

Developments in Europe had a considerable impact on the stability of the entire international system, he continued. Europeans must be able to bear the main responsibility for events in their own continent. It was of crucial importance that the Union develop its capacity to take decisions and to act in the field of conflict prevention and crisis management. In doing so, the Union will increase its ability to contribute to international peace and security in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter.

The Union, he said, called for a continuing commitment on the part of the international community in the fight against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery. All the Union Member States on the list of 44 States whose ratification is required for the CTBT to enter into force, including the two nuclear weapon States, France and the United Kingdom, have ratified the CTBT. The Union calls upon all States that have not yet done so to sign and ratify the CTBT without delay. One issue of particular concern for the Union is the lack of progress in the implementation of safeguards in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. In that context, the Union calls again upon the Democratic People’s Republic to adhere to the resolution adopted at the forty-third General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and to comply with its safeguard treaties. The Union hopes that the disarmament and non-proliferation objectives will be further served through active multilateral efforts, including current Committee meeting, so that full use is made of the available opportunities to contribute to peace and stability.

CLIVE WALLACE PEARSON (New Zealand) said that, while some were arguing that the international security fabric might be unravelling, his country would not go that far. There was, however, a clear requirement across the board to renew the determination to deliver results. The universality of many treaties was not in prospect. An important cornerstone of strategic stability was being questioned. The nuclear non-proliferation norm had been challenged and, now, there was extremely worrying talk about the pursuit of a minimum credible nuclear deterrent policy in South Asia.

Frustrating though the current situation might be, he did not believe that the world was about to enter some kind of disarmament meltdown. Prophesies like that were too often prone to become self-fulfilling. There was, however, no doubt that the pace of the global disarmament effort overall was faltering. Any complacency and frustration redirected into productive engagement.

He regretted that efforts to reach a consensus on the Conference Disarmament's programme of work failed this year. While New Zealand remained committed to the Conference, the need to take a serious look at its working procedures, in particular its now anachronistic political group structures and ritualistic decision-making machinery, was overdue and compelling. He could not and would not accept the assertion that the interests of non-nuclear-weapon States should be excluded from contributing, in a constructive way, to the process of nuclear disarmament. Nuclear weapons were multilateral in their reach and in their pernicious devastation.

ANWARUL KARIM CHOWDHURY (Bangladesh) said the Secretary-General’s forecast that disarmament agreements were threatened by a number of developments that would likely undermine global security and cause an increase in global military expenditures was disturbing. Indeed, the cap on nuclear proliferation remained unprotected, and there were suggestions that the number of threshold States could increase. The controversy over vertical proliferation had also been accentuated by subcritical tests. There was, nevertheless, a perceptible and expending international consensus that favoured the elimination of weapons of mass destruction.

He drew attention to the utmost importance of universalizing the CTBT and its agreed objectives. All nuclear-weapon States and nuclear-weapon-capable States in all regions of the world must pursue, in good faith, negotiations leading to the ultimate goal of the total elimination of nuclear weapons. As the Secretary-General had asserted, the systematic and progressive reduction of nuclear stockpiles and their eventual complete elimination remained a priority task of the international community.

In the field of conventional arms, attention had remained focused on transparency, he said. The open sale and easy availability of small arms was a matter of serious concern. It was the abundant and ready supply of easy-to-use tools of conflict and weapons of death and disability that was responsible for an estimated 90 per cent of all conflict-related deaths and injuries, of which 80 per cent were women and children. The illicit international trafficking and transfer of small arms and their accumulation in many countries constituted a serious threat to their populations and to regional security. The problem had been exacerbated by the absence of global norms for reducing the accumulation, transfer and trafficking. The convening of an international conference next year would be an important step towards the urgent goal of building a global consensus on the issue.

Turning to the CTBT, he said it was crucial that the three nuclear-weapon States that had not yet ratified the Treaty, as well as those States whose ratification was also required for the Treaty’s entry into force, deposit their instruments promptly. As the Secretary-General had rightly observed, the path to the 2000 Review Conference of the parties to the NPT would be smoother if tangible progress was made in the CTBT and other areas of nuclear disarmament. Bangladesh, which signed the Treaty in October 1996, had just decided in principle to ratify it. Its major concern, however, continued to be the heavy financial obligations associated with accession to the CTBT. A mechanism should be found to relieve the least developed States of that weighty burden, without jeopardizing the Treaty’s implementation. In the field of biological weapons, there was a clear need to chart a credible compliance regime. Bangladesh had been the first to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention, which it ratified in April 1997. That action would have little meaning, however, unless the major States that possessed chemical weapons also joined the Convention.

Regional disarmament presented newer challenges, he went on. In that context, his delegation attached considerable importance to the activities of the United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament. Those should be given sufficient resources to enable them to actively promote dialogue on disarmament issues in a regional and subregional context. Regarding the Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific, it was disappointing that, despite repeated requests, the Centre was operating from New York, rather than from Kathmandu. Surprisingly, the Secretary-General’s report on the Centre did not report any positive indication about moving the Centre to Kathmandu. He sought information from the Under- Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs on the funding required to operate the Centre at Kathmandu and asked whether the funding was the only obstacle towards its establishment in the region.

JENO C.A. STAEHELIN, Observer for Switzerland, said that his delegation regretted to acknowledge that the negotiations on nuclear disarmament and arms control had seriously slowed, both at the bilateral and multilateral levels. The prolonged deadlock in those negotiations risked undermining international security and could also weaken the institutions and international organizations active in that field. In order to counter those worrying developments, an in-depth evaluation of the current situation and a review of priorities must be carried out. In addressing the issue of progress in disarmament and arms control in the current year, he noted that multilateral negotiations in the United Nations played a key role in several areas, including those of nuclear disarmament, the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, and of landmines. For his country, the work of the United Nations in the field of disarmament was an indispensable part of international security and stability.

DUMISANI S. KUMALO (South Africa) said it must be conceded that the inability of multilateral forums and the international community to substantively address some of the most central issues of the day reflected a deepening crisis in international relations, non-proliferation, disarmament and arms control. The nuclear tests in South Asia last year and the release of a draft nuclear doctrine in India this year should have been a wake-up call, especially to the nuclear- weapon States. He was deeply concerned to see new or expanded rationales being offered for the use of nuclear weapons, which exacerbated the prospect of their indefinite possession and might lead others to develop similar rationales for acquiring them.

Nuclear disarmament was a concern of the entire international community, he said. A source of concern for South Africa was the continuing refusal to recognize that that was indeed the case. That refusal had led to the failure to reach accommodation in the Conference on Disarmament and the review process of the NPT. South Africa, together with its partners of the new agenda coalition, will again present a resolution for consideration by the First Committee, the objective of which would be to put forward a realistic agenda for the achievement of nuclear disarmament.

He hoped delegations would seriously engage the substance of the resolution and not retreat into vague conceptual notions for reasons of political expediency, as had been the case with certain delegations last year. The notion that the future agenda could not be considered until the completion of the so-called present agenda would be an unconscionable waste of valuable time. The new agenda approach sought to form the basis for a common approach for the achievement of the goal of eliminating nuclear weapons through existing unilateral and bilateral processes, as well as through complimentary and mutually reinforcing steps at the plurilateral and multilateral levels.

JUAN LARRAIN (Chile) said that it was essential for the First Committee to restore shattered concepts in international security, including a total prohibition of anti-personnel landmines, protection of civilians in conflicts, and prohibitions on small arms. In his region, a clear commitment existed against the manufacturing and trafficking of small arms, the stockpiling of which worsened and prolonged conflicts, reducing security and confidence. The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) estimated that, in the last decade, 2 million children had been killed by small arms.

Chile, he said, supported the aims of the new agenda coalition, which accurately reflected the realities of the nuclear disarmament debate. The goals on non-proliferation must be strengthened. When Chile acceded to the NPT in 1985, it did so with the understanding that all countries would commit to nuclear disarmament —- not that a small group of States had the right to possess nuclear weapons, while the large majority of States did not. The International Court of Justice had provided a solid doctrinal base that should not be ignored. The Court established a link between disarmament and humanitarian law. Members of the international community had a binding obligation to maintain peace and security. Any use or threat of use of nuclear weapons should be prohibited. He viewed the Court as having established a vital conceptual framework, based on confidence, rather than threat of conflict.

Also of great importance was the need to regulate international transport of radioactive waste and nuclear fuel, he said. He supported any initiative aimed at raising international standards to ensure such regulation, taking into account IAEA rules concerning such shipments, including contingency plans in case of accident. He also welcomed the reactivation of the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Latin America, which should help build a new climate through confidence-building measures.

ABDALLAH BAALI (Algeria) said the overall political climate of international relations, developments in South Asia and the rather modest results of the third session of the NPT Preparatory Committee, as well as the lack of agreement on a programme of work in the Conference on Disarmament, were a real source of concern. They had compelled his delegation to further reflect on the need to pursue, with determination, efforts to carry out disarmament and strengthen international peace and security. He hoped common interests would prevail in the Committee over narrow interests, in order that progress might be made.

Convinced of the need to establish a new model for international relations, African leaders had decided at their thirty-fifth summit to give special emphasis to disarmament issues, with a view to reaching concrete decisions that would improve the security situation in Africa and possibly pave the way for the rest of the international community, he said. His delegation had noted the seriousness accorded the problem of small arms and light weapons by African leaders, whose constituents had been exposed to them directly. Those weapons had posed real threats to their stability and security. A decision on the proliferation, circulation and illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons had been adopted at the summit, as an expression of the determination of Africans to deal resolutely with that threatening scourge.

Regions that did not produce such arms had nonetheless faced the ravaging scope of the phenomenon, he said. Reducing the flow of those weapons called for coordinated action, including among the producer countries and especially the five permanent members of the Security Council, whose exports amounted to 85 per cent of the world market. The international conference on illicit trafficking represented the ideal opportunity for serious-minded consideration of the issue and, he hoped, the adoption of concrete measures. In order to ensure the success of that important conference, an agenda must be prepared in detail and agreement should be reached on the venue. United Nations Headquarters in New York was the most appropriate for the conference itself, as well as the preparatory committee meetings leading up to it. The report of the group of governmental experts on small arms was a useful basis for discussions, which, along with the conference itself, should be presided over by a member of the Non-Aligned Movement.

While specific attention should be given to conventional arms, he said the international community could not shirk the priorities that it had defined in 1978, namely that negotiations in good faith should be pursued in the area of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, a complete programme was adopted at that special disarmament session with a timetable for the gradual reduction of those weapons and of their delivery systems, aimed at their total elimination. Three decades later, the progress had not met the expectations of the international community or of those traumatized by nuclear weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Furthermore, he said the serious developments in South Asia and the emergence of nuclear deterrence doctrines had renewed concerns and increased apprehension. Similarly, the lack of implementation by the political powers towards implementation of article VI of the NPT was not reassuring. Moreover, the attitude and inflexibility of some States and nuclear Powers, observed during the Preparatory Committee meetings of the NPT Review Conference, did not augur well. The nuclear Powers should, pursuant to article VI of the NPT, commit themselves in good faith to carry out negotiations to eliminate nuclear weapons. In that spirit, the proposal of the Group of 21 countries in the Conference on Disarmament to create a special committee to establish a timetable for the gradual reduction of nuclear weapons deserved serious consideration.

He said that, for many years, his country had promoted nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and the continued strength of the NPT as the basic pillar on the path of general and complete disarmament. Thus, in 1994, Algeria had adhered to the NPT and had placed its installations under IAEA safeguards, demonstrating its strong commitment to nuclear non-proliferation and general and complete disarmament. It had also advocated the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones and in February 1998 had adhered to the Pelindaba Treaty. In the Mediterranean region, Algeria had always endeavoured to establish an area of peace, security and prosperity. It was logical, therefore, that such commitments be extended to the region of the Middle East, where only Israel had refused to join the NPT and submit its installations to IAEA control. It was essential that all States in the region finally and unequivocally advocate the creation of a nuclear-weapon-free zone. That appeal had also applied to South Asia, where the arms race between two neighbours was of great concern.

* *** *