FIFTEEN MORE DISARMAMENT TEXTS INTRODUCED IN FIRST COMMITTEE

Press Release
GA/DIS/3156

FIFTEEN MORE DISARMAMENT TEXTS INTRODUCED IN FIRST COMMITTEE

In view of recent political developments, the General Assembly would recognize that the time was now opportune for all the nuclear-weapon States to undertake effective disarmament measures with a view to the total elimination of nuclear weapons, according to one of 15 draft resolutions introduced this afternoon in the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security), as it concluded the introduction and consideration of all disarmament and security-related draft resolutions.

By further terms of the text on nuclear disarmament introduced by the representative of Myanmar, the Assembly would recognize the genuine need to de-emphasize the role of nuclear weapons and to review and revise nuclear doctrines accordingly. In that connection, it would urge the nuclear-weapon States to stop immediately the qualitative improvement, development, production and stockpiling of nuclear warheads and their delivery systems, and to immediately de-alert and deactivate their nuclear weapons.

The other texts introduced dealt with: a request for a Secretary- General's report on missile development; nuclear disarmament; banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons; advisory opinion of the International Court of the Justice on the legality of nuclear weapons; nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere; African nuclear-weapon-free zone Treaty; chemical weapons; radioactive waste; verification; the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons; conventional arms control; small arms; the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean; and the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa.

Convinced of the need for a comprehensive approach towards missiles at the global and regional levels, in a balanced and non-discriminatory manner as a contribution to international peace and security, the Assembly would request the Secretary-General to prepare a report on the issue of missiles in all its aspects, according to a new draft resolution introduced by the representative of Iran. He said that the security implications of the new dimensions of missile development and the absence of any multilaterally negotiated instrument on that complex issue had required a comprehensive international study.

According to a draft text introduced by the representative of Pakistan on security assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States, the Assembly would appeal to all States, especially the nuclear-weapon-States to work actively

First Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/DIS/3156 19th Meeting (PM) 29 October 1999

towards an early agreement on a common approach and, in particular, on a common formula that could be included in an international instrument of a legally binding character. The Assembly would recommend that further intensive efforts should be devoted to the search for a common approach or common formula and that the various alternative approaches, including, in particular, those considered in the Conference on Disarmament, should be further explored in order to overcome the difficulties.

Introducing a second text today, by which the Assembly would decide to give urgent consideration conventional arms control issues at the regional and subregional levels, the representative of Pakistan said that while nuclear weapons had posed a threat of global annihilation, conventional weapons had been used in scores of conflicts worldwide. In addition, the conventional arms race had consumed the vast majority of resources spent on armaments by both rich and poor nations. Despite hopes for a restoration of balance in the immediate aftermath of the cold war, the danger of a build-up of conventional armaments and armed forces had been revived. A grave imbalance in conventional arms acquisitions could encourage aggression and create compulsions for weapons of mass destruction, he said.

Under the terms of a draft introduced by the representative of Malaysia on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons, the Assembly would underline once again the unanimous conclusion of the Court that there existed an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.

By the terms of three draft resolutions introduced by the representative of Canada today, the Assembly would: urge the Conference on Disarmament to establish an ad hoc committee to negotiate a non-discriminatory, multilateral and internationally and effectively verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear devices; urge all States parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction to meet, in full and on time, their obligations under the Convention and to support the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in its implementation activities; and reaffirm the critical importance of, and vital contribution that had been made by, effective verification measures in arms limitation and disarmament agreements.

A text introduced by the representative of Brazil would have the Assembly call upon the States parties and signatories to the treaties of Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok and Pelindaba, in order to pursue the common goals envisaged in those treaties and to promote the nuclear-weapon-free status of the southern hemisphere and adjacent areas, to explore and implement further ways and means of cooperation among themselves and their treaty agencies.

First Committee - 1b - Press Release GA/DIS/3156 19th Meeting (PM) 29 October 1999

The Assembly would urgently call upon all States that had not yet done so to take all measures to become parties, as soon as possible, to the Convention on the Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects and its Protocols, and in particular, to amended Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby Traps and Other Devices, under a text introduced by the representative of Sweden.

By the terms of a text submitted by the representative of Japan, the Assembly would decide to convene the conference on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in Geneva in June/July 2001, the scope of which would be the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects.

The representative of Burkina Faso tabled three draft resolutions by which the Assembly would: express grave concern regarding any use of nuclear wastes that would constitute radiological warfare and have grave implications for the national security of all States, and call upon them to take appropriate measures with a view to preventing any dumping of nuclear or radioactive wastes that would infringe upon the sovereignty of States; call upon African States to sign and ratify the Treaty as soon as possible so that it could enter into force without delay; and reaffirm its strong support for the revitalization of the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa and emphasize the need to provide it with resources.

The Assembly would reiterate its strong support of the role of the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean in the promotion of United Nations activities at the regional level in order to increase peace, stability, security and development among its Member States, by the terms of a draft text introduced by the representative of Peru.

Statements were also made by the representatives of Chile, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Mozambique, Mexico (on behalf of the Rio Group), Benin, Netherlands, Finland, Kenya, Australia, Mongolia and Nepal.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Monday, 1 November to begin the third and final phase of its work: action on all draft resolutions and decisions.

Committee Work Programme

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this afternoon to conclude its thematic discussion, as well as introduction and consideration of all disarmament and security-related draft resolutions.

During the phase of its work just completed, the Committee combined the thematic discussion with consideration of drafts, as part of a reform to streamline the Committee's work. The third and final stage of its work, which is scheduled to begin on Monday, 1 November, will be action on all disarmament draft resolutions.

It is expected to hear the introduction of draft resolutions concerning: missiles; nuclear disarmament; banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons; advisory opinion of the International Court of the Justice on the legality of nuclear weapons; nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere; African nuclear-weapon-free zone Treaty; and the dumping of radioactive waste.

The Committee was also expected to hear the introductions of drafts on: the Convention on the Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects; the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention); verification in all its aspects; conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels; small arms; the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean; and the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa.

A draft text on the dumping of radioactive waste (document A/C.1/54/L.6), sponsored by Nigeria, would have the Assembly express grave concern regarding any use of nuclear wastes that would constitute radiological warfare and have grave implications for the national security of all States, and call upon them to take appropriate measures with a view to preventing any dumping of nuclear or radioactive wastes that would infringe upon the sovereignty of States.

By further terms, the Assembly would request the Conference on Disarmament to take into account, in the negotiations for a convention on the prohibition of radiological weapons, radioactive wastes as part of the scope of such a convention. It would also request the Conference to intensify efforts towards an early conclusion of such a convention and to include in its report to the General Assembly at its fifty-sixth session the progress recorded in the negotiations on the subject.

Under a draft text sponsored by Burkina Faso, on behalf of the Group of African States, on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa (document A/C.1/54/L.10), the Assembly would reaffirm its strong support for the revitalization of the Regional Centre and emphasize the need to provide it with resources to enable it to strengthen its activities and carry out its programmes. It would appeal again to all States, as well as to international governmental organizations and foundations, to make voluntary contributions in order to strengthen the programmes of activities of the Regional Centre and facilitate the implementation of such programmes.

The Assembly would take note of the report of the Secretary-General and commend the activities carried out by the Centre, in particular, in support of the efforts made by the African States in the areas of peace and security. It would request the Secretary-General to provide all necessary support, within existing resources, to the Centre for better results, and also request him to facilitate the close cooperation between the Centre and the Organization of African Unity, (OAU) in particular in the area of peace, security and development, and to continue to assist the Centre's Director in his efforts to stabilize the Centre's financial situation and revitalize its activities.

According to a draft text sponsored by Canada and Poland on the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention) (document A/C.1/54/L.11), the Assembly would urge all States parties to the Convention to meet, in full and on time, their obligations under the Convention and to support the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in its implementation activities.

A draft resolution entitled “Missiles” sponsored by Iran (document A/C.1/54/L.12) -- would have the Assembly, convinced of the need for a comprehensive approach towards missiles at the global and regional levels, in a balanced and non-discriminatory manner as a contribution to international peace and security, request the Secretary-General, within existing resources, to prepare a report, for the consideration of the fifty-sixth session on the issue of missiles in all its aspects with the assistance of a panel of qualified governmental experts to be nominated by him. It would further request him to seek the views and proposals of Member States on the issue, to collect all other relevant information and to make them available for consideration of the panel of governmental experts.

A draft resolution sponsored by Burkina Faso on the African Nuclear-Weapon- Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba) (document A/C.1/54/L.17), would have the Assembly call upon African States to sign and ratify the Treaty as soon as possible so that it could enter into force without delay. It would call upon the States contemplated in Protocol III to the Treaty that had not yet done so to take all necessary measures to ensure the speedy application of the Treaty to territories for which they were, de jure or de facto, internationally responsible and which lay within the limits of the geographical zone established in the Treaty.

It would call upon the African States parties to the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) which had not yet done so to conclude comprehensive safeguards agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), thereby satisfying the requirements of the Treaty when it entered into force and to conclude additional protocols to their safeguards agreements on the basis of the Model Protocol approved by the Board of Governors on 15 May 1997.

It would express appreciation to the nuclear-weapon States which had signed the Protocols that concerned them, and call upon those which had not yet ratified them to do so as soon as possible.

According to a draft resolution on verification in all its aspects (document A/C.1/54/L.29), the Assembly would reaffirm the critical importance of, and vital contribution that had been made by, effective verification measures in arms limitation and disarmament agreements. The Assembly would request the Secretary- General to report to the Assembly at its next session on further views received from Member States pursuant to the relevant resolutions 50/61 and 52/31.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Austria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Lithuania, New Zealand, Poland, Republic of Korea, Singapore, Slovakia, Ukraine and Uruguay.

By the terms of a draft resolution on negotiations banning the production of fissile material for weapons purposes (document A/C.1/54/L.30), the Assembly would urge the Conference on Disarmament to establish, under the agenda item on cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament, an ad hoc committee to negotiate a non-discriminatory, multilateral and internationally and effectively verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear devices. It would urge the Conference to re-establish its ad hoc committee at the beginning of the 2000 session.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States.

According to a 64-Power draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/54/L.34), the Assembly would call upon the States parties and signatories to the treaties of Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok and Pelindaba, in order to pursue the common goals envisaged in those treaties and to promote the nuclear-weapon-free status of the southern hemisphere and adjacent areas, to explore and implement further ways and means of cooperation among themselves and their treaty agencies. The Assembly would also call for the ratification of those Treaties by all regional States and for all concerned States to facilitate adherence to the protocols to nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties by all relevant States that had not yet done so.

The Assembly would welcome the steps taken to conclude further nuclear- weapon-free zone treaties on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among the States of the region concerned and call upon all States to consider all relevant proposals, including those reflected in its resolutions on the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones in the Middle East and South Asia. It would reiterate the important role of nuclear-weapon-free zones in strengthening the nuclear and non-proliferation regime and in extending the nuclear-weapon-free areas of the world. The Assembly would call upon all States, with particular reference to the nuclear-weapon States, to support the process of nuclear disarmament, with the ultimate goal of eliminating all nuclear weapons.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Angola, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbardos, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Indonesia, Iran, Kenya, Krygyzstan, Liberia, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Samoa, Senegal, Sao Tome and Principe, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sudan, Suriname, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam and Zambia.

A draft resolution on assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States (document A/C.1/54/L.36) would have the Assembly appeal to all States, especially the nuclear-weapon-States, to work actively towards an early agreement on a common approach and, in particular, on a common formula that could be included in an international instrument of a legally binding character. It would recommend that further intensive efforts should be devoted to the search for a common approach or common formula and that the various alternative approaches, including, in particular, those considered in the Conference on Disarmament, should be further explored in order to overcome the difficulties.

The Assembly would also recommend that the Conference should actively continue intensive negotiations with a view to reaching early agreement and concluding effective international arrangements to assure the non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons, taking into account the widespread support for the conclusion of an international convention and giving consideration to any other proposals designed to secure the same objective.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Brunei Darussalam, Colombia, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Viet Nam. By the terms of a draft text on conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/54/L.37), the Assembly would decide to give urgent consideration to the issues involved in conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels. It would 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, and looked forward to a report of the Conference on the subject.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Bangladesh, Belarus, Czech Republic, Fiji, Germany, Mexico, Nepal, Norway, Pakistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Ukraine.

By the terms of a draft resolution sponsored by Myanmar on nuclear disarmament (A/C.1/54/L.41), the General Assembly would recognize that, in view of recent political developments, the time was now opportune for all the nuclear- weapon States to undertake effective disarmament measures with a view to the total elimination of nuclear weapons. It would also recognize the genuine need to de- emphasize the role of nuclear weapons and to review and revise nuclear doctrines accordingly.

In that connection, 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 an interim measure, to immediately de-alert and deactivate their nuclear weapons. It would also urge them to commence plurilateral negotiations among themselves at an appropriate stage on further deep reductions of nuclear weapons as an effective measure of nuclear disarmament.

The Assembly would reiterate its call upon 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 nuclear weapons. It would call for the conclusion, as a first step, of universal and legally binding multilateral agreement committing States to the process of nuclear disarmament leading to the total elimination of nuclear weapons. It would also call upon those States, pending the achievement of the total elimination of nuclear weapons, to agree on an internationally and legally binding instrument of the joint undertaking not to be the first to use nuclear weapons.

It would call upon all States to conclude an internationally and legally binding instrument on security assurances of non-use and threat of use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States. 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 2000 on a phased programme of nuclear disarmament and for the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons, through a set of legal instruments, which might include a nuclear weapons convention.

In a related provision, the Assembly would call for the convening of an international conference on nuclear disarmament at an early date with the objective of arriving at an agreement or agreements on a phased programme of nuclear disarmament and for the eventual total elimination of nuclear weapons through a set of legal instruments, which might include a nuclear weapons convention. The Secretary-General would be requested to submit to the Assembly, at its next session, a report on the implementation of the present resolution, and decide to include in the provisional agenda of that session an item entitled “Nuclear disarmament”.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Algeria, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Libya, Malaysia, Malta, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Thailand, Uruguay, Viet Nam and Zambia.

By the terms of a draft resolution on small arms (document A/C.1/54/L.42), the Assembly would decide to convene the conference on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects in Geneva in June/July 2001. The Assembly would also decide that the scope of the conference would be the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects.

The Assembly would further decide to establish a Preparatory Committee, open to participation by all States, with the participation as observers of the United Nations specialized agencies, other relevant international organizations and others to be determined by the Preparatory Committee, which would hold no less than three sessions, with its first session to be held in New York, from 28 February to 3 March 2000, at which the dates and venue of its subsequent sessions would be decided.

By further terms of the text, all Member States would be invited to respond to the Secretary-General’s note verbale of 20 January, to communicate to him their views on the agenda and other relevant questions relating to the conference.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Benin, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Ecuador, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Lithuania, Madagascar, Mexico, Mozambique, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Philippines, Republic of Korea, San Marino, Solomon Islands, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Togo.

Under the terms of a draft on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/54/L.43), the Assembly would underline once again the unanimous conclusion of the Court that there existed an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.

In that connection, the Assembly would call upon all States immediately to fulfil that obligation by commencing multilateral negotiations in 2000 leading to an early conclusion of a nuclear weapons convention prohibiting the development, production, testing, deployment, stockpiling, transfer, threat or use of nuclear weapons and providing for their elimination.

The Assembly would request all States to inform the Secretary-General of the efforts and measures they had taken to implement the present text and nuclear disarmament. It would request the Secretary-General to apprise the Assembly of that information at its next session.

The draft is sponsored by Algeria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Egypt, Fiji, Ghana, Guyana, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Kenya, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Malawi, Mexico, Mongolia, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Samoa, San Marino, Singapore, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Thailand, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Under a draft resolution sponsored by Peru on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (document A/C.1/54/L.51), the Assembly would reiterate its strong support of the role of the Centre in the promotion of United Nations activities at the regional level in order to increase peace, stability, security and development among its Member States.

The Assembly would urge all the States of the region to make greater use of the Centre’s potential to meet the current challenges facing the international community, with a view to fulfilling the aims of the United Nations Charter regarding peace, disarmament and development. It would appeal to Member States, particularly those within the region, as well as to governmental and non- governmental organizations and foundations, to make voluntary contributions to strengthen its programme of activities and their implementation.

By the terms of a text on the Convention on the Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (document A/C.1/54/L.52), the Assembly would urgently call upon all States that had not yet done so to take all measures to become parties, as soon as possible, to the Convention and its Protocols, and in particular to amended Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby Traps and Other Devices. The Assembly would call upon successor States to take appropriate measures towards universal adherence to those measures.

The Assembly would express satisfaction that the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons (Protocol IV) had entered into force on 30 July 1998. It would welcome the entry into force on 3 December, 1998, of the amended Protocol on Prohibitions or restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby Traps and Other Devices (Protocol II) and call upon all States parties that had not yet done so to notify the Secretary- General of their consent to be bound by Protocol II and IV.

In that connection, the Assembly would come the convening, from 15 to 17 December, of the first annual conference of High Contracting Parties to Protocol II and call upon all High Contracting Parties to address at the conference, among other things, the issue of holding the second annual conference in 2000, and recall the decision of States parties to the Convention to convene the next review conference no later than 2001, preceded by the preparatory committee.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, United Kingdom, United States and Uruguay.

JUAN MIGUEL MIRANDA (Peru) introduced the draft resolution on the Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (document A/C.1/54/L.51). He said that, despite efforts towards disarmament, the elimination of nuclear weapons needed to continue to be a priority. The disarmament machinery of the United Nations must be strengthened at the regional level and the Regional Centre in Latin America could contribute significantly.

He said that such a regional link had an extremely beneficial effect on developing discussions, debates and generating consensus in a non-binding sphere. It was also important in bringing together regional entities for the prevention of conflicts, peace development and disarmament. The purpose of the draft was to emphasize the important role of the Centre. He hoped the draft would receive the broadest support possible in the Committee.

WALDEMAR COUTTS (Chile) spoke on behalf of the draft resolution on the Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (document A/C.1/54/L.51). He said the solution to conflict had to be sought within the context of international law. He agreed with Peru that the Regional Centre should exchange information and generate opinions towards the prevention of conflict. An increase in knowledge about international law could have a positive impact on the creation and dissemination of norms that would make the world a more certain, rather than a more risky place.

The Centre in Lima should define preventive strategies to convey guidelines that would inhibit conflicts and tensions that still characterized international relations. His country supported the convening of a fourth special session for disarmament, as well as the ideas of the “new agenda”, for the mere possession of nuclear weapons was a threat to international security.

HASMY AGAM (Malaysia) introduced the draft resolution on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legality of the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/54/L.43). He said that the text was similar to the one presented last year, with minor amendments. Clearly, according to the Court, States had a legal obligation not only to pursue negotiations on nuclear disarmament, but to bring such negotiations to an early conclusion. That was consistent with the solemn obligation undertaken by States parties to article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The Court’s unanimous opinion on the existence of that obligation was a clear basis for Member States to proceed in their determined efforts to rid the world of nuclear weapons.

He said he wished to respond to comments made last year to the text. It had been alleged that the draft had called for multilateral negotiations leading to an early conclusion, which was unrealistic and lacked credibility. The draft had called on States to commence multilateral negotiations “leading to” an early conclusion of a nuclear weapons convention. It had not referred to the commencement of immediate negotiations on the convention, but only to the steps the nuclear-weapon States had already committed to support. The text was compatible with such incremental approaches.

Aware that disarmament should advance progressively, the text had commended bilateral and unilateral agreements or arrangements, but the lack of progress in those endeavours had been disappointing, he said. START II had still not entered into force, six years after its opening for signature, and some countries, including three nuclear-weapon States, had failed to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). Such bilateral and unilateral negotiations should not detract from multilateral efforts. Indeed, those two tracks could reinforce each other. After all, nuclear disarmament was a matter of concern for all humanity, and not just for the nuclear-weapon States.

On the matter of the selectivity of the Court’s opinion, he said that, indeed, the text had focused on the unanimous opinion concerning the obligation to pursue nuclear disarmament negotiations, as it had not wished to confuse the two main conclusions, which had referred also to the legality of the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. The first operative paragraph had focused on the disarmament negotiations of States, whose implementation was an entirely appropriate concern of the General Assembly, which was mandated to promote such negotiations. The text did not pretend to be concerned only with the Court’s conclusion, as if there were no other actions to be taken in light of its decision.

Continuing, he said the contention that the draft resolution had relieved the non-nuclear-weapon States of any disarmament responsibility “does not hold water”. The text had not singled out the nuclear-weapon States. To a further contention that the text had ignored the obligation under article VI of the NPT, the Court had relied on international law, of which the NPT obligation was a part, as well as on other disarmament and customary law. Its conclusion that there existed an obligation had implied no linkage between such an obligation and general and complete disarmament. It had merely stated the need to do both.

The unanimous decision of the International Court of Justice had been an important contribution to the development of international law, which should not be somberly dismissed, he said. The fact that nuclear-weapon States had ignored that unanimous opinion, and had failed to pursue multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations, could only have a negative impact on the NPT Review Conference, in particular, and disarmament, in general. If that persisted, Member States seeking full compliance with the NPT might wish to seek a further opinion of the Court regarding the non-compliance of nuclear-weapon States.

To the allegation that the draft resolution was silent about the fact that there did not exist in international law a prohibition against the threat of use or use of nuclear weapons, he said the Court had concluded that the threat or use of those weapons was generally illegal. It was, therefore, incorrect to say that it had allowed for any exception. The Court had, in fact, rejected the argument that there would be legal permission to use or threaten to use weapons that were incapable of distinguishing between military and civilian targets. Hopefully, the text would be adopted by a large majority. Those countries seeking multilateral negotiations would have no valid reason to oppose the text.

LUIZ TUPY CALDAS DE MOURA (Brazil) introduced the draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/54/L.34). The General Assembly support of the draft had increased last year, when it had adopted it by 154 votes in favour. Hopefully, the draft, in its fourth year, would enjoy even broader support at the current session. Last year, the text had taken into account questions relating to navigation rights and maritime space. The current text was almost identical. A new reference had been introduced in the second preambular paragraph, on the guidelines for the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones adopted in 1999 by the Disarmament Commission.

One of the most significant developments in the last decade had been the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones in several parts of the world that had decided to rule out the nuclear option. Such zones had contributed to a nuclear- weapon-free southern hemisphere. The States parties to those treaties had renounced the acquisition of nuclear weapons and had accepted commitments to that effect. The current initiative had sought to achieve the recognition of the General Assembly for the fourth year of the progressive emergence of a nuclear- weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas.

He said the text had not created new legal obligations. It had aimed to recall the need to respect existing commitments under nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties and their protocols and called upon States to move towards their ratification and consider further proposals for nuclear non-proliferation zones. The promotion of the idea that most of the globe was nuclear-weapon free had provided further impetus to the process of nuclear disarmament and the strengthening of the nuclear non-proliferation regime. Continued support by all those who had voted in favour of the draft last year was anticipated.

MYA THAN (Myanmar) introduced the draft resolution entitled, “Nuclear disarmament” (document A/C.1/54/L.41). He said that the draft resolution had emerged as the draft of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and a large number of countries of the Non-Aligned Movement. The draft resolution had evolved, taking into account suggestions by co-sponsors, and had become more flexible and realistic. It now projected a vision of nuclear disarmament with realism.

The main thrust of the resolution was the proposal for a phased programme of nuclear disarmament leading to the total elimination of nuclear weapons with a view to establishing a nuclear-weapon-free world. It also contained proposals for systemic and step-by-step practical nuclear disarmament measures. He, therefore, requested the Committee to once again accord overwhelming support for it.

ANWARUL CHOWDHURY (Bangladesh) spoke in favour of the draft resolution on disarmament measures with a view to the total elimination of nuclear weapons (document A.C.1/54/L.41). He said that disarmament was an essential goal, as nuclear weapons remained the principle threat to man. The problem in negotiations was to find common ground in an approach to a common goal. His country supported the establishment of an ad hoc committee in the Conference on Disarmament, which sought consensus from the broadest range of Member States. He commended the draft resolution and hoped for the widest possible support for it.

MAKARIM WIBISONO (Indonesia) spoke on the draft resolution on transparency in armaments (document A/C.1/54/L.41). He said the draft resolution was supported by a vast number of Member States, and reflected the will of the majority of the international community. It concurred with the belief of the Non-Aligned Movement that the Conference on Disarmament was the sole multilateral negotiating forum. It also called for the establishment of an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament, in phased measures.

CARLOS DOS SANTOS (Mozambique) spoke on behalf of the Southern African Development Community (SADC). Within his region, unimpeded access to light weapons and small arms had increased the lethality of crime, violence and civil disobedience. The demobilization of ex-combatants and disarmament programmes were constrained by the existence of large amounts of poorly regulated light weapons.

The proliferation of those weapons in his subregion, he said, was both a product of the past and of the current demand for arms for political or criminal purposes. The strategies for control and reduction needed to be multifaceted. They had to address reduction in local demand and strengthen control of existing legal and illegal stocks in the subregion.

He said that the preparatory committee for the international conference on the illicit arms trade in all its aspects would have a great deal of work to do to facilitate deliberations in the Conference. It was important that all Member States participate both in the preparatory Committee, as well as in the Conference. The chairman of the preparatory committee should come from one of the most affected States.

Another issue of great concern to the SADC, he said, was that of anti- personnel mines. The SADC believed that the States parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Ottawa Convention) should keep the current momentum of the process by calling the second meeting of State parties to the Convention next year, to look into practical issues of the implementation of the Convention.

He added that the efforts aimed at curbing the proliferation of small arms and light weapons and the prohibition of landmines could only be successful with international assistance and cooperation. The SADC appealed to the international community to spare no efforts in providing the required assistance to those countries in need.

ANGELICA ARCE (Mexico), on behalf of the Rio Group, spoke in support of the draft resolution on small arms (document A/C.1/54/L.42). He said that in his region, there was an urgent need to stop conflict and eliminate the proliferation of small arms, which was endangering the well-being of the people. Regional efforts to curb the problem were not enough. There was an urgent need for international help.

He said that the Untied Nations needed to strengthen its activity in that area. In that regard, Mexico supported the holding of an international conference on curbing the illicit traffic in small arms. Such a conference would give the international community an opportunity to restate its commitment to solving that most serious problem. The Preparatory Committee should examine topics related to the procedure of the Conference and prepare actions and measures that should be carried out. It should meet in a place that would allow for ample participation by Member States.

JEAN-BAPTISTE KAMBIRE (Burkina Faso) introduced three draft resolutions: on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa (document A/C.1/54/L.10); the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba) (document A/C.1/54/L.17); and the prohibition on the dumping of radioactive waste (document A/C.1/54/L.6).

He said the draft resolution on the Regional Centre had not differed in its essentials from last year’s text. The only changes had derived from the decision from the heads of State of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) at the thirty- fifth summit held from 12 to 14 July in Algiers. Thus, the third operative paragraph of the draft contained a request of Member States and the international community for voluntary financial contributions to enable the Centre’s smooth functioning. It had welcomed the Secretary-General’s decision to appoint a Director of the Centre, a national of Cameroon, who had been carrying out his duties most efficiently.

The draft resolution on the Pelindaba Treaty was identical to the one adopted last year, he said, except for a few changes concerning an appeal to African States parties to the NPT to conclude comprehensive safeguards agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), thereby carrying out their obligations under the Pelindaba Treaty. Those States had also been invited to conclude additional protocols to their safeguards agreements.

He said the draft resolution on the prohibition of dumping of radioactive waste had contained only one new factor, namely the wish expressed to examine the text every other year. Meanwhile, the Assembly should call on all States to take all necessary measures to prevent the dumping of nuclear waste that would adversely affect national security. In that context, the Assembly should note the adoption in 1991 of a resolution by the OAU devoted to the prohibition of the importation into Africa of dangerous waste, specifically on the control of transport, movement and management of such waste.

The three draft texts had been the subject of broad agreement, he said. The African States were convinced that the texts would enjoy widespread support and be adopted again by consensus.

SAMUEL AMEHOU (Benin) said that since the end of the cold war the world had witnessed a new kind of conflict, where third world countries had been the theatre. Inside countries, rather than between States, armed groups fought each other. Most of those conflicts –- a consequence of underdevelopment –- had turned yesterday’s brothers and neighbours into enemies. Such frictions could have been settled in the past without armed conflict, but since the beginning of the 1990s a propitious climate had emerged for the development of such conflicts. Indeed, the illicit trafficking of small arms and light weapons had grown exponentially. Those weapons had been improved. They were lightweight, practical, easy to use -- and deadly.

He said that armed groups had overcome democratically-elected regimes through the force of such arms. Villages had been desecrated, as groups of bandits and outlaws had spread fear and desolation among the populations. Public law enforcement officials had been powerless against them, because their firepower was generally less than those of the bandit groups. Relevant national legislation could not control those groups, which were flooding Africa’s still porous borders. How could development be envisaged in a country whose inhabitants could no longer tend to their affairs of trade or fieldwork? he asked.

The ease with which those weapons could be used had also led to the recruitment of children, he said. In his subregion, the illicit traffic in light weapons and small arms had become a phenomenon of great importance. His Government had greatly appreciated the attention of the international community to the problem, even while nuclear weapons still remained the most haunting issue of humankind. However, his Government had greatly appreciated the unsparing efforts made by Member States to wage a merciless war against the proliferation of small arms and light weapons.

HENRIK SALANDER (Sweden) introduced the draft resolution on 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)(document A/C.1/54/L.52). He said that the Convention and its Protocols constituted an essential and integral part of international law applicable in armed conflict. The purpose was to place constraints on the conduct of war by restricting the use of certain conventional weapons. When implemented, the rules of the protocols would limit the risks to civilians, as well as combatants.

The Convention offered a framework for negotiations to gradually refine or expand the areas covered by it, he said. The draft resolution promoted the universality of that very important body of international humanitarian law. He hoped it would be adopted by consensus, as it was last year.

Ch. SANDERS (Netherlands) spoke in support of the draft resolution on the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (document A/C.1/54/L.52). He said that the Convention and its Protocols helped lessen the suffering of civilians in combat areas by prohibiting the indiscriminate use of weapons. No effort should be spared to promote the universal adherence to those Protocols. It was appropriate for the General Assembly to call on those States not yet party to the Convention to join it. The international community needed to further develop and strengthen those legal instruments, and he hoped that the resolution would be adopted without a vote.

MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan) introduced the draft resolution on security assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/54/L.36). That call must be viewed in the correct perspective, as it had been based on the fundamental principle of the United Nations Charter concerning States’ obligation to refrain from the use of force. That principal had applied to all kinds of weapons. If the drafters of the Charter had been aware of the existence of nuclear weapons, they would have undoubtedly specifically prohibited their use. The very first resolution of the General Assembly had affirmed the need to outlaw nuclear weapons.

Unfortunately, he said that obligation had not been expressly and legally affirmed by the first, second or third nuclear-weapon States. Perhaps that was because the Charter’s adoption and the dawn of the nuclear era had been soon followed by the outbreak of the cold war. When the NPT was being negotiated, the non-nuclear-weapon States had pointed out that as long as nuclear weapons were possessed by a few, those countries being asked not to acquire them should receive binding guarantees that those weapons would not be used against them and that they would receive assistance in the event of their use.

He said that the response to those reasonable expectations from the nuclear Powers had been “dismal”. In hindsight, that had been the source of much of the nuclear danger confronting the world today. Such security guarantees had not been written into the NPT, nor into a protocol, as some nuclear-weapon States had suggested. The conference of non-nuclear-weapon States in Geneva in 1968 had been prevented by the sponsors of the NPT from reaching a consensus in favour of unconditional, binding positive and negative security assurances. The security assurances that had been offered by three nuclear-weapon States had been partial and dependent on unlikely events. In 1979, some nuclear Powers had offered different negative security assurances.

Continuing, he said the Final Document of the First Special Session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament had called for the conclusion of an international instrument on security guarantees by the Conference on Disarmament. Unfortunately, despite the lapse of more than 21 years, the Conference had been unable to conclude that international agreement. During the cold war, a common formula could not have been evolved. Four of the five nuclear Powers had offered only partial and restricted assurances. One side excluded non-nuclear-weapon States members of a military alliance. All four had excluded all non-nuclear- weapon States which were not parties to the NPT. Only China had offered unrestricted assurances to all non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.

There was considerable hope at the end of the cold war that the nuclear Powers would be ready to offer binding and non-conditional assurances to all non- nuclear-weapon States, he said. Unfortunately, most nuclear-weapon States had proceeded in the opposite direction. Through means “fair and foul”, those had secured the indefinite extension of the NPT without offering tangible assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States or to nuclear disarmament or the elimination of nuclear weapons. A Security Council resolution on the subject –- 984 (1995) -- had been even more limited in scope and credibility than its predecessor.

Following the indefinite extension of the NPT, he said, some nuclear-weapon States had asserted their right to retain nuclear weapons indefinitely and had announced new programmes to maintain and improve them. Next, statements had been made reserving the right to use those weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States, even those party to the NPT and to nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties, in case those countries used or threatened to use other weapons of mass destruction. That had represented significant erosion of even the limited assurances contained in two previous Security Council resolutions.

Last year, a further erosion had taken place when a western alliance had announced a new doctrine envisaging an out-of-area use of force. The expansion of that nuclear alliance had intensified and nuclear sharing had been confirmed among the alliance members.

He said the spread of nuclear weapons to South Asia and elsewhere had added to the possible of the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. In South Asia, the danger had arisen from imbalance of conventional forces and exist of outstanding disputes, especially Kashmir dispute. That had been heightened by a draft nuclear doctrine announced by Pakistan’s neighbour, which had envisaged the operational deploy of a huge arsenal of nuclear weapons on land, sea and air. In the new environment created by South Asia’s nuclearlization, the Conference on Disarmament’s task on negative security assurances had become more challenging and urgent. His country was prepared to extend appropriate assurances, if requested, to respect a region’s nuclear-weapon-free status. Should the new nuclear Powers in South Asia or elsewhere be required to offer negative security assurances? he asked. If that was not politically feasible, were there other ways to achieve that?

The co-sponsors of the draft resolution had believed that the Conference on Disarmament had a vital task to reverse the progressively negative trends regarding the use or possible use of nuclear weapons, he said. The call for effective international arrangements was even more urgent today than in the past. The achievement of an unconditional and legally-binding commitment against any non- nuclear-weapon States would have the following positive effects: reduce the nuclear danger; build confidence; provide greater credibility to the endeavours to halt nuclear proliferation; and facilitate the nuclear disarmament process, thereby representing a first step towards a nuclear-weapon0free world. The Conference should re-establish the ad hoc committee on negative security assurances early next year and make rapid progress towards reaching the objectives set out in the text.

AKIRA HAYASHI (Japan) introduced a draft resolution on small arms (document A/C.1/54/L.42). He said that in the last few years, awareness of the problems concerning small arms had grown remarkably. Many initiatives were now being taken at the international, regional and local levels.

The draft resolution, he said, had been the subject of intensive consultations. It would decide that the conference on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons would be held in June/July 2001 and that the preparatory committee would be established. This committee would conduct its work in no less than three sessions, the first of which was to be held in New York from 28 February to 3 March 2000.

M. WESTDAL (Canada) introduced three draft resolutions. He said his delegation had consulted widely on the draft text of Implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons (Chemical Weapons Convention) (document A/C.1 /54/L.11), and that those consultations had reinforced the merit of maintaining the consensus nature of the important resolution. It was hoped that, as in previous years, the resolution could be adopted without a vote.

He said that the draft resolution on verification in all its aspects (document A/C.1/54/L.29) remphasized the importance of verification to disarmament, arms control and confidence-building. Few issues were of greater significance in international disarmament and arms control negotiations. The resolution would serve to remind the international community of that truth and reinforce continuing efforts to maintain and strengthen the international verification regime.

Except for some factual adjustments, the draft resolution on the Conference on Disarmament (A/C.1/54/L.30) was identical to the one adopted without a vote by the Committee and the General Assembly last year. The resolution was strictly procedural, anchored firmly in the realities of the Conference and the expectations of the international community.

He said that Canada also wished to restate the importance of a verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices as a significant contribution to nuclear non- proliferation in all its aspects.

MARKKU REIMAA (Finland), on behalf of the European Union, spoke on behalf of the draft resolution on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) (document A/C.1/54/L.23). He said the European Union Member States were supporting the draft resolution, as well as actively pursuing efforts to promote early entry into force of the landmark achievement in the area of nuclear disarmament and non- proliferation. The Union was firmly convinced that the CTBT was an essential element in pursuing nuclear disarmament efforts, and hoped all Member States would give their support to this import draft resolution.

Mr. KUINOWA (Kenya) spoke in support of three draft resolutions on small arms (documents A/C.1/54/L.25, L.42 and L.44). He said that there were over 500 million small arms in the world today, most of them in Africa. Those affected the security, independence and socio-economic well-being of African States. It had become clear that the illicit trafficking of those weapons could only be curbed through international efforts. He hoped that the 2001 conference and its preparations would be extremely productive in solving that problem.

PHILIPPA KING (Australia), commenting on the draft resolution on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) (document A/C.1/54/L.23) said that three years after its adoption in the General Assembly by an overwhelming majority, the Treaty had not yet entered into force. While great progress had been made in that regard, clearly there was still some way to go. As a ratifier, her country had often repeated the call for others to sign and ratify it. It was important for the General Assembly to reinforce that call, which was the thrust of the present text. It was uncomplicated and balanced and drew on the Final Declaration of the conference in Vienna to facilitate the Treaty’s operation. It focused on the need for all States to sign and ratify it, or refrain from acts that could defeat its object and purpose in the meanwhile.

She said that every effort must be made towards universalizing the CTBT. All States, in particular the nuclear-weapon States, should be encouraged to ratify the Treaty as a matter of priority. The failure of the United States to ratify the Treaty had been deeply disappointing, and she would urge that administration to continue its efforts in that regard. It was a matter of priority that those countries that had not yet signed, especially those that had continued to test, sign as soon as possible.

The Treaty’s global monitoring system had represented a significant investment of the international community, she said. Without adequate verification measures, the CTBT would be a “weaker guardian” against further nuclear testing. The world community needed to shoulder the responsibility it took on three years ago, by ensuring that the CTBT Organization (CTBTO) was fully effective once the Treaty entered into force. The First Committee and the General Assembly should send an unambiguous message of support for the CTBT by adopting the draft without a vote.

MOHAMMAD HASSAN FADAIFARD (Iran) introduced the draft resolution entitled “Missiles” (document A/C.1/54/L.12). The production and testing of missiles as defensive and offensive arms had dated back many decades and its effectiveness and role in armed conflicts had convinced the military establishments to initiate plans to develop missiles.

He said the opening of the space age had added new dimensions to missiles. Today, any advanced space activity was dependent on the level of the development of missile technology in the country concerned. That trend seemed to continue and States were becoming more eager to enter the area of missile technology. After all, the legitimate interest of all countries in the peaceful use and exploration of outer space could not be denied.

Missile development in the military and civilian arenas would be a reality for years to come, he said. In other words, the development of missiles would have security implications at both the regional and global levels. Meanwhile, there was no internationally negotiated legal instrument to cover missiles in the broad context. Recently, greater interest had been demonstrated by States to discuss the various aspects of the question. Due to the complexity of missile-related matters, however, no initiative had been taken at the global level. The partial solutions already presented had been deemed to be impracticable or unfeasible.

A comprehensive study was therefore needed at the international level, he went on. The draft resolution was somewhat general in nature, which might be interpreted by some delegations as vague, but he had not wished to prejudge the outcome of such a study. A qualified panel of governmental experts, appointed by the Secretary-General on the basis of equitable geographical representation, with the participation of Member States advanced in the field of missile technology, would be the best way to initiate such a study and assist the Secretary-General in his first report on the subject. The call for the study should be adopted by consensus.

JARGALSAIKHANY ENKHSAIKHAN (Mongolia) spoke on several draft resolutions which it intended to co-sponsor in light of the importance it attached to them. As a State Party which was among the first to sign and ratify the CTBT, Mongolia wished to join sponsorship of the draft resolution which was a follow-up of the Vienna Conference (document A/C.1/54/L.23). It also would co-sponsor the “new agenda” resolution (document A/C.1/54/L.9), as well as the draft resolution on a verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material (document A/C.1/54/L.30).

As his government was firmly committed to strengthening international non- proliferation regime, he said, it was also co-sponsoring the draft resolution on nuclear-weapon-free zones of the southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/54/L.34)

MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan) introduced the draft resolution on conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/54/L.37). He said that while nuclear weapons had posed a threat of global annihilation, conventional weapons continued to be used in scores of conflicts worldwide. The conventional arms race had also consumed the vast majority of resources spent on armaments by both rich and poor nations. Despite hopes in the immediate aftermath of the cold war, the danger of an emphasis on a build-up of conventional armaments and armed forces had been revived for several reasons. Those included: the proliferation of conflicts globally; the growing divergence in strategic priorities; and technological progress which had made the acquisition of new weapons "irresistible" to the military complexes of the most powerful States.

Disarmament in the conventional field needed to be promoted in several ways, he said, including the balanced restraint on the transfer and acquisition of those weapons and the promotion of nuclear disarmament and agreement among the major Powers. At same time, the principle measures to address issues related to conventional weapons should be taken at the regional and subregional levels where the conflicts had arisen. The resolution of such disputes was essential in promoting conventional arms control. Regional and subregional approaches were also the best way to arrest asymmetries that could destabilize sensitive regions. If some States could not match conventional arms acquisitions, a grave arms imbalance could encourage aggression and create a compulsion for weapons of mass destruction. HIRA THAPA (Nepal) spoke in support of the resolution on nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/54/L.41). He said that he hoped the resolution would receive the widest support possible.

* *** *