FIRST COMMITTEE APPROVES 11 DRAFT RESOLUTIONS, ONE DECISION ON WIDE RANGE OF DISARMAMENT MEASURES
Press Release
GA/DIS/3158
FIRST COMMITTEE APPROVES 11 DRAFT RESOLUTIONS, ONE DECISION ON WIDE RANGE OF DISARMAMENT MEASURES
19991101UN Conventional Arms Register, Regional Conventional Arms Control, Arms Control Agreement Compliance, Small Arms among Issues Addressed
The General Assembly would reaffirm its decision, with a view to the further development of the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms, to keep the scope of and participation in the Register under review, by the terms of one of 11 draft resolutions and one draft decision approved this afternoon in the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security).
By further terms of the text, approved by a recorded vote of 128 in favour to none against, with 13 abstentions, the Assembly would call upon Member States, with a view to achieving universal participation, to provide the Secretary-General by 31 May, annually, the requested data and information for the Register, including nil reports, if appropriate. (For details of the vote, see Annex IV.)
Prior to approval of the draft, the Committee took two separate recorded votes. The first concerned operative paragraph 4 (b) by which the Assembly would request the Secretary-General, with the assistance of a group of governmental experts to be convened in 2000, to prepare a report on the continuing operation of the Register and its further development, with a view to a decision at its next session. The operative paragraph was approved by a vote of 121 in favour to none against, with 12 abstentions. (Annex II)
The second recorded vote concerned operative paragraph 6, by which the Assembly would invite the Conference on Disarmament to consider continuing its work undertaken in the field of transparency in armaments. The paragraph was approved by a vote of 120 in favour to none against, with 15 abstentions. (Annex III)
Speaking before action on the text, several representatives from the Middle East explained they would abstain in the vote because the 1991 transparency instrument - which had included seven categories of conventional weapons and no categories of weapons of mass destruction - had not met the security concerns of their countries. In order for the Register to be a truly significant confidence-building measure and enhance security and stability, the representative of Egypt said it should be comprehensive and non-discriminatory,
First Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/DIS/3158 21st Meeting (PM) 1 November 1999
ensure equal rights and obligations for all States, and provide a broad degree of transparency in all fields of armaments in a non-selective manner.
Under another transparency text, approved today without a vote, the Assembly would call upon all Member States to report to the Secretary-General by 30 April annually their military expenditures for the fiscal year. It would recommend the guidelines and recommendations for objective information to all Member States for implementation, fully taking into account specific political military and other conditions prevailing in a region, on the basis of initiatives with the agreement of the States of the region concerned.
By a recorded vote of 133 in favour to 1 against (India), with 2 abstentions (Benin, Bhutan), the Committee approved a text by which Assembly would decide to give urgent consideration to the issues involved in conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels. In that connection, the Assembly 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 (Annex I).
Acting without a vote, the Committee approved a draft decision tabled by the United States, by which the Assembly would include an item on compliance with arms limitation and disarmament and non-proliferation agreements in the provisional agenda of its fifty-sixth session.
Following action on that text, the representative of China said he had joined consensus because strict compliance with disarmament treaties was of crucial importance. He hoped the main sponsor of the text could match their words with their deeds and effectively implement and comply with the legal obligations it had undertaken. Compliance with disarmament agreements, including with the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems - the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty -- should receive unanimous Committee support.
Also acting without a vote, the Committee approved a text by which the Assembly would request the Secretary-General to continue his broad-based consultations on the illicit trafficking in small arms and to submit to the international conference on the subject information on: the magnitude and scope of illicit trafficking; measures to combat it; and the role of the United Nations in collecting, collating, sharing and disseminating information on the problem.
A draft resolution on regional disarmament, also approved without a vote, would have the Assembly call upon States to conclude agreements for nuclear non- proliferation, disarmament and confidence-building measures at the regional and subregional levels. The Assembly would stress that sustained efforts were needed, within the framework of the Conference on Disarmament and under the umbrella of the United Nations, to make progress on the entire range of disarmament issues.
First Committee - 1b - Press Release GA/DIS/3158 21st Meeting (PM) 1 November 1999
Also acting without a vote, the Committee approved several texts on the United Nations disarmament machinery, by which the Assembly would: urge the Conference on Disarmament to fulfil its role as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum of the international community; and recommend that the Disarmament Commission consider at its 2000 substantive session the items submitted by the Assembly, including one on nuclear disarmament.
A series of texts on the United Nations Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament would have the Assembly: reiterate the importance of the United Nations activities at the regional level to increase the stability and security of its Member States; reaffirm its strong support for the revitalization of the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa; reiterate its strong support of the role of the Centre in Latin America and the Caribbean in the promotion of United Nations activities at the regional level; and reaffirm its strong support for the continuing operation and further strengthening of the Centre in Asia and the Pacific, and underscore the importance of the Kathmandu process as a vehicle for the development of the practice of region-wide security and disarmament dialogue.
Statements on drafts were made by the representatives of Iraq, Syria, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Kuwait. Texts were introduced by the representatives of Uzbekistan and France.
The Committee will meet at 10 a.m. Tuesday, 2 November, to continue taking action on all disarmament- and security-related drafts.
Committee Work Programme
The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this afternoon to continue taking action on disarmament- and security-related draft resolutions. It was also expected to hear the introduction of two draft decisions on: the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia; and the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters.
The draft decision sponsored by France on the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters (document A/C.1/54/L.28) would decide to request the Secretary-General to adjust the language in the mandate of the Advisory Board as set out in paragraphs 45 to 46 of the report of the Secretary-General (document A/54/218).
Those paragraphs concern the Board's improved functioning and mandate, and contain the Secretary-General's endorsement that the General Assembly approve the change of language to reflect the current practice of the Board. The Board proposes that the language of its formal mandate, adopted in 1982, be readjusted to reflect its actual functions, as they have been performed for more than a decade. The thrust of the amendment would be to emphasize the Board's proactive advisory role on disarmament matters over its role to advise on various aspects of studies and research. Its function to serve as the Board of Trustees for the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) would remain unchanged, and it would retain its role of advising on the implementation of the Disarmament Information Programme.
A draft decision sponsored by Uzbekistan on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia (document A/C.1/54/L.35) would have the Assembly decide to include that item in the provisional agenda of its fifty- fifth session.
Also for action, the Committee had before it one draft on conventional weapons, two on regional disarmament and security, three on confidence-building measures, including transparency in armaments, and six on the United Nations disarmament machinery.
According to a draft resolution on the Disarmament Commission (document A/C.1/54/L.3), the Assembly would commend the Commission for the successful conclusion of the items on the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones and guidelines on conventional arms control, limitation and disarmament. It would note with regret that the Commission was unable to reach a consensus on the item on a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament.
By further terms of the text, the Assembly would reaffirm the role of the Disarmament Commission as the specialized deliberative body within the United Nations multilateral disarmament machinery that allowed for in-depth deliberations on specific disarmament issues, leading to the submission of concrete recommendations on those issues. It would recommend that the Commission, at its 1999 organizational session, adopt two items to be determined in the coming months for consideration at its 2000 substantive session.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Croatia, Ecuador, Egypt, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Mali, Mexico, Mongolia, Philippines, Portugal, Slovakia, and Trinidad and Tobago.
Under a draft text sponsored by Burkina Faso, on behalf of the States Members 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 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 activities of the Regional Centre and facilitate the implementation of its 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, 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 decision sponsored by the United States on compliance with arms limitation and disarmament and non-proliferation agreements (document A/C.1/54/L.13), the Assembly, on the recommendation of the First Committee, recalling its resolution 52/30 of 9 December 1997, would decide to include in the provisional agenda of its fifty-sixth session the item entitled Compliance with arms limitation and disarmament and non-proliferation agreements.
A draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific (document A/C.1/54/L.14) would have the Assembly reaffirm its strong support for the continuing operation and further strengthening of the Regional Centre. The Assembly would underscore the importance of the Kathmandu process as a powerful vehicle for the development of the practice of region-wide security and disarmament dialogue.
In that connection, the Assembly would appeal to Member States, as well as to international governmental and non-governmental organizations and foundations, to make voluntary contributions, the only resources of the Regional Centre, so as to strengthen it. It would express its appreciation for the continuing political support and financial contributions to the Regional Centre, which were essential for its continued operation.
According to a draft text sponsored by Australia on the Conference on Disarmament (document A/C.1/54/L.16), the General Assembly would urge the Conference to fulfil its role as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum of the international community in light of the evolving international situation, with a view to making early substantive progress on priority agenda items. It would welcome the decision of the Conference on 5 August to admit five new members, and note that the Conference recognized the importance of continuing consultations on the question of expansion of its membership. It would also welcome the Conferences strong collective interest in commencing substantive work as soon as possible during its 2000 session. The Conference would be encouraged to continue the ongoing review of its agenda and methods.
Under a draft text on objective information on military matters (document A/C.1/54/L.27), the Assembly would call upon all Member States to report annually, by 30 April, to the Secretary-General their military expenditures for the latest fiscal year. The Assembly would recommend the guidelines and recommendations for objective information to all Member States for implementation, fully taking into account specific political military and other conditions prevailing in a region, on the basis of initiatives with the agreement of the States of the region concerned.
The Assembly would request the Secretary-General to continue consultations with relevant international bodies, within existing resources, with a view to ascertaining the requirements for adjusting the present instrument to encourage wider participation, with emphasis on examining possibilities for enhancing complementarity among international and regional reporting systems and to exchange related information with those bodies. It would further request him to make recommendations on necessary changes to the content and structure of the standardized reporting system in order to strengthen and broaden participation, and to submit a report on the subject to the Assembly at its fifty-sixth session.
In a related provision, the Assembly would call upon all Member States, in time for the fifty-sixth session of the Assembly, to provide the Secretary- General with their views on the analysis and recommendations contained in his report with further suggestions to strengthen and broaden participation in the United Nations system for the standardized reporting of military expenditures, including necessary changes to its content and structure.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Paraguay, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States and Uruguay.
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 Czech Republic, Norway, Pakistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Ukraine.
Under a draft resolution on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/54/L.38), the Assembly would call upon States to conclude agreements, wherever possible, for nuclear non-proliferation, disarmament and confidence-building measures at the regional and subregional levels. It would stress that sustained efforts were needed, within the framework of the Conference on Disarmament and under the umbrella of the United Nations, to make progress on the entire range of disarmament issues. It would affirm that global and regional approaches to disarmament complemented each other and should, therefore, be pursued simultaneously to promote regional and international peace and security.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Egypt, Indonesia, Niger, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Tunisia.
A draft text on transparency in armaments (document A/C.1/54/L.39) would have the Assembly call upon Member States, with a view to achieving universal participation, to provide the Secretary-General by 31 May annually the requested data and information for the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms, including nil reports if appropriate, on the basis of relevant General Assembly resolutions and the 1997 report of the Secretary-General on the continuing operation of the Register and its further development. It would reiterate its call upon all Member States to cooperate at the regional and subregional levels, taking fully into account the specific conditions prevailing in the region or subregion, with a view to enhancing and coordinating international efforts aimed at increased openness and transparency in armaments.
The Assembly would reaffirm its decision, with a view to the further development of the Register, to keep the scope of and participation in the Register under review. Towards that goal, it would recall its request to Member States to provide the Secretary-General with their views on the continuing operation of the Register and its further development and on transparency measures related to weapons of mass destruction.
The Assembly would also recall its request to the Secretary-General, with the assistance of a group of governmental experts to be convened in 2000 on the basis of equitable representation, to prepare a report on the continuing operation of the Register and its further development, with a view to a decision at its fifty-fifth session.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Monaco, Mongolia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Samoa, San Marino, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Swaziland, Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Thailand, Togo, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay and Venezuela.
According to a draft resolution on the illicit traffic in small arms (document A/C.1/54/L.44*), the Assembly would request the Secretary-General to continue his broad-based consultations, within available financial resources and with any other assistance provided by Member States in a position to do so, and to submit to the international conference on the subject, information on: the magnitude and scope of illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons; measures to combat illicit trafficking in and circulation of small arms and light weapons; and the role of the United Nations in collecting, collating, sharing and disseminating information on illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons.
The Assembly would encourage Member States to promote regional and subregional initiatives and request the Secretary-General, within available financial resources, and also States in a position to do so, to assist States taking such initiatives to address the illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons in affected regions. It would invite the Secretary-General to use those initiatives as part of his consultations.
In a related provision, the Assembly also encourage those Member States, in a position to do so, to take appropriate national measures to destroy surplus small arms and light weapons, as well as confiscated or collected small arms and light weapons, and to provide, on a voluntary basis, information to the Secretary-General on types and quantities destroyed.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Botswana, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte dIvoire, Croatia, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Mexico, Mozambique, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Senegal, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Swaziland, Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Uganda, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
A text sponsored by South Africa on the United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament (document A/C.1/54/L.49) would have the Assembly reiterate the importance of the United Nations activities at the regional level to increase the stability and security of its Member States, which could be promoted in a substantive manner by the maintenance and revitalization of the three regional centres for peace and disarmament.
The Assembly would reaffirm that, in order to achieve positive results, it would be useful for the three regional centres to carry out dissemination and educational programmes that promoted regional peace and security aimed at changing basic attitudes with respect to peace and security and disarmament. In that connection, it would appeal to Member States, as well as to international governmental and non-governmental organizations and foundations, to make voluntary contributions to the regional centres to strengthen their programmes of activities and implementation.
Under a draft text sponsored by Peru on the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament 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, and urge all States of the region to make greater use of the Centres potential in meeting the current challenges of the international community, with a view to fulfilling the aims of the United Nations Charter regarding peace, disarmament and development.
The Assembly 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 the Centres activities.
Introduction of Drafts
NODIRBEK IBRAGIMOV (Uzbekistan) introduced the draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia (document A/C.1/54/L.35). He said that significant progress had already been achieved towards that process, and he hoped the Committee would find consensus and it would be adopted without a vote.
HUBERT DE LA FORTELLE (France) introduced a draft decision on the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters (document A/C.1/54/L.28). He said that the recommendations in the draft concerned procedural matters meant to facilitate the work of this advisory body. He hoped it would be adopted without a vote.
Statements on Texts
The representative of Iraq commented on the draft resolution on the prevention of an arms race in outer space (document A/C.1/54/L.22). He said he was concerned at steps being taken by the United States towards the militarization of outer space. The United States had hoped to control outer space through tests of anti-satellite laser weapons and anti-ballistic missiles. If executed, American plans would violate the Convention on Outer Space, to which the United States acceded in 1967, which stipulated the exploration of space would be the common heritage of humanity. The fifth paragraph of the Convention stipulated that the use of space by all State parties would be for purely peaceful purposes.
In addition, he said that he hoped that the draft resolution on the prohibition of new weapons of mass destruction (document A/C.1/54/L.26) would specifically name depleted uranium, so that it could be prohibited for use in military purposes. The use of such depleted uranium by the United States and the United Kingdom in 1991 had led to an environmental disaster in Iraq.
Action on Texts
The Secretary of the Committee announced that Brazil, Venezuela, Haiti, and El Salvador had become co-sponsors to the draft resolution on the illicit traffic in small arms (document A/C.1/54/L.44).
The representatives of Burkina Faso, Suriname, Paraguay and Mali also added their countries to the list of co-sponsors.
The Committee adopted the draft resolution on the illicit traffic in small arms without a vote.
Speaking on explanation of position, the representative of Cuba said the resolution on the illicit traffic in small arms covered a topic receiving priority attention and deserved the broadest possible debate. But, the discussion of adopting concrete measures needed to respect the unique features of each region and country concerned. It was up to the preparatory committee to take responsibility for final decisions on documents that must be sent in advance to the delegations to the international conference.
The representative of India, speaking before the vote on the draft resolution on conventional arms control at regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1./54/L.37), said she was not convinced that the resolution -- in particular operative paragraph 2, which requested the Conference on Disarmament to consider the formulation of principles that could serve as a framework for regional agreements on conventional arms control -- had productive value. India had security concerns that were not confined to the so-called region of South Asia, and such a narrow definition did not reflect its true security concerns.
The Committee Secretary announced that Norway had withdrawn co-sponsorship of the resolution.
The draft resolution on conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/54/L.37) was approved by a recorded vote of 133 in favour to 1 against (India), with two abstentions (Benin, Bhutan). (For details, see Annex I.)
The representative of Burkina Faso said he would have voted in favour of the draft.
The Committee next approved the draft resolution on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/54/L.38) without a vote.
Turning to the series of resolutions in the category on confidence- building measures, including transparency in armaments, the representative of Iraq took the floor on the draft resolution on verification in all its aspects (document A/C.1/54/L.29). The international disarmament conventions and the United Nations literature on the subject, including the report of the Secretary- General on verification, had shown that verification was a process in which the data was collected and analysed so as to reach decisions concerning compliance that was based on accessible information.
He said the United Nations literature also had confirmed that effective verification could occur without affecting the national confidentiality. It was necessary for Member States to be able to protect sensitive information and facilities. It was also important to steer away from any abuse in the verification field. However, the experience of United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) in Iraq had violated all of those concepts. The verification concept adopted by UNSCOM had changed the nature of inspections. There had been many exaggerations of various aspects of verification, which had been arbitrary and aimed at finding some kind of relationship between the verification process and UNSCOMs allegations.
Indeed, he said, the previous UNSCOM had made the verification process a cover to implement its own policies, in particular, the policies of one or two States known to be enemies of Iraq. The objective was to enable UNSCOM to continue to impose sanctions on Iraq and perpetuate also the various false allegations for the continuing aggressions, which began on 16 December 1998. The United States had not denied the fact that UNSCOM inspectors of United States and United Kingdom citizenship had carried out information and intelligence activities through exchanging visits and information between the different intelligence systems between those two countries and Israel. Those had also implanted spying devices to monitor the movement of Iraqi officials and their communications.
The Secretary-General had not denied the accusations aimed at the previous UNSCOM, he went on, and during an interview with the British Broadcasting Service on 27 June, the Secretary-General had said that accusations directed at UNSCOM inspectors of spying for the United States were partially true. At the same time, there had been no denial by any United States official of those accusations aimed at UNSCOM.
In addition, he added, the investigations carried out by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in the UNSCOM laboratory in Baghdad had revealed last July that the work of UNSCOM in Iraq had not been professional, and the international procedures used in the field of verification had not been adopted. There had been no documentation of work in the laboratory and the log book had been destroyed. Moreover, UNSCOM had brought into Iraq samples of VX, without declaring its presence. The objective had clearly been to leave some traces on Iraqi missiles.
The behaviour of the previous UNSCOM had been largely detrimental to the credibility of the Organization and the disarmament systems, he said, including the concept of verification. The United Nations had to invest those practices and impose disciplinary measures on those accused of negligence. Unfortunately, neither the Secretary-Generals report nor the draft before the Committee had referred to those serious practices and deviation from the work of the United Nations.
The Committee then approved the draft decision on compliance with arms limitation and disarmament and non-proliferation agreements (document A/C.1/54/L.13).
The representative of China said his delegation had joined consensus. Strict compliance with the various disarmament agreements had been of crucial import to achieving results. For that reason, his country had always supported the resolution on the topic, presented by the United States and other countries, since 1985. Today, that item was of greater significance than ever before, but regrettably it had taken note of the significance of compliance, on the one hand, but had demonstrated a negative attitude towards the draft resolution concerning compliance with the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM Treaty) (document A/C.1/54/L.1).
He hoped the main sponsor of the text could match their words with their deeds and effectively implement and comply with the legal obligations it had undertaken not to use double standards or jeopardize the interest of others for their own sake, or take unilateral actions in area of disarmament and arms control treaties. Such action would jeopardize the basis of disarmament efforts and hinder the process. He hoped compliance with arms limitation and non- proliferation, including compliance with the ABM Treaty, would receive the unanimous support of Member States.
The Committee next turned to the draft resolution on objective information on military matters, including transparency of military expenditures (document A/C.1/54/L.27).
The Committee Secretary announced that Haiti had become a co-sponsor of the text.
The text was approved without a vote.
Turning to the draft resolution on transparency in armaments (document A/C.1/54/L.39), the representative of Syria said his delegation had supported the establishment of an international community free from the threat of force, where justice, equality and peace had prevailed. He affirmed his countrys readiness to participate in achieving that goal. However, the draft had not taken into account the special situation in the Middle East, where the Arab- Israeli conflict had continued to rage because of Israels continued occupation of Arab territories, as well as its refusal to implement the relevant Security Council resolutions. Moreover, Israel had been acquiring some of the most sophisticated and destructive weapons and storing them domestically. Transparency in the field of Israeli armaments had been applied only to a very small part of its arsenal. His delegation would, therefore, abstain in the vote.
The representative of Egypt said that since the adoption of draft in 1991, establishing the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms, his country had contributed faithfully to advocating transparency in military matters and had supported the Registers underlying objective. It had also supported the resolution from 1991 to 1993, when it was adopted without a vote, but it had abstained beginning in 1994 when a group of experts had been unable to reach agreement on further expansion of the Register. In order for it to be a truly significant, confidence-building measure and contribute to enhanced security and stability, it should be: comprehensive and non-discriminatory; ensure equal rights and obligations for all States, and address their legitimate security concerns; and provide a broad degree of transparency in all fields of armaments in a non-selective manner.
The Register, in its present form, might meet the security concerns of some States, but not of Egypt, he said. Such an instrument must show the overall military capabilities of States. Other countries, however, had not shared his enthusiasm in that regard, and wished to limit the transparency exercise to conventional arms. That approach had been inconsistent with the 1991 decision of the General Assembly regarding the early expansion of the Registers scope. It should include more than seven categories of conventional weapons. States with more advanced military capabilities had not been required to provide transparency, especially in the areas of weapons of mass destruction. The prospects for the eventual development of the Register, in terms of expanding its scope, had been unimpressive, even remote, owing to the lack of will on the part of the international community. For those reasons, he would abstain in the vote. The representative of Mexico said his delegation had been up to date concerning the information it had provided to the Register. Operative paragraph 6 of the draft had invited the Conference on Disarmament to consider continuing its work undertaken in the field of transparency in armaments. First of all, the Conference had not undertaken any work at all in 1999. In addition, the position of the Group of 21 countries of the Conference had been that the ad hoc committee that had functioned some time ago had completed its mandate. In subsequent years, there had been a special coordinator who had consulted with countries about the manner in which transparency could be pursued, but no work had been undertaken. Therefore, operative paragraph 6 did not reflect a reality. Thus, his delegation would abstain in the vote.
The representative of Saudi Arabia said his delegation would reiterate its full support for transparency, as that would contribute to international peace and security. In order for any such mechanism to succeed, however, it must be inspired by clear basic principles and be balanced, comprehensive and non- discriminatory, and enhance national, as well as regional and international, security for all States, in accordance with international law. The Register had been a first attempt by the international community to deal with the question of transparency at the global level.
He said that, despite the fact that its value as a global confidence- building measure and as an early-warning mechanism had been clear, the Register had faced a number of very notable problems, including that half the Member States of the United Nations had consistently refrained from providing information to the Register. He, therefore, must reiterate the need to take into account the apprehensions of States seeking universality. The statement made by the League of Arab States to the Secretary-General on 28 August 1997 entitled The United Nations Register on Conventional Arms, had made clear that an expanded Register -- to also contain information about weapons of mass destruction, in particular nuclear weapons, and advanced technology with military applications -- would constitute a more balanced, comprehensive and less discriminatory tool and attract a larger number of participants. His delegation would abstain in the vote.
The representative of Libya said his delegation would also abstain for the same reasons expressed by the representatives of Egypt, Syria and Saudi Arabia. Of course, his country had supported transparency in armaments, but in the Arab region there was a hostile entity that is armed to the teeth with weapons of mass destruction and developing new ones not heard of in the world until Sundays report in The New York Times on genetic weapons. Such information could not be found in the Register. Regrettably, his delegation would have to abstain.
The representative of Kuwait said it was important to expand the scope of the Register in order to include weapons of mass destruction. He, therefore, supported the statements made by the representatives of Egypt, Syria and Libya, and would abstain in the vote.
The Committee Secretary announced that the following countries had become co-sponsors of the text: Zambia, Zimbabwe, El Salvador, Haiti, Venezuela, Uzbekistan, Cape Verde and Jamaica. In a separate recorded vote, operative paragraph 4 (b), by which the Assembly would request the Secretary-General, with the assistance of a group of governmental experts to be convened in 2000, to prepare a report on the continuing operation of the Register and its further development, was approved by a vote of 121 in favour to none against, with 12 abstentions (Annex II).
Next, in a separate recorded vote, operative paragraph 6, by which the Assembly would invite the Conference on Disarmament to consider continuing its work undertaken in the field of transparency in armaments, was approved by a vote of 120 in favour to none against, with 15 abstentions (Annex III).
By a recorded vote of 128 in favour to none against, with 13 abstentions, the Committee approved the draft resolution as a whole on transparency in armaments (document A/C.1/54/L.39) (Annex IV).
Speaking in explanation of vote, the representative of China said he had abstained on the draft resolution concerning transparency in armaments. For the past four years, a certain country had registered its arms sales to Taiwan with the United Nations Register by way of a footnote, which had seriously interfered in the internal affairs of China. Clearly, that was not an international sale of arms between sovereign States. That certain country had politicized the Register, and China was compelled to withdraw from participation in it.
The representative of Cuba said he had voted in favor of the resolution, but expressed reservations about operative paragraph 6, which invited the Conference to consider continuing its work in the field of armament transparency. The Conference had already concluded its work on that matter.
The representative of Myanmar agreed with the main thrust of the draft resolution, but expressed reservations about operative paragraph 4 (b), which requested a group of governmental experts to prepare a report on the continuing operation of the Register and its further development. It was premature and unnecessary to further develop the Register, and he questioned the usefulness of another meeting of governmental experts on the subject. There was no need for the Conference to take up the issue of transparency. Rather, the Conference should concentrate on important issues, such as nuclear disarmament and banning fissile material for weapons.
The representative of Algeria said that the United Nations Register did not address transparency in a universal manner. He had difficulties with paragraph 6 of the draft, which asked the Conference on Disarmament to consider continuing its work on transparency. He believed the Conference had already considered the issue.
As the Committee turned to the next group of resolutions, the representative of Saudi Arabia said his country had joined as a co-sponsor to the draft resolution on the Report on the Disarmament Commission (document A/C.1/54/L.3).
The Committee adopted the draft resolution on the Report of the Disarmament Commission without a vote. The representative of Guyana said she had voted in favour of the resolution on transparency in armaments.
The Committee then adopted the draft resolution on the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa (document A/C.1/54/L.10) without a vote.
The representative of Bangladesh spoke before the vote on the draft resolution on the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific (document A/C.1/54/L.24). He said that, while his country would vote for the draft, it would no longer be a co-sponsor, as the present text did not represent its sentiments forcefully enough.
The representative of the Lao Peoples Democratic Republic said his country joined as a co-sponsor to the resolution.
The Committee Secretary said that Uzbekistan also joined as co-sponsor.
The Committee adopted the draft resolution on the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific without a vote.
The representative of Oman, speaking after the vote, said his country supported the draft and was happy to see it receiving consensus. However, it believed the Centre should have broader scope than it currently did and greater coordination with the Member States it was supporting.
The Committee adopted the draft resolution on Report on the Conference of Disarmament (document A/C.1/54/L.16) without a vote.
The Committee Secretary announced that Jamaica had joined as a co-sponsor on the draft resolution.
The Committee adopted the draft resolution on United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament (document A/C.1/54/L.49) and the draft on the Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (document A/C.1/54/L.51) without a vote.
The representative of Zambia said his country wished to go on record as being in favour of the two draft resolutions: Prohibition of the dumping of radioactive wastes (document A/C.1/54/L.6), and the prevention of an arms race in outer space (document A/C.1/54/L.22).
(annexes follow)
ANNEX I
Vote on Conventional Arms Control at Regional Level
The draft resolution on conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/54/L.37) was approved by a recorded vote of 133 in favour to 1 against, with 2 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Côte dIvoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia.
Against: India.
Abstain: Benin, Bhutan.
Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Jordan, Kiribati, Lao Peoples Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Tajikistan, Tonga, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.
(END OF ANNEX I)
ANNEX II
Vote on Operative Paragraph 4 (b) of Transparency in Armaments
Operative paragraph 4 (b), concerning a report of the Secretary-General on the operation of the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms, of the draft resolution on transparency in armaments (document A/C.1/54/L.39), was approved by a recorded vote of 121 in favour to none against, with 12 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte dIvoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Paupa New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Zambia.
Against: None
Abstain: Algeria, China, Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, Indonesia, Iran, Kuwait, Mexico, Myanmar, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Yemen.
Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Belize, Cameroon, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Jordan, Kiribati, Lao Peoples Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Morocco, Nauru, Oman, Palau, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Tajikistan, Tonga, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.
(END OF ANNEX II)
ANNEX III
Vote on Operative Paragraph 6 of Transparency in Armaments
Operative paragraph 6, concerning the Conference on Disarmament, of the draft resolution on transparency in armaments (document A/C.1/54/L.39), was approved by a recorded vote of 120 in favour to none against, with 15 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte dIvoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Zambia.
Against: None
Abstain: Algeria, China, Cuba, Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Kuwait, Libya, Mexico, Myanmar, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Yemen
Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Belize, Cameroon, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Jordan, Kiribati, Lao Peoples Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Morocco, Nauru, Oman, Palau, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sudan, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.
(END OF ANNEX III)
ANNEX IV
Vote on Transparency in Armaments
The draft resolution on transparency in armaments (document A/C.1/54/L.39) was approved by a recorded vote of 128 in favour to none against, with 13 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte dIvoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Zambia.
Against: None
Abstain: Algeria, China, Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, Egypt, Iran, Kuwait, Libya, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria.
Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Cameroon, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Jordan, Kiribati, Lao Peoples Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Tajikistan, Tonga, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zimbabwe.
* *** *