Disarmament Commission

2001 Substantive Session

247^th Meeting (AM) and Round-up

DISARMAMENT COMMISSION REVIEWS APPROACHES TO NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT

AND CONVENTIONAL ARMS CONTROL, AS IT CONCLUDES CURRENT SESSION

The Disarmament Commission concluded its substantive session for 2001 this morning with the adoption of its final report and reports of its two working groups, as orally revised.

In her closing remarks, Commission Chairperson Diane Quarless (Jamaica) said that the task the Commission had set for itself was not an easy one, for the issues which it currently had under consideration were fundamental and critical to the meaningful advancement of the disarmament agenda, in both the nuclear and conventional fields. 

It was fitting, she noted, that the Commission had begun the new millennium with a commitment to explore new ways and means to achieve nuclear disarmament, and to develop practical confidence-building measures in the field of conventional arms.  It set the bar high for future action in pursuit of a strengthened regime for the enhancement of international peace and security. 

The Working Paper on ways and means to achieve nuclear disarmament was a good synthesis of the many facets of the issue, she said.  It built on the Chairman’s non-paper introduced at the beginning of the session, drawing on the Chairman’s compilation of proposals, comments and oral and written submissions from delegations.  It attempted to present in a realistic way the achievements and current developments in the field of nuclear disarmament, while acknowledging the work that still remained to be done.  In addition, the non-paper on practical confidence-building measures in the field of conventional arms remained a sound basis for deliberation and future negotiation. 

Yaw Odei Osei (Ghana), Chairperson of Working Group I on "ways and means to achieve nuclear disarmament", introduced the report of the Group as contained in document A/CN.10/2001/CRP.3/Rev.1.  During the 10 meetings the Group held over the past three weeks, it exchanged views and presented oral and written proposals on the papers before it.  The text of the Chairman’s paper would be the basis for continuing negotiations next year.  The inter-sessional consultations, which would precede the revision of his paper, would be based on the preliminary comments made on the paper during the first reading.

Gabriela Martinic (Argentina), Chairperson of Working Group II, presented the report on practical confidence-building measures in the field of conventional arms (document A/CN.10/2001/CRP.4 Rev.2).  She said the Group had held

11 substantive meetings, during which delegations made valuable oral and written proposals on the three working papers under consideration and discussed

preliminary ideas on recommendations for confidence-building measures.  The Group benefited from a briefing by a representative of the Department of Disarmament Affairs on the work being done by the Department and its regional centres in the field.  By the next session, the Group should be in a position to make its small but important contribution to practical confidence-building measures in the field of conventional arms.

In addition, the Rapporteur of the Commission, Ko Ko Shein (Myanmar), introduced the Commission's report, and comments were made by the representatives of Nepal and Sweden.

Closing statements were made by the representatives of Mexico (on behalf of the Latin American and Caribbean States), India, Iraq (on behalf of the League of Arab States), Viet Nam (on behalf of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN)), South Africa (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), China and Canada (on behalf of the Group of Western European and Other States).

Commission Highlights

During this session, the Commission continued to explore ways and means to achieve nuclear disarmament and practical confidence-building measures in the field of nuclear arms.  This was the penultimate year of its planned three-year review of those topics.  To guide its deliberations, the Commission’s two working groups had before them sets of non-papers, which highlighted delegations’ concerns and observations compiled from meetings held in 2000.  The current session opened with the election of Diane Quarless, the first woman to chair the Commission in its near 50-year history.

In her opening remarks, Ms. Quarless said the year 2000 should be remembered as the year that the door leading to disarmament had been opened, if only just a little.  Indeed, significant events, such as the Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) had infused a new spirit into the dialogue on the maintenance of international peace and security, and renewed the collective commitment to both nuclear and conventional non-proliferation and disarmament.  But while much remained to be done -– ensuring the early entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) and the opening negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty -– progress had undoubtedly been achieved.

What was important now, Ms. Quarless continued, was to work collectively

and diligently to ensure that expressed good intentions could ultimately be transformed into demonstrable action.  In those efforts, the Commission’s contributions would be invaluable.  Indeed, as the only universal body that promoted deliberation, negotiation and consensus-building on disarmament issues, the Commission served as a forum in which to explore areas of convergence in the field of international peace and security, where the dividends to be gained through dialogue were immeasurable.

Those sentiments were echoed by Jayantha Dhanapala, Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, who praised the Commission’s impressive record during the past decade in the slow incremental process of building and maintaining global disarmament norms.  In 1999 alone, it had reached consensus on two sets of guidelines concerning the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones and on conventional arms control, with particular emphasis on the consideration of peace following armed conflicts. Though not legally binding, those guidelines influenced governments as they established ground rules for national security policies in an increasingly interdependent global environment.  They also offered citizens, including legislative workers, non-governmental groups and the media, a yardstick against which the actions of States could be measured.

Mr. Dhanapala said, however, that reaching global consensus on disarmament would not be easy.  And while the 1990s had not been marked by nuclear war, it

had been a time of devastating bloodshed involving the use of an ever-expanding variety of conventional arms.  The era could also be characterized by the

so-called “revolution in military affairs”.  By some estimates, more than

5 million people had been killed in armed conflicts during the post-cold-war era.  At the same time, military budgets had grown to nearly $800 billion a year.  The phenomenon of the illicit traffic in small arms had grown from a regional problem to a crisis of global dimensions.  He said that those changes -- the expenditure, loss of life and disrespect for the rule of law -- had eroded human security everywhere.

As the Commission’s general debate began, many delegations agreed with the Under-Secretary-General’s assessment that escalating production, stockpiling and transfer of weapons made this a critical moment to identify concrete confidence-building measures in the field of conventional arms. Many warned that the build-up of weapons beyond national self-defence levels could only lead to regional and international insecurity and instability, as well as the resumption of a global arms race.  Therefore, the representative of Iran said, the interrelationship between building confidence and reliance on conventional arms was an essential element to consider in the process of consolidating peace and containing tensions. The representative of Myanmar, among others, believed that confidence-building measures should be based on the principles of sovereign equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of States and respect for the mutual interest of nations.

The representative of South Africa said one of the underpinning factors to practical confidence-building measures was the overall need for transparency.  In that regard, she echoed the sentiments of other delegations that the scope of the Conventional Arms Register was too narrow as it did not include smaller types of arms, which had become the weapons of choice in conflicts destabilizing regions around the globe.  An expanded register, or a correlating system, which tracked small arms and light weapons, would enhance confidence among States.  Other delegations considered the destruction of surplus and confiscated weapons no longer used by governments as another important confidence-building measure.

The representative of Sweden, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the Commission’s recommendations should be designed to build an environment of cooperative security and emphasize the duty of Member States to refrain from the use or threat of force in their international relations. But cold war mentalities, hegemony and power politics died hard, said China’s representative.  Therefore, the inclination to acquire absolute security by imposing military advantages remained undiminished.  Military superiority never guaranteed security, he added. It was critical, then, for countries seeking to ensure their own security to consider ways in which those measures affected the common security of all countries.

Several other delegations said that at the heart of the matter lay actions taken by the United States, which were, in essence, a disguised form of nuclear expansion that had severely shaken the foundation of global nuclear disarmament efforts.  They expressed particular concern by that country’s attempts to forge ahead with a national missile defence system, including the introduction of weapons into outer space.  Indonesia’s representative said plans for building a missile defence would inevitably have far-reaching repercussions.  Such plans would be incompatible with the limiting provisions of the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM Treaty) -- a critical component of strategic stability and an indispensable element to further reduce strategic armaments. 

Mongolia’s representative said that the Commission had an increasingly important role to play in the promotion of arms control and disarmament at the regional and global levels.  Nuclear disarmament, the most crucial of all disarmament and non-proliferation issues, was a prerequisite for the maintenance and strengthening of international peace and security.  In that regard, the representative of India urged the Commission to set down principles and measures that would pave the way to agreed, multilateral, non-discriminatory and irreversible nuclear disarmament.  A global "no first use" agreement should be pursued, which should include legally binding assurances of non-use against non-nuclear-weapon States and the recognition of nuclear-weapon-free zones established on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among the States of a region.

Commission Bureau

The Bureau of the Disarmament Commission comprises:  Chairman, Diane Quarless (Jamaica); and Vice-Chairpersons, Henrik Salander (Sweden), Niklas Lindquist (Finland) Yurii Onishchenko (Ukraine), Martha Beatriz Lopez de Mitre (Bolivia), Ismail Khairat (Egypt) and Jean Philip Du Preez (South Africa).  Ko Ko Shein (Myanmar) was the Commission’s Rapporteur.

* *** *