TWENTY DRAFT TEXTS INTRODUCED IN FIRST COMMITTEE; EFFECTIVE CONTROL OVER ARMS TRANSFERS, ENHANCED COMMITTEE ROLE IN SECURITY AMONG ISSUES ADDRESSED

Fifty-eighth General Assembly

First Committee

14^th Meeting (AM)

TWENTY DRAFT TEXTS INTRODUCED IN FIRST COMMITTEE; EFFECTIVE CONTROL OVER ARMS

TRANSFERS, ENHANCED COMMITTEE ROLE IN SECURITY AMONG ISSUES ADDRESSED

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) continued its thematic debate today on regional disarmament and confidence-building measures, and heard the introductions of 20 drafts on a wide range of disarmament issues, including texts aimed at effective national control of arms transfers, and a new resolution on enhancing the Committee’s contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security.

Submitting the draft resolution for the second year on national legislation on transfer of arms, military equipment, and dual-use goods and technology, which would have the Assembly call for the exercise of effective national control over those transfers, the representative of the Netherlands highlighted the important role that national legislation could play in that regard.  Seeking to avoid a separate vote on the reference in the preambular portion to transfers that could contribute to proliferation, he had modified that paragraph to have the Assembly merely recall that effective national control of such transfers, including those that could contribute to proliferation activities, was an important tool.

Introducing the draft resolution on transparency in armaments, by which the Assembly would reaffirm its determination to ensure the effective operation of the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms, that speaker noted that transparency had already been improved by the inclusion in the Register of man-portable air-defence systems (MANPADS).  The MANPADS represented a serious threat, since terrorists could use them to shoot down passenger airplanes, and the new transparency, which would expose their trafficking, represented a significant confidence-building measure.  Lauding the rise in countries’ participation

vis-à-vis the Register, he, nevertheless, stressed the need for its universality.

The United States representative, tabling for the first time the draft on enhancing the Committee’s contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security, said that the Committee, for the sake of its own relevance, must, in its work, reflect the fact that it was a changed world -– one faced with new threats to international peace and security.  Among the issues demanding urgent attention were the dangers posed by the prospect of terrorists gaining access to weapons of mass destruction, and threats to existing treaty regimes arising from non-compliance or inadequate implementation.  The Committee should design an annual schedule that permitted a fuller examination, both of its existing agenda and of new threats to common security, he said.

Drafts were also introduced today, by which the Assembly would:  call on Israel to accede to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT); urge parties to take the necessary steps to create a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East; call upon Member States to further consider, at multilateral levels, existing and potential threats in information and telecommunications; decide to defer consideration of the consolidation of peace through practical disarmament measures to its next session and to consider it biannually in the future; call on Member States to report annually, to the Secretary-General, their military expenditures for the latest fiscal year; reiterate its conviction that a dialogue among the permanent members of the Security Council and the major maritime users of the Indian Ocean would help to advance peace, security and stability in the Indian Ocean region; and decide to establish an open-ended working group to consider the objectives and agenda for the fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament. 

The Assembly would also:  reaffirm multilateralism as the core principle in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation; reaffirm that international disarmament forums should take fully into account the relevant environmental norms in negotiating treaties and agreements; decide to include the relationship between disarmament and development in its next provisional agenda; decide to include the review of the implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security in its next provisional agenda; urge the Conference on Disarmament to fulfil its role as the international community’s single multilateral negotiating forum on disarmament; affirm that scientific and technological progress should be used for the benefit of all mankind; and call upon all remaining African States to sign and ratify the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba) as soon as possible. 

Under other drafts, the Assembly would:  reiterate the importance of the United Nations regional activities 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; reaffirm its strong support for the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific; and reiterate its strong support for the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean.

The representatives of the following delegations also introduced drafts today:  Egypt (on behalf of the Arab Group), Russian Federation, Nepal, Costa Rica, Germany, Malaysia (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), Japan, India, and Nigeria (on behalf of the African Group).

Speaking in the thematic debate were the representatives of Serbia and Montenegro, Sweden, Republic of Korea, Bangladesh, Romania, Canada, Italy (as the European Union Presidency), Finland (on behalf of the Presidency of the 2003 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) Conference), Belarus, Uruguay (on behalf of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR)), Austria, Argentina, United Kingdom, South Africa, France, and Poland.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Friday, 24 October, to continue its thematic debate and hear further introductions of drafts.

Background

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this morning to continue its thematic debate, today, on:  regional disarmament; confidence-building measures, including transparency in armaments; and other disarmament measures and machinery. 

The Committee was also expected to continue to hear introductions of draft resolutions and decisions, including on:  effective national control of arms transfers, military equipment and dual-use goods and technology; transparency in armaments; developments in information and telecommunications in the context of international security; United Nations Regional Centres; practical disarmament measures; objective information on military matters, including transparency of military expenditures; Indian Ocean as a zone of peace; and a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament.

Also:  promotion of multilateralism in disarmament and non-proliferation; observance of environmental norms in drafting arms control and disarmament agreements; relationship between disarmament and development; Declaration on Strengthening of International Security; the Conference on Disarmament; enhancing the Committee’s contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security; the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament; the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Pelindaba Treaty); establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East; and the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. 

Draft Summaries

According to a draft resolution sponsored by the Russian Federation on developments in information and telecommunications in the context of international security (document A/C.1/58/L.3) the Assembly would call upon Member States to further consider, at multilateral levels, existing and potential threats in that field, as well as possible measures to limit emerging threats without drastically compromising the free flow of information.

The draft resolution sponsored by Japan on the report of the Conference on Disarmament (document A/C.1/58/L.5) would have the Assembly urge the Conference to fulfil its role as the international community’s single multilateral negotiating forum on disarmament, in light of the evolving international situation and with a view to making early substantive process on its agenda.

The draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (document A/C.1/58/L.7), sponsored by Costa Rica on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States, would have the Assembly reiterate its strong support for the role of the Centre in promoting United Nations activities at the regional level to strengthen peace, stability, security and development.  It would appeal to Member States, particularly in the region, and to international governmental and non-governmental organizations and foundations to make and increase voluntary contributions to strengthen the Centre and its programme of activities.

A draft resolution on the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba) (document A/C.1/58/L.11), sponsored by Nigeria on behalf of the Group of African States, would have the Assembly call upon African States that had not yet done so to sign and ratify the Treaty as soon as possible.

The Assembly would also call upon States that had not yet done so to take all necessary measures to ensure the speedy application of the Treaty to territories for which they are, de jure or de facto, internationally responsible, and that lie within the limits of the geographical zone established in the Treaty.

By a further term, it would call upon the African States parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weaponsthat had not yet done so to conclude comprehensive safeguards agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Expressing grave concern at the emergence of new threats to international peace and security in the post-September 11, 2001 period, the General Assembly would ask the Secretary-General, within existing resources, to seek the views of Member States on the issue of improving the effectiveness of the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security), prepare a report recommending appropriate actions, and submit it for consideration at the next session, according to a new draft resolution submitted by the United States entitled “Enhancing the contribution of the First Committee to the maintenance of international peace and security” (document A/C.1/58/L.15).

Under the terms of a text sponsored by the Netherlands, the Assembly, convinced that effective national control of transfer of arms, military equipment and dual-use goods and technology, including those transfers that could contribute to proliferation activities, was an important tool in achieving disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation, would invite Member States to enact or improve national legislation, regulations and procedures to exercise effective control over the transfers of arms, military equipment and dual-use goods and technology, while ensuring that such measures were consistent with the obligations of States parties under international treaties (document A/C.1/58/L. 16).

It would encourage States to provide, on a voluntary basis, information to the Secretary-General on their national legislation, regulations and procedures on such transfers, as well as the changes therein, and ask the Secretary-General to make that information accessible to Member States.

A draft decision sponsored by Germany on consolidation of peace through practical disarmament measures (document A/C.1/58/L.17) would have the Assembly decide to defer consideration of that item to its next session and to consider it biannually in the future.

Reaffirming the role of the Disarmament Commission as the specialized, deliberative body with the United Nations multilateral disarmament machinery that allowed for in-depth deliberations on specific disarmament issues, leading to the submission of concrete recommendations, the draft text on the report of the Disarmament Commission (document A/C.1/58/L.20) would have the Assembly request the Commission to meet for a period not exceeding three weeks during 2004, namely, from 5 to 23 April.  It would recommend that the Commission consider the following items at its 2004 session:  [to be determined]; and [to be determined]. 

The draft resolution is sponsored by Algeria, Brazil, Belarus, Czech Republic, Egypt, Guatemala, Italy, Kazakhstan, Morocco, Nepal and Venezuela.

A draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific (document A/C.1/58/L.21) would have the Assembly reaffirm its strong support for the forthcoming operation and further strengthening of the Centre, and underline the importance of the Kathmandu process as a powerful vehicle for the development of the practice of region-wide security and disarmament dialogue.  It would appeal to Member States, especially those within the Asia-Pacific region, as well as to international governmental and non-governmental organizations and foundations, to make voluntary contributions, the only resources of the Centre, to strengthen the Centre’s activities and their implementation.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Afghanistan, Australia, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, China, India, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Maldives, Federated States of Micronesia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tonga and Viet Nam.

The Assembly, according to a draft resolution sponsored by Egypt on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East (document A/C.1/58/L.22), would urge all parties directly concerned to consider seriously taking the practical and urgent steps required to implement that proposal, and, as a means of promoting that objective, invite the countries concerned to adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). 

It would call on the countries of the region that had not done so, pending the establishment of the zone, to agree to place all their nuclear activities under IAEA safeguards.  It would note the importance of the ongoing bilateral Middle East peace negotiations and the activities of the multilateral Working Group on Arms Control and Regional Security in promoting mutual confidence and security in the Middle East, including the establishment of the zone. 

According to a draft resolution submitted by Egypt on behalf of the League of Arab States on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/58/L.23), the Assembly, noting that Israel remained the only State in the Middle East that had not yet become party to the NPT, would call upon it to accede to the Treaty without further delay, and not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons, and to renounce possession of nuclear weapons and to place all its unsafeguarded nuclear facilities under full-scope IAEA safeguards, as an important confidence-building measure among all States of the region, and as a step towards enhancing peace and security.

A draft resolution sponsored by Malaysia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) on implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace (document A/C.1/58/L.24) would have the Assembly reiterate its conviction that the participation of all permanent members of the Security Council and the major maritime users of the Indian Ocean in the work of the Ad Hoc Committee was important, and would greatly facilitate the development of a mutually beneficial dialogue to advance peace, security and stability in the Indian Ocean region.

Reiterating its conviction that a special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament could set the future course of action in the field of disarmament, arms control and related international security matters, the Assembly would decide to establish an open-ended working group, working on the basis of consensus, to consider the objectives and agenda, including the possible establishment of the preparatory committee, for the fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament (document A/C.1/58/L.25), by a text sponsored by Malaysia on behalf of NAM. 

Convinced that, in the globalization era and with the information revolution, arms regulation, non-proliferation and disarmament problems were, more than ever, the concern of all countries of the world, the General Assembly, according to a draft on the promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation (document A/C.1/58/L.26), would reaffirm multilateralism as the core principle in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation, with a view to maintaining and strengthening universal norms and enlarging their scope.  It would also reaffirm multilateralism as the core principle in resolving disarmament and non-proliferation concerns.

The Assembly would urge the participation of all interested States in multilateral negotiations on arms regulation, non-proliferation and disarmament in a non-discriminatory manner, and underline the importance of preserving the existing agreements on arms regulation and disarmament, which constituted an expression of the results of international cooperation and multilateral negotiations in response to the challenges facing mankind. 

It would call, once again, on all Member States to renew and fulfil their individual and collective commitments to multilateral cooperation as an important means of pursuing and achieving their common objectives in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Malaysia, on behalf of NAM.

The Assembly, by a text on the observance of environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of disarmament and arms control agreements (document A/C.1/58/L.27), would reaffirm that international disarmament forums should take fully into account the relevant environmental norms in negotiating treaties and agreements.  It would call upon States to adopt unilateral, bilateral, regional and multilateral measures, so as to contribute to ensuring the application of scientific and technological progress in the framework of international security, disarmament and other related spheres, without detriment to the environment or to its effective contribution to attaining sustainable development. 

Malaysia, on behalf of NAM, sponsored the draft resolution.

A draft resolution on the United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament (document A/C.1/58/L.28) 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.  It would reaffirm that it was useful for the centres to carry out dissemination and educational programmes that promoted regional peace and security and that were aimed at changing basic attitudes with respect to peace and security and disarmament, so as to support the achievement of the principles and purposes of the United Nations. 

The Assembly would appeal to Member States in each region and those that were able to do so, as well as to international governmental and non-governmental organizations and their foundations, to make voluntary contributions to the centres in their respective regions to strengthen the activities and initiatives.

Malaysia, on behalf of NAM, sponsored the draft resolution.

Another draft decision sponsored by Malaysia, on behalf of NAM, on the relationship between disarmament and development (document A/C.1/58/L.29) would have the Assembly decide to include the item in its next provisional agenda.

And another draft decision sponsored by Malaysia, on behalf of NAM, on review of the implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security (document A/C.1/58/L.30) would have the Assembly decide to include that item on its next provisional agenda.

A draft resolution on objective information on military matters, including transparency of military expenditures (document A/C.1/58/L.32) would have the Assembly call on Member States to report annually, by 30 April, to the Secretary-General, their military expenditures for the latest fiscal year for which data was available, using, preferably and to the extent possible, the United Nations system for the standardized reporting of military expenditures.  It would encourage them to submit nil returns, if appropriate. 

Among the draft’s several requests was that the Secretary-General, within existing resources, continue consultations with relevant international bodies, with a view to ascertaining requirements for adjusting the present instrument and to encourage wider participation, and to make recommendations based on necessary changes to the content and structure of that reporting system.

The draft resolution is sponsored Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Mali, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States and Uruguay.

By a draft resolution on the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament (document A/C.1/58/L.33), the Assembly would affirm that scientific and technological progress should be used for the benefit of all mankind to promote the sustainable economic and social development of all States, and to safeguard international security, and that international cooperation in the use of science and technology through the transfer and exchange of technological know-how for peaceful purposes should be promoted.

It would urge Member States to undertake multilateral negotiations with the participation of all interested States, in order to establish universally acceptable, non-discriminatory guidelines for international transfers of dual-use goods and technologies and high technology with military applications. 

The draft resolution is sponsored by Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Congo, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, Lesotho, Libya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mauritius, Namibia, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Viet Nam and Zambia.

By a draft resolution on transparency in armaments (document A/C.1/58/L.45), the Assembly would reaffirm its determination to ensure the effective operation of the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms.  With a view to achieving universal participation, it would also call upon Member States to provide the Secretary-General, by 31 May annually, with the requested data and information for the Register, including nil reports, if appropriate.

By a further term, it would invite Member States in a position to do so, pending further development of the Register, to provide additional information on procurement from national production and military holdings and to make use of the “Remarks” column in the standardized reporting form to provide additional information such as types or models.

It would also 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 draft resolution is sponsored by Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Canada, Chile, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Lesotho, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Monaco, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Zambia.

Statements

TAMARA RASTOVAC (Serbia and Montenegro) said that on 16 October 2003 her country had destroyed many of its small arms.  Costing about 285,000 euros, the procedure was primarily financed by the Netherlands.  There had also been other occasions during which her Government had destroyed such weapons with the help of the United States.  Expressing particular concern about the proliferation of and the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in Kosovo, she appealed for further assistance from the international community to help combat those threats.

CHRIS SANDERS (Netherlands) introduced a draft resolution on transparency in armaments (document A/C.1/58/L.45) and one on national legislation on transfer of arms, military equipment, and dual-use goods and technology (document A/C.1/58/L.16).

Regarding the former, he said transparency had already been improved by the inclusion in the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms of man-portable air-defence systems (MANPADS).  MANPADS represented a serious threat, since terrorists could use them to shoot down passenger airplanes, and the new transparency, which would expose their trafficking, represented a significant confidence-building measure.  Lauding the rise in countries’ participation vis-à-vis the Register, he, nevertheless, stressed that it was still not a completely universal instrument.  Additionally, the Register’s scope did not include weapons of mass destruction, which was a topic of serious concern.

With respect to the second text, he said his country had first presented it last year.  It had been adopted unanimously.  He told delegates that the draft was important because it highlighted the important role national legislation could play in regulating the transfer of arms, military equipment, and dual-use goods and technology.  He added that such legislation could only strengthen States’ sovereignty.  Explaining that, last year, several countries had abstained during a separate vote on a portion of preambular paragraph 2, which had referred to transfers that could contribute to proliferation activities, he said that paragraph had since been modified to take Member States’ concerns into account.  It would now merely have the Assembly recall that effective national control of such transfers, including those that could contribute to proliferation activities, was an important tool.  Additionally, a new third preambular paragraph would have the Assembly recall that States parties to international disarmament and non-proliferation treaties had undertaken to facilitate the fullest possible exchange of such goods and technologies for peaceful purposes.

ELISABET BORSIIN BONNIER (Sweden) thanked the representative of the Netherlands for introducing that draft and expressed appreciation for the continuing efforts undertaken by him on that important issue.  She fully supported the text and had co-sponsored it, as in the past.  She hoped it would be adopted without a vote this year.  The Register of Conventional Arms had become a milestone in its 11-year history.  She looked forward to its further developments.  As far as small arms and the seventh category was concerned, there was still room for some improvements.  She was committed to working actively to elaborate a reporting provision, thereby enhancing transparency, which had been a main objective for establishing the Register in the first place.  The need for transparency had never been greater, and had increased, rather than diminished, since the Register was established.

ANTON VASILIEV (Russian Federation) submitted the draft resolution on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security (document A/C.1/58/L.3).  The rapid innovations in information technology and systems and their application in all spheres of human activity had opened up unprecedented possibilities for development.  Information resources were becoming more and more valuable, both for nations and mankind.  In today’s world, States depended ever more on information and telecommunications technology.  The issue of the potential use of that technology for purposes incompatible with the maintenance of international stability was directly linked to the issue of safeguarding the political and military security of all States.

He stressed that information technology was a critically important aspect of the national security of States, and also an element of the overall system of international security.  Recognition by States of the importance of examining that issue at the international level, and of evolving a common approach to the objective of that exercise, had been reflected by the adoption, by consensus, of the resolution on the issue in previous years.

The draft proposed the establishment of a working group of national experts in 2004, he said.  It would be tasked with a review of existing and potential threats to information technology and potential joint measures to counteract those threats, as well to examine international conceptual frameworks, aimed at enhancing global security for information and telecommunications systems.  Their report would be prepared for the Assembly’s sixtieth session.  It would be appropriate, initially, to focus on issues where there was consensus, particularly the development of a common conceptual framework and the definition and classification of threats and possible means to counteract them.  The draft contained no fundamental changes, with the exception of some technical clarifications.

NARAYAN DEV PANT (Nepal) introduced a draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific (document A/C.1/58/L.21), and said some technical updates had been made to this year’s text.  Nevertheless, operative paragraph 6 would still reiterate the wish of the co-sponsors to ensure the relocation of the Centre to Kathmandu within six months of the date of signature of the host country agreement.  Stressing that his Government would do anything possible to support the Centre in his country, he added that it would even sign a memorandum to address the concerns regarding the Centre’s security-related costs.  Thus, it was now up to the Secretariat to quickly revise the host country agreement, so that the Centre could move to Nepal as soon as possible.  Before concluding, he expressed the hope that the draft resolution would be adopted without a vote, as in previous years.

PARK YOON-JUNE (Republic of Korea), referring to the draft resolution introduced by the representative of Nepal, reaffirmed the crucial role of the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific in fostering regional cooperation and promoting dialogue regarding disarmament issues.  Declaring that his Government would continue to extend political and financial support to the Centre, to strengthen its programmes and activities, he announced that his country, in collaboration with the Centre, would host a conference entitled “The Global Non-Proliferation Regime in a Changing Security Environment” this December.  It would address disarmament, the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and missiles, and verification measures. 

SAIDA MUNA TASNEEM (Bangladesh) said she fully supported the draft on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific, which she had traditionally co-sponsored.  The importance of a regional approach to disarmament and to enhancing regional security could not be overemphasized.  The continued arms race, including for nuclear weapons, in various regions, such as in South Asia, remained a formidable threat and drained considerable resources.  In that context, she reaffirmed that the Regional Centre was an important forum for fostering a climate of peace and cooperation. 

She said that the unhindered Kathmandu process was critical in addressing regional concerns.  Important preconditions for its meaningful functioning were continuing financial support and the Centre’s full-fledged operation in Kathmandu, instead of New York.  She called on all concerned to sustain and enhance their voluntary contributions to the Centre.  She appreciated the valuable overall support provided by Nepal, as the host nation, and hoped for an early conclusion of the host country agreement and Memorandum of Understanding with the United Nations.  She welcomed Nepal’s recent initiatives to address the security concerns of the Secretariat. 

BRUNO STAGNO UGARTE (Costa Rica), on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States, introduced the draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (document A/C.1/58/L.7).  The text had been the result of a joint coordination effort by all co-sponsors, which showed the great interest of his region in the Centre, which was headquartered in Lima, Peru.  The draft did not have any major changes, except for the usual ones to bring it up to date.  Some new ideas were contained, however, including in the fifth preambular paragraph, which welcomed the Secretary-General’s conclusion in his report that the Centre acted as a facilitator for implementation of regional initiatives by identifying regional security needs and cooperation with States and organizations in the region. 

He said that the sixth preambular paragraph referred to the beginning of a new role in the Centre’s activities in the area of disarmament and development, and encouraged it to intensify its activities in that regard.  The eighth preambular paragraph welcomed the forthcoming general meeting of the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin American (OPANAL), to be held in Cuba.  That meeting would recognize the fact that the Treaty of Tlatelolco would officially enter into force for all countries of the region.  He thought the text was balanced, with all of the necessary fundamental elements.  He hoped it would be adopted by consensus, as usual.

Mr. HEINSBERG (Germany) introduced a draft decision on the consolidation of peace through practical disarmament measures (document A/C.1/58/L.17) and a draft resolution on objective information on military matters, including transparency of military expenditures (document A/C.1/58/L.32).

Regarding the draft decision, he said it deferred consideration of the item entitled “consolidation of peace through practical disarmament measures” to next year’s session of the General Assembly, and noted that it would now only be considered every two years.  Stressing that carrying out practical measures could be seen as constituting a more pressing need than holding political discussions, he, nevertheless, conceded that there were politically contentious issues that perhaps should be addressed before turning to more technical matters, such as the one he was addressing.  By insisting on the biennialization of his topic, he was taking into account recommendations to make the Committee’s work more efficient.

Telling delegates that practical disarmament measures included more comprehensive educational programmes on disarmament, he called for more donor involvement to support such endeavours.  However, acknowledging that voluntary contributions could not be solicited simply through resolutions, he recognized that a strategy to invigorate such donations would need to be crafted.  Before turning to the next text, he reminded the Committee that his delegation would table the draft resolution on practical disarmament measures at the next session of the General Assembly.

On the draft resolution on objective information on military matters, including transparency of military expenditures, he encouraged other delegations to co-sponsor it.  The biennial draft, a follow-up to the 2001 version, had been slightly reshaped for better understanding.  Once again, it called on Member States to provide information regarding their military expenditures to the Secretary-General.  Even if States had nothing to report, the text still encouraged them to submit reports, to further global participation and universalization.  Acknowledging that more countries were participating in the reporting, he noted with satisfaction that, this year, 13 new countries had done so for the first time.  That brought the total to over 115 governments, representing 80 per cent of global military expenditures.

He lauded the fact that the United Nations Department for Disarmament Affairs, with the help of the Netherlands, Canada, and Germany, had facilitated workshops and symposia over the past two years in Latin America and Africa, to promote the standardized reporting system.  Telling delegates, especially those whose countries had only participated once, that more consistency in reporting would significantly increase participation levels, he expressed hope that the draft would be adopted without a vote.

IONUT SUSEANU (Romania) expressed support for the draft on the transparency of military expenditures (document A/C.1/58/L.32), which had been introduced by the representative of Germany.  Telling delegates that the draft was submitted every two years by Germany and Romania, he encouraged States to tell the Secretary-General how the reporting instrument could be strengthened.  He also expressed hope that the draft would be adopted without a vote.

PAUL MEYER (Canada) said that the credibility and effectiveness of multilateral non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament regimes was closely linked to the compliance records of the States parties to those regimes.  That fact had never been more clearly displayed than today, when some of those regimes faced major crises of compliance.  Verification of compliance provided confidence among parties to a regime that negotiated obligations were being fulfilled and, therefore, real security benefits would be realized.  Absence of sound, well-established and broadly agreed compliance and verification measures, by contrast, made analyzing and resolving crises much more difficult. 

He said that, while a presumption of good faith on the part of those entering into binding commitments remained at the core of international security cooperation, effective verification also remained a critical element of the security cooperation equation, as part of a robust and meaningful multilateralism.  He submitted the draft decision on verification in all its aspects, including the role of the United Nations in the verification field (document A/C.1/58/L.48).  A substantive discussion of the compliance and verification issue and the consideration of options for improving performance in that field would be a more valuable outcome of this year’s meeting, than the adoption of a general expression of principles that had not changed in more than a decade.

On the basis of such a discussion, he said that future action might suggest itself, including the possibility of ongoing informal exchanges over the coming year and submission of a modified resolution on the subject.  The draft decision would have the item inscribed on the agenda for next year, with a view to using the coming year to reflect on that important issue.  Hopefully, it would be adopted by consensus. 

Informed by the 16 verification principles, he offered his delegations reflections on them.  Those suggestions included making maximum use of existing machinery.  In that regard, States parties should be encouraged to adopt the highest standards in demonstrating their compliance with undertakings and in facilitating the verification tasks of the concerned agencies, where such standards had been promulgated.  The Additional Protocol of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was a good example.  He also urged the disarmament community to seek ways to strengthen the non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament regime, and ensure that verification kept up with technological developments.  He also suggested a review of the role of the Security Council. 

CARLO TREZZA (Italy), speaking as the Presidency of the European Union, said that, although the proposal had been for a draft decision on verification, rather than a resolution, he drew the Committee’s attention to the importance of verification in the field of disarmament and non-proliferation for Europe, in general, and the European Union, in particular.  Observation and inspection had a key role in enhancing security and cooperation in Europe, and verification was a fundamental feature of its arms control arrangements.  The concept of verification had been widely referred to in the “Declaration on Non-Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction”, adopted in June by the European Council.  That was the most recent and comprehensive document elaborated by the European Union on the non-proliferation of mass destruction weapons. 

He said that, throughout that declaration, the Union had expressed its commitment to the political, financial and technical support of multilateral institutions charged with verification.  It underlined the key role played by the IAEA safeguards and expressed support for the rapid establishment of the verification regime for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT).  Verifiability should also be an essential component of a fissile material cut-off treaty.  Among the basic principles to devise and define the Union’s strategy against the proliferation of mass destruction weapons was detectability of violations and of compliance through existing verification mechanisms, and, if necessary, through additional ones.  The action plan contemplated providing the IAEA with adequate budget increases for implementing its safeguards task.  It promoted inspections, in general, and, especially, making use of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC). 

Mr. PARK (Republic of Korea) said he firmly believed that the Committee’s deliberations this year should include a lively discussion about compliance and verification.  He welcomed the statement made by the Canadian representative on verification.  He also appreciated the decision to initiate an exchange of views on that vital issue.  Hopefully, that interaction would lead to a concrete and useful outcome.  Verification activities could not be conceived in isolation from multilateral arms control and disarmament efforts.  Full implementation of agreements and their effective verification were now more important than ever, and should be further developed to significantly contribute to both nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation.

He said he stood ready to support any efforts to strengthen the capabilities of those international agencies responsible for carrying out verification activities.  Recent disclosures had made everyone acutely aware of the difficulties in detecting clandestine weapons of mass destruction programmes.  In that regard, further development of verification and monitoring techniques would certainly promote confidence and detect illegal clandestine activities.  Having witnessed the IAEA’s enhanced verification methods in resumed inspections in Iraq, he felt there was clearly a need to further enhance the effectiveness of multilateral verification mechanisms through better use of national technical means.

The CTBT envisaged national technological means, such as satellite monitoring, as a supplementary mechanism that could be used to improve that Treaty’s verification regime, he noted.  Given the IAEA’s role as the competent authority responsible for verifying and assuring compliance with its safeguard agreements, the Additional Protocol was an important tool for the Agency’s effective verification of compliance with the non-proliferation obligations, provided for in the NPT, which his Government would be ratifying soon.

Ms. BONNIER (Sweden) said that, this past year, events had demonstrated the need for enhanced global tools for verification, inspection and analysis, with regard to weapons of mass destruction. However, aside from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) dealing with nuclear inspections and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) keeping a watch over chemical weapons, there was no international treaty dedicated to biological weapons or missiles.  That major shortcoming constituted an issue of serious concern.

In that context, she called for the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) to step up to the task of monitoring developments in missiles and biological weapons.  Its legitimacy and expertise would make it an ideal player to counter the threat of States refusing to comply with international disarmament and non-proliferation treaties.  To facilitate its work, she suggested that UNMOVIC be made a permanent section of the United Nations Secretariat, or a regular subsidiary organ of the Security Council, along the lines of the Counter-Terrorism Committee.

TOM GRONBERG (Finland), speaking on behalf of the Presidency of the 2003 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) Conference in Vienna, said the Conference met because of a mechanism in article 14 of the Treaty, which allowed for a majority of ratifiers to convene and decide what internationally acceptable measures could be taken to accelerate the ratification process, if the Treaty had not entered into force three years after being opened for signature.

The Conference, held last month in Vienna, had been attended by 102 States signatories, five other States, and several organizations.  That high level of participation demonstrated the importance attached to the Treaty by the international community.  Additionally, it was noted that 168 States had signed the Treaty, and 104 had deposited instruments of ratification.  In the final document adopted at the Conference, States stressed the particular importance of ratification by those States whose ratification was needed for the Treaty to enter into force. 

Reaffirming that the CTBT had an essential role to play in strengthening international peace and security, he said the Conference also envisioned a strong verification regime that would go into effect when the Treaty entered into force.  Such a system would be unprecedented in its fortified efforts to maintain that States were meeting their commitments.

He said the Conference had called on all States to continue their moratoriums on nuclear explosions and adopted a list of concrete measures to usher the Treaty into force, as well as adopting a final declaration.  Among the 12 measures was the drafting of a contact list for ratifiers that wished to voluntarily assist regional coordinators in their efforts to promote accession to the Treaty.  In addition, a trust fund would be established from voluntary contributions to assist such efforts, and regional seminars and meetings would be held at the political level to enhance understanding and benefits of the Treaty.  Declaring that non-governmental organizations could play an important role in furthering the Treaty’s objectives, he encouraged them to participate and offer assistance to regional coordinators.

ALEH S. SHLOMA (Belarus) said that confidence-building measures provided one of the key elements of conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels.  Their main goal focused on strengthening regional security as an active constituent in international security, as well as lowering the risk of armed conflict.  Development of such measures objectively lowered the risk of misunderstandings or wrong assessments of military activities, prevented military confrontation, and reduced the risk of sudden attack or outbreaks of war.  By creating a regional climate that minimized the importance of a military element, confidence-building measures could contribute to the process of balanced arms reduction and disarmament, as well as a more effective verification regime.

He welcomed the countries’ decisions to conclude appropriate bilateral and multilateral agreements on confidence-building measures in the military and political spheres, and urged other States to support such initiatives.  The most optimal approach was based on flexibility in the realization of common interests in the sphere of regional security and arms control.  States’ inalienable right to an adequate security level must be guaranteed, with the understanding that none of the States or groups of States parties to confidence-building agreements would strive to acquire advantages over the others at any stage of implementation and development.  He noted the role and importance of the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty as a key element of European security. 

RASTAM MOHD ISA (Malaysia), on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement of countries (NAM), introduced seven draft texts on the following subjects:  implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace (document A/C.1/58/L.24); convening of the fourth special session devoted to disarmament (document A/C.1/58/L.25); promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation (document A/C.1/58/L.26); observance of environmental norms in drafting disarmament and arms control agreements (document A/C.1/58/L.27); United Nations Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament (document A/C.1/58/L.28); relationship between disarmament and development (document A/C.1/58/L.29); and implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security (document A/C.1/58/L.30).

He said that NAM believed in the vital importance of multilateralism and multilaterally agreed solutions in addressing disarmament and international security issues.  Those draft texts had been submitted in that spirit.  He was confident that they would continue to receive the support of Member States, and had no doubt that their implementation would contribute significantly to the aspiration of the international community to revolve the issues of disarmament and international security.  He sincerely appreciated delegations’ support.

SUSANA RIVERO (Uruguay), speaking on behalf of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), expressed support for the CTBT and declared her opposition to nuclear weapons of any nature.  Representing the first subregion that had prohibited nuclear testing, she called on other countries in her greater region to follow suit and adhere to the Treaty.  Simply maintaining individual moratoria on nuclear testing was not enough.

KUNIKO INOGUCHI (Japan), as President of the Conference on Disarmament, introduced a draft resolution on the Report of the Conference (document A/C.1/58/L.5).  Lamenting that the Conference had not agreed on a programme of work, she insisted that it had still made progress.  For example, it had considered the “A-5 proposal” on the programme of work, which had been submitted by five ambassadors who were former presidents of the Conference.  It had also pursued new ideas to make the body more responsive to contemporary challenges to disarmament and arms control.  More information had been exchanged between the Conference, States, and various organizations, and talks about how civil society could be involved in more of the Conference’s work were held.  Declaring that the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan, as well as other eminent officials from around the world, had addressed the Conference, she said that such appearances showed that the world was attaching great importance to disarmament.

Stating that the problems that had prevented the Conference from agreeing upon a programme of work had not changed, she stressed that it was necessary for Conference members to strike a balance among their different priorities.  In that context, she called on members, some of whom advocated removing links between elements and others who stressed the need for a more comprehensive approach, to consider how they could achieve a compromise.  Because members were truly interested in commencing real work in 2004, they had requested her to consult with the incoming President, a Kenyan national, and make recommendations, based in part on the A-5 proposal, on ways to overcome the impasse.  She told the Committee she had already started such consultations.

Turning to the draft resolution at hand, she said this year’s version attempted to send a clear political message about the urgent need for the Conference to commence substantive work.  She added that all States needed to embrace that sense of urgency before coming to the next session.  She also highlighted operative paragraph 5, which was new, and would have the Assembly request all States members to cooperate with the current and incoming presidents to help guide the Conference.  Specifically, she said the presidents wanted to see deeds, not just words.  Telling delegates that this year’s draft went beyond the normal procedural language and actually clarified the urgency of the Conference’s stalemate, she hoped it would help to create an environment in which future presidents could really make a difference.  In conclusion, she recommended that the draft be adopted without a vote.

ALEXANDER KMENTT (Austria) thanked the Japanese delegation to tabling the draft resolution on the report of the Conference on Disarmament (document A/C.1/58/L.5).  It contained some new formulations that clearly expressed the sense of urgency that the international community felt about the stalemate that had been imposed on that body for seven years.  It was highly appropriate and timely that the General Assembly express that sense of urgency.  As many were aware, his delegation had considered tabling a text with the same aim.  Its rationale had been based on the fact that the Conference, although an independent body, was linked to the Assembly by a formal relationship, which he detailed in the present statement.

Since 1997, he said, the Conference’s report to the Assembly had been devoid of progress.  Consequently, and as a matter of responsibility, more direct engagement with the Assembly was required than merely taking note of the factual report.  That responsibility was all the more pressing at a time of widespread international concern about the proliferation of mass destruction weapons and their delivery means, as well as about terrorists gaining access to those weapons and to nuclear materials.  The current situation, therefore, merited that the Assembly, with its universal membership, express its concern about that stalemate and urge the Conference’s Member States to overcome it.

Consequently, he said it was appropriate to give members, as well as non-members of the Conference, the change to express their dissatisfaction with the current stalemate and their wish for substantive progress on disarmament issues.  He had wanted to bring to the attention of the broader United Nations’ membership that ongoing impasse over the programme of work.  In so doing, his goal had been to underline the fact that the overwhelming majority of States was of the same conviction regarding the need to start substantive work and thereby increase the pressure on the Conference to resolve the impasse at the outset in 2004. 

GABRIELA MARTINIC (Argentina) said the Register on Conventional Arms had been a success because maintaining transparency was a mutually beneficial practice for all States.  Lauding the fact that participation in the Register had expanded, she hoped it would be sustained and consolidated.  In that context, she expressed support for the draft introduced by the Netherlands on transparency in armaments (document A/C.1/58/L.45), and invited delegations to join as co-sponsors.  Acknowledging that the Register required further adjustments, she, nevertheless, stressed that it represented a step in the right direction.  Additionally, because it strengthened regional and bilateral dialogue and confidence-building, she called for its universality.

ROBERT L. LUACES (United States) introduced a new draft resolution entitled “Enhancing the contribution of the First Committee to the maintenance of international peace and security” (document A/C.1/58/L.15).  The events of 11 September 2001 had had a profound effect on the United States’ outlook on a range of issues, including disarmament.  Those events had reminded it, and hopefully the entire international community, that efforts needed an improved focus and that those of the Committee must address all of the threats to common security confronting governments today.  His country remained committed to effective multilateralism, an absolutely critical principle if, together, the world was to deal with the “new, gathering threats to international peace, security and stability”.

He said that the Committee could contribute to that process this year by initiating an exchange of views on how to improve its operations.  The United States had already expressed the view that, for the sake of its own relevance, the Committee, in its work, must reflect the fact that it was a changed world -– one faced with new threats to international peace and security.  Among the issues demanding urgent attention were the dangers posed by the prospect of terrorists gaining access to weapons of mass destruction, and threats to existing treaty regimes arising from non-compliance or inadequate implementation. Member States should examine how the Committee could best manage its annual schedule to permit a fuller examination both of its existing agenda and of new threats to common security.

The Committee should find ways to streamline its work and ensure that its agenda did not duplicate, or subtract from, important work being done in other United Nations forums, or outside that system.  A significant number of countries favoured the initiation, during the present session, of a process to make the Committee more relevant and effective.  On 13 October, his delegation had circulated a working paper listing suggestions by his Government, as well as others received during the past three months, for streamlining and modernizing the Committee’s work.  The positive reactions had encouraged him to take the next, modest step in what, everyone agreed, must be an incremental process.  The simple draft asked the Secretary-General to seek views on improving the Committee’s effectiveness and to prepare a report recommending options for the Committee’s consideration next year.

VENKATESH VARMA (India) introduced the draft resolution on the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament (document A/C.1/58/L.33).  India had been submitting that text to the Committee since 1989, he said.  Significant progress in science and technology, especially recent advances in biotechnology, space application, and information technology, among others, offered vast possibilities for socio-economic development.  Access to them was undoubtedly a crucial prerequisite for their participation in globalization, including trade.  A model instrument was the Chemical Weapons Convention, which had placed an obligation on States parties to review national regulations in the field of chemical weapons, in order to make those policies consistent with the Convention. 

He said that the dual-use character of many of the scientific and technological advances, namely, their potential for use in both civilian and military applications, was a cause for concern, but discriminatory regimes, which denied access to those advances that were crucial to development, had become a non-economic barrier to normal exchanges, and countered the spirit of global economic exchanges.  Growing energy needs, particularly in the developing world, should also be taken into account.  Those must be met without damaging the environment.  Recent events had questioned the effectiveness of such exclusive arrangements.  What were needed were inclusive and universally acceptable arrangements for regulating arms, including weapons of mass destruction and their delivery means. 

His delegation had consistently maintained that multilateral negotiations and non-discriminatory agreements, open to universal participation, would be the best way forward to addressing proliferation concerns of technologies related to mass destruction weapons and their delivery means.  That would ensure their effectiveness and improve the chances for universality.  Today, more than ever, agreement was needed on an effective and transparent system of export controls that would achieve the objectives, while ensuring transfers of science and technology for peaceful purposes.  The draft resolution hoped to support such a process. 

He added that he had joined the list of co-sponsors of the draft on the illicit small arms trade (document A/C.1/58/L.1).  He also supported the draft on the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (document A/C.1/58/L.50).  As chair designate of the meeting of States parties to that Convention, to be held in November, India attached considerable import to that process, which offered a unique forum for States with diverse interests to harmonize and move forward on specific areas, as soon as possible.  He also supported the draft on securing developments in information and telecommunications (document A/C.1/58/L.3).  He had joined consensus on that draft since 1998, and supported the Russian objective in that regard. 

Mr. BROUCHER (United Kingdom) welcomed the report of the 2003 group of experts on the development of the Register on Conventional Arms, and he lauded the fact that it was the first time since the instrument’s establishment in 1992 that agreement had been reached on revising its categories, improving its operation, and enhancing its relevance.  Because transparency was so important to combat the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, he encouraged the Member States, which were in a position to do so, to submit information on transfers to the Register.  For its part, his country would do just that.  Besides technical adjustments, he said the Register’s scope should be expanded to include procurement, manufacture, and national military holdings.  Monitoring transfers was simply not enough.  The increasing willingness of countries to provide such information went a long way towards improving the instrument.

In response to the Canadian representative’s suggestions, he welcomed them and agreed with the idea of making maximum use of IAEA and OPCW machinery.  He also agreed that there should be a panel of experts, upon which the Secretary-General could call when mandated by the Security Council, to carry out verification tasks, and that further discussion was needed to determine how the expertise of UNMOVIC could be retained.

Ms. MAKUPULA (South Africa) lauded the Register, but said it was vital for it to be made as relevant as possible, particularly among developing countries.  In that context, she expressed satisfaction with the recommendation by the group of experts to lower calibre thresholds, since that would make it more applicable to conflicts in Africa.  It was also a good idea to include missile launchers in the Register’s scope.  Noting that, during deliberations, the group had not been able to reach consensus on a number of proposals, she stressed that a more comprehensive approach towards small arms and light weapons would make the Register even more relevant, in an African context.  Before concluding, she said that, if the instrument gained broader support, the United Nations Secretariat would need to do more to maintain its significance, since States could not do that alone.  In that context, she called for a strengthened Department for Disarmament Affairs to actively promote the Register as one of its primary responsibilities.

CHUKA CHIDEBELEZE UDEBIBIA (Nigeria), on behalf of the African Group of States, introduced the draft resolution on the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free-Zone Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba) (document A/C.1/58/L.11).  That Treaty had been signed in Cairo, Egypt on 11 April 1996.  The Cairo declaration, adopted on that occasion, had emphasized that nuclear-weapon-free zones, especially in regions of tension such as the Middle East, enhanced global and regional peace and security.  The signing of that Treaty had been an important contribution by African countries to maintain international peace and security.  The draft was the same as the one adopted at the fifty-sixth session.  As usual, he hoped for its consensus adoption.  

FRANÇOIS RIVASSEAU (France), speaking on the subject of verification, said that the threat linked to the dangers of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction had been increasing.  Until now, the international community and the Security Council, or certain of its members, had tried to respond to that with certain international instruments, export controls or diplomatic activities.  All of those had been represented either by international mechanisms relating to certain weapons or to particular crises.  But, there was a need to reinforce those various arrangements.  His Foreign Minister, Dominique de Villepin, had suggested the creation of a permanent United Nations disarmament corps.  In such an arrangement, under the authority of the Security Council, the United Nations should be provided with the capacity to react rapidly and effectively in key areas.

He said his President, on 23 September, had proposed the creation of a permanent inspection corps, under the Council’s authority.  Given the danger of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and of those weapons falling into the hands of terrorists, the international community was duty-bound to give the Council the means to deal with those threats by setting up a disarmament inspection corps within the United Nations.  No one was starting from a blank sheet; there had been the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), the IAEA and others.  That was why France believed it was possible to build on what already existed and use that to its best advantage.

The corps' mission, structure, how it should fit into the system, who should serve in it, what mandate and what financing was needed, was open to discussion.  He was trying here to contribute to the Committee’s reflection and lay out paths for addressing the potential threat of terrorists gaining access to mass destruction weapons.  He submitted that proposal to stimulate discussion and obtain further contributions to that debate.

KRZYSZTOF JAKUBOWSKI (Poland) expressed the belief that the Conference on Disarmament had played and would continue to play a profound role in strengthening international security.  Calling for increased transparency and confidence-building measures, he said the Conference could enhance its role by helping States to close the gaps between their opposing positions.  Acknowledging its current stalemate, he said the impasse could not be blamed on the Conference, but rather on the lack of political will in capitals across the world.  It was, therefore, up to States to take advantage of the opportunities provided by the Conference.  That was especially important in a non-bipolar world tainted by many global uncertainties.

ALAA ISSA (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the Arab League, presented a draft resolution concerning the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/58/L.23).  Declaring that it emphasized the importance of all countries in the region to take the necessary steps to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, he said it also attached great importance to adherence to the NPT.  It called on Israel, as the only country in the region that did not adhere to the Treaty, to accede to it without delay, and to subject its nuclear facilities to the IAEA.  It also called upon the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly, at its next session, a report on progress achieved in that connection.

He also submitted a draft resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East (document A/C.1/58/L.22), which he had submitted before.  Explaining the draft, he said it stressed that all nuclear activities in the region should be subjected to IAEA inspections, and called on all countries in the region to refrain from testing, acquiring, and deploying such weapons until a nuclear-weapon-free zone could be established there.

* *** *