SECURITY FOR NON-NUCLEAR-WEAPON STATES, ACCELERATING NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT AMONG ISSUES, AS 19 TEXTS INTRODUCED IN FIRST COMMITTEE

Fifty-ninth General Assembly

First Committee

11^th Meeting (AM)

SECURITY FOR NON-NUCLEAR-WEAPON STATES, ACCELERATING NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT

AMONG ISSUES, AS 19 TEXTS INTRODUCED IN FIRST COMMITTEE

(Issued on 20 October 2004.)

The General Assembly, convinced that nuclear weapons posed the greatest threat to mankind and to the survival of civilization, would reaffirm the urgent need to reach an early agreement on effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons, according to one of 19 draft resolutions and decisions introduced today in the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security).

As the Committee continued its thematic debate this morning, it heard the introductions of drafts on the following issues:  missiles; a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia; a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East; measures to uphold the authority of the 1925 Geneva Protocol; and a United Nations conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of nuclear disarmament.

Also:  the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention); the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) And Toxin Weapons and On Their Destruction (Biological Weapons Convention); accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments; and a path to the total elimination of nuclear weapons.

In addition:  the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT); nuclear disarmament; a convention on the prohibition of the use of nuclear weapons; reducing nuclear danger; the Conference on Disarmament decision to establish an ad hoc committee to negotiate a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons; risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East; a follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons; a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere; international; and The Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation.

The draft resolution entitled “Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world:  Accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments” calls upon all States to fully comply with commitments made to nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation and not to act in any way that may be detrimental to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation or that may lead to a new nuclear arms race.

A related text on reducing nuclear danger would have the Assembly call for a review of nuclear doctrines and immediate and urgent steps to reduce the risks of unintentional and accidental use of nuclear weapons.  It would also request the five nuclear-weapon States to take measures towards implementation of that provision and call upon all Member States to take the necessary measures to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and to promote nuclear disarmament, with the objective of eliminating nuclear weapons.

And a draft resolution entitled “A path to the total elimination of nuclear weapons” would have the Assembly express deep concern regarding the growing dangers posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, including that caused by proliferation networks and, convinced that every effort should be made to avoid nuclear war and nuclear terrorism, reaffirm the importance of achieving the universality of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and call on States not parties to the Treaty to accede to it as non-nuclear weapon States without delay and without conditions.

Drafts were introduced by the representatives of:  Brazil; Myanmar; Japan; Sweden, on behalf of the New Agenda Coalition (Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and Sweden); India; Canada; Egypt; New Zealand; Malaysia, on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement; Mexico; Uzbekistan; Chile; Pakistan; Iran; Poland; and Hungary.

Speaking in the thematic debate were the representatives of:  Algeria; Netherlands, on behalf of the European Union; Republic of Korea; Romania; Brazil; Qatar; China; Russian Federation; Canada; Sweden; Sri Lanka; and Venezuela.  The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea spoke in exercise of the right of reply.

The Committee will meet again on Wednesday, 20 October, at 10 a.m. to continue its thematic debate.

Background

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this morning to begin its thematic debate and hear introductions of draft resolutions and decisions.  The Committee was expected to hear introductions of drafts on the following topics:  missiles; a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia; a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East; measures to uphold the authority of the 1925 Geneva Protocol; and a United Nations conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of nuclear disarmament.

Also:  the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention); the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and On Their Destruction (Biological Weapons Convention); accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments; and a path to the total elimination of nuclear weapons.

Also:  the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT); nuclear disarmament; a convention on the prohibition of the use of nuclear weapons; reducing nuclear danger; the Conference on Disarmament decision to establish an ad hoc committee to negotiate a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons; risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East; a follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons; a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere; international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons; and the Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation.

By the terms of a resolution on missiles (document A/C.1/59/L.6), sponsored by Egypt, Indonesia and Iran, the Assembly would request the Secretary-General to prepare a report, with the support of qualified consultants and the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, to contribute to the United Nations endeavour to address the issue of missiles by identifying areas where consensus could be reached, and to submit that report to the General Assembly during its sixtieth session.  It would also request the Secretary-General, with the assistance of a Panel of Governmental Experts, to be established in 2007, to further explore ways and means to address within the United Nations the issue of missiles, including identifying areas where consensus could be reached, and to submit a report for consideration by the General Assembly at its sixty-third session.

A draft decision on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia (document A/C.1/59/L.7), sponsored by Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, would have the Assembly decide to include in the provisional agenda for its sixtieth session an item on that subject.

A draft resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East (document A/C.1/59/L.8), sponsored by Egypt, would have the Assembly urge all parties directly concerned to consider seriously taking the practical and urgent steps required for the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly.  To promote that objective, the Assembly would invite the countries concerned to adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).  It would also call on countries of the region that had not done so, pending the establishment of the zone, to agree to place all their nuclear activities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.

By further terms, the Assembly would invite all countries of the region, pending the establishment of the zone, to declare their support for establishing such a zone and to deposit those declarations with the Security Council.  It would also invite those countries, pending establishment, not to produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or permit the stationing on their territories, or territories under their control, of nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices.  Additionally, the Assembly would invite nuclear-weapon States and all other States to render their assistance in the establishment of the zone and, at the same time, refrain from any actions that ran counter to both the letter and the spirit of the present resolution.

A draft resolution on measures to uphold the authority of the 1925 Geneva Protocol (document A/C.1/59/L.12), sponsored by Malaysia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, would have the Assembly renew its previous call on all States to observe strictly the principles and objectives of the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, signed at Geneva on 17 June 1925, and reaffirm the vital necessity of upholding its provisions.  It would call on those States that continued to maintain reservations to the Protocol to withdraw them.

A draft decision sponsored by Mexico on a United Nations conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.15) would have the Assembly decide to include an item on that topic in the provisional agenda of its sixtieth session.

Under the terms of a draft resolution submitted by Poland on implementing the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention) (document A/C.1/59/L.16), the Assembly would underline that the Convention and its implementation contributed to enhancing international peace and security.  It would emphasize that its full, universal and effective implementation would further contribute to that purpose by excluding completely, for the sake of all humankind, the possibility of the use of chemical weapons. 

The Assembly would stress the importance to the Convention that all possessors of chemical weapons, chemical weapons production facilities or chemical weapons development facilities, including previously declared possessor States, should be among the States parties to the Convention, and welcomed progress to that end.

It would urge all States parties to the Convention to meet in full and on time their obligations and to support the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in its implementation activities.

According to a draft resolution sponsored by Hungary on the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and On Their Destruction (Biological Weapons Convention) (document A/C.1/59/L.17), the Assembly would note with satisfaction the increase in the number of States parties to the Convention and reaffirm its call on all signatories that had not yet ratified it to do so without delay.  It would call on those States that had not yet signed the Convention to become parties to it at an early date, thus contributing to its universal adherence. 

The Assembly would also recall the decision reached at the Fifth Review Conference to discuss and promote common understanding and effective action on two topics in 2004:  enhancing international capabilities for responding to, investigating and mitigating the effects of cases of alleged use of biological or toxin weapons or suspicious outbreaks of disease; and strengthening and broadening national and international institutional efforts and existing mechanisms for the surveillance, detection, diagnosis and combating of infectious diseases affecting humans, animals, and plants.

By a further term, the Assembly would call upon the States parties to the Convention to participate in its implementation.

Expressing its grave concern at the danger to humanity posed by the possibility that nuclear weapons could be used, the Assembly would call upon all States to fully comply with commitments made to nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation and not to act in any way that may be detrimental to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation or that may lead to a new nuclear arms race, according to a draft resolution entitled “Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world:  Accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments” (A/C.1/59/L.22).

The Assembly would also call upon all States to spare no efforts to achieve universal adherence to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and the early entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT).

By further terms, the Assembly would call upon all NPT States to accelerate the implementation of the practical steps agreed upon at the 2000 Review Conference, and upon the nuclear-weapon States to take further steps to reduce their non-strategic nuclear arsenals and not develop new types of nuclear weapons.

Additionally, it would agree to urgently strengthen efforts to resume negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament on a non-discriminatory, multilateral and verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material.  It would further call for the establishment of a subsidiary body within the Conference to deal with nuclear disarmament.

The draft resolution is sponsored by the New Agenda Coalition, which includes Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and Sweden.

Expressing deep concern regarding the growing dangers posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, including that caused by proliferation networks, and convinced that every effort should be made to avoid nuclear war and nuclear terrorism, the Assembly would reaffirm the importance of achieving the universality of the NPT, and call on States not parties to the Treaty to accede to it as non-nuclear-weapon States without delay and without conditions, according to a draft resolution entitled “A path to the total elimination of nuclear weapons” (document A/C.1/59/L.23).

The Assembly would also reaffirm the importance for all States parties to the Treaty to fulfil their obligations under the NPT, and invite the
nuclear-weapon States to keep United Nations Members informed on their progress in the field of nuclear disarmament,

By further terms, the Assembly would stress the importance of further developing verification capabilities, such as International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, and call upon all States to redouble their efforts to prevent and curb the proliferation of nuclear weapons.  It would also call upon all States to maintain the highest possible standards of security, safe custody, effective control and physical protection of all materials related to such weapons, so that they did not fall into the hands of terrorists.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Afghanistan, Australia, Bangladesh, Côte d’Ivoire, Fiji, Italy, Japan, Nepal, Switzerland and Ukraine.

A draft resolution on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) (document A/C.1/59/L.25), sponsored by Australia, Mexico, and New Zealand, would have the Assembly stress the importance and urgency of signature and ratification, without delay and conditions, to achieve the earliest entry into force of the Treaty.

By an additional term, the Assembly would underline the need to maintain momentum towards completion of the verification regime.  It would also call on all States to maintain their moratoria on nuclear-weapons test explosions or any other nuclear explosions, and refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of the Treaty.

Regarding States that had not yet signed the Treaty, the Assembly would call on them to sign and ratify it as soon as possible.  Furthermore, it would call on all States that had signed but not yet ratified the Treaty, in particular those whose ratification were needed for the instrument’s entry into force, to accelerate their ratification process with a view to the earliest successful conclusion.

A draft resolution on nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.26) would have the Assembly urge the nuclear-weapon States to immediately stop the qualitative improvement, development, production, and stockpiling of nuclear warheads and their delivery systems.  It would also urge them to, as an interim measure, immediately de-alert and deactivate their nuclear weapons and to further reduce the operational status of their nuclear-weapon systems.

By a further term, it would call on those States to agree on an internationally and legally binding instrument imposing policies of no-first use, and upon all States to conclude an internationally and legally binding instrument on security assurances of non-use and non-threat of use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States.  It would also urge nuclear-weapon States to commence plurilateral negotiations among themselves at an appropriate stage on further deep reductions of nuclear weapons.

By additional terms, the Assembly would call for the full and effective implementation of the thirteen steps for nuclear disarmament, contained in the Final Document of the 2000 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and urge the nuclear-weapon States to carry out further reductions of non-strategic nuclear weapons, based on unilateral initiatives.

The Assembly would also call for the immediate commencement of negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament on a non-discriminatory, multilateral and verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.  In that context, it would urge the Conference on Disarmament to agree on a programme of work which includes immediate negotiations on such a treaty with a view to their conclusion within five years.

By further terms, it would call for the conclusion of an international legal instrument or instruments on adequate security assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States, and for the early entry into force and strict observance of the CTBT.

The Assembly would also call for the convening of an international conference on nuclear disarmament at an early date to identify and deal with concrete measures to attain that goal.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Algeria, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Colombia, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Dominican Republic, Guinea, Haiti, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Viet Nam, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

By a draft resolution entitled “Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons” (document A/C.1/59/L.29), the Assembly would reiterate its request to the Conference on Disarmament to commence negotiations in order to reach agreement on such an instrument.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Colombia, Congo, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, Fiji, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Mauritius, Myanmar, Nepal, Sudan, Viet Nam and Zambia.

Considering that the hair-trigger alert of nuclear weapons carried unacceptable risks of unintentional or accidental use of nuclear weapons, which would have catastrophic consequences for all mankind, the General Assembly would call for a review of nuclear doctrines and, in that context, immediate and urgent steps to reduce the risks of unintentional and accidental use of nuclear weapons, by a text entitled “Reducing nuclear danger” (document A/C.1/59/L.30).

The Assembly would request the five nuclear-weapon States to take measures towards implementation of that provision and call upon all Member States to take the necessary measures to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in all its aspects and to promote nuclear disarmament, with the objective of eliminating nuclear weapons.

The Secretary-General would be requested, among other things, to intensify efforts and support initiatives that would contribute towards the full implementation of the recommendations identified in the report of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters (document A/56/400) that would significantly reduce the risk of nuclear war.

[Those recommendations include:  de-alerting nuclear weapons; review of nuclear doctrines; further reduction of tactical nuclear weapons as an integral part of the nuclear arms reduction and disarmament process; enhancing security at a global and a regional level by promoting increased transparency of all nuclear weapons programmes; and creating a climate for implementing nuclear disarmament measures.]

The draft resolution is sponsored by Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cuba, Fiji, Haiti, India, Jordan, Kenya, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Namibia, Sudan, Viet Nam and Zambia.

A draft resolution on the Conference on Disarmament decision to establish an ad hoc committee to negotiate a non-discriminatory, multilateral, internationally verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/59/L.34) would have the Assembly urge the Conference to agree on a programme of work that includes the immediate commencement of negotiations on such a treaty, under the conviction that such a treaty would be a significant contribution to nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Algeria, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, CzechRepublic, Germany, Grenada, Ireland, Kenya, Luxembourg, Morocco, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, San Marino, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand and Turkey.

According to a draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/59/L.37), 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 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, as an important confidence-building measure among all States of the region and as a step towards enhancing peace and security.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.

Convinced that the continuing existence of nuclear weapons posed a threat to all humanity and that their use would have catastrophic consequences for all life on earth, the Assembly would underline, once again, the unanimous conclusion of the International Court of Justice that there existed an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control, under a draft resolution entitled “Follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons” (document A/C.1/59/L.39).

The Assembly would call, once again, all States immediately to fulfil that obligation by commencing multilateral negotiations leading to an early conclusion of a nuclear weapons convention prohibiting the development, production, testing, deployment, stockpiling, transfer, threat or use of nuclear weapons and providing for their elimination.  It would request all States to inform the Secretary-General of the efforts and measures they had taken to implement the present resolution and nuclear disarmament, and request the Secretary-General to apprise the Assembly of that information at its next session.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Algeria, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Costa Rica, Cuba, Egypt, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Liberia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mexico, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, Singapore, Viet Nam and Yemen.

According to a draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/59/L.41), the Assembly would affirm its conviction of the important role of nuclear-weapon-free zones in strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime and in extending the areas of the world that were nuclear-weapon-free.  With particular reference to the responsibilities of the nuclear-weapon States, it would call on all States to support the nuclear disarmament process and work for the total elimination of all nuclear weapons.

By additional terms, it would:  call upon all concerned States to work together in order to facilitate adherence to the protocols to nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties by all relevant States that had not yet done so; and call upon the States parties and signatories to the Treaties of Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok and Pelindaba to pursue the common goals envisaged in those treaties, to promote the nuclear-weapon-free status of the southern hemisphere and adjacent areas, and to explore and implement further ways and means of cooperation among themselves and their treaty agencies.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Angola, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Guatemala, Indonesia, Liberia, Mexico, Mongolia, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Singapore, South Africa and Venezuela.

Convinced that nuclear weapons posed the greatest threat to mankind and to the survival of civilization, the General Assembly would reaffirm the urgent need to reach an early agreement on effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons, according to a draft resolution on that topic (document A/C.1/59/L.44).  It would appeal to all States, especially the nuclear-weapon States, to work actively towards an early agreement on a common approach and, in particular, on a common formula that could be included in an international instrument of a legally binding character.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Colombia, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, El Salvador, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Malaysia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Viet Nam and Zambia.

Concerned about the increasing security challenges caused by the ongoing proliferation of ballistic missiles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction, the Assembly would welcome the adoption of the Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation, according to a draft resolution about the Code (document A/C.1/59/L.50).  By a further term, the Assembly would invite all States that had not yet done so to subscribe to the Code.

The draft is sponsored by Albania, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (federated States of), Monaco, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela and Zambia.

Statements

CARLOS ANTONIO DA ROCHA PARANHOS (Brazil) introduced the draft resolution on nuclear weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/59/L.41).  He said that the sponsors of the draft resolution were determined to contribute to nuclear non-proliferation.  The important contribution made by nuclear-weapon-free zones needed to be matched by the granting of unconditional negative security assurances to member states of such zones.  The sponsors of the draft resolution welcomed the decision by the Government of Mexico to convene a meeting of member states of nuclear-weapon-free zones.

U AYE (Myanmar) introduced a draft resolution on nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.26).  Noting that Cambodia and Thailand had decided to join the many co-sponsors, he said the present draft was an annual text that was tabled every year.  To create a world totally free of nuclear weapons, the international community had to take a step-by-step approach, he said.  He also stated that the present draft made it “abundantly clear” that nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation were mutually reinforcing processes, and that non-proliferation could not be addressed without pursuing disarmament as well.

Attaching great importance to the 13 practical steps for nuclear disarmament set out at the 2000 NPT Review Conference, he called on the nuclear-weapon States to follow them.  He also highlighted the draft’s calls for security assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States and for nuclear-weapon States to adopt no-first-use policies.  Once again, the draft encompassed the many concerns of the international community and addressed the need to overcome the threats posed by nuclear weapons.  He also called on the world to show overwhelming support for the draft, as it had done in previous years.

YOSHIKI MINE (Japan) introduced the draft resolution on “A path to the total elimination of nuclear weapons” (document A/C.1/59/L.23).  He said that Japan believed that the issue of disarmament and non-proliferation should be based on an incremental approach to the total elimination of nuclear weapons.  This year, it had tried to achieve a balanced draft resolution and looked forward to its adoption by many Member States.

In responding to remarks by the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea yesterday, he said Japan’s position had been clearly stated by the Japanese Prime Minister in his address to the General Assembly.  The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s nuclear programme posed a serious challenge to North-East Asia and to the international community as a whole.  Japan was determined to seek a comprehensive resolution of the nuclear issue.  The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea stood to reap substantial benefits from the six-party talks, but there would be no benefit in continuing its nuclear programme.  Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea must remain committed and must implement the Pyongyang Declaration.

ELISABET BORSIIN BONNIER (Sweden), speaking on behalf of the New Agenda Coalition, which includes Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and Sweden, introduced the draft resolution entitled “Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world:  Accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments” (document A/C.1/59/L.22).  Stating that the current global situation remained “rather bleak”, she urged the international community to show strong support for both nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament, which were mutually reinforcing processes.

She told delegates that one purpose of the draft at hand was to uphold and safeguard the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in its entirety, along with the commitments made at the two NPT Review Conferences.  She also stressed that agreements needed to be implemented and that implementation had to be accelerated.  Informing delegates that this year’s version of the draft resolution was “short, focused and operative”, she said it reflected the Coalition’s desire for clarity and brevity, and its support of the current calls for Committee reform.  Relying on consensus language, much of which came from the 2000 NPT Review Conference, it also went beyond the NPT and addressed the entire international community.

JAYANT PRASAD (India) introduced the draft resolution on a Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons (document A/C.1/59/L.29).  He said that the draft resolution underlined that the use of nuclear weapons posed the most serious threat to the survival of mankind.  The Non-Aligned Movement had stressed the concern at the threat to humanity derived from the continued existence of nuclear weapons and of their possible use, or threat of use.  As long as certain States claimed an exclusive right to possess nuclear weapons in perpetuity, and as long as the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons were justified as a legitimate guarantor of security, the threat of their use would remain.  A positive vote for the resolution would be a vote by the international community in favour of decisive step toward the elimination of nuclear weapons.

Mr. Prasad also introduced the draft resolution on “Reducing Nuclear Danger” (document A/C.1/59/ L.30).  He said that the draft resolution underlined the need to hold an international conference to identify ways and means of eliminating nuclear dangers and called for measures to protect humanity from the catastrophic consequences of unintentional or accidental use of nuclear weapons that could result from prevalent security doctrines and nuclear postures.  The draft resolution offered modest and pragmatic proposals for the safety and security of mankind and called for a review of nuclear doctrines.  It also called for immediate steps to reduce the risk of unintentional or accidental use of nuclear weapons.  The very real danger posed by the increased risk of systems and components falling into the hands of non-State actors had aggravated current dangers, he added. 

PAUL MEYER (Canada) introduced a draft resolution on the 1998 decision by the Conference on Disarmament to establish an ad hoc committee to negotiate a fissile material cut-off treaty (document A/C.1/59/L.34).  Telling delegates that it was identical to last year’s version, which had been adopted without a vote, he noted that the draft provided a vehicle for the First Committee to urge the Conference to immediately commence negotiations on such an instrument.  He also assured delegates that, in his view, during any future negotiations, any party could raise whatever issues or concerns they had.  Before concluding, he said that such a treaty would be fundamental in the furthering of both disarmament and non-proliferation objectives.

HEBA ELMARASSI (Egypt) introduced the draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/59/L.37).  She said that the draft resolution reflected the concern of the countries of the Middle East and the international community as a whole over the continued existence of nuclear materials in the Middle East region that were not under the IAEA safeguards regime.  It also underlined the need to adopt a zone free of nuclear weapons in the region.  Additionally, it called on Israel, the only State in the region that had not joined the NPT, to do so.

Ms. Elmarassi also introduced the draft resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middles East (document A/C.1/59/L.8), saying that the draft resolution stressed the need for the relevant parties to adopt and to ensure that all nuclear materials in the Middle East region were placed under the IAEA safeguards regime.

CAROLINE MCDONALD (New Zealand) introduced a draft on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) (document A/C.1/59/L.25).  Drawing attention to operative paragraph 3, which would have the Assembly underline the need to maintain momentum towards completion of a verification regime, she acknowledged that only after the Treaty’s entry into force could such a regime come into being. Declaring that such an international monitoring system would be very helpful, since it would be able to detect nuclear explosions anywhere, she expressed frustration with the slow process of global ratifications.

Pointing out that operative paragraph 8 was new this year, she told delegates that it would have the Assembly request the Secretary-General to prepare a report on the efforts made by ratifying States towards its universalization and possibilities for providing assistance on ratification procedures to States that so requested it.  Such a report would provide more focus as to how universalization efforts could be best directed in the future.  She also noted that this year’s draft featured strengthened calls on non-parties to join the CTBT.

RADZI RAHMAN (Malaysia) introduced the draft resolution entitled “Follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons” (document A/C.1/59/L.39).  Reminding delegates that the Court had unanimously concluded that there was a global obligation to pursue and conclude negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament under strict and effective control, he added that that decision must be followed up by concrete action by all Member States.

Stating that developments in the field of nuclear disarmament over the past year had been “rather disheartening”, he called for the unfavourable situation to be rectified.  It would be difficult to improve things, however, so long as nuclear-weapon States maintained their large arsenals and continued to develop new types of nuclear weapons.  He, therefore, called on all Member States to immediately implement the provisions of the present draft upon its adoption, in line with the international community’s commitment to the elimination of nuclear weapons.

He said that, as the world moved towards nuclear disarmament, it should have clear, foreseeable, realistic and attainable targets.  Nevertheless, it should also not tolerate the “indefinite perpetuation” of the possession of such weapons.  In that context, he urged governments to support multilateral efforts to rid the globe of such arms.  Reminding delegates that the present draft was being submitted for the ninth consecutive year, he expressed confidence that it would once again receive the support of a large majority of Member States.

U. CANCHOLA (Mexico) introduced the draft decision on the United Nations Conference on Eliminating Nuclear Dangers (document A/C.1/59/L.15).  He said that the international community must move with resolve to find ways to counter the threat of the danger posed by nuclear weapons and that the holding of the Conference would be a step in that direction.  It was Mexico’s intention to help to find the space for consultation to address the threat.  There was an urgent need to redouble effort leading to the convening of an international conference on eliminating nuclear dangers.

SAAD MAANDI (Algeria) said that his country supported the resolutions introduced by Myamnar and Malaysia.  He said that nuclear weapons had continued to gain in importance and to pile up as a threat to mankind.  Their elimination was a vital obligation of the international community.  The abolition of those weapons would free mankind from the threat and would free up considerable financial resources.  Nuclear States must take measures that addressed the threat posed by those weapons.  It was time to establish a system of collective security that would be free of military theories and doctrines of the cold war era.  The draft resolutions recognized that it was now possible to create a world free of nuclear weapons.  The convening of an international conference on nuclear disarmament would help in achieving that goal.  Algeria supported the draft resolutions and was dedicated to the total elimination of nuclear weapons.

RUSTAM KAYUMOV (Uzbekistan), on behalf of his country, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan, introduced a draft decision on the nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia (document A/C.1/59/L.7).  He said that since the adoption of the first General Assembly resolution on that topic several years ago, the region had succeeded in drafting a protocol containing security assurances to the five non-nuclear-weapon States in Central Asia.  Telling delegates that the Central Asian countries were currently in the midst of negotiating the accession to that protocol by the nuclear-weapon States, he expressed the hope that the nuclear Powers would help make the nuclear-weapon-free zone a reality.  He also hoped that the draft would receive support from all delegations and be adopted by consensus.

LUIS WINTER (Chile), on behalf of 113 co-sponsors, introduced a draft resolution on The Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation (document A/C.1/59/L.50).  Stating that the draft was brief and general, he said its main objective was to welcome the Code, which had 117 signatories.  He added that the Code served as a non-binding “political reference point” that promoted transparency and confidence-building.  While it recognized that no State should be excluded from using outer space for peaceful purposes, it also stressed that none should contribute to the proliferation of ballistic missiles there, which would be capable of carrying weapons of mass destruction.  He expressed hope that the draft would be adopted without a vote.

SHAUKAT UMER (Pakistan) introduced the draft resolution on conclusion of effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/59/L.44).  He said that the provision of security assurances to non-nuclear weapon States was an obligation under the Charter of the United Nations.  That obligation extended to the assurance of non-use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.  At end of cold war, there had been expectations that it would become easier to extend negative assurances.  The conclusion of credible nuclear assurances had become all the more important.  The co-sponsors of the draft resolution believed that the conclusion of an effective arrangement on negative security assurances was overdue and that such a credible assurances would facilitate negotiations towards nuclear disarmament.

Mr. RADZI (Malaysia), on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, introduced a draft resolution on measures to uphold the authority of the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, signed in Geneva in 1925 (document A/C.1/59/L.12).  Reiterating that multilateralism provided the only sustainable way to address international disarmament and security issues, he said he was submitting the present draft in that spirit.  In addition, the draft reflected the longstanding commitment of the international community to ban chemical and biological weapons.  Before concluding, he expressed the hope that the text would be adopted with the widest possible support, and that it would facilitate global efforts to ban chemical and biological weapons.

HAMID BAJDI NEJED (Iran) introduced a draft resolution on missiles (document A/C.1/59/L.6).  Since the introduction of that item to the General Assembly in 1999, the international community had become more and more interested in addressing the topic, he said.  Noting that the first panel of governmental experts, which had been convened by one of the current draft’s previous versions, had been able to adopt a report and explore vital issues, he lamented that the second panel had not been so successful.  Given the complexity of the issues at hand, no consensus could be reached, according to the Secretary-General.  That was unfortunate, he said.  However, it should only prompt Member States to work with more dedication, seriousness and preparation.  After all, if the international community acted in good faith, focused its attention, and redoubled its efforts, it could still make progress and thus help contribute to a safer future.

This year’s text focused on the future, he said.  For example, in operative paragraph 3, it suggested the establishment of a third panel of governmental experts, which would work throughout 2007 and 2008.  The third panel’s mandate would be more specific than the previous ones, and the allotment of two years would provide for more time to have thorough discussions.  He also mentioned that operative paragraph 2 would have the Assembly request the Secretary-General to prepare a report on the topic, with the support of qualified consultants.  He hoped the report would note areas where consensus could be reached, he said.

CHRIS SANDERS (Netherlands), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the Chemical Weapons Convention was a unique disarmament and non-proliferation instrument, the strict application of which needed to be fully guaranteed.  The Union’s Strategy against the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, adopted in December 2003, had identified a number of concrete actions in support of promoting and reinforcing the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Biological Weapons Convention.  The Union was now in the course of implementing that strategy.  The concrete steps it had taken so far included a joint action with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which was being finalized to allow for financial support to its programmes in the area of universality, national implementation and international cooperation in the field of chemical activities.  The Union would consider giving support to OPCW States facing administrative or financial difficulties in their implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention.

He announced that the Union was also promoting the instrument of challenge inspections in the framework of the Chemical Weapons Convention and beyond.  A few months ago, Austria organized and hosted a Union Seminar on challenge inspections that concluded in an action plan on that subject.  That outcome would further raise the overall awareness of the procedural and practical issues surrounding challenge inspections.  Since that Biological Weapons Convention did not contain a verification mechanism, the Union would try to find ways to strengthen compliance with the Convention, he added.  In that context, the Union fully supported the inter-sessional programme of work for the years 2003-2005 in Geneva.  It, however, remained committed to develop measures to verify compliance with the Biological Weapons Convention and believed that it would be an appropriate subject for consideration at the Review Conference.

KWANG-CHUL LEW (Republic of Korea) said he welcomed Libya’s accession to the Chemical Weapons Convention.  He also said that he supported this year’s draft resolution on measures to uphold the authority of the 1925 Geneva Protocol (document A/C.1/59/L.12), because it would bolster the Convention’s universality and was a necessary tool that would help the international community cope with the increasing threat of chemical weapons being used by terrorists.  Turning to the Biological Weapons Convention, he said the lack of a verification protocol should not be used as an excuse for countries not to monitor themselves at the national level.  Before concluding, he added that multilateral arms control and non-proliferation agreements should not remain static.  Instead, they should be made more efficient, especially in the face of emerging threats, and be evaluated periodically.

DORU COSTEA (Romania) said that so-called “other weapons of mass destruction”, namely chemical and biological ones, continued to pose threats to international security and stability, despite multilateral agreements prohibiting their production and use as weapons.  That was not because the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Biological Weapons Convention had failed in their ultimate target.  Romania attached particular importance to the OPCW activities and continued to contribute to the promotion of its core objectives, mainly to its universalization and national implementation.

His country hosted the third meeting of national authorities of the Eastern European States parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention from 17 to 19 May.  Representatives of 25 organizations, such as the World Customs Organization and the European Council of Chemical Industry Associates, discussed the practical actions needed to fulfil the objectives of article VII of the OPCW Action Plan on enhancing the effectiveness of the Convention’s National Implementation Measures.  The status of that Convention’s implementation in Eastern Europe was reviewed, focusing on the requirements for legislative and administrative provisions to monitor and declare scheduled chemicals.  Participants shared their experience in that topical area, further strengthening the cooperative network established to provide implementation support to individual States parties.  In that context, the United States and Romania had launched an assistance programme for the implementation of the Convention.

Mr. DA ROCHA PARANHOS (Brazil), speaking on behalf of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) States, expressed satisfaction at Libya’s accession to the Chemical Weapons Convention.  He said that there was a need for constant improvement of verification mechanism of the Convention.  States should continue to contribute towards the attainment of that objective.  Any delay in the destruction of chemical weapons affected the important work being done in the sphere of the Convention.  MERCUSOR States considered the Convention to be a sufficient tool in the fight against the proliferation of chemical weapons.  From 6 to 8 September, in Buenos Aires, a technical meeting had been organized for customs officials.  Representatives of 44 States parties had participated in that meeting which was held with a view to discussing customs control on the import and export of chemicals.

SALEM MOUBARAK AL-SHAFI (Qatar) said the General Assembly had already called for the creation of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.  It had also said that, until the establishment of such a zone, States in the region should refrain from acquiring nuclear weapons and respect the authority of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).  Insisting upon the need for States to respect such calls, he said that Israel should join the NPT and abide by Security Council resolution 487 (1981), which had called on Israel to place its facilities under IAEA supervision.

Mr. SANDERS (Netherlands), speaking on behalf of the European Union on the subject of outer space, said that the Union was actively cooperating in various space initiatives.  The Union believed that such activities should be developed in a peaceful environment and that an arms race in outer space should be prevented.  The Conference on Disarmament was the only international multilateral negotiating forum for disarmament and any decision regarding the work on the prevention of an arms race in outer space should be taken in that body.  He expressed support for the establishment of a subsidiary body at the Conference on Disarmament to deal with that matter on the basis of a mandate which would be the subject of an agreement by all.

HU XIAODI (China) said that the peaceful use of outer space was in the interest of all the peoples of the world. Outer space both benefited all countries and also remained a possible source of fresh military tensions.  The deployment of weapons in outer space could undermine international arms treaties and trigger an arms race.  That could seriously threaten the security of outer space assets.  The existing regime governing outer space had revealed its limitations in preventing the deployment of weapons other than nuclear weapons in space.

Over the years, the international community had sought to prevent the weaponization of outer space and to prevent an arms race there, he said.  In that context, in 2002 China and Russia, along with a number of other States, tabled a working paper on preventing the deployment of weapons in outer space.  It was China’s hope that the Conference on Disarmament would take that document as a basis for concluding an international agreement.  Other States were welcome to join discussion on the issue.  The Conference on Disarmament should, as soon as possible, take up its role on the prevention of an arms race in outer space.  An early conclusion of international legal instrument to prevent an arms race in outer space was crucial to promoting common security for all countries.

ANTON VASILIEV (Russian Federation) said preventing the deployment of weapons in outer space was one of the most important and urgent tasks facing the international community today.  Noting that the world was beginning to depend more and more on space technology, he stressed that the exploration of outer space should be used for mankind’s benefit, in such areas as predicting natural disasters, for example.  He also emphasized that outer space must remain a sphere for cooperation, not confrontation.  In that regard, the international community now had a “real opportunity” to prevent conflicts in outer space.

Declaring that his country had no plans to create or deploy any weapons in outer space, and had consistently been complying with the moratorium on developing outer space weapons systems, he expressed hope that the paper his Government, along with China, had submitted at the Conference on Disarmament would stimulate further discussions.  He also hoped that an international, legally binding agreement would be drafted.  Calling for a subsidiary body dedicated to the theme to be established in the Conference on Disarmament, he said his country would not be the first to deploy weapons of any type in outer space, and he called on all other States with outer space capabilities to follow suit.

BRIAN PARAI (Canada) said that his country was profoundly opposed to the weaponization of space.  Space should be considered a universal good.  Canada was committed to seeing the Conference on Disarmament re-establish an ad hoc committee to discuss preventing an arms race in outer space in all its aspects and to seeing the Conference eventually undertake negotiation of an outer space weapons ban.  With a view to realizing such a ban, the re-establishment of an ad hoc committee would also respond to General Assembly resolution 58/36 and its predecessors.

Canada also called for the establishment of “crosswalks” between the space-related work of the First and Fourth Committees, he continued.  Likewise, the United Nations Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and the Conference on Disarmament needed to work more closely together on that issue.  In March, Canada co-sponsored a workshop, with the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, on the margins of the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, and a clear message from that workshop had been the need for a more comprehensive and coordinated approach to ensuring space security.  Canada encouraged creative thinking and action with regard to confidence-building measures that could help ensure space security and the prevention of an arms race in outer space.  The country’s goal was to support continued access to, and use of, space by all nations for peaceful purposes.

Ms. BONNIER (Sweden) expressed concern over the prospect of weapons being deployed in outer space.  In that context, she lauded the adoption of The Hague Code of Conduct and expressed hope that all States would soon adhere to that non-binding instrument.  Voicing support for the establishment of a subsidiary body in the Conference on Disarmament to deal with outer space issues, she further suggested that informal technical meetings should take place there, as well.  Such meetings would include space technicians and members of the private sector, people whose perspectives could be quite important and helpful, especially given the intricacies involved when discussing dual-use goods.  The Secretariat’s Office of Outer Space Affairs should also be more involved.

SARALA FERNANDO (Sri Lanka) said the prevention of an arms race in outer space was an issue of great concern to her country.  On such vital themes, there was merit in reiterating a resolution every year on the same topic to reaffirm the importance of the issue.

MARIA LEDENO (Venezuela) said her Government supported any initiative aimed at preserving outer space as the common heritage of mankind.  Declaring that no nation had the right to claim unilateral rights or privileges there, she said outer space must be used for peaceful purposes only.  That was in line with the humanistic policies of her country.  She supported the initiative by China and the Russian Federation in the Conference on Disarmament to establish an international legal agreement on the prevention of the deployment of weapons in outer space.  After all, the possibility that outer space might be used as a theatre of war was a matter of great concern.

ANDREAS TOTH (Hungary) introduced the draft resolution on the Biological Weapons Convention (document A/C.1/59/L.17).  He said that the draft resolution called on all States to participate in the implementation of decisions of the review conferences of the Convention, including through the sharing of information.  He hoped that the text would generate wide acceptance and be adopted without a vote.

Mr. RUCINSKI (Poland) introduced the draft resolution on the implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (document A/C.1/59/L.16), saying that the text was well balanced and showed the unequivocal support of the United Nations for the full and effective implementation of all the provisions of that Convention.  The basic assumption and goals of his country was to ensure a consensus approval of the draft resolution.  Consensus was crucial to provide unequivocal support for implementation of the Convention.

Right of Reply

The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea acknowledged that Japan had been the victim of nuclear holocaust.  Nevertheless, because it had introduced nuclear weapons in its own territory, it was merely being hypocritical whenever it spoke of nuclear disarmament.  In that context, he urged Japan to take a fair stand and not to simply side with the United States, if it truly wanted to resolve the KoreanPeninsula’s nuclear issue.

* *** *