Fifty-ninth General Assembly

First Committee

14^th & 15^th Meetings (AM & PM)

WEST AFRICAN ARMS TRAFFIC, MAN-PORTABLE AIR DEFENCE SYSTEMS

AMONG ISSUES, AS 30 TEXTS INTRODUCED IN FIRST COMMITTEE

The General Assembly, deeply disturbed by the magnitude of the illicit proliferation and circulation of and traffic in small arms in the States of the Sahelo-Saharan subregion, would encourage the establishment of national commissions in the Sahelo-Saharan countries to combat such proliferation, according to one of 30 draft resolutions introduced today in the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security).

Submitting the text, the representative of Mali, on behalf of the member States of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), said that it took into account a major concern of the West Africa subregion and, therefore, the whole of Africa.  The text was an updated version of the resolution adopted at the fifty-eighth session of the General Assembly and would support subregional collective awareness of the danger posed by illicit traffic in small arms.

By the terms of the draft, the Assembly would invite the international community to lend support to those national commissions and would encourage civil society groups to participate in the work of the national commissions and in implementing the moratorium on the trade and manufacture of small arms and light weapons in West Africa.

Another draft, presented today by the representative of Australia, would have the Assembly urge Member States to support all international, regional and national efforts related to prevention of the illicit transfer and unauthorised access to and use of man-portable air defence systems (MANPADS).  It would also stress the importance of effective and comprehensive national controls on the production, transfer and brokering of MANPADS.

By the terms of one of two draft texts introduced by the Representative of Pakistan, the Assembly would request the Conference on Disarmament to consider the formulation of principles that could serve as a framework for regional agreements on conventional arms control.  It would also decide to give urgent consideration to the issues involved in conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels.  By the terms of the second draft, the Assembly would stress that sustained efforts were needed, within the framework of the Conference on Disarmament and under the umbrella of the United Nations, to make progress on the entire range of disarmament issues.

Also today, the Committee heard the introduction of a draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific by the Representative of Nepal; a draft on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons by the Representative of Colombia; and a text on the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed To Be Excessively Injurious or To Have Indiscriminate Effects (Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons) by the representative of Sweden.

A draft resolution on the implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Ottawa Convention) was introduced by the representative of Thailand; a draft resolution on consolidation of peace through practical disarmament measures by the representative of Germany; and a draft decision on problems arising from the accumulation of conventional ammunition stockpiles in surplus by the representative of Bulgaria.

Other drafts introduced today included draft resolutions on national legislation on transfer of arms, military equipment and dual use goods and technology by the representative of the Netherlands; maintenance of international security -- through good neighbourliness, stability and development –- in South-Eastern Europe by the representative of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; on Mongolia’s international security and nuclear-weapon-free status by that country’s representative; activities of the United Nations Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa by the representative of Equatorial Guinea; United Nations Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa by the representative of Nigeria, on behalf of the African Group; and the report of the Disarmament Commission by the representative of Georgia.

Draft resolutions were also introduced by the representative of the Russian Federation on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security; by the representative of India on the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament; by the representative of the United States on improving the effectiveness of the methods of work of the First Committee; by the representative of Argentina on information on confidence-building measures in the field of conventional arms;  and by the representative of India on measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.

The representative of Mexico introduced two draft resolutions on the United Nations Disarmament Information Programme and on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean.  The representative of Canada introduced a draft text on Verification in all its aspects, including the role of the United Nations in the field of verification.

Also today, the representative of Malaysia, on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, introduced six texts on:  the relationship between disarmament and development; improving the effectiveness of the methods of work of the First Committee; the promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation; the drafting and implementation of disarmament and arms control agreements; the convening of the fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament; and the United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament.

The representative of the Netherlands made a statement in support of the draft decision introduced by the representative of Bulgaria.

Also today the Committee continued its thematic debate, with statements by the representatives of Cote d’Ivoire; the Russian Federation; Oman; the United Arab Emirates; the Republic of Korea; Belarus; Nicaragua; the Netherlands, on behalf of the European Union; Cyprus; Brazil, on behalf of MERCOSUR; Canada; Switzerland; Argentina; Sweden; Australia; Germany; the United States; Canada; Japan; and Malta.

The representative of Israel made a statement in exercise of the right of reply.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m., Monday, 25 October, to continue its thematic debate and to hear the introduction of new draft texts.

Background

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met today to continue its thematic debate and hear introductions of draft resolutions and decisions.  The Committee was expected to hear introductions of drafts on the following topics:  improving the effectiveness of the methods of work of the First Committee; developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security; and activities of the United Nations Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa.

Also:  national legislation on transfer of arms, military equipment and dual use goods and technology; United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament; environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of disarmament and arms control agreements; promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation; convening of the fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament; and the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean.

In addition:  Mongolia’s international security and nuclear-weapon-free status; the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific; assistance to States for curbing the illicit traffic in small arms and collecting them; the United Nations Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa; relationship between disarmament and development; measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction; the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament; and verification.

Also:  the consolidation of peace through practical disarmament measures; the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Ottawa Convention); the report of the Disarmament Commission; the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons; conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels; regional disarmament; problems arising from the accumulation of conventional ammunition stockpiles in surplus; and the prevention of the illicit transfer and unauthorized access to and use of man-portable air defence systems (MANPADS).

Furthermore:  the United Nations Disarmament Information Programme; information on confidence-building measures in the field of conventional arms; the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed To Be Excessively Injurious or To Have Indiscriminate Effects (Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons); and maintenance of international security -- through good-neighbourliness, stability and development –- in South-Eastern Europe.

By a draft resolution sponsored by the United States on improving the effectiveness of the methods of work of the First Committee (document A/C.1/59/L.1), the Assembly would decide to adopt seven measures to better the body’s operation.

First, the Assembly would limit the number of studies commissioned by the Committee to one per year.  Second, it would set a numerical limit on the number of draft resolutions and decisions tabled each year.  Third, it would introduce resolutions traditionally adopted by consensus only on a biennial or triennial basis.  Fourth, it would institute automatic “sunset” provisions for all United Nations activities generated by the Committee.

Fifth, the Assembly would consolidate reports initiated by the Committee with other reports on related issues that the Secretariat was required to produce.  Sixth, it would elect the Committee’s full Bureau one year in advance.  Finally, it would work towards improving the accuracy of projections related to the programme budget implications and increasing the advance notice provided to Member States regarding the financial implications of draft resolutions and decisions.

A draft resolution on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security (document A/C.1/59/L.2/Rev.1), sponsored by the Russian Federation, would have the Assembly call upon Member States to promote further at multilateral levels the consideration of existing and potential threats in the field of information security, as well as possible measures to limit the threats emerging in this field, consistent with the need to preserve the free flow of information.

A draft resolution on the activities of the United Nations Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa (document A/C.1/59/L.3) would have the Assembly reaffirm its support for efforts aimed at promoting confidence-building measures at regional and subregional levels, in order to ease tensions and conflicts in Central Africa and to further peace, stability and sustainable development in the subregion.

The Assembly would also emphasize the need to make the early-warning mechanism in Central Africa operational so that it would serve as an instrument for analysing and monitoring political situations in the States members of the Standing Advisory Committee and as a technical body through which the member States would carry out the Committee’s programme of work, adopted in 1992.  It would also appeal to MemberStates and organizations to make additional voluntary contributions to support the Committee’s work.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea and Gabon.

A draft resolution on national legislation on transfer of arms, military equipment and dual use goods and technology (document A/C.1/59/L.5), sponsored by the Netherlands, would have the Assembly invite Member States in a position to do, without prejudice to  the provisions contained in Security Council resolution 1540 (2004) of 28 April 2004, to enact or improve national legislation, regulations and procedures to exercise effective control over the transfer of arms, military equipment and dual use goods and technology, while ensuring that such legislation, regulations and procedures were consistent with the obligations of States parties under international treaties.

The Assembly would also encourage Member States to provide, on a voluntary basis, information to the Secretary-General on their national legislation, regulations and procedures on the transfer of arms, military equipment and dual use goods and technology.

A draft resolution on the United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.9), sponsored by Malaysia, on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, would have the Assembly reiterate the importance of United Nations activities at the regional level to increase stability and security of Member States, which could be promoted in a substantive manner by the maintenance and revitalization of the three regional centres for peace and disarmament.  The Assembly would also 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 foundations, to make voluntary contributions to the centres.

By the terms of a draft resolution on the observance of environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of disarmament and arms control agreements (document A/C.1/59/L.10), sponsored by Malaysia, on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, the Assembly would reaffirm that international disarmament forums should take fully into account the relevant environmental norms in negotiating treaties and agreements on disarmament and arms limitation and that all States, through their actions, should contribute fully to ensuring compliance with those norms in the implementation of treaties and conventions to which they were parties.

It would also call on 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.

A draft resolution on the promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation (document A/C.1/59/L.11), sponsored by Malaysia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, would have the Assembly reaffirm multilateralism as the core principle in negotiations in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation with a view to maintaining and strengthening universal norms and enlarging their scope.  It would also have the Assembly reaffirm multilateralism as the core principle in resolving disarmament and non-proliferation concerns and urge the participation of all interested States in multilateral negotiations on arms regulation, non-proliferation and disarmament in a non-discriminatory and transparent manner.

By additional terms, the Assembly would underline the importance of preserving the existing agreements on arms regulation and disarmament, which constitute an expression of the results of international cooperation and multilateral negotiations in response to the challenges facing mankind.  It would also 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 Assembly would also request States parties to the relevant instruments on weapons of mass destruction to consult and cooperate among themselves in resolving their concerns with regard to cases of non-compliance, as well as on implementation, in accordance with procedures defined in those instruments, and to refrain from resorting or threatening to resort to unilateral actions or directing unverified non-compliance accusations against one another to resolve concerns.

A draft resolution sponsored by Malaysia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, on improving the effectiveness of the methods of work of the First Committee (document A/C.1/59/L.13), would have the Assembly request Member States to elect the Chairman and other members of the Bureau at least three months before the meeting of the session.

By further terms, the Assembly would invite Member States to hold more interactive debates and urge them to submit draft resolutions in a more concise and action-oriented manner.  The Assembly would also invite Member States to consider the biennialization or triennialization of the Committee’s agenda items, on a voluntary basis, and in particular when no specific action is required to be taken for the implementation of the relevant resolutions.

The Assembly would further recommend that the Committee hold more informal consultations, with the participation of all interested Member States for furthering discussions on draft resolutions.  It would also urge the Committee to continue its existing methods of work in clustering its agenda items as a means of facilitating the thematic discussions and action on the draft resolutions.

The draft resolution would also have the Assembly consider that any change in the disarmament agenda and machinery, including the Committee, shall be made in the context of the fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament.

By the terms of a draft resolution concerning the convening of the fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.14), sponsored by Malaysia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, 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 that session.

It would also request that group to hold an organizational session in order to set the date for its substantive sessions, and to submit a report on its work, including possible substantive recommendations, before the end of the sixtieth session of the General Assembly.

A draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (document A/C.1/59/L.18), sponsored by Mexico 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 those in the region, and to international governmental and non-governmental organizations and foundations to make and increase voluntary contributions to the Centre.

According to a draft resolution on Mongolia’s international security and nuclear-weapon-free status (document A/C.1/59/L.19), the Assembly would endorse and support that country’s good relationship with its neighbours as an important element of strengthening regional peace, security and stability.  It would also appeal to the Member States in that region to support Mongolia’s efforts to join the relevant regional security and economic arrangements.

A draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific (document A/C.1/59/L.20) 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 Assembly would also urge the Secretary-General to ensure the physical operation of the Regional Centre from Kathmandu within six months of the date of signature of the host country agreement.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Afghanistan, Australia, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, China, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, India, Indonesia, Japan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Republic of Korea and Sri Lanka.

Deeply disturbed by the magnitude of the illicit proliferation and circulation of and traffic in small arms in the States of the Sahelo-Saharan subregion, the Assembly, by a draft resolution concerning assistance to States for curbing the illicit traffic in small arms and collecting them (document A/C.1/59/L.21), would encourage the establishment of national commissions in the Sahelo-Saharan countries to combat the aforementioned proliferation, and invite the international community to lend support to those commissions.

By a further term, it would encourage civil society groups to participate in the work of the national commissions and in implementing the moratorium on the trade and manufacture of small arms and light weapons in West Africa.  The Assembly would also call upon the international community to provide technical and financial support to strengthen the capacity of civil organizations to take action to combat the illicit trade in small arms.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Cote d’Ivoire, El Salvador, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali (on behalf of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)), Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo.

A draft resolution sponsored by Nigeria, on behalf of the Group of African States, on the United Nations Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa (document A/C.1/59/L.24) would have the Assembly reaffirm its strong support for the Centre and emphasize the need to provide it with the necessary resources to enable it to strengthen its activities and carry out its programmes.  It would appeal once again to all States, as well as intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations and foundations, to make voluntary contributions to the Centre.

The Assembly would also appeal to the Centre, in cooperation with the African Union, regional and subregional organizations and African States, to take steps to promote the consistent implementation of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light weapons in All Its Aspects.

According to a draft resolution on the relationship between disarmament and development (document A/C.1/59/L.28), sponsored by Malaysia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, the Assembly would stress the central role of the United Nations in the disarmament-development relationship.  By a further term, the Assembly would urge the international community to devote part of the resources made available by the implementation of disarmament and arms limitation agreements to economic and social development, with a view to reducing the ever widening gap between developed and developing countries.

Deeply concerned by the growing risk of linkages between terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, and particularly by the fact that terrorists might seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction, the Assembly would call on all Member States to support international efforts to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction and their delivery means, according to a draft resolution entitled “Measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction” (document A/C.1/59/L.31).

The Assembly would urge Member States to take and strengthen national measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring mass destruction weapons, their delivery means and materials and technologies related to their manufacture.  It would invite them to inform the Secretary-General, on a voluntary basis, of the measures taken in that regard.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Afghanistan, Bhutan, Colombia, Fiji, France, India, Mauritius, Myanmar, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

By a draft resolution on the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.32), 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 Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Congo, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Fiji, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Mauritius, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Viet Nam and Zambia.

According to a draft resolution entitled “Verification in all its aspects, including the role of the United Nations in the field of verification” (document A/C.1/59/L.33), the Assembly would reaffirm the critical importance of, and the vital contribution that has been made by, verification measures in non-proliferation, arms limitation and disarmament agreements.

It would also request the Secretary-General, with the assistance of a Panel of Government Experts, which would be established in 2006 on the basis of equitable geographic distribution, to explore the issue of verification, including the role of the United Nations, and to submit the Panel’s report to the General Assembly at its sixty-first session.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Canada, Chile, El Salvador, Germany, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation and Sweden.

A draft resolution on consolidation of peace through practical disarmament measures (document A/C.1/59/L.38) would have the Assembly once again encourage Member States, as well as regional arrangements and agencies to lend their support to the implementation of the recommendations contained in the Secretary-General’s report on that theme.

The Assembly would emphasize the importance of including in United Nations-mandated peacekeeping operations, as appropriate and with the consent of  the host State, practical disarmament measures aimed at addressing the problem of illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in conjunction with disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes aimed at former combatants, with a view to promoting an integrated comprehensive and effective weapons management strategy that would contribute to sustainable peace-building process.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Israel, Kenya, Latvia, Lesotho, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

A draft resolution on the implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Ottawa Convention) (document A/C.1/59/L.40/Rev.1) would have the Assembly invite all States that had not yet signed the Convention to accede to it, and urge all States that signed but did not ratify it to do so without delay.

The Assembly would also urge all States parties to provide the Secretary-General with complete and timely information to promote transparency and compliance with the Convention.  By a further term, it would renew its call upon all States and other relevant parties to work together to promote, support and advance the care, rehabilitation and social and economic reintegration of mine victims, mine risk education programmes and the removal of anti-personnel mines and stockpiles throughout the world and the assurance of their destruction.

In addition, the Assembly would invite and encourage all interested States, the United Nations, other relevant international organizations or institutions, regional organizations, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and relevant non-governmental organizations to attend the First Review Conference at the highest possible level and, pending a decision to be taken at the First Review Conference, to maintain the high level of participation in the subsequent Meetings of the States Parties including their programme of intersessional work.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Afghanistan, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brazil, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Eritrea, France, Gabon, Germany, Greece, Guinea, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mexico, Monaco, Mozambique, Namibia, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sudan, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

A draft resolution on the report of the Disarmament Commission (document A/C.1/59/L.42) would have the Assembly reaffirm the role of the Commission as the specialized, deliberative body within the United Nations multilateral disarmament machinery that allowed for in-depth deliberations on specific disarmament issues, leading to the submission of concrete recommendations.  The Assembly would also request the Commission to meet for a period not exceeding three weeks during 2005, namely, from 18 July to 5 August.

The draft is sponsored by Bosnia and Herzegovina, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Georgia, Ireland, Israel, Peru, Republic of Korea and Uzbekistan.

Emphasizing the importance of early and full implementation of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects, the Assembly would decide that the United Nations conference to review progress made in implementing it, would be held in New York for a period of two weeks between 26 June and 7 July 2006, according to the draft resolution on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons (document A/C.1/59/L.43).

The Assembly would also decide that the preparatory committee for that conference should be held in New York between 9 and 20 January 2006, with a subsequent session, if necessary.  By a further term, the Assembly would decide that the second biennial meeting of States as stipulated in the Programme of Action -- to consider the Programme’s national, regional and global implementation -- would be held in New York between 11 and 15 July 2005.

The draft is sponsored by Argentina, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Japan, Kenya, Liberia, Mexico, Mongolia, Mozambique, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Republic of Moldova, Senegal, South Africa, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

By a draft text on conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/59/L.46), the Assembly, convinced that conventional arms control needed to be pursued primarily in the regional and subregional context since most threats to peace and security in the post-cold-war era arise mainly among States located in the same region or subregion, would decide to give urgent consideration to the issues involved and request the Conference on Disarmament to consider the formulation or principles that could serve as a framework for regional agreements on conventional arms control.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Bangladesh, Germany, Liberia, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Ukraine.

Convinced that endeavours by countries to promote regional disarmament would enhance the security of all States and reduce the risk of regional conflicts, the Assembly, by the terms of a draft resolution on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.47) would stress that sustained efforts were needed, within the framework of the Conference on Disarmament and under the umbrella of the United Nations, to make progress on the entire range of disarmament issues.  It would call upon States to conclude agreements, wherever possible, for nuclear non-proliferation, disarmament and confidence-building measures at the regional and subregional levels.

The draft is sponsored by Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Nepal, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Pakistan and Turkey.

By a draft decision on problems arising from the accumulation of conventional ammunition stockpiles in surplus (document A/C.1/59/L.48), sponsored by Bulgaria, France and the Netherlands, the Assembly would decide to include the topic as an item in the provisional agenda of its sixtieth session.

According to a new draft resolution entitled “Prevention of the Illicit Transfer and Unauthorised Access to and Use of Man-Portable Air Defence Systems (MANPADS)” (document A/C.1/59/L.49), the Assembly would urge Member States to support all international, regional and national efforts related to that theme. I t would also stress the importance of effective and comprehensive national controls on the production, transfer and brokering of MANPADS.

The draft is sponsored by Argentina, Australia, Kenya, Thailand and Turkey.

By the terms of the draft resolution on United Nations Disarmament Information Programme (document A/C.1/59/L.51) the Assembly would take note with appreciation of the report of the Secretary General on that topic.

The Assembly would recommend that the programme continue to inform, educate and generate public understanding of the importance of multilateral action and support for it, including action by the United Nations and the Conference on Disarmament, in the field of arms limitation and disarmament, in a factual, balanced and objective manner, focusing on:  continuing to publish the Yearbook in all official languages and posting the 2002 and 2003 English editions on the Internet; continuing to maintain the Disarmament Internet Web site as part of the United Nations web site and producing new versions of the site in as many official languages as feasible; continuing to intensify interaction with the public, principally non-governmental organizations and research institutes, to help further an informed debate on topical issues of arms limitations, disarmament and security; and  continuing to organize discussions on topics of interest in the field of arms limitation and disarmament.

The Assembly would, in addition, invite Member States to make contributions to the Voluntary Trust Fund for the United Nations Disarmament Information Programme with a view to sustaining a strong outreach programme.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Argentina, Armenia, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Indonesia, Liberia, Mexico, Myanmar, New Zealand, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines and South Africa.

A draft resolution on information on confidence-building measures in the field of conventional arms (document A/C.1/59/L.52) would have the Assembly welcome confidence-building measures in that field already undertaken by MemberStates as well as the information on such measures voluntarily provided.  It would encourage Member States to continue to adopt and provide information on confidence-building measures and to also engage in a dialogue on such measures.  It would, in addition, request the Secretary-General to establish with the financial support of States in a position to do so, an electronic database containing information provided by Member States and to assist them, at their request, in the organization of seminars, courses and workshops aimed at enhancing the knowledge of new developments in the field.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Bangladesh, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti,  Honduras, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Kenya, Liberia, Latvia, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malawi, Malta, Mexico, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the  Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela and Zambia.

According to a draft resolution on the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed To Be Excessively Injurious or To Have Indiscriminate Effects (Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons)(document A/C.1/59/L.54), the Assembly would call upon all States that had not yet done so to become parties, as soon as possible, to the Convention, its annexed Protocols, and the amendment that extends the scope of the Convention and Protocols to include armed conflicts of a non-international character.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Israel, Latvia, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and United Kingdom.

By a draft resolution on the maintenance of international security -- through good-neighbourliness, stability and development –- in South-Eastern Europe (document A/C.1/59/L.55/Rev.1), the Assembly would call upon all States the relevant international organizations and the appropriate organs of the United Nations to respect the principles of territorial integrity and sovereignty of all States and the inviolability of international borders.

The Assembly would also call upon all States to continue to take measures in accordance with the Charter and the commitments of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and through further development of regional arrangements, as appropriate, to eliminate threats to international peace and security and to help to prevent conflicts in South-Eastern Europe, which could lead to the violent disintegration of States.

Under a further term, the Assembly would call upon all participants in the Stability Pact for South-Eastern Europe, as well as all concerned international organizations, to continue to support the efforts of the States of South-Eastern Europe towards regional stability and cooperation so as to enable them to pursue sustainable development and integration into European and Euro-Atlantic structures.

The Assembly would also call upon all States and relevant international organizations to contribute to the full implementation of Security Council resolutions 1244 (1999), on Kosovo, and 1345 (2001) and 1371 (2001), on the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

By additional provisions, the Assembly would reject the use of violence in pursuit of political aims, and stress that only peaceful political solutions could assure a stable and democratic future for South-Eastern Europe.  It would also urge the strengthening of relations among the States of South-Eastern Europe on the basis of respect for international law and agreements, in accordance with the principles of good-neighbourliness and mutual respect.

The Assembly would also urge all States to take effective measures against the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons and to help promote the collection and safe destruction of surplus stocks of such arms and light weapons.  In addition, it would stress the importance of closer cooperation among States, inter alia, in crime prevention, combating terrorism, trafficking in human beings, organized crime and corruption, drug trafficking and money-laundering.

It would also call on all States to intensify cooperation with and render all necessary assistance to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) to bring all at large indictees to surrender to the ICTY in line with Security Council resolution 1503.

The text is sponsored by Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and the United States.

Statements

STEFAN TAFROV (Bulgaria) introduced the draft decision on problems arising from the accumulation of conventional ammunition stockpiles in surplus (document A/C.1/59/L.48), saying that because of the problems of stockpiles of surplus ammunition, the issue deserved consideration by the Committee in the future.  Military conflicts had resulted from a large accumulation of such ammunition and it could also create environmental problems and have an impact on civilian populations.  Some countries found it difficult to ensure the safety of their stockpiles.  That meant that such stockpiles were easily vulnerable to theft or plundering.  Given the serious threat that they could fall into wrong hands, the co-sponsors of the draft decision felt that the international community should be aware of the complex problem and that there be a discussion of ways and means to address it.  Practical measures were required to address the issue, and the inclusion in the agenda of the sixtieth session of the General Assembly would be a way to address the problem.  The sponsors hoped that the draft would be adopted by consensus.

CHRIS SANDERS (Netherlands), whose delegation had co-sponsored the draft decision on problems with surplus conventional ammunition stockpiles (document A/C.1/59/L.48), expressed his full support for the text.

NARAYAN DEV PANT (Nepal) introduced the draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific (document A/C.1/59/L.20).  This year’s text had been amended to reflect the activities of the Centre during the present reporting period, he said.  He also lauded the work of the Centre, which had fostered a climate of cooperation in the region.  Nevertheless, the Centre could play an even greater role, as had been envisaged in its mandate, he added.

He told delegates that his country was committed to hosting the Centre and would provide all necessary support in that regard.  In that context, he declared that the Centre must move to Kathmandu in order to better serve its larger objectives.  To further that end, his Government had consulted extensively with the United Nations Department of Disarmament Affairs, with a view to finalizing the host country agreement.  Expressing hope that the Kathmandu Process would be revived as soon as possible, he appealed to all delegations to adopt the present draft without a vote, as had been done in previous years.

GEOFFREY SHAW (Australia) introduced a draft resolution on preventing the illicit spread of man-portable air defence systems (MANPADS) (document A/C.1/59/L.49).  Declaring that research had shown that there was a lack of adequate State control over MANPADS and that the risk of those weapons falling into the hands of non-State actors was genuine, he said the draft at hand would complement the Committee’s larger resolution on small arms.  He assured delegates that the text would not have the Assembly restrict or even address authorized trade between governments, since MANPADS constituted a legitimate defence measure for States.  He also explained that the draft resolution took a practical approach, encouraging the deployment of resources and technical expertise to States that requested them.

YOUSSOUF KONE (Mali) introduced the draft resolution on assistance to States for curbing the illicit traffic in small arms and collecting them (document A/C.1/59/L.21) on behalf of the member States of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).  He said that the draft took into account a major concern of the West Africa subregion and, therefore, the whole of Africa.  It was an updated version of the resolution adopted at the fifty-eight session and would support the subregional collective awareness of the danger posed by illicit traffic in small arms.  It also recognized that the Bamako agreement embodied the common African position on that matter.  It welcomed the declaration of a moratorium on small arms in West Africa and the decision by West African States to establish national commissions to combat small arms.  It did not contain any major changes.  The sponsors hoped that the draft resolution would be adopted by consensus.

NICOLAS RIVAS (Colombia) introduced the draft resolution on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons (document A/C.1/59/L.43).  He said that the draft builds on resolution 58/241 adopted in 2003, which decided to convene a United Nations conference in 2006 to review the implementation of the United Nations Programme of Action on small arms and light weapons.  It was essentially a procedural resolution that makes operative decisions that had been reached during earlier sessions.

KHALIL-UR-RAHMAN HASHMI (Pakistan) introduced draft resolutions on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.47) and conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/59/L.46).  Regarding the first, he said that while international disarmament measures were vital, security could usually be promoted more effectively at the regional level.  Telling delegates that the text took into account the unique situations existing in different regions, he added that it encouraged confidence-building measures.  With respect to the second text, he said it addressed a topic that had previously been ignored.  Explaining that post-cold war conflicts usually arose among States in the same region, he added that military balance between neighbours was often crucial to ensure stable relations.  He hoped both drafts would be adopted without a vote.

ELISABET BORSIIN BONNIER (Sweden) introduced the draft resolution on the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (document A/C.1/59/L.54).  Lauding the fact that States parties had been able to adopt protocol V, a legally binding instrument concerning explosive remnants of war, she explained that the new protocol would help minimize the humanitarian consequences caused by such remnants.  Calling upon all States, which had not yet done so, to become parties to the Convention and all its protocols, including the important amendment that extended the treaty’s scope to include armed conflicts of a non-international character, she expressed hope that the draft at hand would be adopted without a vote, as in previous years.

KHUNYING LAXANACHANTORN LOAHAPHAN (Thailand) introduced the draft resolution on the implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Ottawa Convention) (document A/C.1/59/L.40/Rev.1).  She said that it was based mainly on the previous resolution and updated based on the Conference of States parties held last year in Bangkok.  New elements had been included to reflect developments in the past year, including the regional seminars that had been held during the year and the upcoming review conference.  It updated the number of States parties, which now stood at 143 countries.  The sponsors hoped for wide support.

DETLEV WOLTER (Germany) introduced the draft resolution on consolidation of peace through practical disarmament measures (document A/C.1/59/L.38).  He said that practical disarmament measures were still a relatively new item on the United Nations agenda.  The international community was now, more than ever, aware of the importance of such measures, especially with regard to the excessive accumulation and uncontrolled spread of small arms and light weapons, which posed a threat to peace and security and reduced the prospects for economic development.  A shinning example of the success of practical disarmament measures was the Albania project, initiated by the group of interested States, which resulted in the collection and destruction of more than 100,000 small arms.  The group would build on best practices to enhance the capacities of the international community to replicate such successes.  A comprehensive and integrated approach toward disarmament measures was key to maintaining and consolidating peace and security.

GASTON YAO (Cote d’Ivoire) said conventional weapons, because of “diplomatic convenience”, did not receive the same attention as weapons of mass destruction.  They should, however, especially since the magnitude of the threat they posed was so great.  Since the last session of the General Assembly, conventional weapons had killed several thousands of people throughout the world and had traumatized, maimed and mutilated many others.  They had also negatively affected the social organization of many tribes.  Such arms were truly the “other weapons of mass destruction”, as the representative of Sierra Leone had cleverly said earlier.

His country was a party to all international instruments concerning conventional weapons, such as those on landmines and the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons.  Unfortunately, however, adherence to such agreements was not universal, and implementation at the regional and national level was not where it should be.  In that context, he called on those States that hesitated to do so to join such instruments and help implement them.  Before concluding, he said that recent brutal experiences in his country had led it to support negotiations on an international instrument on the marking and tracing of small arms and light weapons.  He also drew attention to the humanitarian, economic, and environmental damage caused by landmines.

ANTON VASILIEV (Russian Federation) said that his country was seriously concerned at the disturbing developments in the Middle East.  The continuing tension in the region did serious damage to all concerned.  In order to ensure peace in that region, his country believed that a comprehensive approach was needed.  In that regards, Russia supported the creation of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in that region.  It was necessary that international community take more robust action in order to prevent the worst case scenario and to promote a peace settlement in the region.

SALIM AL-BUSAIDI (Oman) said that his country was also concerned about threat to peace in the Middle East.  The country had acceded to most international conventions relating to international security.  In addition, it had taken many national initiatives in that area.  One single State in region, Israel, had remained outside collective concept.  Israel still remained outside the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and that situation was abnormal.  It could lead to a threat to international peace and security.  Arab States had repeatedly called for the region to be made free of weapons of mass destruction.  They recognized the seriousness of the situation.  They had also been calling on the international community to put pressure on Israel to submit to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.  Unfortunately, all those efforts had been futile and some States in the Committee even avoided mentioning the situation.

KHALIFA SIAF ALTUNAIJI (United Arab Emirates) spoke about establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, one of the world’s “hotbeds of tension”.  Telling delegates that Israel had refused to abide by United Nations resolutions and had instead insisted on possessing a highly modern system of nuclear weapons, he said that country was a source of concern for neighbouring States, and should be for the entire world, as well.  In that context, he condemned Israel and called on the global community to take all measures possible to pressure the Israeli Government to respect international resolutions.

Demanding that Israel accede to the Treaty on the NPT, as all other States in the region had done, he added that it should subject its nuclear arsenals and fissile material to the supervision of the IAEA.  It should also cease all nuclear testing and work towards dismantling its nuclear facilities.  He stated that current international conditions required taking strenuous steps to establish a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East.  Such a zone would contribute greatly to alleviating tension and instability in the region and pave the way to renewing dialogue.

KWANG-CHUL LEW (Republic of Korea) reaffirmed the important role of the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific.  Because the Centre promoted dialogue and fostered a spirit of cooperation in the region, his country would continue to extend financial and political support to it.  He also stated that, in collaboration with the Centre, his country would host a conference on ways to address disarmament and non-proliferation today, from 6 to 8 December, on JejuIsland.  That meeting would address missiles, the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the 2005 NPT Review Conference.

ALEH SHLOMA (Belarus) said that the main goal of confidence-building measures in the sphere of conventional arms control focused on strengthening of regional security as an active constituent of international security, as well as lowering the risk of armed conflicts.  Development of such measures reduced the risk of misunderstanding or wrong assessment of military activities, prevented military confrontation, and lowered the risk of sudden attack and outbreak of war as a result of a military incident.  By creating a regional climate that lowered the importance of the military element, confidence-building measures could contribute to the process of balanced arms reduction, as well as more effective functioning of a verification regime.

His country believed that the optimal approach for creating and further developing confidence-building measures in the military and political sphere was based on flexibility and recognition of common interests in the area of regional security and arms control.  A State’s inalienable right to an adequate security level must be guaranteed.  It must be understood that none of the States or group of States parties to such agreements would strive to acquire advantages over the other party at any stage of the implementation and development of confidence-building measures.

MARIO CASTELLON-DUARTE (Nicaragua) said that the regional centre for peace and disarmament supported measures taken by the countries in the Central America region.  Such support had extended to the Central American plan under which the countries expected to harmonize their national legislation, as well as strengthening international controls on the transfer of small arms and light weapons.  A workshop had been held in Nicaragua, with the support of the United Kingdom, Sweden and non-governmental organizations.  That workshop reaffirmed the position of the Central American countries that multilateral cooperation, based on the principle of shared responsibility, was essential to address current international peace and security issues.  The countries of the region agreed that much more progress was necessary, and noted that important results had been achieved because of the goodwill of public officials and other actors.

CHRIS SANDERS (Netherlands), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said he supported the establishment of confidence-building measures as a way to establish transparency and eliminate mistrust and miscalculations, especially in regions of tension.  Telling delegates that Europe had benefited greatly from such measures, he said other parts of the world could do so as well.  In that context, he expressed an interest in closer cooperation between the Union and other regions, to explore different types of confidence-building measures together.  After all, the diversity of such measures was extensive.  At the global level, several confidence-building measures, like the Register of Conventional Arms, had already proven to increase confidence between States, he noted.

ANDREAS MAVROYIANNIS (Cyprus) said that, in December 2003, his country had destroyed stockpiles containing 4,000 landmines, in accordance with the provisions of the Ottawa Convention.  That destruction would hopefully do much to build confidence in Cyprus, even though a significant portion of the island continued to be occupied, he said.  In addition to unilateral demining efforts, his country had also recently proposed the withdrawal of military forces from sensitive areas and the halting of military exercises there.

Telling delegates that his country had also put a proposal before the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) to clear all minefields within the buffer zone, he noted that a positive response from “the other side” had still not been received.  He was pleased to report, however, that the United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) had already conducted an on-site investigation of the minefields there and prepared a technical report on practical steps required for demining.

CARLOS ANTONIO DA ROCHA PARANHOS (Brazil), speaking on behalf of the members of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), welcomed the results achieved at the 2003 security conference held in Mexico.  That conference had concluded that transparency measures in defence policies contributed to increasing international peace and security.  Members of MERCOSUR also continued to develop initiatives in the bilateral field.  An example was the joint standardized methodology for measuring defence expenditures adopted by the members.

PAUL MEYER (Canada) said that, in order to persuade States to freely accept certain constraints on their behaviour as part of an international accord, it had long been recognized that such States needed to be assured that others were also abiding by the obligations set out in that mutual agreement.  Developing the right verification approach to a given non-proliferation, arms control or disarmament challenge was not a simple task, nor was there any universal template that applied.  One constant, however, was that it be an objective process that provided States parties with the information necessary to make substantiated judgements regarding compliance by other States parties.  Ideally, such a verification capacity should be linked to a process for resolving disputes about compliance and taking remedial action to correct non-compliance.  The First Committee and the United Nations as a whole should pay more attention to issues of verification and compliance as one way of promoting synergies among multilateral non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament regimes.  The topic of verification and compliance should be included as a distinct part of the thematic debate timetable of the First Committee.

CHRISTIAN FAESSLER (Switzerland) said verification regimes were central to the validity of treaties.  In that regard, he said such regimes should not be seen as a means of control, but rather as measures of transparency and confidence-building.  Expressing support for such organizations as the IAEA, he said he was happy that the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) had established a system of confidence-building measures that applied to stockpiles of conventional weapons.  He also voiced support for a verification protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention and an effective and strong verification system for a future fissile material cut-off treaty.  In conclusion, he said that, because shortcomings in the existing systems had to be improved upon, his delegation stood behind the draft resolution on verification (document A/C.1/59/L.33) that would be introduced by Canada.

ANTON VASILIEV (Russian Federation) began by expressing support for India’s draft resolution on measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction (document A/C.1/59/L.31).  Declaring that the international community must take adequate and reliable steps to keep such weapons out of the hands of terrorists, especially given today’s unpredictable climate, he stressed that terrorism could only be adequately dealt with through multilateralism, with cooperation from all States.  Voicing support for Security Council resolution 1540 (2004), which dealt with weapons of mass destruction and non-State actors, he told delegates that it was his country’s initiative that had led to current talks on a convention against nuclear terrorism.  Calling for the speedy adoption of that draft convention, he said it could serve as a powerful block against terrorists seeking weapons of mass destruction.  He also said that verification mechanisms for other treaties should be strengthened, that excessive arsenals that could undermine military balances must be renounced, and that India’s draft resolution would help international efforts to combat terrorism.

MARIELA FOGANTE (Argentina) said that her country observed environmental standards in its disarmament activities.  The country had carried out two processes for the destruction of firearms last year in conformity with legislation, and those destructions had been carried out in conformity with environmental norms.  They included the destruction of 20 units of mines, thereby fulfilling Argentina’s obligations under article VI of the Ottawa Convention.  At all times, relevant norms were observed to safeguard against accidents during transportation of the explosive materials and the detonation was carried out in the open.  Also, military camps where ammunition destruction took place were selected so that the lands used were those that had already suffered from an environmental impact.  In addition, wasteland was used that contained high salt content in order to limit environmental damage.  Livestock were removed to distances recommended by competent veterinarians, and the charges used were such that would leave the least amounts of residue.

ELISABETH BORSIIN BONNIER (Sweden) said that her country believed that treaty-based solutions were the best and were enhanced tools at the global level.  That approach was recognized by the various treaties concerned on international security.  With regards to the NPT, the IAEA had the power to bring cases of non-compliance before the Security Council and the General Assembly.  In the same way, the Executive Council of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) also had the same power.  The Security Council itself had defined proliferation of weapons of mass destruction as a threat to international peace and security.  Sweden wanted to see the capacity of the United Nations to meet that challenge raised.  It did not, however, want to see the creation of a new and cumbersome bureaucracy.  Instead, a standing capacity that would be available would enhance legitimacy and could be used in cases of non-compliance.  Such capacity could also be somewhere to turn to for a country that had been accused of breaching an agreement.  Such a capacity could be very easily raised.

PAUL STEPHENS (Australia) said multilateralism must be strengthened.  Leaving aside the well-known problems in the Conference on Disarmament and Disarmament Commission, there were still ways in which the international community could improve the global disarmament machinery.  Heartened by efforts to make the First Committee more relevant and efficient, he said the body’s work might even be improved further if more non-governmental organizations participated in the debates.  At the same time, however, he acknowledged that that proposal would need to be agreed upon by all delegations, in accordance with their level of comfort.

Expressing appreciation for this session’s more streamlined resolutions, he urged the sponsors of draft texts to consider not requesting the views of Member States year after year.  After all, because the value added from such responses was very little, very few delegations bothered to participate.  He also cautioned against the often-heard calls for groups of governmental experts to be established.  Such groups were often more costly than they were worth, and their work could be better accomplished in other forums, he said.

GABRIELA MARTINIC (Argentina) voiced support for the draft resolution on measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction (document A/C.1/59/L.31).  In that context, she called Security Council resolution 1540 (2004) an important measure, especially since it built upon resolution 1373 (2001), which had established the Counter-Terrorism Committee.  Although, it did not produce weapons of mass destruction, her country had taken measures to regulate materials that might be used to make such weapons.  She also expressed support for the missile technology control regime, export control regimes in general, and a convention against nuclear misconduct.  She added that the international community needed to coordinate its responses to the growing threat posed by terrorists acquiring deadly arsenals.

Turning to the draft resolution on information and telecommunications in the context of international security (document A/C.1/59/L.2/Rev.1), she said she stood behind that one as well, especially since resolving information-related problems was becoming particularly challenging in the face of growing complexities.  Declaring that, with respect to information, it was important to maintain confidentiality, availability and integrity, she explained that personal data and organizations’ confidential files must be administered with the greatest care, in order to ensure privacy.  She also cited the improper use of information resources as a major problem.  Lamenting the rise of new cyber-crimes, she said that intentionally deployed computer viruses and the resulting counter-measures caused an unfortunate diversion of resources.

Mr. SANDERS (Netherlands) introduced a draft resolution on national legislation on the transfer of arms, military equipment and dual use goods and technology (document A/C.1/59/L.5).  He noted that this was the fourth year this text had been introduced and that in previous years it had been adopted by consensus.  Stating that the straightforward document established a norm and invited Member States that could do so to enact national legislation to exercise effective control over dual-use goods and technology, he pointed out that operative paragraph 1 had been amended slightly to acknowledge Security Council resolution 1540 (2004).  That resolution had not been mentioned in previous versions because, quite simply, it had not existed.  In that context, he emphasized that the current draft would not affect that Security Council resolution in any way.  He also drew attention to the fact that the final operative paragraph did not state that the General Assembly had to address the matter next year, because he was open to making it a biennial draft.

IGOR DZUNDEV (The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) introduced a draft resolution on the maintenance of security in South-Eastern Europe (document A/C.1/59/L.55/Rev.1).  Addressing the complexities of security and cooperation in the region, the text aimed to promote a spirit of good neighbourliness and stability, he said.  Acknowledging that there had been many positive changes in the region, he drew attention to more widespread democracy and the rule of law there.  Calling the draft balanced, he said it strove to strengthen regional efforts aimed at destroying landmines and combating the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons.  In conclusion, he noted that the primary responsibility for security in the region rested with the States themselves, but that the international community had an important role to play.  In that context, he expressed hope that the draft would be adopted without a vote, as in previous years.

CHOISUREN BAATAR (Mongolia) introduced a draft resolution on Mongolia’s international security and nuclear-weapon-free status (document A/C.1/59/L.19).  He said that a steady progress had been made in consolidation of Mongolia’s international security since the adoption of the last General Assembly resolution under the same title.  His Government had taken numerous actions based on its open, multi-pillar and proactive foreign policy towards that end.  There had been welcome developments in bilateral relations –- political, economic and cultural, with countries not only in the region, but throughout the world.  Relations with many countries had reached the level of partnership, among them with China, India, Japan, the Russian Federation and, most recently, with the United States.  The nuclear-weapon-free status of Mongolia, an important aspect of the country’s international security and foreign policy, as well as its contribution to the strengthening of peace and stability in the region and beyond, had continued to receive solid support from the international community.  The draft resolution his country was introducing, though procedural, had been the subject of very careful examination by interested delegations.  Thus, it enjoyed wide support.  He hoped that it would be adopted without a vote.

JOB-OBIANG ESONO MBENGONO (Equatorial Guinea) introduced the draft resolution on the activities of the United Nations Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa (document A/C.1/59/L.3).  He said that the draft resolution was aimed at strengthening confidence at the regional and subregional levels, with a view to preventing conflicts.  It also provided for early warning as a way of mitigating future armed conflicts, in order to prevent possible invasion by mercenaries, as had happened before in his country.

CHUKA CHIDEBELEZE UDEDIBIA (Nigeria), on behalf of the Group of African States, introduced a draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa (document A/C.1/59/L.24.)  He then highlighted a slight change that had occurred in the last preambular paragraph.  Specifically, instead of having the Assembly take into account the need for close cooperation between the Regional Centre and the African Union’s Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution, it would instead acknowledge a necessary link between the Regional Centre and the Union’s Peace and Security Council.

Telling delegates that the Centre continued to carry out peace-related activities, promote the implementation of international instruments, and consolidate relationships with the African Union and subregional organizations, he pointed out that 85 per cent of its financial resources came from voluntary contributions.  Unfortunately, however, donors had not been forthcoming with funds, he said.  In view of the resulting precarious financial situation, the draft resolution encouraged donors to be generous.  Before concluding, he expressed desire for the draft, which was identical to previous versions in terms of its objectives, to be adopted without a vote.

REVAZ ADAMIA (Georgia) introduced a draft resolution on the report of the Disarmament Commission (document A/C.1/59/L.42).  The draft was similar to previous versions, with only a few minor updates.  He noted that non-traditional dates had been proposed for next year’s Disarmament Commission, so that there were no conflicts with the dates of the upcoming NPT review conference.  Acknowledging that the Disarmament Commission had been unable to agree on an agenda this year, he stated that that was not a disaster, since the difficulties had been more political than institutional.

He also pointed out that the Commission was trying to assert its identity as the only multilateral body, with universal membership, dedicated to in-depth deliberations on disarmament issues.  Despite the inability of the Commission to make progress, many interesting proposals had been made and would hopefully serve as a basis for consensus building at the 2005 session, he noted.  In addition, the inability of the Commission to advance had contributed to a heightened sense of urgency, and that might positively influence future work.

ANTON VASILIEV (Russian Federation) introduced a draft resolution on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security (document A/C.1/59/L.2/Rev.1).  He noted that the draft resolution he was introducing had traditionally been adopted by consensus.  The report of the Secretary General had set forth a range of new national views and assessments on information technology issues.  Information security was a substantial element of national security of States and of overall international peace and security.  Threats using information security could be cross-border in nature and could adversely affect the infrastructure of States.  The draft resolution did not contain any fundamental differences from earlier ones adopted by the Assembly.  Only minor technical adjustments had been made to reflect new developments that had taken place.  He hoped the text would be adopted without a vote.

RAVI PRAKASH VARMA (India) introduced a draft resolution on the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.32).  He said that his country first brought that resolution before the First Committee in 1989.  Significant recent advances in information technology, advanced materials, and biotechnology and space applications offered wide possibilities for socio-economic development.  Access to those technologies was undoubtedly a crucial pre-requisite for developing countries.  That fact had been recognized by various conventions for arms control and disarmament.  The Chemical Weapons Convention, the first multilateral disarmament agreement of a universal character eliminating a complete class of weapons of mass destruction, offered an opportunity to put in place a multilaterally negotiated, non-discriminatory and legal mechanism that would address proliferation concerns about transfers, while promoting the economic interests of States Parties.  The co-sponsors of the draft resolution wanted to make the Chemical Weapons Convention a model for other future organizations.  India had recognized the “dual use” character of many of the advances in science and technology.  It must be recognized that exclusive export control policies were being initiated at a time when there were no global agreements that comprehensively addressed proliferation concerns.  Recent events questioned the effectiveness of such ad hoc arrangements in achieving their stated purpose.

ROBERT LUACES (United States) introduced a draft resolution on improving the effectiveness of the methods of work of the First Committee (document A/C.1/59/L.1) and said it enjoyed wide support.  Having hoped that it would be adopted without a vote, however, he now realized that that might not be possible.  In that context, he told delegates that his delegation had been involved in consultations with the delegation of Indonesia, which was representing the Non-Aligned Movement.  Specifically, they were discussing the possibility of merging the text at hand with the Non-Aligned Movement’s draft of the same name (document A/C.1/59/L.13).  The new document, if agreed upon, would also incorporate a series of recommendations and proposals submitted by the European Union.

His delegation had proposed that all consultations on the matter be open-ended to allow for greater participation, and they were proceeding with complete transparency so far, he said.  He also stated that yesterday he had submitted a working draft, incorporating all three elements, to the delegations of Indonesia and the Netherlands, which was representing the European Union.  That draft no longer identified itself as a revision of document A/C.1/59/L.1 and contained a change in operative paragraph 13.

GABRIELA MARTINIC (Argentina) introduced a draft resolution on confidence building measures in the area of conventional weapons (document A/C.1/59/L.52). She said the aim of this draft was to strengthen and enhance measures that had already taken place in that area. Pointing out that the text was not binding, she noted that it did call for voluntary provisions of information that would help to promote trust between States, and she expressed hope that the draft would be adopted by consensus.

JAYANT PRASAD (India) introduced the draft resolution on measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction (document A/C.1/59/L.31).  He said that the draft resolution gave expression to the shared concerns of the international community and called on Member States of the United Nations to take measures aimed at preventing terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.  It underlined that the international response to the threats needed to be inclusive, multilateral and global.  That approach had been widely endorsed by the Non-Aligned Movement, the Group of Eight, the European Union and most other regional organizations.

ANDREA GARCIA GUERRA (Mexico) introduced the draft resolution on the United Nations Disarmament Information Programme (document A/C.1/59/L.51), saying that the sponsors hoped that they could count on the support of members of the Committee for the draft, as a reflection of their support for the disarmament information programme.

She also introduced the draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (document A/C.1/59/L.18)L157.  She said that for the group of Latin American States, the unanimous support for the text would mean recognition of the importance of the work being done by the Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America.

ANN POLLACK (Canada) introduced a draft biennial resolution on verification (document A/C.1/59/L.33).  Reminding delegates that last year, in the spirit of rationalizing the Committee’s work, the topic had been introduced as a decision, to encourage an exchange of views during the thematic debate, she said such exchanges had continued in the two open-ended consultation meetings her delegation had organized this session.  Calling verification a “timely and crucial” topic, she stated that the Committee needed to address it in a substantive fashion, and that the draft at hand moved the Committee into a further phase of consideration.  That phase had been built on earlier inputs, such as Member States’ expressed concerns.

RASTAM MOHHD ISA (Malaysia), on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), introduced six draft resolutions on a range of disarmament and non-proliferation issues.

Introducing the draft resolution on the relationship between disarmament and development (document A/C.1/59/L.28), he said that the symbiotic relationship between disarmament and development and the important role of security in that connection could not be denied.  The NAM was concerned at the increasing global military expenditures, which could otherwise be spent on development, poverty eradication and elimination of diseases, in particular in developing countries.  It believed that States should consider allocating part of the resources made available by the implementation of disarmament and arms limitation agreements to economic and social development.

Introducing the draft resolution on improving the effectiveness of the methods of work of the First Committee (document A/C.1/59/L.13), he said that NAM believed that improving the functioning of the First Committee was an ongoing process that should be considered in an integrated and comprehensive manner through the existing three stages of the Committee.  It believed that the measures proposed in the draft resolution could contribute towards improving the functioning and the role of the Committee in promoting peace and security.  Informal consultations were continuing with delegations with a view to agree on a consensus text.

He then introduced the draft resolution on the promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation (document A/C.1/59/L.11), saying that NAM believed strongly in multilateralism and multilaterally-agreed solutions, in accordance with the United Nations Charter, as the only sustainable way of addressing disarmament and international security issues.  It was critical for the General Assembly to adopt such a resolution to reflect the international community’s continued conviction of the importance of the role of the United Nations in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation.  The draft resolution embodied the desire of the international community for multilateral cooperation in that area.  Much was at stake, including the unravelling of existing international disarmament treaties.

Introducing the draft resolution on environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of disarmament and arms control agreements (document A/C.1/59/L.10), he said that NAM considered that question to be an important item on the Committee’s agenda.  Ensuring continued sustainability of the global environment was an issue of utmost importance, especially for succeeding generations.  The international community should collectively endeavour to ensure that necessary measures were taken to preserve and protect the environment, especially in the formulation and implementation of agreements concerning disarmament and arms control.

Introducing the draft resolution on the convening of the fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.14), he said that following consultations with the Secretariat concerning the date for the convening of the open-ended working group on the Special Session, there would be one meeting of the organizational session in January 2006 and three substantive sessions that would consist of 15 meetings.  The substantive sessions would be convened between March and June 2006.  The report of the working group would be submitted prior to the sixtieth session of the General Assembly, at the latest in August 2006.

He then concluded with the introduction of the draft resolution on the United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament (document A/C.1/59/L.9).  He said that the United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament had been instrumental in promoting understanding and cooperation among States in their respective regions in the field of peace, disarmament and development.  The NAM hoped that the centres would continue to receive the support they needed, especially from Member States, with a view to enabling them to strengthen, improve and implement their activities and programmes.

DETLEV WOLTER (Germany) said his delegation had decided to co-sponsor India’s draft on measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction (document A/C.1/59/L.31).

PAULA DESUTTER (United States) shared her country’s views on verification, compliance, and compliance enforcement, declaring that those three elements, which were interdependent and key to achieving non-proliferation and disarmament objectives, were often misunderstood.  She went on to explain that they required a State’s actions to be weighed against its obligations.  If an imbalance was noted, measures to induce compliance had to be considered.  She also attached importance to identifying the nature of the non-compliance and determining whether it was inadvertent or deliberate.

Discussing her country’s policies in that area, she said that information on non-compliance, whatever its source, warranted evaluation.  Also, international agreements had to be examined to verify what the precise obligations of the States were.  Declaring that her Government often considered steps that might bring a party back into compliance, she told delegates that determining when a State was in violation of its obligation was not easy.  In fact, it was time consuming.  Nevertheless, her country’s safety and security depended on other States honouring their obligations, she said.

She said her country did not demand “perfect verification” because there could never be certainty that all violations were being detected.  However, “effective verification” was a worthy goal to pursue, and strong national mechanisms could be helpful in that regard.  She also emphasized that all nations must respond when confronted by non-compliance.  After all, unilateral action by the United States and mere detections of violations were not enough.

MARK OPGENORTH (Canada), expressing support for the resolution introduced by the representative of Mexico on the United Nations study on disarmament and non-proliferation education, said that his country had long recognized and supported active engagement of civil society and non-governmental organizations in the promotion of non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament objectives.  On an annual basis, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs held consultations with civil society to address topical non-proliferation and disarmament issues.  His Government had introduced the practice of including civil society on its delegations to meetings of the NPT.

His Government had also funded non-governmental organizations to convene expert-level consultations, and supported efforts to ensure wide public access to national statements and other documents emanating from meetings of United Nations disarmament bodies.  The International Security Research and Outreach Program of Foreign Affairs of Canada constituted a focal point of original research and assessment relevant to international security, including non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament, verification and confidence building measures.  It drew together in-house capability, resources from other Government departments and a network of expertise from the academic community and other knowledgeable individuals in Canada and abroad.

YOSHIKI MINE (Japan) said that his country, as the only country to have experienced the devastation of a nuclear bombing, placed the utmost importance on disarmament and non-proliferation education.  It was through such education that people gained better understanding of the inhumane nature of such weapons and acquired knowledge and skills to make contributions to the achievement of concrete disarmament and non-proliferation measures.  Education was an important and yet under-utilized tool for strengthening disarmament and non-proliferation for future generations.

He said that under the United Nations Disarmament Fellowship Programme, his country had been inviting various government officials to visit Japan each year since 1983.  About 500 participants had taken part in such visits to date.  This year, participants had recently completed their visits to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  Japan hoped that those visits had helped provide an insight into the reality of atomic bombing.  Also, in July, in the margins of a conference on disarmament issues in Sapporo, a seminar on disarmament education was held with the participation of experts, teachers from local cities and members of international organizations and civil society.  The event provided the opportunity to raise awareness about the importance of disarmament and non-proliferation education among local educators.  Japan’s ministry of Foreign Affairs had also been making various efforts to disseminate materials on its disarmament and non-proliferation efforts.  An English version of Japan’s Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Policy had just been published.

HECTOR BONAVIA (Malta), in light of the “thorny and multifaceted” threats to socio-economic and political stability in the Mediterranean region, voiced support for all regional groups and initiatives that were working to address such challenges.  Calling for greater cooperation and security in the region, he said that, in order to accomplish that goal, interested parties should focus on reducing the ever-widening economic and social gap between Mediterranean countries.

He also said it was necessary to address the “troubled situation” in the Middle East, which had at its core the “problem of Palestine”.  Because the crisis had a particular effect on the Mediterranean, he called for the concerned parties to follow the Road Map, which would result in two independent States, Israel and Palestine, living side by side with secure and recognized borders.  His support for the Road Map was especially strong, since his country could be considered a part of the Quartet, via its membership in the European Union, he said.  He also called for a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.

Turning to the European Union Strategy Partnership with the Mediterranean and the Middle East, he said that he wholeheartedly welcomed it, since its goal was to create a zone of peace in the region.  Setting out a concrete policy agenda, the strategy committed the Union to:  advancing political reform, good governance, democracy and human rights; stimulating trade and economic cooperation, economic liberalization and personal contacts; and promoting conflict prevention and resolution in the Mediterranean and Middle East, as well as measures to combat terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and illegal immigration.

KWANG-CHUL LEW (Republic of Korea) said that the proliferation of missiles in general, and of ballistic missiles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction, was a serious threat to international peace and security.  Currently, there was no international legal instrument that comprehensively addressed that problem.  As a result of the continuing effort of the international community, however, some progress had been made in that field.  His country supported The Hague Code of Conduct Against Ballistic Missile Proliferation.  It also supported the Security Council resolution, which addressed the danger of non-State actors gaining access to weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery.  The proliferation of such weapons had become one of the most serious concerns pressing on the international community today.  His country also welcomed the various initiatives aimed at controlling the spread of MANPADS.  In addition, it recognized the vital need to curb proliferation through export control.

Right of Reply

ALON BAR (Israel) said that one of the sources of conflict and insecurity in the Middle East was the intention of some States there to destroy Israel.  As long as that desire continued, and terrorists continued to blow themselves up in Israeli cities, the NPT would not be able to provide his country with the necessary security assurances.  He said that countries that had no desire to threaten the security of Israel need not be concerned by his country’s capabilities.  In addition, a zone officially free of weapons of mass destruction could not be a first step in the creation of peace, but rather a final step to be taken, after the development of good neighbourliness and a new framework for regional security.

* *** *