NUCLEAR-WEAPON-FREE ZONES, BOLSTERING GLOBAL NON-PROLIFERATION REGIME, AMONG ISSUES ADDRESSED, AS FIRST COMMITTEE APPROVES 21 DRAFT TEXTS

Sixtieth General Assembly

First Committee

18^th Meeting* (PM)

NUCLEAR-WEAPON-FREE ZONES, BOLSTERING GLOBAL NON-PROLIFERATION REGIME,

AMONG ISSUES ADDRESSED, AS FIRST COMMITTEE APPROVES 21 DRAFT TEXTS

Importance of Test-Ban Treaty, Risk of Middle East Nuclear

Proliferation, Assurances for Non-Nuclear-Weapon States Also Highlighted

(Issued on 25 October 2005.)

Heading into the final phase of its substantive work for 2005, the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) today approved 21 draft texts aimed at shoring up regional disarmament measures and reducing the global threat of the use of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction.

Among other things, the draft resolutions highlighted the need for States to work towards the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones, assure non-nuclear weapons States against the threat of use of nuclear weapons, and bolster the global nuclear non-proliferation regime.  The Committee also considered the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament.  The texts will be forwarded to the General Assembly for adoption.

According to a traditional draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, the Assembly, noting that Israel remained the only State in the Middle East that was not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), would call on it to:  accede to the Treaty without further delay; not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons;  renounce possession of nuclear weapons; and place all its un-safeguarded nuclear facilities under full-scope International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.

The Committee approved that text by a recorded vote of 149 in favour to 2 against ( Israel, United States), with 4 abstentions ( Cameroon, Ethiopia, India, Australia).  (For details of the voting, please see Annex III).

Prior to acting on the draft as a whole, the Committee approved, in a separate vote, preambular paragraph 6, which recalls the Final Document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference, which, among other things, called on those remaining States not parties to the Treaty to accede to it.  Members voted to retain that paragraph by a vote of 145 in favour to 2 against ( India, Israel), with 5 abstentions ( Bhutan, Cameroon, Mauritius, Pakistan, United States).  (Annex II).

Acting without a vote, the Committee approved the resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.  Also without a vote, it approved a decision on including the issue of establishing such a zone in the Central Asia on the Assembly’s provisional agenda for its sixty-first session.  It similarly approved a draft on the consolidation of the regime established by the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco).

In three separate recorded votes, the Committee approved a draft resolution on establishing a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere.  It voted to retain operative paragraph 5 as a whole, by which the Assembly would welcome steps taken to conclude further nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties, and call on all States to consider all relevant proposals, including those reflected in its resolutions on establishing such zones in the Middle East and South Asia.  The vote was 141 in favour, to 1 against ( India), with 9 abstentions ( Bhutan, France, Israel, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Spain, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom, United States).  (Annex VI). 

Prior to approving the paragraph as a whole, it voted to retain the three words “and South Asia” by a vote of 140 in favour to 2 against (India, Pakistan), with 7 abstentions (Bhutan, France, Israel, Russian Federation, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom, United States).  (Annex V).

The Committee approved the draft as a whole on ridding the entire southern hemisphere of nuclear weapons by a vote of 144 in favour to 3 against (France, United Kingdom, United States), with 6 abstentions (Bhutan, India, Israel, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Spain).  (Annex VII).

By a vote of 98 in favour to none against, with 55 abstentions, the Committee approved a draft resolution by which the Assembly, convinced that nuclear weapons pose the greatest threat to mankind and to the survival of civilization, would reaffirm the urgent need to reach an early agreement on effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons (Annex X).

A draft on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons was approved by a vote of 103 in favour to 29 against, with 21 abstentions. (Annex XII).  By it, the Assembly would call on States immediately to fulfil the obligation to pursue in good faith and to bring to a conclusion negotiations leading nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.

Prior to approving the draft as a whole, the Committee voted to retain operative paragraph 1 by a vote of 142 in favour to 3 against (Israel, Russian Federation, United States), with 5 abstentions (Belarus, France, Latvia, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan).  (Annex XI). 

Other nuclear weapons-related texts concerned:  the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which was approved by a vote of 149 in favour to 1 against (United States), with 4 abstentions (Colombia, India, Mauritius, Syria) (Annex VIII); nuclear disarmament, by a vote of 94 in favour to 42 against, with 17 abstentions (Annex IX); a convention on the prohibition of nuclear weapons, by a vote of 97 in favour to 46 against, with 11 abstentions (Annex XIV); a conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of nuclear disarmament, by a vote of 108 in favour to 5 against (France, Israel, Poland, United Kingdom, United States), with 39 abstentions (Annex IV); and reducing nuclear danger, by a vote of 94 in favour to 45 against, with 14 abstentions (Annex XIII).  A draft decision on missiles was approved by a vote of 101 in favour to 2 against ( Israel, United States), with 50 abstentions (Annex I). 

Determined to prevent the emergence of new types of weapons of mass destruction that have characteristics comparable in destructive effect to those of weapons of mass destruction, as identified in the definition of weapons of mass destruction adopted by the United Nations in 1948, the Assembly would reaffirm that effective measures should be taken to prevent the emergence of new types of weapons of mass destruction, according to a draft banning the development and manufacture of new types of such weapons. 

It approved that draft by a vote of 150 in favour to 1 against ( United States), with 1 abstention ( Israel) (Annex XV). 

By a vote of 147 in favour to 1 against ( India), with 1 abstention ( Bhutan), the Committee approved a text by which the Assembly would decide to give urgent consideration to the issues involved in conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (Annex XVI).

A text on the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament was approved by a vote of 88 in favour to 49 against, with 13 abstentions (Annex XVII). 

Acting without a vote, the Committee approved drafts on:  implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention; regional disarmament; confidence-building measures in the regional and subregional context; dumping of radioactive waste; and on the report of the Conference on Disarmament. 

General statements today were made by the representatives of Cuba; Nigeria, on behalf of the African Group; and Mexico, who also introduced two draft resolutions:  a United Nations conference on eliminating nuclear dangers, and consolidation of the regime established by the Treaty of Tlatelolco.

Explanations of vote were delivered by the representatives of:  United Kingdom, on behalf of the European Union; Spain; Cuba; China; Israel; Norway; Japan; France; Colombia; Canada; India; France; Australia; Iran; Switzerland; Republic of Korea; Pakistan; Ethiopia; Syria; United States; and Belarus.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 25 October, to continue taking action on all disarmament- and security-related draft texts.

Background

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this afternoon to begin its third and final phase of work, namely action on all draft resolutions and decisions.  It had before it texts related to nuclear weapons, other weapons of mass destruction, regional disarmament and security, disarmament machinery and other disarmament measures.

Expected to be acted on under cluster 1, which concerns nuclear weapons, are drafts on:  a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East; missiles; the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East; establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia; African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone treaty; prohibition of the dumping of radioactive waste; a United Nations conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers; a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas; consolidation of the regime established by the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco); Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty; nuclear disarmament; the conclusion of effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons; follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons; reducing nuclear danger; and a Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons.

Draft Summaries

A draft resolution sponsored by Egypt on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East (document A/C.1/60/L.3) would have the Assembly urge all parties directly concerned to consider seriously taking the practical and urgent steps required for the establishment of such a zone in the Middle East in accordance with the relevant General Assembly resolutions.  To promote that objective, the Assembly would invite those countries concerned not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or permit the stationing on their territories, or territories under their control, of nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices.  It would also call upon countries of the region that had not done so, pending the establishment of the zone, to agree to place all their nuclear activities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.

By further terms, the Assembly would invite all countries of the region, pending the establishment of such a zone, to declare their support for it, and to deposit those declarations with the Security Council.  A related provision would have the Assembly invite nuclear-weapon States and all other States to assist in the zone’s establishment, and to refrain from any action that ran counter to both the letter and the spirit of the resolution.

By the terms of a draft decision sponsored by Egypt, Indonesia and Iran on Missiles (document A/C.1/60/L.5), the Assembly would decide to include in the provisional agenda of its sixty-first session the item entitled “Missiles”.

A draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/60/L.6) would have the Assembly, noting that Israel remained the only State in the Middle East that was not a party to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), would call on it to accede to the Treaty without further delay and not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons, and to renounce possession of nuclear weapons, and to place all its un-safeguarded nuclear facilities under full-scope IAEA safeguards as an important confidence-building measure among all States of the region and as a step towards enhancing peace and security.

The Assembly would also welcome the conclusions on the Middle East of the 2000 NPT Review Conference.  It would ask the Secretary-General to report to the Assembly at its next session on implementation of the present text.

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

A draft decision submitted by Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia(document A/C.1/60/L.7) would have the Assembly decide to include the item in the provisional agenda of its sixty-first session.

Under the terms of a draft resolution sponsored by Nigeria on behalf of the Group of African States (document A/C.1/60/L.8), the Assembly would call on African States that had not yet done so, to sign and ratify the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba) as soon as possible so that it may enter into force without delay.  The Assembly would also call on the African State parties to the NPT that have not yet done so to conclude comprehensive safeguards agreements with the IAEA pursuant to the Treaty, thereby satisfying requirements of article 9 (b) of and annex II to the Treaty of Pelindaba when it enters into force.  It also called on those States to conclude additional protocols to their safeguards agreements on the basis of the Model Protocol approved by the Agency’s Board of Governors on 15 May 1997.

It would express its appreciation to the nuclear-weapon States that have signed the Protocols that concern them, and call on those that have not yet ratified the Protocols concerning them to do so as soon as possible.  Under a related term, the Assembly would call on the States contemplated in the Treaty’s Protocol III to take all necessary measures to ensure the speedy application of the Treaty to territories for which they are, de jure or de facto, internationally responsible and that lie within the limits of the geographical zone established in the Treaty.

According to a draft resolution sponsored by Nigeria on behalf of the Group of African States on the prohibition of the dumping of radioactive wastes (document A/C.1/60/L.9), the Assembly would express grave concern regarding any use of nuclear wastes that would constitute radiological warfare and have grave implications for the national security of all States.

Upon further terms, the Assembly would call upon States to take appropriate measures with a view to preventing any dumping of nuclear or radioactive wastes that would infringe upon the sovereignty of States, and it would appeal to all Member States that had not yet taken the necessary steps to become party to the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management to do so as soon as possible.  The Assembly would request the Conference on Disarmament to take into account, in the negotiations for a convention on the prohibition of radiological weapons, radioactive wastes as part of the scope of such a convention.

Under a draft decision tabled by Mexico on a United Nations conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of disarmament (document A/C.1/60/L.11), the Assembly would decide to include the item in the provisional agenda of its sixty-first session.

Determined to pursue the total elimination of nuclear weapons and to contribute to the prevention of their proliferation, the General Assembly would affirm its conviction of the important role of nuclear-weapon-free zones in strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime and in extending the areas of the world that are nuclear-weapon-free, according to a revised draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/60/L.12).

With particular reference to the responsibilities of the nuclear-weapon States, the Assembly would call on all States to support the process of nuclear disarmament and to work for the total elimination of all nuclear weapons.  It would call upon all concerned States to work together to facilitate adherence to the protocols to nuclear-weapon-free-zone treaties by all relevant States that have not yet done so.  The Assembly would welcome the steps taken to conclude further nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among the States of the region concerned, and call on all States to consider all relevant proposals, including those reflected in its resolutions on the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones in the Middle East and South Asia.

The draft resolution is by Antigua and Barbuda, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Ecuador, Guyana, Liberia, New Zealand, Saint Lucia and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. 

A draft on the consolidation of the regime established by the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco) (document A/C.1/60/L.25) would have the Assembly welcome the fact that the Treaty was now in force for the sovereign States of the region, and that that fact was officially acknowledged by the General Conference of the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean at it eighteenth session in Havana, Cuba on 5 and 6 November 2003.

The Assembly would urge the countries of the region that have not yet done so to ratify the Treaty’s amendments, which were approved by the General Conference of the Agency in its resolutions 267 (E-V), 268 (XII) and 290 (E-VII).

In a text on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) (document A/C.1/60/L.26/Rev.1) the Assembly, recognizing that there now exist conditions for the establishment of a world free of nuclear weapons, and stressing the need to take concrete practical steps towards achieving this goal, would urge the nuclear-weapon States to stop immediately the qualitative improvement, development, production and stockpiling of nuclear warheads and their delivery systems.  The Assembly would also urge the nuclear-weapon States, as an interim measure, to de-alert and deactivate immediately their nuclear weapons and to take other concrete measures to reduce further the operational status of their nuclear-weapon States.  It would urge those States to commence multilateral negotiations among themselves at an appropriate stage on further deep reductions of nuclear weapons as an effective nuclear disarmament measure.

It would reiterate its call upon those States to undertake the step-by-step reduction of the nuclear threat and to carry out effective nuclear disarmament measures with a view to achieving the total elimination of those weapons.  The Assembly would also call for the full and effective implementation of the 13 steps for nuclear disarmament contained in the Final Document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference.  In a related term, the Assembly would call on the nuclear-weapon States, pending the total elimination of nuclear weapons, to agree on an internationally and legally binding instrument on a joint undertaking not to be the first to use nuclear weapons.  It calls on all States to conclude an internationally and legally binding instrument on security assurances of non-use and non-threat of use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon States.  It would also call for the early entry into force and strict observance of the CTBT.

Also according to the text, the Assembly would express regret that the 2005 Review Conference of the Parties to the NPT were unable to achieve any substantial result, and that the Outcome Document of the Assembly’s recent High-Level Summit failed to make any reference to nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation.  It would also express regret that the Conference on Disarmament was unable to establish an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament at its 2005 session.

In that connection, it would reiterate its call on the Conference to establish, on a priority basis, an ad hoc committee to deal with nuclear disarmament early in 2005, and to commence negotiations on a phased programme of nuclear disarmament leading to the eventual total elimination of nuclear weapons.  The Assembly would urge the Conference on Disarmament to agree on a work programme, which includes the immediate commencement of negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty, with a view to their conclusion within five years.

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

Convinced that nuclear weapons pose the greatest threat to mankind and to the survival of civilization, the Assembly would reaffirm the urgent need to reach an early agreement on effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons, according to a draft text on conclusion of effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/60/L.45).

The Assembly would appeal to all States, especially the nuclear-weapon States, to work actively towards an early agreement on a common approach and, in particular, on a common formula that could be included in an international instrument of a legally binding character.  It would recommend that further intensive efforts be devoted to the search for such a common approach or common formula, and that the various alternative approaches, including, in particular, those considered in the Conference on Disarmament, be explored further in order to overcome the difficulties.  The Assembly would further recommend that the Conference on Disarmament actively continue intensive negotiations with a view to reaching early agreement and concluding effective international arrangements on such assurances, taking into account the widespread support for the conclusion of an international convention and giving consideration to any other proposals designed to secure the same objective.

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

Convinced that the continuing existence of nuclear weapons posed a threat to all humanity and that their use would have catastrophic consequences for all life on earth, the Assembly would underline, once again, the unanimous conclusion of the International Court of Justice that there existed an obligation to pursue in good faith and to bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control, under a draft resolution by Malaysia entitled follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (document A/C.1/60/L.46).

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

The draft resolution is sponsored by Algeria, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Congo, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Egypt, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mexico, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Uruguay, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

A draft resolution entitled reducing nuclear danger (document A/C.1/60/L.52) would have the Assembly, considering that the hair-trigger alert of nuclear weapons carries unacceptable risks of unintentional or accidental use of nuclear weapons, which would have catastrophic consequences for all mankind, would call for a review of nuclear doctrines and, in that context, immediate and urgent steps to reduce the risks of unintentional and accidental use of nuclear weapons.  The Assembly request the five nuclear-weapon States to take measures towards the implementation of that provision, and call upon all Member States to take the necessary measures to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in all its aspects and to promote nuclear disarmament, with the objective of eliminating nuclear weapons.  The Secretary-General would be requested, among other things, to intensify efforts and support initiatives that would contribute to the full implementation of the seven recommendations identified in the report of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters that would significantly reduce the risk of nuclear war.

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

Convinced that the use of nuclear weapons poses the most serious threat to the survival of mankind and that a multilateral, universal and binding agreement banning their use or threat would contribute to eliminating the nuclear threat, the Assembly would reiterate its request to the Conference on Disarmament to commence negotiations, in order to reach agreement on such an instrument, according to a draft resolution entitled convention on the prohibition of the use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/60/L.54).  The Assembly would request the Conference to report to the Assembly on the results of those negotiations.

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

Action could also be taken on the following texts:

Cluster II

The General Assembly, determined to prevent the emergence of new types of weapons of mass destruction that have characteristics comparable in destructive effect to those of weapons of mass destruction as identified in the definition of weapons of mass destruction adopted by the United Nations in 1948, would reaffirm that effective measures should be taken to prevent the emergence of new types of weapons of mass destruction, according to a new resolution entitled “Prohibition of the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons:  report of the Conference on Disarmament” (document A/C.1 /60/L.10).

The Assembly would request the Conference on Disarmament, without prejudice to further overview of its agenda, to keep the matter under review, with a view to making, when necessary, recommendations on undertaking specific negotiations on identified types of such weapons.  It would call upon all States immediately following any such recommendations to give favourable consideration to those recommendations.

It would decide to include in the provisional agenda of its sixty-third session the item entitled “Prohibition of the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons:  report of the Conference on Disarmament”.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Georgia, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Ukraine and Venezuela.

According to a draft resolution sponsored by Poland on implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention) (document A/C.1/60/L.31), the Assembly would emphasize that the Convention’s universality is fundamental to achieving its objectives and purposes.

Acknowledging progress made in implementing the action plan for the Convention’s universality, the Assembly would call on States that have not yet done so to become parties to the Convention without delay.

Underlining that the Convention and its implementation contribute to international peace and security, the Assembly would stress that the full and effective implementation of all the Convention’s provisions, including those on national implementation (article VII) and assistance and protection against chemical weapons (article X) constitute an important contribution to United Nations efforts in the global fight against terrorism.

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

Stressing the importance of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in verifying compliance with the provisions of the Convention, as well as in promoting the timely and efficient accomplishment of all its objectives, the Assembly would urge all States parties to meet in full and on time their obligations under the Convention and to support the OPCW in implementing its activities.

By further terms of the text, the Assembly would urge States parties to fulfil their obligations under article VII without delay.  (article VI covers national implementation of the Convention).  It would also reaffirm the importance of the article XI provisions relating to the economic and technological development of States parties and recall that the full, effective and non-discriminatory implementation of these provisions contributes to universality.

Cluster V

The Assembly would call on States to conclude agreements, wherever possible, for nuclear non-proliferation, disarmament and confidence-building measures at the regional and subregional levels, by a draft resolution on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/ 60/L.23).

Further to the text, the Assembly would stress that sustained efforts were needed, within the framework of the Conference on Disarmament and under the United Nations umbrella, to make progress on the entire range of disarmament issues.

It would support and encourage efforts aimed at promoting confidence-building measures at the regional and subregional levels to ease regional tensions and to further disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation measures at the regional and subregional levels.

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

A draft resolution on Conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/60/L.44) would have the Assembly decide to give urgent consideration to the issues involved in conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels.  The Assembly would ask the Conference on Disarmament to consider the formulation of principles that can serve as a framework for regional conventional arms control agreements, and look forward to a report of the Conference on this subject.

By further terms, the Assembly would note with particular interest the initiatives taken in this regard in different regions of the world, in particular the commencement of consultations among a number of Latin American countries and the proposals for conventional arms control made in the context of South Asia.  It would also recognize the relevance and value of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, which is a cornerstone of European security.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Bangladesh, Belarus, Germany, Italy, Liberia, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, Spain and Ukraine.

Cluster VI

Concerned that the continuation of disputes among States might contribute to the arms race and endanger the maintenance of international peace and security and the efforts of the international community to promote arms control and disarmament, the Assembly would encourage the promotion of bilateral and regional confidence-building measures to avoid conflict and prevent the unintended and accidental outbreak of hostilities, by the terms of a draft text submitted by Pakistan (document A/C.1/60/L.24).

A further term of the draft would have the Assembly emphasize that the objective of confidence-building measures should be to help strengthen international peace and security and be consistent with the principle of undiminished security at the lowest level of armament.

The Assembly would urge States to comply strictly with all bilateral, regional and international agreements, including arms control and disarmament agreements, to which they were party.

According to a draft resolution on the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament (document A/C.1/60/L.53), the Assembly would invite Member States to undertake additional efforts to apply science and technology for disarmament-related purposes and to make disarmament-related technologies available to interested States.

By further terms, the Assembly 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, Dominican Republic, Fiji, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, Libya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Namibia, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Viet Nam and Zambia.

Cluster VII

Stressing the urgent need for the Conference on Disarmament to commence its substantive work at the beginning of its 2006 session, a Peruvian draft resolution on the Report of the Conference on Disarmament (document A/C.1/60/L.20), would have the Assembly call upon the Conference to intensify negotiations and explore possibilities with a view to reaching an agreement on a programme of work.

By further terms, the Assembly would request Conference to submit a report on its work to the Assembly.  It would ask all Conference members to cooperate with the current President and successive Presidents in their efforts to guide the Conference to the early commencement of substantive work in its 2006 session.

Statements

The representative of Cuba, making a general statement, said he wanted to make some general comments on the nuclear weapon cluster.  He was mindful of the danger that was represented by the very existence of those weapons.  He reiterated the important urgent obligation for nuclear disarmament.  Several drafts included in that group contained references to the NPT and the treaty to ban nuclear weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco).  He rejected the selective implementation and the double standard of the NPT.  His Government had taken some practical measures, which clearly reflected its determination for a rapid implementation of these obligations that had been contracted in the treaties.  Cuba had already spoken in detail in a statement during the general debate and in the thematic debate.  On those draft resolutions in cluster one, he reaffirmed that, as a delegation, Cuba would like a case-by-case vote and, on each case, it would vote bearing in mind that full and complete nuclear disarmament needed to be based on nationally verifiable systems.

The representative of Nigeria, speaking on behalf of the African Group, introduced the draft resolution on the prohibition of the dumping of radioactive wastes (A/C.1/60/L.9).  He said radioactive wastes compromised the security of all States, constituted a serious health hazard and was harmful to the environment.  Some developing countries had been victims of the dumping of radioactive waste.  At the time of the adoption of the resolution at the forty-third session of the General Assembly, Africa had been a preferred destination for radioactive waste.  Concerned about the serious affects, the African Group wanted the international community to continue to sustain the resolution to protect those States from indiscriminate dumping of harmful materials.  The Council of Ministers had, in 1988 and in 1989, adopted resolutions concerning the dumping of nuclear wastes in Africa.  Since then, the international community had decided to address the issue.  In 2001, the general conference adopted a resolution inviting States that shipped radioactive material to provide assurances and to provide concerned States with relevant information.  In Vienna, in 1997, the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the safety of Radioactive Waste Management was adopted.  The text appealed to all Member States that had not taken steps to join the Convention to do as soon as possible.

Making a general statement, as well as introducing a draft decision on the United Nations conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of disarmament (document A/C.1/60/L.11), the representative of Mexico said that text was aimed at keeping the issue on the agenda.  Five years after a consensus decision on the matter had been reached at the Millennium Summit, Mexico believed that holding such a meeting was more relevant than ever.  Indeed the dangers of nuclear weapons and their spread had intensified during that period even as relevant negotiations had slowed.  Mexico intended to not only keep the matter on the agenda, but to step up efforts to ensure that such a conference was held.

He then introduced the draft resolution on consolidation of the regime established by the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco) (document A/C.1/60/L.25), saying that the text contained a new paragraph which noted with satisfaction the leadership of the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean in the convening of the first conference of States parties and signatories that establish nuclear-weapon-free zones, held in Mexico from 26 to 28 April 2005.  The meeting had been highly successful, he added.

Action on Drafts

Speaking in explanation of vote before action was taken, the representative of the United Kingdom, who spoke on behalf of the European Union, referring to the text on the Risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/60/L.6), said that although his delegation supported its general thrust, it was concerned that it did not cover some relevant recent developments.  The European Union would vote in favour of the draft and would call on all States in the region that had not done so to conclude the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement and to sign and ratify the Additional Protocol.

The European Union shared the international community’s concerns over Iran’s nuclear programme.  That country’s non-compliance with its Safeguards obligations raised serious questions and was not compatible with the international non-proliferation regime.  It was of critical importance for all States in the Middle East to accede to relevant non-proliferation treaties and conventions, but also that all parties to the treaties and conventions implement fully their obligations under those instruments.

On the draft resolution on the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba) (document A/C.1/60/L.8), he said the European Union shared Spain’s concern at being singled out, and called upon all parties concerned to resume their efforts to find a solution.  On the draft on Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) (A/C.1/60/L.26), he said the European Union believed that a legally binding prohibition of nuclear weapons test explosions and all other nuclear explosions, as well as credible verification regime, was vital.  The European Union supported the text.

The representative of Cuba said his delegation backed the draft resolution on nuclear disarmament (A/C.1/60/L.36).  He took the view that it appropriately reflected the priority in nuclear disarmament.  He made an appeal to the Disarmament Conference for it to prioritize an ad hoc committee at the beginning of 2006 to deal with nuclear disarmament and to get into negotiations on a staged nuclear disarmament programme to end with the complete elimination of those weapons.  In years past, Cuba reiterated that the elimination of nuclear weapons must continue to be a top priority.  His country had always supported steps designed to attain that end without delay.

The representative of China, before voting on the three nuclear disarmament resolutions towards a nuclear-weapon-free world:  accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments (A/C.1/60/L.4), nuclear disarmament (L.36), and renewed determination towards the total elimination of nuclear weapons (L.28), said he wanted to explain China’s voting position.  His country wanted the total destruction of nuclear weapons.  In addition, nuclear disarmament should be gradual, with two States bearing the primary responsibilities.  His only complaint with current treaties was that they should further reduce arsenals in a verifiable manner.

Also, he said, before complete prohibition was achieved, nuclear-weapon States should commit themselves to the no-first-use of nuclear weapons and should not threaten their use.  Nuclear-weapon States should abandon the policies of nuclear deterrence.  Nuclear disarmament should maintain global strategic balance and security for all, and arms race in outer space should be prevented.  The Conference on Disarmament should reach an agreement on the programme of work, to establish the appropriate ad hoc committees.  China said the resolutions did not fully support the basic principle of nuclear disarmament and still had room for improvement.  On L.36 and L.4, China would vote in favour.  On L.28, there were a few measures it viewed as premature.  China had some reservations and would abstain.

The representative of Israel, speaking in explanation of vote on the text concerning the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/60/L.6), said that once again the Committee had been called upon to vote on a text that was one-sided and undermined, rather than enhanced, the situation among States in the region.  Surprisingly enough the resolution ignored evidence regarding States that joined international arrangements, but did not comply with them.  It also ignored the outright hostility of States in the region towards Israel.  The text focused on only one State, Israel, which had never posed a threat to any of its neighbours.  Indeed, the text singled out Israel, as did no other text considered by any body in the United Nations.  It did not lend the Committee any credibility, he added, calling on all members to reconsider and vote against it.

Turning to the text on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) (A/C.1/60/L.26), he said that Israel had participated in all negations on that instrument, as well as efforts to develop the verification regime.  It had decided to vote in favour of the text because of the importance it attached to the objective of the CTBT, over and above its objection to some of the language included.

The representative of Norway aligned his delegation with the statement made on behalf of the European Union on the draft on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/60/L.6).

On the text on the nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/60/L.12), the representative of Spain said his delegation fully supported the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones in whatever region, and had throughout expressed its backing of relevant treaties, on the understanding that such decisions strengthened the non-proliferation regime and led to nuclear disarmament.   Spain would abstain from the vote on the text, however, because, among other things, it contained new language on an international conference that was qualitatively different from the decisions previously taken on the creation of such zones.

Action on Texts

Taking up the draft on establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East (document A/C.1/60/L.3), the Committee approved it without a vote.

The Committee then approved the draft decision on Missiles (document A/C.1/60/L.5) by a vote of 101 in favour to 2 against ( Israel, United States), with 50 abstentions.  (Annex I)

The Committee then approved, in a separate vote, preambular paragraph six of the resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/60/L.6) by a vote of 145 in favour to 2 against (India, Israel), with 5 abstentions (Bhutan, Cameroon, Mauritius, Pakistan, United States).  (Annex II)

Taking up the draft as a whole, the resolution was approved by a vote of 149 to 2 against, ( Israel, United States), with 4 abstentions ( Cameroon, Ethiopia, India, Australia).  (Annex III)

The draft decision on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia (document A/C.1/60/L.7) was then approved without a vote.

The draft resolution on the prohibition of the dumping of radioactive wastes (document A/C.1/60/L.9) was also approved without a vote.

The text on the United Nations conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of disarmament (document A/C.1/60/L.11) was approved by a recorded vote of 108 in favour to 5 against (France, Israel, Poland, United Kingdom, United States), with 39 abstentions.  (Annex IV)

The Committee then took a series of actions on the text on the nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/60/L.12).  It first retained the last three words of operative paragraph 5, “and south Asia” by a vote of 140 in favour to 2 against (India, Pakistan), with 7 abstentions (Bhutan, France, Israel, Russian Federation, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom, United States).  (Annex V)

Following that action, operative paragraph 5, as a whole, was approved by a vote of 141 in favour to 1 against (India), with 9 abstentions (Bhutan, France, Israel, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Spain, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom, the United States).  (Annex VI)

The Committee approved the text as a whole by a vote of 144 in favour to 3 against ( France, United Kingdom and United States), with 6 abstentions ( Bhutan, India, Israel, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Spain).  (Annex VII)

The Committee adopted the resolution on the consolidation of the regime established by the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco) (document A/C.1/60/L.25) without a vote.

The Committee adopted the resolution Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) (A/C.1/60/L.26) by a vote of 149 in favour to 1 against (United States) with 4 abstentions, (Colombia, India, Mauritius, Syria) (Annex VIII)

The Committee adopted the resolution on nuclear disarmament (A/C.1/60/L.36) by a vote of 94 in favour to 42 rejections, with 17 abstentions.  (Annex IX)

The draft resolution on the conclusion of effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons (A/C.1/60/L.45) was adopted by a vote of 98 in favour to none against, with 55 abstentions.  (Annex X)

The Committee then approved operative paragraph 1 of the resolution on the follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (document A/C.1/60/L.46) by a recorded vote of 142 in favour to 3 against (Israel, Russian federation, United States), with 5 abstentions (Belarus, France, Latvia, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan).  (Annex X1)

The entire text was then approved by a vote of 103 in favour to 29 against, with 21 abstentions.  (Annex XII)

The Committee next approved a draft resolution on “Reducing Nuclear Danger” (document A/C.1/60/L.52) by a vote of 94 in favour to 45 against, with 14 abstentions.  (Annex XIII)

The draft resolution on the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons “Reducing Nuclear Danger” (document A/C.1/60/L.54) was approved by a vote of 97 in favour to 46 against, with 11 abstentions.  (Annex XIV)

Explanation of Vote

The representative of Japan said he wanted to explain his country’s position on voting on two resolutions.  First, on draft resolution on nuclear disarmament (A/C.1/60/L.36), Japan abstained.  Japan shared the same goal as the draft resolution.  In that regard, his delegation took note of positive developments concerning nuclear disarmament.  The NPT was the cornerstone of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament.  However, the draft resolution did not contain necessary elements, including that nuclear-weapon States should form an agreement towards nuclear disarmament.  Steps should be realistic and progressive, with the involvement of nuclear-weapon States.  Japan preferred a different approach.

Second, on the resolution on the follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (A/C.1/60/L.46), he said Japan highly appreciated Malaysia’s sincere attitude to the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament.  He also believed that, because of the immense power to cause destruction, the use of nuclear weapons was contrary to fundamental humanitarianism.  Therefore, Japan stressed that nuclear weapons should never be used again.  Continuous efforts should be made to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons.  The opinion of the ICJ clearly demonstrated the complexity of the subject.  Japan supported the ICJ call to pursue nuclear disarmament and to conclude negotiations.  In that context, it was premature to call upon all States to fulfil negotiations leading up to an early conclusion of the nuclear weapons convention.  Japan believed that steady progress should be made prior to embarking on the negotiations.  That was why Japan abstained.

The representative of France said he asked for the floor on behalf of the United Kingdom, the United States and France to explain the resolution on nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (A/C.1/60/L.12), and to explain, as in previous years, why the three delegations had voted against the resolution.  Their delegations remained uncertain as to what value would be added by that resolution.  They questioned whether the real goal was the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone of the high seas.  The delegations did not object in principle to nuclear-weapon-free zones.  Also, on L.11, the decision on the United Nations conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of disarmament, the three delegations voted no last year, and their position remained the same.

The representative of Colombia said his delegation had abstained in the vote on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) (document A/C.1/60/L.26).

The representative of Canada said his delegation had voted in favour of the text on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/60/L.6), but would stress that all States in the Middle East should devote unequivocal commitment to non-proliferation in that region.  Canada was concerned that the text did not include language reflective of recent IAEA decisions concerning Iran’s non-compliance with the NPT.  The text could have been strengthened by such a reference, along with a call for Iran to comply with the IAEA decisions.

India’s representative said his delegation had joined consensus in the vote on the prohibition of the dumping of radioactive wastes (document A/C.1/60/L.9), but would stress that, as a developing country, India placed importance on safety and full access to all elements of the fuel cycle.  Spent fuel was, therefore, a valuable resource.  He said that his delegation had voted against the last three words in operative paragraph 5 in the resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/60/L.12), and had abstained from the vote on the draft as a whole.  India had also abstained from the vote on the text on nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/60/L.36) out of the belief that the threat of nuclear weapons could only be addressed in a complete and comprehensive manner.

The representative of Australia said he supported a Middle Eastern zone free of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery.  He strongly supported the universality of the NPT.  But, there were substantive difficulties with the text on the issue, notably the emphasis on the State of Israel, with no reference to other States or their nuclear concerns.   Iran had been in non-compliance with the nuclear safeguard agreement.  The proposed resolution made no references to the international community and their concern on that matter.

The representative of Iran said the idea of the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone was as important a disarmament measure now as when it was first initiated by Iran in 1974.  The repeated adoption of that resolution was a manifestation of global support.  Unfortunately, due to the non-adherence of Israel to the NPT, or to place its facilities under the IAEA nuclear safeguard system, realization of the group had yet to be realized.  It was the irresponsible behaviour of that regime that put the establishment of the nuclear-weapon-free zone in serious doubt.  All countries in the Middle East region, except for Israel, had become States parties to the treaties.  The international community must now exert pressure on Israel to accede to the NPT and place its facilities under safeguard.  As a State party to the NPT, Iran was committed to that international undertaking.

The representative of Switzerland said he wanted to explain his vote on the resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/60/L.6).  He voted in favour of it.  The resolution called for the universality of the NPT and asked for the only country that had not joined the treaty, to do so.   Switzerland attached a bigger importance to the existing obligations.  In that context, the full cooperation with the IAEA was essential.  His country was also concerned by the situation that had developed recently concerning such cooperation.  The text was against nuclear proliferation throughout the region.  The authors of the resolution should take into account the current context.

The representative of Israel said that his delegation had joined consensus on the draft on a nuclear-weapon-free Middle East, notwithstanding its reservations on certain elements of the text.  It had always been Israel’s view that the matter should be dealt with within the region and could not be imposed from outside.  All States in the region should participate, he added, and the creation of such a zone should be taken one step at a time, starting with discussions between parties and efforts at reconciliation within the region.  Mutual recognition was also an important step, particularly since some States refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist.

The representative of the Republic of Korea said his delegation had abstained from the vote on the text concerning the conclusion of effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons (A/C.1/60/L.45), saying that non-party States to the NPT were entitled to security assurances from nuclear weapons States.  He added that more creative discussions should proceed on ways to provide such assurances.

The representative of Pakistan said his country supported a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the southern hemisphere on the basis of the principle that the regions themselves should care for it.  But, to call for the creation of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in South Asia betrayed the reality on the ground.  His country had sought to promote the objective unsuccessfully for two decades.  The purpose of creating a zone in South Asia had been defeated.  The reference to South Asia was in complete variance to the realities on the ground.  Pakistan abstained on resolution L.12 as a whole, as well as operative paragraph 5.  Second, for resolution on the CTBT (L.26), Pakistan decided to restore support.  On the resolution on nuclear disarmament (L.36), its references to documents and the NPT Review had obliged his delegation to abstain.

The representative of Ethiopia said, on preambular paragraph 6 of the resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (L.6), Ethiopia had intended to abstain.

The representative of Syria had abstained on the text on the CTBT (document A/C.1/60/L.26), as he had had stated time and again that such an important treaty and the future commitments emanating therefrom should in no way ignore the concerns on non-nuclear States, which had received no guarantees of non-use or threat of use of such weapons.  The text allowed signatories to take measures against non-signatories, including measures taken by the Security Council.  Such loopholes were to be viewed with grave concern.  Syria also rejected the fact that there was no mention of Israel, which had refused to join the IAEA or subject its nuclear facilities to the Agency’s inspectors.

Cluster II

Turning to texts on “other weapons of mass destruction”, the representative of Belarus said that he hoped the Committee would adopt without vote the draft on prohibition of the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons:  report of the Disarmament Conference (document A/C.1/60/L.10).

Action on Texts

The text on prohibition of the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons:  report of the Conference on Disarmament (document/C.1/60/L.10) was adopted by a vote of 150 in favour to 1 against ( United States), with 1 abstention ( Israel) (Annex XV).

A text on the implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (document A/C.1/60/L.31) was adopted without a vote.

Speaking in explanation of vote after the vote, the representative of the United States said that her delegation believed the threat of weapons of mass destruction beyond the chemical, biological and nuclear spheres remained hypothetical, and that there was no reason to deflect the attention of the international community from real threats to such hypotheticals.

Cluster V

The text resolution on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/60/L.23), was approved by the Committee without a vote.

The Committee voted to approve the resolution on conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/60/L.44) by a vote of 147 in favour with 1 rejection ( India), and 1 abstention ( Bhutan) (Annex XVI).

India’s representative, speaking in explanation of the vote on conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/60/L.44), said his country did not agree that the Conference on Disarmament should be asked, as in the operative part of the resolution, to consider the formulation of principles that can serve as a framework for regional agreements on conventional arms control.  The Conference on Disarmament should concern itself with negotiating legal instruments.  It was a deliberative body.

Cluster VI

Turning next to texts on matters related to “other disarmament measures and international security”, the Committee approved a draft resolution on confidence-building measures on the regional and subregional context (document A/C.1/60/L.24) without a vote.

A text on the role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament (document A/C.1/60/L.53) was adopted by a vote of 88 in favour to 49 against, with 13 abstentions. (Annex XVII)

Cluster VII

Taking up next on draft text on matters relating to disarmament machinery, the Committed approved without a text on the report of the Disarmament Conference (document A/C.1/60/L.20).

ANNEX I

Vote on Missiles

The draft decision on “Missiles” (document A/C.1/60/L.5) was approved by a recorded vote of 101 in favour to 2 against, with 50 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  Israel, United States.

Abstain:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, United Kingdom.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX II

Vote on Preambular Paragraph 6/Middle East Nuclear Proliferation

The sixth preambular paragraph of the draft resolution on Middle East nuclear proliferation (document A/C.1/60/L.6) was approved by a recorded vote of 145 in favour to 2 against, with 5 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  India, Israel.

Abstain:  Bhutan, Cameroon, Mauritius, Pakistan, United States.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX III

Vote on Middle East Nuclear Proliferation

The draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/60/L.6) was approved by a recorded vote of 149 in favour to 2 against, with 4 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  Israel, United States

Abstain:  Australia, Cameroon, Ethiopia, India.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX IV

Vote on Conference on Nuclear Dangers

The draft resolution on a United Nations conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers (document A/C.1/60/L.11) was approved by a recorded vote of 108 in favour to 5 against, with 39 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  France, Israel, Poland, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Monaco, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX V

Vote on ‘And South Asia ’

The words “and South Asia” in operative paragraph 5 of the draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/60/L.12/REV.1) were retained by a recorded vote of 140 in favour to 2 against, with 7 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  India, Pakistan.

Abstain:  Bhutan, France, Israel, Russian Federation, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom, United States.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Monaco, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX VI

Vote on Operative Paragraph 5/Southern Hemisphere

Operative paragraph 5 of the draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/60/L.12/Rev.1) was adopted by a recorded vote of 141 in favour to 1 against, with 9 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  India.

Abstain:  Bhutan, France, Israel, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Spain, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom, United States.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Monaco, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX VII

Vote on Nuclear-Weapon-Free Southern Hemisphere

The draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere (document A/C.1/60/L.12/REV.1) was approved by a recorded vote of 144 in favour to 3 against, with 6 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  France, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Bhutan, India, Israel, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Spain.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Monaco, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX VIII

Vote on Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty

The draft resolution on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (document A/C.1/60/L.26/REV.1) was approved by a recorded vote of 149 in favour to 1 against, with 4 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  United States.

Abstain:  Colombia, India, Mauritius, Syria.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX IX

Vote on Nuclear Disarmament

The draft resolution on nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/60/L.36) was approved by a recorded vote of 94 in favour to 42 against, with 17 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, India, Ireland, Japan, Kazakhstan, Malta, Mauritius, Pakistan, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, Sweden, Ukraine, Uzbekistan.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX X

Vote on Assurance for Non-Nuclear-Weapons States

The draft resolution on the conclusion of international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapons States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/60/L.45) was approved by a recorded vote of 98 in favour to none against, with 55 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  None.

Abstain:  Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX XI

Vote on Operative Paragraph 1/International Court of Justice Advisory

Operative paragraph 1 of the draft resolution on the International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/60/L.46) was approved by a recorded vote of 142 in favour to 3 against, with 5 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  Israel, Russian Federation, United States.

Abstain:  Belarus, France, Latvia, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Monaco, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX XII

Vote on International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion

The draft resolution on the International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/60/L.46) was approved by a recorded vote of 103 in favour to 29 against, with 21 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Andorra, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Japan, Kazakhstan, Liechtenstein, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Serbia and Montenegro, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Uzbekistan.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX XIII

Vote on Reducing Nuclear Danger

The draft resolution on reducing nuclear danger (document A/C.1/60/L.52) was approved by a recorded vote of 94 in favour to 45 against, with 14 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, China, Israel, Japan, Kazakhstan, Paraguay, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, Ukraine, Uzbekistan.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX XIV

Vote on Convention on Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

The draft resolution on a convention on the prohibition of the use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/60/L.54) was approved by a recorded vote of 97 in favour to 46 against, with 11 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Japan, Kazakhstan, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, Ukraine, Uzbekistan.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX XV

Vote on Prohibiting Development of New Weapons

The draft resolution on prohibition of the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction (document A/C.1/60/L.10*) was approved by a recorded vote of 150 in favour to 1 against, with 1 abstention, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  United States.

Abstain:  Israel.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX XVI

Vote on Regional Conventional Arms Control

The draft resolution on conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/60/L.44) was approved by a recorded vote of 147 in favour to 1 against, with 1 abstention, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  India.

Abstain:  Bhutan.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Niger, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX XVII

Vote on Science and Technology

The draft resolution on the role of science and technology in the context of international security (document A/C.1/60/L.53) was approved by a recorded vote of 88 in favour to 49 against, with 13 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Brazil, Chile, Kazakhstan, Paraguay, Russian Federation, South Africa, Ukraine, Uruguay, Uzbekistan.

Absent:  Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Namibia, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

* *** *

___________________

*     The 17^th meeting was brief and procedural. No press release was issued.

For information media • not an official record