DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE TACKLES BROAD RANGE OF ITEMS, INCLUDING CLUSTER MUNITIONS, SMALL ARMS, LANDMINES, VERIFICATION OF ARMS CONTROL, DISARMAMENT TREATIES

Sixty-second General Assembly

First Committee

16^th Meeting (AM)

DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE TACKLES BROAD RANGE OF ITEMS, INCLUDING CLUSTER MUNITIONS,

SMALL ARMS, LANDMINES, VERIFICATION OF ARMS CONTROL, DISARMAMENT TREATIES

Members Hear Introduction of 11 Draft Texts, Including Risk of Nuclear

Proliferation in Middle East, Use of Armaments Containing Depleted Uranium

International attention today focused on such wide-ranging challenges as anti-personnel mines, cluster munitions, the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons and negotiation of a possible arms trade treaty to control it, and verification of arms control and disarmament agreements, as the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) continued its thematic debate segment.

Members also heard the introduction of 11 draft texts on such items as the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation, and implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security.

South Africa’s speaker highlighted the progress achieved in the area of landmines, 10 years after the launch of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Mine Ban Convention).  Those gains had included the clearing of vast tracts of land and the success of 80 States parties to the treaty in destroying their landmine stockpiles, which had destroyed an estimated 40 million mines.

Drawing attention to a humanitarian crisis of “huge and tragic proportions”, she noted that the conflict in Lebanon last year had left numerous unexploded cluster munitions, which the international community must address.  A global instrument was needed to prohibit the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of those cluster munitions that caused “unacceptable harm” to civilian populations. 

On behalf of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), Uruguay’s representative said that the Mine Ban Convention was clear evidence of what could be achieved by the international community.  Ten years after its adoption, there had been widespread, encouraging progress around the world.  Nevertheless, there were still 78 countries with those menacing weapons, and at least 10 States were still manufacturing them.  The universalization of the Convention was essential.

Broadening the scope of the debate, Canada’s delegate focused on the paramount importance of verification.  He worried that today’s international security environment had stagnated, and that progress on non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament had effectively ground to a halt.  That was in contrast to the 1990s, when the world had witnessed significant gains in multilateral disarmament and arms control, including in the chemical and biological weapons spheres with adoption of those two Conventions, the anti-personnel landmines ban, and the establishment moratoriums on nuclear tests. 

Not only had those advances represented achievements in themselves, but they made verification an integral tool to reinforce disarmament agreements, thus enhancing national and international peace and security.  Unfortunately, those gains had not been built upon, he stressed. 

Similarly concerned, the United States representative said that the international community faced a tremendous challenge in achieving and maintaining full compliance with international agreements.  Too often, excuses were found not to act in a timely and sufficiently forceful manner when a State chose not to comply with its freely undertaken obligations to the international community.

The United States viewed verification, compliance assessment and compliance enforcement as critically interrelated, he said.  Verification was designed to strengthen national and international security by providing the means and methods for the detection and deterrence of non-compliance.  However, if detection had no consequences for the violator, then verification had no meaning, and deterrence was unachievable.

Several delegations highlighted the important contributions of the United Nations Regional Centres on disarmament.  Introducing a draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean, Peru’s speaker said the Centre had put into practice far-reaching initiatives, and was the only one of the three regional centres whose mandate included social and economic development.  It had also sought to combat the illicit arms trade in cooperation with the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa and Interpol (International Criminal Police Organization).

Speaking in a similar vein about the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa, the representative of Senegal said that Centre’s mandate remained valid and that it played an important role in achieving regional peace and security. 

The representative of Nepal announced that his country and the United Nations Secretariat had signed a memorandum of understanding with regard to the relocation of the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific to Kathmandu.  Introducing a draft resolution on the Centre, he said that his Government had released the necessary budget for the installation of the Centre.  Nepal was grateful to the international community for the assistance provided to the Centre, but it urged increased support for its effective functioning in the days ahead, to enable it to perform its mandated duties.

Also today, the Committee heard the introduction of 10 draft resolutions and one draft decision, including on implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace; observance of environmental norms in drafting disarmament and arms control agreements; the relationship between disarmament and development; effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium; United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific; United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean; the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Middle East; and the strengthening of Security in the Mediterranean region.

Statements in the thematic debate on weapons of mass destruction were made by the representatives of Singapore, Japan, Indonesia and the Russian Federation.

The representatives of Azerbaijan, the United States, Kuwait, Iraq, Egypt, Algeria and United Arab Emirates made statements in the thematic debate on regional disarmament and security.

A statement in the thematic debate on conventional weapons was also made by the representative of Japan.

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

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 25 October, to continue its thematic debate segment and to hear the further introduction of drafts.

Background

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this morning to continue its thematic debates on such items as disarmament measures and international security issues, verification, and conventional weapons.  It would also convene a panel discussion on regional disarmament measures and security, and hear the introduction of draft resolutions and decisions.

Thematic Debate Statements/Introduction of Drafts

DOLLY NEO ( Singapore) said that, while in the past concerns over weapons of mass destruction had been focused on possession by States, today the world had to worry about non-State actors acquiring such weapons.  The threat of proliferation had become linked to terrorism and was one of the most serious threats to international security today.  She stressed the need for international cooperation and support for multilateral non-proliferation regimes -- like the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons; the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention); and the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (Biological Weapons Convention) -- and called for universal adherence to United Nations Security Council resolution 1540 (2004).

Noting that Singapore was an aviation hub and a port located along one of the world’s most important shipping lanes, she said that, in order to avoid being used by proliferators in their illicit activities, the country relied on “robust” export control systems and active counter-proliferation efforts.  In January 2003, Singapore had enacted a Strategic Goods (Control) Act, which included brokering controls, controls on intangible transfers of technology, and a “catch-all” provision allowing for the control of items intended for weapons of mass destruction end-use.  The country was planning to expand its strategic goods export control lists beginning in January 2008 to include all items covered under the Australia Group, the Wassenaar Arrangement, the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Missile Technology Control Regime.

Singapore was also an active participant in the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), which aimed to deepen international cooperation to stop the movement of mass destruction weapons and related items from flowing to State and non-State actors, she said, noting that that initiative was not a stand-alone measure, but one that complemented international efforts, such as United Nations Security Council resolutions.  Singapore had hosted an interdiction exercise of that initiative in August 2005, as well as an operational expert group meeting in July 2006.  It had also participated in a counter-proliferation maritime interdiction exercise from 13-15 October. 

DAVID KENNEDY ( United States) said that the international community faced a tremendous challenge today in achieving and maintaining full compliance with international agreements.  Too often, there was a penchant in some quarters to find excuses not to act in a timely and sufficiently, or forceful enough manner –- or regrettably, not to act at all -– when a State chose not to comply with its freely undertaken obligations to the international community.

He said that today, for example, Iran’s continued refusal to comply with its international non-proliferation obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, its International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards agreement, and numerous Security Council resolutions made clear, “in stark terms”, the difficulty of ensuring  compliance.  It also posed the question of what the international community could and should do about failure to comply.  His country welcomed the various decisions taken by the IAEA Board of Governors and the unanimous adoption of Security Council resolutions 1737 (2006) and 1747 (2007), imposing Chapter VII sanctions on Iran.  Those demonstrated the unity of the international community on that issue.

At the same time, he said, his Government supported ongoing diplomatic efforts to encourage Iran to come into full compliance with its various obligations.  Should that country continue to refuse to comply with its international obligations, however, the Security Council should move forward, as soon as possible, to adopt a third resolution under Chapter VII, imposing additional sanctions.

The United States viewed verification, compliance assessment and compliance enforcement as critically interrelated, he stressed.  They were the “three legs of a stool that cannot stand if one leg is removed”.  Verification was designed to strengthen national and international security by providing the means and methods for the detection and deterrence of non-compliance.  However, if detection had no consequences for the violator, then verification had no meaning, and deterrence was unachievable.

SUMIO TARUI (Japan), discussing his country’s recent activities on disarmament and non-proliferation education, said his Government had been inviting groups of young diplomats to Japan under the United Nations Disarmament Fellowship Program every year since 1983.  Since 1989, Japan had co-sponsored, together with the United Nations, a conference on disarmament issues.  This year’s conference had taken place in Sapporo, from 27 to 29 August, under the theme “New Vision and Required Leadership towards a World Free from Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction”.  In March, Japan had hosted Owen Greene, Director of the Centre for International Cooperation and Security at Bradford University, to deliver a public lecture on small arms and light weapons.

He said that the Japanese Government had recently decided to launch a programme, entitled “New Initiatives on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Education”.  That series of initiatives focused on teaching youth about disarmament, and it included a debating contest and the creative use of manga comics and animation.  His Government would continue to contribute to educational efforts in the field of disarmament and non-proliferation at the national, regional and international levels.

DAVID EDWARDS ( Canada) said that, during the 1990s, the world witnessed significant gains in multilateral disarmament and arms control, including the Chemical Weapons Convention, the anti-personnel landmines ban, and the establishment of the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.  Not only did those represent achievements in themselves, but they made verification an integral tool to reinforce disarmament agreements, thus enhancing national and international peace and security.

Unfortunately, he said, those gains had not been built upon.  The international security environment had stagnated, and progress on non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament had effectively “ground to a halt”.  The report of the panel of governmental experts to prepare a study on verification in all its aspects, established by General Assembly resolution 56/60, had noted that the technical means of verification had continued to evolve.  The extraordinary development of information and communications technology had broadened the availability of relevant information, not only of States and international organizations, but also of civil society.  That provided a genuine opportunity for global progress in verification and implementation of compliance.

FEBRIAN ALPHYANTO RUDDYARD ( Indonesia), on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, introduced five draft resolutions and one draft decision.

Introducing a draft resolution, entitled “Implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace” (document A/C.1/62/L.16), he noted that the situation globally, particularly in the Indian Ocean, had passed through many changes since the adoption of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace in 1971.  Several initiatives had been undertaken to bring about the socio-economic development of the countries concerned, but there was still ample room to develop measures to reach the objectives of the 1971 Declaration.

When he introduced a second resolution, “Observance of environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of agreements on disarmament and arms control” (document A/C.1/62/L.14), he said that the Movement considered that the continued sustainability of the global environment was of utmost importance.

The third resolution, entitled “Promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation” (document A/C.1/62/L.13) stressed multilateralism as the only sustainable way of addressing non-proliferation and disarmament issues.

Another resolution, entitled “Relationship between disarmament and development” (document A/C.1/62/L.52), was based on that “symbiotic” relationship, which could not be denied, he said.  The Movement was concerned about the increased military spending –- funding that could otherwise be used for development.  For that reason, the Movement welcomed the report of the governmental expert group on the relationship between disarmament and development.

Tabling a fifth resolution on “Effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium” (document A/C.1/62/L.18), he noted that there was still not a full understanding of the effect that fine particles of depleted uranium might have on the human body, and the IAEA, the World Health Organization, and the United Nations Environment Programme had all stated that more research was needed on that issue.  The draft resolution excluded controversial issues that had been introduced in a previous text on the issue.

The draft decision, entitled “Review of the implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security” (document A/C.1/62/L.51) reaffirmed the importance of the Declaration, adopted by the United Nations Security Council in 1970.

PETER LITAVRIN ( Russian Federation) said that international information security was one of the priority topics requiring detailed multilateral study, primarily at the United Nations, because it concerned international problems of current importance to the global community, such as the use of information and telecommunications technologies for criminal, terrorist and military-political purposes.  Striving to seek a better understanding of the challenges and threats to international information security, and searching for collective ways and means to address them, his country had raised that issue at the General Assembly in 1998.  Since then, the Assembly had regularly considered and adopted, by consensus, a resolution on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security.  That Russian initiative sought to remove serious concerns that hampered the creation of the global information society, and to promote the development of information telecommunications technologies and the dissemination of information.

He said his country noted with satisfaction the growing understanding by the world community of the importance, urgency and complexity of international information security issues, which was being discussed at international and regional levels.  Those had included such representative forums as the World Summit on the Information Society, held under United Nations auspices, and the International Telecommunications Union.  His country proposed to take specific measures within the United Nations to study challenges and threats to international information security.

OGTAY ISMAYIL-ZADA ( Azerbaijan) said that unresolved conflicts persisted in his region.  Azerbaijani territory occupied by Armenia had become a transit point for illicit arms.  Further, Armenia had been intensively arming its security forces in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan.

Pointing to United Nations report A/62/170, he said Armenia had not published a list of arms possessed by its army.  According to experts, Armenia had concealed the import of military equipment, including military transport helicopters and missile launchers, as well as large quantities of fuel.  Further, it was a little-known fact that Armenia now had received special blankets for its battle tanks, which reflected radar waves and made the tanks invisible to radar detection.

MADHU RAMAN ACHARYA ( Nepal) introduced a draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific (document A/C.1/62/L.35).  In July, Nepal and the United Nations Secretariat had signed a memorandum of understanding with regard to the physical relocation of the Regional Centre to Kathmandu.  The Government had released the necessary budget for the installation of the Centre, in accordance with the provisions of that text.  The relocation did not entail additional financial obligations for Member States.

He said his country was grateful to the international community for the assistance provided to the Centre, and it urged increased support for its effective functioning in the days ahead, to enable it to perform its mandated duties of providing substantive support to the initiatives and activities agreed by the Member States of the Asia-Pacific region.  The draft resolution this year had been revised to reflect the requisite technical updates and the new development, in the context of the conclusion of the memorandum of understanding.

Mr. KENNEDY ( United States) said he wished to highlight the work being done by the United Nations to strengthen international security and fight the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.  He pointed especially to the work of the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs on regional outreach, promoting the implementation of United Nations Security Council resolution 1540 (2004), being conducted in cooperation with the “1540 Committee”.

He called that resolution an “excellent example of how the international community can work together to create effective tools to combat proliferation”.  The resolution would enhance national security and build capacities applicable to other national priorities, from augmenting trade and export controls to improving the capacity to mitigate threats to public health and security.  The text also promoted transparency and cooperation on the regional and global levels.

A regional seminar organized by the Disarmament Affairs Office with the “1540 Committee” on 4 and 5 September had been held in Amman, Jordan on implementing the resolution for Arab States, he noted.  That had provided “important assistance” to participating countries in the region to better understand the practical challenges and tools necessary to implement the text.  He called on the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs to continue similar work in the future, noting that another workshop had been planned for late November in Gaborone, Botswana.

MUBARAK AL-SAMHAN ( Kuwait) said that the possession of weapons of mass destruction did not achieve security in the Middle East.  Rather, the proliferation of those deadly weapons only increased tensions and conflicts between the peoples and countries of the region.   Kuwait looked with extreme concern at the prevailing international situation, since the Middle East region in particular still faced security threats and risks emanating from proliferation of mass destruction weapons.  The region would not accomplish its objectives of stability, security and development as long as Israel was the only country in the region that refused to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

He said that true peace between States should be built on compliance with the rules of international legitimacy, the fulfilment of commitments, and the implementation of international resolutions of the United Nations and the IAEA, as well as those issued by the Review Conferences of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.  True peace emanated from avoiding an arms race in the region, and ridding it of all weapons of mass destruction.  Kuwait looked forward to the redoubling of international efforts aimed at pressuring Israel to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and to immediately dismantle its nuclear facilities or subject them to the monitoring process of the IAEA.  The international community should also impel all other concerned parties to halt all scientific, technological and financial assistance destined for the purpose of further developing those facilities.

RICARDO MOROTE ( Peru), on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries (GRULAC), introduced a draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (document A/1.C/62/L.4).  He congratulated the Regional Centre in Lima, Peru on the many initiatives it had carried out at the regional and subregional level during the 20 years since its creation.  The Centre was the only one of the three Regional Centres of the Office for Disarmament Affairs whose mandate included social and economic development, which had permitted the Centre to put into practice far-reaching initiatives.

He said that the Regional Centre had established strong relations with United Nations agencies and with regional groups, including the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), the Andean Community of Nations, the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and the Central American Integration System.  The Centre had also sought to combat the illicit arms trade in cooperation with the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa, together with Interpol (International Criminal Police Organization).

The Centre’s achievements would not have been possible without funding, including voluntary contributions from United Nations Member States, he said, calling on the Secretary-General to work to provide more funding to enable the Centre to continue to fulfil its mandate.

ABBAS KHADHIM OBAID ( Iraq) said that the creation of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East enjoyed the support of most of the international community and countries of the region.  Although there was the wish, efforts towards the creation of a zone free of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction had not seen much progress because of the complex nature of the region, which had been subjected to conflict and external intervention.  Besides, Israeli policies encouraged possession of weapons of mass destruction in the region.  The absence of a nuclear-weapon-free zone was a major source of instability in the area, and led to a climate which could further jeopardize peace and security regionally and internationally.  That was why it was absolutely necessary to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone and a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the region.

He said that serious efforts and political will had been exerted by the countries of the region to stop an arms race there, and to settle all pending issues in all their aspects as a way to encourage the establishment of the zone.  Relevant agreements had also been signed with the IAEA by all countries of the region except one.  All the Arab States wished to see the zone created and they respected their international obligations and commitments.   Iraq called on Israel to do same.  His country placed great importance on the establishment of the zone in the Middle East and had tried to rid the region of nuclear weapons through agreements on weapons of mass destruction.   Iraq was free of all weapons of mass destruction, as confirmed by article 9 of its Constitution.

COLY SECK ( Senegal) spoke about the mechanism for funding the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa.  The Centre was created in 1986, following General Assembly resolution 40/151 G, and played an important role in achieving regional peace and security.  Given that the Centre had experienced financial difficulties for several years, the Secretary-General had established a resolution on a consultative mechanism for its reorganization.  That mechanism had reached an agreement and had adopted the report of its president, the conclusions of which were contained in United Nations document A/62/140.

He said that report concluded that the Centre’s mandate remained valid, but that it must give a higher priority to small arms and light weapons, disarmament, capacity-building, and the prevention of nuclear, chemical, and radioactive waste.  The report also called for the launching of a fund to allow the Centre to achieve its mandate.  He appealed to all States to support the draft resolution on the Centre, submitted yesterday by Nigeria.

KHALED ABDEL RAHMAN SHAMAA (Egypt) introduced a draft resolution, entitled “The risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East” (document A/C.1/62/L.2), explaining that the text focused on the concern of the Middle East and the international community as a whole that nuclear weapons could proliferate in the region.  That concern had been expressed by successive review conferences of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.  The draft emphasized the importance for all concerned of taking active and serious steps towards establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, and it called upon Israel, as the only State in the region that had not adhered to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to adhere to that regime and to subject its facilities to the full scope of IAEA safety guarantees.

He then introduced another draft resolution, entitled “The establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East” (document A/C.1/62/L.1), noting that his country had submitted that resolution for more than 25 years.  The text called on all States to restrain themselves from developing, testing or deploying nuclear weapons in the region until a nuclear-weapon-free zone was established there.

LARBI EL HADJ ALI ( Algeria) introduced a draft resolution, entitled “Strengthening of security in the Mediterranean region” (document A/C.1/62/L.48).  The resolution reflected an “unswerving” commitment to making the Mediterranean region one of peace, and expressed a strong will to promote cooperation and solidarity in the region.  The text also demonstrated the growing link between the two shores of the Mediterranean.  Subjects covered by the draft also included the strengthening of security and cooperation in the region, recalling initiatives already undertaken by the countries of the region.  In addition, the draft affirmed the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.  It called for the elimination of economic and social differences in the region, and for measures to promote mutual understanding among peoples of the region. 

Further, he said, the draft asked States in the region to adhere to international disarmament and non-proliferation instruments.  It also asked States to take further action in combating terrorism in all forms, as well as combating organized crime, illicit arms transfers, and drug production and trafficking.

AHMED ABDULLA ALI AL KETBI ( United Arab Emirates) said that, despite measures to establish confidence, and despite disarmament efforts, security conditions in the Middle East were a threat to international peace and stability, given that Israel continued to be attached to its nuclear arsenal.  The United Arab Emirates was concerned by the “exception” that Israel represented, as the only country that had not acceded to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.  There had been a failure by the international community in addressing that problem, which was dangerous for the whole region.  A double standard had been applied, with Israel encouraged to develop its nuclear material.  That had pushed other States to attempt to acquire such weapons for the sake of deterrence.

He asked the international community to pressure Israel to cooperate with the IAEA and to unveil its activities and infrastructures, revealing its stockpiles.  He also asked States to call upon Israel to end the manufacture of all fissile material and related equipment used to produce weapons of mass destruction, to end its nuclear tests, and to dismantle its nuclear arsenal.  The international community must exert economic pressure on Israel.  The application of such measures could promote confidence between all interested States, leading to the revitalization of the peace process in the region, and to preventing terrorism. 

The agreement between the IAEA and the Iranian Government to determine a calendar by which to find a solution to all pending issues had been welcome, and he looked forward to the launch of negotiations with all parties towards a peaceful solution that would lead the region back from the brink of conflict.  The United Arab Emirates supported the draft resolutions on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East and on freeing the Middle East from nuclear threats.

Right of Reply

The representative of Armenia, exercising the right of reply in response to the statement by the representative of Azerbaijan on an arms race in the South Caucasus, said that, according to information from official sources, Azerbaijan’s military budget had increased eightfold in the past eight years.  The information on the armed forces of Armenia presented by the representative of Azerbaijan was false.  Those figures were misleading.   Armenia was committed to and abided by its international obligations.  It followed strictly the ceilings established for countries of the South Caucasus.  A detailed picture of the Armenian Armed Forces could be found in the appropriate reports of the United Nations and of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

Thematic Debate Statements/Draft Introductions, Continued

Mr. TARUI (Japan) said that, although last year’s United Nations conference to review progress on the implementation of the 2001 Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects had been unable to reach agreement on further efforts at the global level, that action plan remained the most important international framework for tackling the illicit small arms scourge.  Bearing in mind that 500,000 people lost their lives each year to small arms, the international community must continue to enhance the implementation of that Action Programme at the national, regional and international levels.

In that context, he said his country had held a workshop in Tokyo in March on small arms and light weapons.  In addition to sharing best practices on that issue, understanding was deepened on demand factors and transfer controls.   Japan had also participated actively in the group of governmental experts’ work on illicit brokering, and had made efforts to forge a report that included the most concrete and action-oriented model of national regulations and recommendations.  His country strongly hoped that many countries would implement its contents.

Japan, in accordance with its “Three Principles on Arms Exports”, did not export weapons, he said.  That policy was executed with the broad support of its citizens, who sincerely desired international peace and security.  Against that backdrop, the country placed immense value on projects on the ground to reduce the actual harm caused by small arms and light weapons, and it assisted countries in that regard, especially in Asia and Africa.  This year, for example, it had provided support to the Central African Republic and the Republic of Congo.

Noting that the group of governmental experts on an arms trade treaty was due to convene next year, he said his country believed that such an initiative was valuable and even “epoch-making”.  There was a pressing need for the international community to overcome the problems of uncontrolled and irresponsible transfers of conventional weapons, and thus, to prevent the victims caused by such transfers.  In order for an arms trade treaty to materialize, it was not only essential to combine technical and expert knowledge, but also to fuel the momentum of discussions through involvement of the greatest number of countries.   Japan was prepared to contribute to the full extent of its ability.

He said his country was also fully aware of the humanitarian concerns caused by cluster munitions.  In order to respond effectively and practically to that problem, a process should be developed that addressed the issue with the participation of the major producers and possessors, while allowing for a balance between humanitarian and security aspects.  Japan supported the negotiation of an international agreement on cluster munitions, within the framework of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects), in which the major countries that produced and possessed those munitions participated.

GLAUDINE MTSHALI ( South Africa) said that progress in the area of landmines included the clearing of vast tracts of land and the success of 80 States parties to the Mine Ban Convention in destroying their landmine stockpiles.  An estimated 40 million mines had been destroyed since the adoption of that Convention, formally, the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction. 

At present, she said that assisting mine survivors and reintegrating the victims into their societies was of the greatest importance.  States with the most significant victim problems were also among the world’s poorest, and a lack of infrastructure often hampered post-trauma assistance in those States.  She called on those States and relevant organizations in a position to do so to work more closely with those highly affected States, in order to assist them in the concrete implementation of their national survivor assistance plans.

In the aftermath of the conflict in Lebanon last year, the numerous unexploded cluster munitions had resulted in a humanitarian crisis of “huge and tragic proportions”, which the international community must address.  In that context, South Africa called for an international instrument to prohibit the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of those cluster munitions that caused “unacceptable harm” to civilian populations.

On small arms and light weapons, she said efforts to implement the 2001 Programme of Action were paying off, particularly in focusing attention on the illicit trade in those weapons at the global and regional levels.  However, greater follow-up was required on the part of individual States, which should incorporate the principles found in the action plan into their national legislation, policies and arms transfer control structures.  She pointed to the Programme of Action’s section III, on “implementation, international cooperation and assistance”, as the most important of the Programme’s undertakings.  Further, it was vital to seek to prevent illicit brokering activities.

FEDERICO PERAZZA ( Uruguay), on behalf of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), said that gun violence had become a global epidemic stealing the lives of hundreds of thousands of people each year.  Every effort was being made to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit trade of small arms and light weapons.  The MERCOSUR countries had sought to register buyers and sellers of firearms, ammunition, explosives and related materials.  They had also formed a working group on firearms and munitions, which had met at least once a year since 2000. 

He said it was vital to implement the United Nations Programme of Action, and he called for a commitment to the full implementation of the recommendations of the international instrument on marking and tracing.  On illicit brokering of those weapons, he said it was of “paramount” importance to work towards the negotiation of a legally binding instrument, and he noted the report by the group of governmental experts on the matter.

Noting the establishment of a governmental expert group to examine the feasibility of elaborating an arms trade treaty, he meanwhile called on all States to reinforce regulations on the acquisition and possession of arms.

Speaking on the subject of anti-personnel mines, also on behalf of the Southern Common Market, he said that the Mine Ban Convention was clear evidence of what could be achieved by the international community.  Ten years after its adoption, there was widespread, encouraging progress around the world.  Nevertheless, there were still 78 countries with mines, and at least 10 that still manufactured them.  He called for the universalization of the Convention, particularly implementation of its article 5, concerning destruction of anti-personnel mines in mined areas. 

Regarding MERCOSUR’S activities, he said that Argentina and Chile had put into practice the Argentine-Chilean initiative on the implementation of article 3 of the Convention, concerning training in mine detection, and Bolivia was considering the implementation of an educational campaign to raise awareness of mined zones near the border with Chile.  Brazil had played a key role in mine clearance activities, through work carried out within the Organization of American States.  Brazil had also signalled its willingness to send technical experts and health professionals to other countries to assist in their mine clearance efforts. 

Continuing, he noted that Chile had established a National Demining Plan and was carrying out mine clearance along its borders with Peru, Bolivia and Argentina.  Ecuador and Peru had undertaken joint work on mine removals.  Uruguay had participated in mine clearance activities as part of United Nations actions in Haiti and in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.  Venezuela, which, in 1997, had possessed more than 50,000 anti-personnel mines, had destroyed 89 per cent of its stockpiles.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record