AMID CONFLUENCE OF CRISES, UNITED NATIONS MEMBER STATES CAPABLE OF RIDDING PLANET OF ‘WEAPONS THAT WE FALSELY BELIEVE PROTECT US’, DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE TOLD

Sixty-third General Assembly

First Committee

6^th Meeting (AM)

AMID CONFLUENCE OF CRISES, UNITED NATIONS MEMBER STATES CAPABLE OF RIDDING PLANET

OF ‘WEAPONS THAT WE FALSELY BELIEVE PROTECT US’, DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE TOLD

Insistence on Utility of Nuclear Weapons Flouts Treaty Obligations;

Non-Nuclear-Weapon States Seek ‘No First Use’ of Those Weapons against Them

In the midst of the world’s confluence of crises, the United Nations Member States had the capability to “rid our planet of the weapons that we falsely believe protect us”, and should exercise the political will to move forward in the complex field of disarmament, the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) heard today as it continued its general debate.

Weapons of mass destruction posed a great global threat, and biological and chemical weapons were just as lethal, warned the representative of the Philippines.  He proposed staying the course of multilaterally agreed solutions, in keeping with the United Nations Charter, stressing that nuclear-weapon States must lead the way, removing those weapons from their arsenals and eliminating stockpiles to deter other countries from acquiring them, and to prevent terrorists and other non-State actors from possessing them.

He said the spread of small arms and light weapons was of great concern to the Philippines as they were easily transportable, used by criminals and gravely affected peace and security.  Because they killed combatants and civilians and triggered refugee crises, his country emphasized the early and full 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.  States should develop mechanisms to foster information sharing.  The Philippines had shared evidentiary information through official channels, on the basis of an exchange agreement signed with Malaysia and Indonesia.

With the current backdrop of rising global tensions reminiscent of the cold war arms race, asserted Sri Lanka’s representative, it was high time for non-nuclear-weapon States and nuclear Powers to recognize that only strong commitments would advance disarmament and non-proliferation.  The appearance of more and new weapons in violation of agreements progressively eroded and undermined the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), she added, pointing to those statesmen well versed with security policies and doctrines that were voicing concern about the nuclear-weapon States’ continued insistence on the utility of nuclear weapons, without due regard for their treaty commitments.

Voicing concern over Iran’s nuclear programme, Israel’s representative said Iran’s claim that its nuclear programme was legitimate could no longer be put forward in a credible manner.  “This nuclear programme represents a clear threat to the stability and security of the region as a whole and presents an urgent challenge for global peace and stability,” he said.  That situation, along with anti-Semitic remarks and constant calls made by the Iranian President for the destruction of Israel, only exacerbated the situation in the region.  Furthermore, the vast majority of NPT non-compliance cases had taken place in the Middle East.

India’s speaker said the end of the cold war had created new space for action on global disarmament, but the goal of nuclear disarmament remained distant.  “We call upon the First Committee to reinforce the message, now being echoed even by prominent statesmen and experts in the field, in favour of generating new momentum to achieve the goal of a world free of nuclear weapons,” he said. “No effort must be spared in building a consensus to this end.”

India had put forward at the General Assembly and the Conference on Disarmament practical measures to reach a consensus, including the unequivocal commitment of all nuclear-weapon States to the goal of complete elimination of nuclear weapons and the negotiation of a universal and legally binding agreement on non-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States.  Disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation were mutually reinforcing processes requiring concerted and cooperative international efforts.  International cooperation should also be expanded in the area of peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

The Committee approved, as orally amended, its indicative timetable for the current General Assembly session (document A/C.1/63/CRP.2).

Statements in the general debate were also made by representatives of Belarus, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Ethiopia, Singapore, Kenya, Senegal, Zambia, South Africa and the Republic of the Congo.

Speaking in exercise of the right of reply were the representatives of Iran and Syria.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. on Monday, 13 October, to continue its general debate.

Background

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) continued its general debate this morning on all disarmament and international security agenda items before the General Assembly.  (For background information and a summary of reports before the Committee, see Press Release GA/DIS/3361 of 6 October 2008).

Statements

VIKTOR GAISENOK ( Belarus) said the security mechanism should be strengthened and made more efficient, especially in Europe.  That had become more evident after the last crisis in the Caucasus.  Belarus supported the Russian initiative to enhance the European security architecture.

He said that the strengthening of the nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime based on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) remained a challenge.  There were several steps on the eve of the 2010 NPT Review Conference that could help uphold the Treaty’s authority, including ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT).  The elaboration of a new agreement to replace the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START) would be real evidence of a firm intention by the United States and Russian Federation to contribute, in practical terms, to the implementation of article IV of the NPT.  The intention of the two major nuclear Powers to limit the number of strategic nuclear warheads to the minimum expectable level had been also a positive development.  There was also a need for legally binding negative security assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States and international mechanisms should guarantee the inalienable and equal rights of all interested Member States to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

Further developing of legally binding norms aimed at preventing the deployment of arms in outer space was also crucial, and Belarus welcomed new initiatives in that field, such as the draft of the international treaty elaborated by the Russian Federation and China, he said.  Also important was to focus on implementing commitments under the 2001 United Nations Programme of Action on Small and Light Weapons and the international instrument on marking and tracing those weapons.  Belarus still faced a difficult task of destroying more than 3 million anti-personnel mines under the Mine-Ban Convention.  That would be difficult without international assistance.  His country shared the humanitarian concern on the use of cluster munitions, and noted the importance of the maintenance and development of confidence-building measures in that field, including the operation of the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms and the United Nations military expenditures reporting mechanism.

HILARIO DAVIDE, Jr. ( Philippines) said as the world faces a confluence of crises, the United Nations Members States had the capability to “rid our planet of the weapons that we falsely believe protect us” and should exercise the political will to move forward in the complex field of disarmament.

He said that the spread of small arms and light weapons remained a great concern to the Philippines.  Those weapons were easily transportable, used by criminals and gravely affected peace and security; they killed combatants and civilians and triggered refugee crises.  In that light, his country emphasized the early and full implementation of the 2001 Programme of Action.  States should develop mechanisms to foster information sharing, he said, noting that the Philippines had, for instance, shared evidentiary information through official channels, on the basis of an exchange agreement signed with Malaysia and Indonesia.

Weapons of mass destruction posed a great global threat, he said, emphasizing that “nuclear weapons must be eliminated for the survival of mankind”.  He proposed staying the course of multilaterally agreed solutions, in keeping with the United Nations Charter, stressing that nuclear-weapon States must lead the way, removing those weapons from their arsenals and eliminating stockpiles to deter other countries from acquiring them, and to prevent terrorists and other non-State actors from possessing them.

The current NPT deadlock was another grave concern and the Philippines hoped that States parties would exhibit flexibility and political will to ensure a successful 2010 Review Conference.  In addition, universal adherence to the Test-Ban Treaty was imperative, he said, urging prompt action from the remaining nine States whose ratification was necessary for the Treaty’s entry into force.  The Philippines, together with other Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) members, had established the South-East Asia Nuclear Weapon-Free-Zone (SEANWFZ) and had supported other similar regional zones, among its contributions to the promotion of nuclear disarmament and international peace and security.  He invited nuclear-weapon States to adhere to those zones, and particularly to the zone in South-East Asia, by signing the Treaty’s protocol.

Biological and chemical weapons were just as lethal as nuclear weapons, he said, recognizing the importance of strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention through multilateral negotiations.  He called on those States who had not yet done so to sign and ratify the Chemical Weapons Convention.

AMIR WEISSBROD ( Israel) said Israel had consistently viewed the regional context as the primary and essential framework to advance critical arms control in the Middle East.  The foundations of peace and stability in the region must be based on a historic reconciliation, which should embody the notions of compromise, mutual trust, respect, safe and recognized borders and good neighbourliness, among other things.  Israel believed that the political reality in its region mandated a practical step-by-step approach.

He said that the achievement of a comprehensive peace between Israel and its neighbours should be accompanied and followed by confidence-building measures and arrangements regarding conventional weapons, culminating in the establishment of a mutually-verifiable zone free of ballistic missiles and of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons.  The zone should emanate from and encompass all the States in the region, through free and direct negotiations.

The Middle East had not become more peaceful or safer since the 2007 deliberations of the First Committee, he noted.  There was particular concern over Iran’s nuclear programme.  Iran’s claim that its nuclear programme was legitimate could no longer be put forward in a credible manner.  “This nuclear programme represents a clear threat to the stability and security of the region as a whole and presents an urgent challenge for global peace and stability,” he said.  That situation, along with anti-Semitic remarks and constant calls made by the Iranian President for the destruction of Israel, only exacerbated the situation in the region.  Furthermore, the vast majority of non-compliance cases with the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons had taken place in the Middle East.

There was also concern over the activities of the Hizbullah terror organization in the region, he said, adding that Hizbullah was supported first and foremost by Iran.  The transfer of arms from Iran and Syria had continued unabated.  The international community should address arms transfers to terrorists as a matter of high priority.

He said Israel attached great importance to the prevention of non-conventional arms proliferation, as well as to the unauthorized transfers of conventional weapons and dual-use items.  It had taken extensive steps to fully achieve all of the non-proliferation regimes.  It was important to prevent terrorists from acquiring the world’s most deadly weapons and their systems of delivery, and he welcomed the adoption of Security Council resolution 1540 (2004) and the extension of the 1540 Committee mandated most recently by the terms of Council resolution 1810 (2008).

There was also a need to strengthen the safety and security of nuclear materials and to prevent illicit trafficking, he warned.  There had been significant developments to the creation of a norm on the use of cluster munitions, and he was convinced that an agreed protocol could be achieved by the end of the year.  He further highlighted positive developments in the area of small arms and light weapons, but regretted the inability to have reached a consensus on a final document at the Biennial Meeting of States on the last day because of Iran.

MUDITHA HALLIYADDE ( Sri Lanka) said a progressively less weaponized security regime would be more cost-effective and a more civilized path to sustainable peace and security within and between States.  “As a country facing the brunt of the scourge of terrorism, we know only too well how costly it is to spend scarce resources on armaments to ensure security.”  She was disappointed at the standstill in the Conference on Disarmament, and she urged political will and meaningful work to move forward on, for instance, negotiations for a fissile material cut-off treaty.

With the current backdrop of rising global tensions reminiscent of the cold war arms race, she said it was high time for non-nuclear-weapon States and nuclear Powers to recognize that only strong commitments would advance disarmament and non-proliferation.  The appearance of more and new weapons in violation of agreements progressively eroded and undermined the NPT, she said, pointing to those Statesmen well versed with security policies and doctrines that were voicing concern about the nuclear-weapon States’ continued insistence on the utility of nuclear weapons, without due regard to their treaty commitments.

Another looming threat came from terrorists and other non-State actors seeking to acquire illegal military capabilities, including weapons of mass destruction and cyberattack materials, she said.  Sri Lanka supported the elimination of illicit small arms and light weapons, and, as a country facing transnational terrorist threats, it had recognized, through its experience, that surveillance mechanisms were required to implement Security Council resolution 1373 (2001) to combat the illicit arms trade. 

Sri Lanka was working on a resolution on preventing an arms race in outer space, she noted, adding that her country also supported regional approaches to peace and nuclear-weapon-free zones.  She called on the nuclear-weapon and non-nuclear-weapon States to embark on a credible and multilateral nuclear disarmament programme.  The current $1.3 trillion in global military expenditure was a phenomenal amount compared to the relatively humble resource requirements to achieve the agreed upon Millennium Development Goals.

ENKHSAIKHAN JARGALSAIKHAN (Mongolia), supporting the statement made on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement of countries, said there were growing concerns about the difficulties facing disarmament and international security.  He commended the efforts of the last six presidents of the Conference of Disarmament to break the procedural deadlock, but he agreed with earlier speakers that the lack of political will was the main cause of the stalemate.  He supported the suggestion to review the Conference of Disarmament’s procedural mechanisms in 2009.

He said that the nuclear issues related to Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea remained a concern of the international community.  Mongolia continued to place high importance on the early entry into force of the Test-Ban Treaty, and noted that the differences in the Non-Proliferation Treaty needed to be overcome, through greater effort by State parties.  He meanwhile commended the work of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), aimed at ensuring that nuclear technologies were used solely for peaceful purposes.  The Agency’s role would increase since many countries were turning to nuclear power as an important source of energy and as an engine for development and social progress.  There were 439 nuclear power reactors in operation and an additional 36 were under construction.  Additionally, almost 50 countries, including Mongolia, had expressed interest in the possible introduction of nuclear power.  He called on all States to conclude Additional Protocols with the Agency as soon as possible.

Nuclear-weapon-free zones were important in nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, he said, suggesting that the changing political environment needed a fresh study to evaluate the role that those zones had played and could play in promoting the nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear disarmament and conflict-prevention agendas.  On a final note, he said that the progress made at the Third Biennial Meeting of States on small arms had been welcome.

ANUAR TANALINOV ( Kazakhstan) said that, despite continuing conflicts and threats, the international community had failed to resolve disarmament and non-proliferation issues, owing to a lack of consensus.  Even though the Non-Proliferation Treaty should serve as the cornerstone of the non-proliferation regime and the basis for disarmament, the current challenge remained ensuring its effectiveness.  The President of Kazakhstan had proposed to adapt that important component of the international security system to new realities.  In fact, new, effective leverage measures for nuclear-weapon States beyond the current framework should be developed to prevent any withdrawal from the Treaty.  He called on States parties to consolidate efforts for a successful 2010 review.

He cited as evidence of Kazakhstan’s desire to strengthen global collaboration its renunciation of nuclear weapons and of the fourth largest nuclear arsenal in the world, as well as adherence to international commitments.  Kazakhstan had joined almost all international instruments and was an active member of the Organization of the CTBT.  The country had supported the initiative to hold a field exercise in September at the former nuclear testing ground in Semipalatinsk, the same symbolic city where the Central Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty had been signed.  The Kazakhstan parliament was now completing ratification of that Treaty.  He hoped the nuclear Powers would soon sign the Treaty’s Protocol, which provided security assurances to countries in the region. 

Kazakhstan also recognized the right of any nation to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes under strict international control, especially the IAEA, and intended to pursue that path, as the country had one of the largest natural uranium resources in the world, he said.  Amid the crisis of the non-proliferation regime, the real danger was nuclear weapons falling to terrorists’ hands, he said, noting that his country was a participant in the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism.

On other arms issues, he said the illicit trafficking of smalls arms and light weapons impacted negatively on security, human rights and socio-economic situations, particularly in crises and post-conflict areas, making no country in the world immune to the disruptions in the mechanism of control over conventional weapons arsenals.  He pointed out that, in many cases, reportedly thousands and even millions of weapons had disappeared and fallen into unknown hands.  He supported the United Nations Secretary-General’s latest report on small arms and believed the United Nations should play a leading role in countering that threat. 

Turning to outer space, he emphasized the need for peaceful research and use of outer space for the benefit of all countries, noting that the Baikonur space port in Kazakhstan was among the world’s largest and that his country actively participated in international space cooperation.  “We are convinced that security in outer space must remain a central issue on the agenda of the international community”, he said, reiterating that “outer space should be a peaceful area of cooperation for all mankind.”

DESALEGN ALEMU (Ethiopia), associating himself with the statements made on behalf of the African Group and the Non-Aligned Movement, said that multilateralism was the most reliable means of effectively dealing with important global issues such as disarmament.  The proliferation of conventional and non-conventional weapons was a big problem, particularly in Africa.  Due to Africa’s many development challenges, it could not afford to be thwarted by the wanton production, distribution, transfer, use, and trafficking of destructive weapons.

He said that the assortment of weapons, with their harmful effects, which continued to inundate the subregion and beyond, not only affected the security of each State, but also fuelled old and fresh conflicts, as well as organized crime.  That also affected economic development endeavours in the region.  Ethiopia attached special importance to that topic and was doing its best to live up to its treaty-based obligations in combating illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons.  The United Nations Regional Centre on Small Arms and Light Weapons had enabled its Member States to take some appropriate practical actions in preventing, combating, and eradicating that illicit weapons traffic.  Landmines also continued to ravage the region.

JEANETTE KWEK ( Singapore) said the complex challenges in the world’s quest for peace and security had developed out of the emerging global fight against terrorism, even with ongoing multilateral efforts in areas such as Afghanistan and Iraq.  Terrorists easily reached beyond borders, and technological advances had facilitated the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, compounded by the free flow of information, materials and personnel.  It was imperative that the international community strengthen efforts to address disarmament and non-proliferation issues, bolstering traditional initiatives and approaches with measures that adhered to international law and that could assist States in practical, effective ways.  As a global transhipment hub, Singapore had taken decisive measures to strengthen its exports control regime to disrupt the illicit transfer of weapons of mass destruction-related materials.  It had also participated in both the Container Security Initiative and the Proliferation Security Initiative.

She said her country remained deeply concerned about the existence of nuclear weapons and she urged members of the international community to work towards their elimination, using cooperation in disarmament and non-proliferation, multilateral approaches based on rule of law, and the concrete implementation of commitments.  “The United Nations must remain ever vigilant and continue playing a lead role to find resolutions for the security issues on the agenda and in finding pragmatic and practical ways for us to cooperate with one another,” she said.

JACQUELINE MOSETI (Kenya), supporting the statements made on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement and the African Group, said the three main provisions of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, namely disarmament, non-proliferation and the peaceful uses of nuclear energy by all States, were the cornerstones of the non-proliferation regime.  They should be given equal and balanced treatment, on the basis of non-selectivity.

She said that security could not be guaranteed by individual States in isolation; that required the collective efforts of Member States.  The Conference on Disarmament occupied an important role in the disarmament agenda.  Concerned about the lack of progress, she hoped that the efforts of its last six presidents would soon bear fruit and that would give impetus to substantive negotiations on a programme of work based on the principle of balance and non-selectivity.  She joined the call for a fourth special session of the United Nations General Assembly devoted to disarmament.

Conventional weapons continued to have a devastating effect on Africa -- fuelling civil wars and other conflicts, she said, reiterating Kenya’s support for the United Nations 2001 Programme of Action.  She also supported a legally binding arms trade treaty, which would ensure a responsible small arms trade.

HAMID ALI RAO ( India) said global contemporary challenges were best addressed through collective efforts, with a spirit of multilateralism.  India attached the highest priority to the goal of nuclear disarmament and was committed to universal, non-discriminatory nuclear disarmament leading to the total elimination of nuclear weapons.  India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had reiterated the country’s proposal for a nuclear weapons convention that prohibited the development, production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons and provided for their complete elimination within a specified timeframe.  While the end of the cold war had created new space for action on global disarmament, the goal of nuclear disarmament had remained distant.  He called on the First Committee to reinforce the message, now being echoed by prominent statesmen and experts in the field, in favour of generating new momentum to achieve the goal of a world free of nuclear weapons.  “No effort must be spared in building a consensus to this end.”

He said his country had put forward at the General Assembly and the Conference on Disarmament practical measures to reach a consensus, including the unequivocal commitment of all nuclear-weapon States to the goal of the complete elimination of nuclear weapons and the negotiation of a universal and legally binding agreement on the non-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States.  Disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation were mutually reinforcing processes requiring concerted and cooperative international efforts, which India supported on the road to realizing global non-proliferation goals.

International cooperation should expand in the area of peaceful uses of nuclear energy by increasing the share of nuclear energy as a non-polluting energy source in a manner that was safe, secure and consistent with non-proliferation objectives.  Such an effort would have a positive impact on global energy, security and climate change.  India also supported negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament on a fissile material cut-off treaty, which was universal, non-discriminatory and verifiable.  It also supported negotiations, leading to an agreement, on effective international assurances for non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.  India had espoused a policy of “no first use” and “non-use” of those weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States and was prepared to convert those undertakings into multilateral legal arrangements.

Regarding outer space, he expressed his support for international efforts to strengthen the legal framework to ensure the safety and security of space assets and to prevent the placement of weapons in space.  Noting the absence of a legal regime governing the possession and use of missiles, he said any initiative to address those concerns should be through an inclusive process based on the principle of equal and legitimate security.

India had contributed to United Nations efforts to strengthen the regulation of small arms and light weapons and remained strongly committed to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons).  Its “process” offered the only universal forum that brought together the main producers and users of major conventional weapons, ensuring that the instruments that emerged had a greater prospect of making a meaningful impact on the ground.  In the current First Committee session, India would seek the Committee’s support for resolutions on a convention on the prohibition of use of nuclear weapons, reducing nuclear danger, and measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring mass destruction weapons.

PAUL BADJI (Senegal), associating himself with the statements of the African Union and the Non-Aligned Movement, said the non-proliferation regime had been encountering a number of obstacles that had been impeding progress.  The Committee needed to work together to overcome the impasse.  The constraints in the non-proliferation regime, however, should not prevent progress on other treaties concerning nuclear weapons, weapons in outer space or fissile material.  Mistrust and suspicion must be eliminated, the authority of the Non-Proliferation Treaty should be strengthened, and the CTBT should enter force.

He urged nuclear-weapon States to provide security guarantees to non-nuclear weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.  The nuclear Powers should also respect nuclear-weapon-free zones and the right of States to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.  The Register of Conventional Arms should be both maintained and reinforced.  The Committee should work to ensure appropriate management of biological and chemical weapons, as well as of missiles.  He was pleased with the adoption of the Convention on Cluster Munitions and appealed to all States to make the signing of the Convention a success in Oslo in December.

The Third Biennial Meeting of States on small arms and light weapons had been encouraging, he said, urging Member States to exhibit a true will to implement its recommendations.  The suffering from small arms and light weapons had increased, and he had hoped for consensus among the group of governmental experts on an arms trade treaty.  He also supported the marking and tracing instrument.  A world without anti-personnel mines should be a priority, and he called on all States to accede to the Mine-Ban Convention.

ANNE LUZONGO MTAMBOH ( Zambia) said that in order to renew progress towards a world free of nuclear weapons, the nuclear-weapon States must muster the political will and flexibility to ensure full compliance with the provisions of the NPT.  The remaining “Annex II” States must ratify the CTBT.  In addition, he called for full implementation of international tracing instruments to curb the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons.  In its cooperation with international efforts to reduce the proliferation of conventional weapons, her country would submit, in due course, its financial and technical assistance requirements.  She also welcomed efforts at concluding an international arms trade treaty.

She said her country, on Africa’s behalf, had coordinated the discussions on the Convention on Cluster Munitions.  She expected all African and other States to sign the treaty in Oslo.  Outlining progress in demining her country, she called upon the international community to support those efforts, as well as mine risk education, to enable people to use the cleared areas for economic activity.  In conclusion, she called for increased political will and flexibility, so that much needed progress in disarmament and non-proliferation could be made. 

LESLIE M. GUMBI (South Africa), stressing that the possession of nuclear weapons did not enhance international peace and security, said that their continued possession or retention by some States perpetuated the danger that they would be used or that they would fall into the hands of non-State actors.  While the primary responsibility for eliminating nuclear weapons lay with nuclear-weapon States, all States had an obligation to work towards that goal.  The Non-Proliferation Treaty remained the cornerstone of nuclear disarmament and proliferation and should be universally adhered to.  States parties could not selectively apply its outcome in particular circumstances or only when it suited them.  Any presumption of the indefinite possession of nuclear weapons by nuclear-weapon States remained incompatible with the Treaty.

Turning to security assurances, he said they would enhance strategic stability, facilitate the elimination of nuclear weapons and contribute to international confidence and security.  Such assurances rightfully belonged to those countries that had foresworn the nuclear option, and not to those who preferred to keep their options open.  That was a key element of the NPT.  South Africa, therefore, would pursue negative security assurances within that framework.  He also underscored the importance of the Test-Ban Treaty.  Nuclear-weapon States should share information about their arsenals and disarmament objectives, and more could be done with improved and regularized reporting.

Welcoming the final outcome of the latest review of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention), he called on possessor States parties to fulfil their obligations.  He also noted that the United Nations small arms process was now widely considered to be back on track.  The Meeting of States Parties to the Mine-Ban Convention should be used to restate commitments to assist survivors.  It should be possible for the Conference on Disarmament members to work with, and not against, each other.  If States showed the necessary political will, negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty could become a reality.  South Africa attached importance to the role of the United Nations Disarmament Commission, despite its failure to reach substantive conclusions at the end of its three cycles of meetings earlier this year.

Noting that the peaceful application of nuclear energy was of particular importance to developing countries, he expressed appreciation for the support shown by IAEA for the Millennium Development Goals and its work with the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD).  Still, the rising demand for nuclear power came with challenges and responsibilities that required the international community to be more vigilant in ensuring its use was for peaceful purposes only.  The Agency should therefore be provided the means, not only to carry out its verification mandate, but also to enhance its technical cooperation activities and assistance in a non-discriminatory, efficient and professional manner.  Expressing support for the work of the Agency’s current Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, he noted that South Africa had decided to nominate Ambassador Samad Minty as Mr. ElBaradei’s successor.

In closing, he stressed that the systematic and progressive elimination of all nuclear weapons remained the only assurance against their use.  “This would effectively curb proliferation because it is not possible to proliferate what you do not have.”

LUC JOSEPH OKIO (Republic of the Congo) said the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their carriers, along with the illicit trafficking in conventional weapons, was a concern.  They caused great harm.  There was also great anxiety over the disarmament agenda.  The world was moving away from the progress made in the 1990s and at the 1995 NPT Review Conference.  He appealed to the nuclear-weapon States to implement the Treaty’s article VI, expressing hope that the upcoming Review Conference would help in that regard.

He said the Third Biennial Meeting of States on small arms and light weapons had achieved historic consensus, which now made it possible to look towards the future.  Small arms and light weapons were truly weapons of mass destruction to Africa.  He welcomed the adoption of the Dublin Convention on Cluster Munitions, and at the same time advised all States to sign unto the Mine-Ban Convention. His country was working towards all demining efforts, and he called upon the international community to help Africa achieve the objectives of the relevant conventions.

He said he was pleased with the work of the United Nations in conflict resolution and called for international support in solving the problems in Central Africa.  However, help was needed to successfully implement confidence-building measures.  Some States were gradually emerging from conflict, and in that connection, he supported the work of the Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa.

Rights of Reply

The representative of Iran, speaking in exercise of the right of reply to a statement made by Israel’s representative, said the Committee had heard a number of “absurd and baseless allegations” against Iran that were based on violence, aggression, occupation, State terrorism and bloodshed.  No amount of slander, deception or smear campaign could cloud its dark history, which demonstrated that it posed the greatest threat to regional peace and security in the Middle East.  He wanted to place on record that Iran was committed to its obligations under the NPT and he would not dignify the rest of the representative’s remarks other than to reject them.

The representative of Syria, also speaking in exercise of the right of reply to the statement made by Israel’s representative, said the speaker had introduced matters not relevant to disarmament and weapons of mass destruction in order to distract attention from Israel’s nuclear weapons and the fact that it had not joined the NPT.  Despite that, a careful observer could not miss the fact that the allegations were meant to cover up continued violations concerning Lebanon and Security Council resolution 1701 (2006), which were cited in reports of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).  The Secretary-General’s sixth report on the implementation of resolution 1701 (2006) stated that the joint force on the border of Lebanon had found no cases of weapons smuggling.  Those claims could not be taken seriously because Israel was hostile to Syria and occupied Syrian territory.  Israel’s aggression towards Lebanon in 2006 had been the grounds for resolution 1701.  Israel had called it the “diplomacy of weapons”.  The role of Israeli weapons had become clear recently in the Caucasus crisis, which was not in line with the statement Israel’s representative made this morning.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record