Sixty-third General Assembly

First Committee

19^th Meeting (PM)

SEEKING TO REDUCE NUCLEAR DANGER, GENERAL ASSEMBLY WOULD CALL FOR URGENT STEPS

TO REDUCE RISK OF ACCIDENTAL USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS, BY FIRST COMMITTEE TEXT

Committee Approves 13 Texts, Including Two on Missiles, Another on Decreasing

Operational Readiness of Nuclear Weapons Systems, Middle East Proliferation Risk

Harnessing the apocalyptic threats posed by nuclear weapons, the General Assembly would call on Member States to prevent the proliferation of those weapons and to promote disarmament with an objective of eliminating nuclear weapons, according to 1 of the 13 draft texts approved today by the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security).

That draft resolution, entitled “reducing nuclear danger”, would have the Assembly call for a review of nuclear doctrines and immediate and urgent steps to reduce the risk of unintentional and accidental use of nuclear weapons, including through their de-alerting and de-targeting.  The Committee approved that text by a vote of 108 in favour to 50 against, with 13 abstentions.  (For details of the vote, see Annex V.)

Concerned that, notwithstanding the end of the cold war, several thousand nuclear weapons remained on high alert, ready to be launched within minutes, the Assembly would call for further practical steps to decrease the operational readiness of nuclear weapons systems, with a view to ensure that all nuclear weapons were removed from high alert status. 

The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 134 in favour to 3 against ( France, United Kingdom, United States), with 32 abstentions.  (See Annex III.)

Reigning in delivery systems was featured in a draft text entitled “Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation”.  By that draft text, the Assembly would invite all States that had not yet subscribed to the Code to do so and would also encourage the exploration of further ways and means to deal effectively with the problem of the proliferation of ballistic missiles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction.

That draft resolution was approved by a recorded vote of 145 in favour to 1 against ( Iran), with 20 abstentions.  (See Annex VIII.)  Speaking after the vote, the representative of Iran explained that he was forced to vote against that draft resolution because he had not noticed any substantive changes to previous drafts.

Another text on missiles, sponsored by Egypt, Indonesia and Iran, was approved by a vote of 112 in favour to 9 against (Denmark, France, Israel, Lithuania, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Netherlands, United Kingdom, United States), with 50 abstentions.  (See Annex VII.)

Cognizant that the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the Middle East would pose a serious threat to international peace and security, the Assembly would reaffirm the importance of Israel’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation and placement of all its nuclear facilities under comprehensive International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, in realizing the goal of universal adherence to the Treaty in the Middle East. 

The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 159 in favour to 5 against (Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, United States), with 7 abstentions (Australia, Canada, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, India, Niger, Nigeria).  (See Annex II.)

Acting without a vote, the Committee approved a draft resolution on establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East.  By that draft resolution’s terms, the General Assembly would urge all parties directly concerned to consider seriously taking the practical and urgent steps required for the implementation of a proposal to establish such a zone, and call upon all countries of the region that had not done so, pending the establishment of the zone, to agree to place all their nuclear activities under IAEA safeguards.

Also without a vote, the Committee approved a draft resolution on Mongolia’s international security and nuclear-weapon-free status.

The Committee also approved the draft decision on a United Nations conference to identify appropriate ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of nuclear disarmament by a vote of 121 in favour to 3 against (France, United Kingdom, United States), with 45 abstentions.  (See Annex XI.)

The following additional resolutions were approved by recorded votes:  convention prohibiting the 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; nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas; Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty; and on renewed determination towards the total elimination of nuclear weapons.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 29 October, to continue to take action on all disarmament and security-related draft resolutions.

Background

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this afternoon to take action on all draft texts submitted under disarmament and international security agenda items.

General Statements on Cluster 1

The representative of Mongolia introduced a draft resolution on Mongolia ’s international security and nuclear-weapon-free-status (document A/C.1/63/L.28).  He said Mongolia had continued to work to institutionalize his country’s status, with a view to concluding a trilateral treaty with Russia and China.  He thanked the Russian and Chinese delegations for the open and sincere discussions.

The draft text would, among other things, have the General Assembly endorse and support Mongolia’s good-neighbourly and balanced relationship with its neighbours, as an important element of strengthening regional peace, security and stability and encourage other Member States to support Mongolia’s independence.

The representative of France, speaking behalf of the European Union, said that agreement on the draft resolution on Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation (document A/C.1/63/L.38) had led the Union to introduce a text, which garnered more than 100 co-sponsors.  The Code reflected the results of broad consultations, with the essential goal of increasing transparency on missile launches and outer space vehicles.

Commenting on a draft resolution on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (document A/C.1/63/L.55), she said the Treaty was an essential instrument for non-proliferation and disarmament.  The Union called on more States, particularly in Annex II, to sign and ratify the treaty.

The representative of Mexico said she was proud to have presented “L.55”, adding that the main message was to urge all States to sign and ratify the Treaty.  The draft text also reaffirmed the need to continue efforts towards creating a verification regime.

The representative of Cuba said his country would co-sponsor and support several draft resolutions, namely the Conclusion of effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/63/L.7), Nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/63/L.14), the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons (document A/C.1/63/L.15), Reducing nuclear danger (document A/C.1/63/L.16), and Follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat of Use of Nuclear Weapons (document A/C.1/63/L.19).

He said “L.14” was one of the texts presented in the Committee that most clearly addressed disarmament concerns, and he was pleased that numerous proposals from the Cuban delegation had been incorporated in that text.

The representative of Iran said he would introduce the draft resolution on Missiles (document A/C.1/63/L.27), adding that the third panel of governmental experts had had serious discussions on the complex issues of missiles and finally had adopted a consensual report.  There was no other forum where diverse States could discuss those important issues than the panel, he said.

The representative of Syria, commenting on the draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/63/L.2), said Israel possessed those weapons outside the non-proliferation regime.  In the case of the Middle East, Israel persisted in an aggressive way in pursuing its arsenal.  Syria had put forward a Security Council resolution to free the region of nuclear weapons in a way that enhanced multilateral conventions.  He called on the international community to put pressure on Israel to adhere to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and to achieve peace in the area.

Actions on Draft Resolutions, Decisions

Explaining his position before the vote on draft resolution “L.38”, on the Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation, the representative of Cuba said he would abstain.  His country raised an objection to the less than transparent process in preparing the Code, which had been prepared outside of the United Nations process.  That should have been done in an inclusive and transparent manner, without discrimination.  Moreover, the Code of Conduct had significant defects and limitations. 

He said that the resolution did not address the peaceful use of missile technology.  It also failed to address the matter of vertical technology.  The Code failed to address the most serious problem, namely, the presence and constant development of nuclear weapons.  It referred only to ballistic missiles.  Nor did it address matters tied to assistance and cooperation.  The main sponsors of “L.38” had indicated clearly that they were not willing to consider amendments or modifications to the text.  He was convinced that legally-binding instruments negotiated in multilateral forums were the best mechanisms and the only ones suited to addressing matters such as the one covered in “L.38”.

The representative of Indonesia said his delegation remained convinced of the need for a multilateral approach to missiles.  Draft resolution “L.38” remained unchanged for three years and it did not mention the central role of the United Nations.  As a result, his delegation would abstain from the vote.

In voting against draft resolution “L.2”, on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, the representative of Israel said there was no doubt that that risk existed.  She drew attention to Iran’s ongoing clandestine activities, saying that the resolution focused entirely on Israel without looking at Iran’s activities.  Adopting such a text would not curb proliferation in the Middle East, and she called on Member States to vote against it.

Speaking on behalf of the European Union, the representative of France said that the Union intended to vote in favour of draft resolution “L.2”.  The Union was fully committed to the implementation of resolutions on the Middle East adopted by the Security Council and the 1995 NPT Review Conference.  It was in favour of creating a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.  She called on those States outside NPT to accede to it.

She said that, since the last General Assembly session, the European Union had tried hard to continue its work and rapprochement around the objective of a Middle East nuclear-weapon-free zone.  Guidelines for the establishment of such zones had existed since 1999, and they should be the subject of consultations between all parties.  The objective to create a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East could not be reached, however, unless all States in the region were convinced that their security would not be diminished, but enhanced by becoming part of such a mechanism.  That supposed a dialogue between the parties, peace negotiations and the installation of trust.

The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, referring to “L.58”, said he rejected the last preambular paragraph “recognizing the importance of implementing Security Council resolution 1718 (2006)…”.  The Security Council, rather than making an issue of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s nuclear test, should have called into account the country that caused the test, he said.  The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had the right to defend itself, and therefore, his country would vote against that draft resolution as a whole.

The representative of Iran, speaking about “L.1” and “L.2”, said that, since Iran’s initiative in 1974, the Security Council had repeatedly supported the establishment of the nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.  As reflected in many assessments, the whole region except the “Zionist regime” had become party to the NPT; that regime had remained an obstacle to such a zone.  Moreover, an inconsistent approach by certain European countries had sent mixed messages to the regime.  Iran was committed to the goal of a nuclear-weapon-free Middle East.

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East (document A/C.1/63/L.1).

By its terms, the General Assembly would urge all parties that were directly concerned to consider seriously taking the practical and urgent steps required for the implementation of a proposal to establish such a zone.

The Assembly would call upon all countries of the region that had not done so, pending the establishment of the zone, to agree to place all their nuclear activities under IAEA safeguards.  Furthermore, it would invite those countries not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or permit the stationing of such weapons or nuclear explosive devices on their territories, or territories under their control.

The draft resolution was approved without a vote.

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/63/L.2).

That draft text would have the Assembly reaffirm the importance of Israel’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and placement of all its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards.  It would call upon Israel to accede to the Treaty without further delay and not develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons, and to renounce possession of nuclear weapons, and place all its unsafeguarded nuclear facilities under full-scope IAEA safeguards.

A separate recorded vote was requested on the sixth preambular paragraph, which reads, “Recalling the decision on principles and objectives for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament adopted by the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons on 11 May 1995, in which the Conference urged universal adherence to the Treaty as an urgent priority and called upon all States not yet parties to the Treaty to accede to it at the earliest date, particularly those States that operate unsafeguarded nuclear facilities.”

The Committee voted to retain the paragraph by 157 in favour to 4 against (India, Israel, Pakistan, United States), with 5 abstentions (Bhutan, Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ethiopia, Mauritius).  (For details of the vote, please see Annex I).

In a vote on the resolution as a whole, the draft resolution was approved by 159 in favour to 5 against (Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, United States), with 7 abstentions (Australia, Canada, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, India, Niger, Nigeria) (Annex II).

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on decreasing the operational readiness of nuclear weapons systems (document A/C.1/63/L.5), which would have the Assembly call for further practical steps to be taken to decrease the operational readiness of nuclear weapons systems and urge States to update the General Assembly on progress made in the implementation of the present draft resolution.

The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 134 in favour to 3 against ( France, United Kingdom, United States), with 32 abstentions (Annex III).

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons (document A/C.1/63/L.15).  It would have the Assembly, convinced that the use of nuclear weapons poses the most serious threat to the survival of mankind, reiterate its request to the Conference on Disarmament to commence negotiations in order to reach agreement on an international convention prohibiting the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons under any circumstances.

The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 110 in favour to 50 against, with 11 abstentions (Annex IV).

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on Reducing nuclear danger (document A/C.1/63/L.16).  By its terms, the Assembly, emphasizing the need to adopt measures to avoid accidental, unauthorized or unexplained incidents arising from computer anomaly or other technical malfunctions, 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, including through de-alerting and de-targeting of nuclear weapons.

By the draft, the Assembly would also call upon 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 draft resolution was approved by a vote of 108 in favour to 50 against, with 13 abstentions (Annex V).

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on the Follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat of Use of Nuclear Weapons (document A/C.1/63/L.19).

By the draft text, the Assembly would underline the unanimous conclusion of the International Court of Justice that there exists an obligation to pursue in good faith, and bring to a conclusion, negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.  It would call upon all States 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 and threat of use of nuclear weapons and providing for their elimination.

It would further request all States to inform the Secretary-General of the efforts and measures they had taken on the implementation of the present resolution and nuclear disarmament, and request the Secretary-General to appraise the General Assembly of that information at its sixty-fourth session.

The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 118 in favour to 30 against, with 22 abstentions (Annex VI).

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on Missiles (document A/C.1/63/L.27), which would have the Assembly, convinced of the need for a comprehensive approach towards missiles, in a balanced and non-discriminatory manner, as a contribution to international peace and security, and underlining the complexities involved in considering the issue of missiles in the conventional context, welcome the report of the Secretary-General on the issue of missiles in all its aspects and request the Secretary-General to seek the views of Member States on the report, and to submit it to the General Assembly at its sixty-fifth session.

The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 112 in favour to 9 against (Denmark, France, Israel, Lithuania, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Netherlands, United Kingdom, United States), with 50 abstentions (Annex VII).

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on Mongolia ’s international security and nuclear-weapon-free-status (document A/C.1/63/L.28).  By its terms, the Assembly would invite Member States to cooperate with Mongolia in taking the necessary measures to consolidate and strengthen that country’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, the inviolability of its borders, its independent foreign policy, its economic security and its ecological balance, as well as its nuclear-weapon-free status.  It would appeal to the Member States of the Asia and Pacific region to support Mongolia’s efforts to join the relevant security and economic arrangements.

The draft resolution was approved without a vote.

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on the Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation (document A/C.1/63/L.38).  That draft text would have the Assembly, concerned about increasing regional and global security challenges caused by ongoing proliferation of ballistic missiles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction, note that 130 States had already subscribed to the Code as a practical step against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

The Assembly would, by the draft text, invite all States that had not yet subscribed to the Code of Conduct to do so.  It would also encourage the exploration of further ways and means to deal effectively with the problem of the proliferation of ballistic missiles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction.

The draft resolution was approved by a recorded vote of 145 in favour to 1 against ( Iran), with 20 abstentions (Annex VIII).

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on a Nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas (document A/C.1/63/L.40), which would have the Assembly, determined to pursue the total elimination of nuclear weapons and stressing the importance of the existing treaties establishing nuclear-weapon-free zones and the Antarctic Treaty, call upon all concerned States to continue to work together to facilitate adherence to the protocols of nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties by all relevant States that have not adhered to them.

Also by the text, 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 would call upon 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.

It would also have the Assembly 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, and, with particular reference to the responsibilities of the nuclear-weapon States, would call upon all States to support the process of nuclear disarmament and to work for the total elimination of all nuclear weapons.

A recorded vote was requested on operative paragraph 6 of the draft text, which would 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 Committee voted to retain the paragraph by 157 in favour to 2 against (India, Pakistan), with 8 abstentions (Bhutan, France, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nepal, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, United States) (Annex IX).

The draft resolution as a whole was then approved by a vote of 161 in favour to 3 against (France, United Kingdom, United States), with 8 abstentions (Bhutan, India, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Pakistan, Palau, Russian Federation) (Annex X).

The Committee then took up a draft decision on the United Nations conference to identify appropriate ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/63/L.54) by which the General Assembly would decide to include in the provisional agenda of its sixty-fourth session the item entitled “United Nations conference to identify appropriate ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of nuclear disarmament.”

The draft decision was approved by a vote of 121 in favour to 3 against ( France, United Kingdom, United States), with 45 abstentions (Annex XI).

The Committee then took up a draft resolution on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (document A/C.1/63/L.55), which would have the Assembly, stressing that after more than 10 years the Treaty’s entry into force was more urgent than ever before, also stress the vital importance and urgency of signature and ratification, without delay and without conditions, to achieve the Treaty’s earliest entry into force.

The Assembly would urged all States that had not signed the Treaty to sign and ratify it as soon as possible and those that had signed but not ratified it, particularly those whose ratification was needed for its entry into force, to accelerate their ratification processes.  It would urge all States to remain seized of the issue at the highest political level and, where possible, to promote adherence to the Treaty through bilateral and joint outreach.

It would urge all States not to carry out nuclear-weapon test explosions or any other nuclear explosions, to maintain their moratoriums in that regard and to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of the Treaty, while stressing that those measures did not have the same permanent and legally binding effect as the Treaty’s entry into force.

The Assembly would call for the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean peninsula in a peaceful manner through the successful implementation of the Joint Statement of 19 September 2005, and the initial and second phase actions to implement it, agreed in the framework of the six-party talks, among other things.

The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 168 in favour to 1 against ( United States), with 3 abstentions ( India, Mauritius, Syria) (Annex XII).

The Committee then took up a draft resolution entitled Renewed determination towards the total elimination of nuclear weapons (A/C.1/63/L.58), which would have the Assembly reaffirm the importance of all States parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) complying with their obligations under all its articles.  It would call upon States not parties to the Treaty to accede to it as non-nuclear-weapon States without delay and without conditions, and pending their accession, to refrain from acts that would defeat the Treaty’s object and purpose, as well as to take practical steps in support of the treaty.

The Assembly would encourage further steps leading to nuclear disarmament, including deeper reductions in all types of nuclear weapons, and emphasize the importance of applying irreversibility and verifiability, as well as increased transparency in a way that promoted international stability and undiminished security for all, in the process of working towards the elimination of nuclear weapons.

It would encourage the Russian Federation and the United States to implement fully the Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions and to undertake nuclear arms reductions beyond those provided for by the Treaty, including through the conclusion of a legally binding successor to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which was due to expire in 2009.

Among the other provisions of that wide-ranging draft, the Assembly would call for the nuclear-weapon States to further reduce the operational status of nuclear weapon systems in ways that promoted international stability and security.

The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 163 in favour to 4 against (Democratic Republic of Korea, India, Israel, United States), with 6 abstentions ( Bhutan, China, Cuba, Iran, Myanmar, Pakistan) (Annex XIII).

The representative of Egypt said he had abstained in the vote on draft resolution “L.38” because he believed the resolution was a product of export control regimes developed outside the United Nations.  He said the draft was discriminatory as it only focused on certain missiles, while it turned a blind eye to other more advanced technologies.  In order to be effective, a discussion on that topic must take place within the United Nations.

Referring to her vote on draft resolution “L.55”, the representative of Colombia said her country had a strong commitment to preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.  She noted Colombia’s recent ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and insisted on its early entry into force.  She called upon the Annex II States to ratify the instrument.

The representative of Singapore said his delegation abstained from the vote on draft resolution “L.27” on missiles.  He acknowledged the growing military significance of missiles in general and said that warranted increased international attention.   Singapore supported all initiatives against the indiscriminate use of missiles, especially when directed against civilians and when they were used as weapons of mass destruction.  However, he defended the legitimate security concerns of States and their right to use missiles for self-defence.   Singapore was concerned about the increasing number of groups of governmental experts being convened to discuss disarmament and non-proliferation issues.  He believed that those issues should be discussed by all Member States in an inclusive, open and transparent manner.

In discussing his vote to abstain on draft resolution “L.5”, the representative of China said his country had always stood for complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons.  In implementing any nuclear disarmament measures, the principles of the 2000 NPT Review Conference document should be followed.  He highlighted the fact that China was the only nuclear-weapon State to adopt the principle of not being the first to use or threaten to use its nuclear weapons or to use its nuclear capabilities in nuclear-weapon-free zones.  He called on the other nuclear-weapon States to abide by those principles.

The representative of Venezuela said she abstained from voting on draft resolution “L.38” because it limited its focus to certain missiles, and there was a lack of clarity within the work of the Code.

The representative of India said he abstained from voting on draft resolution “L.2” and voted against preambular paragraph 6.   India’s approach was to look at the resolution based on its merits, which resulted in the action he had taken in the voting on that resolution.

On draft resolution “L.28”, he welcomed its adoption without a vote.  Mongolia had taken many steps to achieve its status and he respected it.  On draft “L.38”, India was fully committed to the fight against ballistic missile proliferation in its region.  He highlighted the fact that he voted against operative paragraph 6 in draft resolution “L.40” and subsequently voted against the draft as a whole.  On draft resolution “L.55”, India remained committed to the goal of the complete elimination of nuclear weapons, but it could not accept the call to accede to NPT as a non-nuclear-weapon State.  Hopefully, that decision would not cast a shadow on India’s willingness to work with other States on the issue.

The representative of Iran said he had been forced to vote against “L.38” once again because he had not noticed any substantive changes from previous drafts.  His delegation shared the main objective of draft resolution “L.58”, but the current draft was not appropriately balanced because it only focused on one issue, the fissile material cut-off treaty.  As a result, he had abstained.

The representative of Malaysia had abstained from the voting on draft resolution “L.38” because it wasn’t comprehensive enough.  He had also felt that the United Nations should be the place to deal with the missiles issue.

In his abstention from voting on draft resolution “L.5”, the representative of the Russian Federation noted his country’s readiness to meet its obligations under Article VI of NPT.  He noted his support for draft resolution “L.38” and pointed out that the United Nations had a very important role to play.  He admitted that the Code was not perfect in its current status.

In the discussion of his vote on draft resolution “L.38”, the representative of Syria underscored his country’s full commitment to the United Nations Charter.  In order to eradicate weapons of mass destruction and nuclear weapons, there needed to be a clear approach to nuclear arms control.  His country abstained in the vote on “L.38” because the Code was selective and discriminatory and discussed only one type of ballistic missile and left out other types of missiles monopolized by certain countries.  The Code of Conduct ran contrary to the multilateral approach of the United Nations, and therefore harmed the non-proliferation system.

He also noted that Syria had abstained from voting on draft resolution “L.55” because such an important treaty as the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty should not ignore at all the legitimate concerns of non-nuclear States for guarantees against use or threat of use of those weapons.  Its text did not include an obligation on the part of nuclear States to dismantle their arsenals in a reasonable timeframe.  He voted for draft resolution “L.58”.

The representative of Pakistan said he had voted in favour of the draft resolution on decreasing the operational readiness of nuclear weapons systems, “L.5”, and he underlined that reciprocity must be considered.  He had abstained from voting on draft resolution “L.38” because the Hague Code of Conduct failed to strike a balance between non-proliferation and disarmament.  On draft resolution “L.55”, Pakistan supported the test-ban Treaty, and had, as in the past, voted in favour on the resolution.  Pakistan had observed a moratorium on nuclear testing and continued to believe that the goal of the call for the Treaty’s entry into force would be achieved when major opponents to the Treaty changed their tune.

He said he had abstained from voting to retain operative paragraph 6 in the draft text “L.40”.  That paragraph’s call for the creation of a nuclear-weapon-free zone [in South Asia] failed to acknowledge the realities on the ground.  The nuclear explosions on 11 and 13 May 1998 had disrupted the strategic balance, and with the occurrence of those incidents, the objective of creating such a zone was defeated, he said.  Pakistan did not agree to several provisions in draft resolution “L.58”, calling them “selective”, and he, therefore, had abstained from casting a vote.

The representative of Lithuania had abstained from voting on draft resolution “L.5”.  While he was pleased to see the action of some States to decrease the operational levels of their nuclear weapons, deterrence remained a main point in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

The representative of Cuba said he had voted in favour of “L.5”, a text that was going in the right direction.  Cuba would continue to support all initiatives that would pursue disarmament and he recognized that the reduction in operational status for nuclear weapons was an interim measure.  Cuba was sure that that resolution could continue to be strengthened in the future.

The representative of Israel explained that she had joined the consensus on draft resolution “L.1” on establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, notwithstanding reservations on certain provisions.  Israel had always maintained that those issues should be addressed in a regional context.  A nuclear-weapon-free zone could only be created through an impetus in the region.  Confidence-building measures followed by mutual recognition and good-neighbourliness were needed.  In the Middle East, unlike other regions, there were continued threats against Israel’s very existence.  The international community should not overlook that most compliance cases in NPT came from the region.

On “L.55”, she said that the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty was important to security and stability in the nuclear sphere.  Israel’s signature on the Treaty in 1996 reflected its view.  Additional obligations, aimed at promoting peace and security, included a comprehensive reform of export control.  Israel had also participated in the verification process.  Completion of the Treaty’s verification regime should be robust to detect non-compliance and be immune to abuse.  Adherence to the Treaty by States in the Middle East was also a concern.  Israel continued to vote in favour of the text.

The representative of Brazil said his country voted in favour of “L.15” because a nuclear weapons convention would be an important instrument.  Brazil’s position remained that negative security assurances could not replace multilaterally-agreed disarmament measures.  He also voted in favour of draft resolution “L.16” on reducing nuclear danger, supporting the position that the mere existence of nuclear weapons already constituted a grave risk to the whole world.  However, Brazil would have preferred that the resolution’s main thrust was the elimination of all nuclear weapons.  On draft resolution “L.38”, Brazil had not subscribed to the Hague Code of Conduct, but supported some provisions of the draft resolution and, therefore, had cast a vote in favour of the draft text.

Voting in favour of “L.58”, Brazil believed the thrust of the text was shared by the New Agenda Coalition, especially that all States party to NPT should comply with it completely, he said, adding, however, that much remained to be done.  While he welcomed concrete proposals, as long as States considered nuclear arsenals a necessary deterrent, the total elimination of those weapons would be impossible.

The representative of Switzerland voted in favour of draft resolution “L.2” on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, as the text promoted universalization of NPT.  Full cooperation with relevant international bodies was crucial, he added.

Regarding the Iranian nuclear issue, Switzerland supported Security Council resolutions, including resolution 1737 (2006) and resolution 1803 (2008), and called on Iran to comply with them as soon as possible.

Australia’s speaker abstained from voting on draft resolution “L.2”, explaining that Australia had long been a supporter of a nuclear-weapon-free zone, including in the Middle East, however, a resolution on the nuclear risk in the region, specifically a resolution that singled out Israel, had caused the delegation to abstain.

Japan’s speaker, explaining his vote on draft resolution “L.19” on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, said the use of nuclear weapons was contrary to humanitarian law; those weapons should never be used again.  Japan supported the advisory opinion, as well as step-by-step progress on disarmament.  Japan, therefore, abstained from voting on the draft resolution.

The representative of Canada said his country abstained on voting on draft resolution “L.5”.  Canada had encouraged efforts in that field, but those steps must be taken in a way that supported international stability.  Canada was pleased there was reference to steps taken by some States, but nuclear deterrence remained a fundamental component of NATO’s defence strategy to which Canada belonged.  Despite Canada’s abstention, he welcomed the debate generated on the issue.

Canada also requested the right to explain his vote on “L.2” at a later date.

The representative of France said she voted against draft resolution “L.27” because the proliferation of missiles not only constituted a major concern for her country but had a destabilizing effect on the region and the world.  In addition, that draft text did not mention the Hague Code of Conduct, which France and the European Union considered to be one of the best tools to deal with missile proliferation.

In support of draft resolution “L.58”, she said that, even though she was not completely satisfied with the text, it was a great improvement over drafts presented in previous years.  She believed the text was more balanced than last year’s draft.  She elaborated on steps France had taken to eliminate nuclear weapons.

In a point of order, the representative of the Sudan said he had intended to vote “yes” on “L.38”, but his vote had been recorded as an abstention.

ANNEX I

Vote on Nuclear Proliferation in Middle East, Preambular Paragraph 6

Preambular Paragraph 6 of the draft resolution on The Risk of Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/63/L.2) was approved by a recorded vote of 157 in favour to 4 against, with 5 abstentions, as follows:

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

Against:  India, Israel, Pakistan, United States.

Abstain:  Bhutan, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ethiopia, Mauritius.

Absent:  Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq, Kiribati, Lesotho, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Palau, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX II

Vote on Risk of Nuclear Proliferation in Middle East

The draft resolution as a whole on The Risk of the Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/63/L.2) was approved by a recorded vote of 159 in favour to 5 against, with 7 abstentions, as follows:

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

Against:  Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Palau, United States.

Abstain:  Australia, Canada, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, India, Niger, Nigeria.

Absent:  Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lesotho, Nauru, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX III

Vote on Operational Readiness of Nuclear Weapons

The draft resolution on Decreasing the Operational Readiness of Nuclear Weapons Systems (document A/C.1/63/L.5) was approved by a recorded vote of 134 in favour to 3 against, with 32 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Germany, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  France, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Albania, Andorra, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Montenegro, Netherlands, Poland, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine.

Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lesotho, Monaco, Nauru, Palau, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX IV

Vote on Nuclear Weapons Convention

The draft resolution on Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear  Weapons (document A/C.1/63/L.15) was approved by a recorded vote of 110 in favour to 50 against, with 11 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, 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, Fiji, Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

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, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Marshall Islands, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Serbia, Uzbekistan.

Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lesotho, Nauru, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX V

Vote on Reducing Nuclear Danger

The draft resolution on Reducing Nuclear Danger (document A/C.1/63/L.16*) was approved by a recorded vote of 108 in favour to 50 against, with 13 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, 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, Fiji, Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

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, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, China, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Marshall Islands, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Serbia, Uzbekistan.

Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lesotho, Nauru, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX VI

Vote on Advisory Opinion on Nuclear Weapons Use

The draft resolution on 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.1/63/L.19) was approved by a recorded vote of 118 in favour to 30 against, with 22 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, 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, Fiji, Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Andorra, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Finland, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Liechtenstein, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Montenegro, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Ukraine, Uzbekistan.

Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lesotho, Monaco, Nauru, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX VII

Vote on Missiles

The draft resolution on Missiles (document A/C.1/63/L.27) was approved by a recorded vote of 112 in favour to 9 against, with 50 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Bahamas, 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, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  Denmark, France, Israel, Lithuania, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Netherlands, United Kingdom, United States.

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

Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lesotho, Nauru, Palau, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX VIII

Vote on Hague Code of Conduct

The draft resolution on The Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation (document A/C.1/63/L.38) was approved by a recorded vote of 145 in favour to 1 against, with 20 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Zambia.

Against:  Iran.

Abstain:  Algeria, Bolivia, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mauritius, Mexico, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, Yemen.

Absent:  Bahrain, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Nauru, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX IX

Vote on Nuclear-Weapon-Free Southern Hemisphere, Operative Paragraph 6

The draft resolution on operative paragraph 6 of Nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas (document A/C.1/63/L.40) was approved by a recorded vote of 157 in favour to 2 against, with 8 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, 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, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mexico, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  India, Pakistan.

Abstain:  Bhutan, France, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nepal, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, United States.

Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Mauritius, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Nauru, Palau, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX X

Vote on Nuclear-Weapon-Free Southern Hemisphere

The draft resolution as a whole on Nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas (document A/C.1/63/L.40) was approved by a recorded vote of 161 in favour to 3 against, with 8 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, 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, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  France, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Bhutan, India, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Pakistan, Palau, Russian Federation.

Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lesotho, Monaco, Nauru, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX XI

Vote on Conference to Eliminate Nuclear Dangers

The draft decision on United Nations conference to identify appropriate ways of eliminating nuclear dangers in the context of nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/63/L.54) was approved by a recorded vote of 121 in favour to 3 against, with 45 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, 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, Fiji, Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  France, United Kingdom, United States.

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

Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lesotho, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Palau, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX XII

Vote on Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty

The draft resolution on Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (document A/C.1/63/L.55) was approved by a recorded vote of 168 in favour to 1 against, with 3 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, 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, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  United States.

Abstain:  India, Mauritius, Syria.

Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lesotho, Nauru, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

ANNEX XIII

Vote on Renewed Determination to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons

The draft resolution on Renewed determination towards the total elimination of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/63/L.58*) was approved by a recorded vote of 163 in favour to 4 against, with 6 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, India, Israel, United States.

Abstain:  Bhutan, China, Cuba, Iran, Myanmar, Pakistan.

Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lesotho, Nauru, Nicaragua, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record