Growing Complexity in Troubled Regions Shapes Debate in First Committee, as Calls Intensify to Rid Middle East of All Mass Destruction Weapons
As old disputes festered, new conflicts and tensions were emerging in several regions and subregions, from the Euro-Atlantic area to the Middle East and elsewhere, the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) heard today during the thematic debate on regional disarmament.
Threats to peace and security, said the representative of Pakistan, continued to arise mainly among States located in the same region or subregion. Because of the inseparable relationship between regional and international peace and security, the United Nations Charter itself recognized regional arrangements. Those centred on disarmament and arms control should accord priority in addressing the most destabilizing military capabilities and imbalances in both conventional and non-conventional fields. Confidence-building measures had proved their efficacy over the years. However, they should not become an end in themselves.
Many speakers stressed the importance of establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, including the representative of Algeria, who said that the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty, or Pelindaba Treaty, had contributed much to denuclearization, peace and security in Africa and the world. It should set an example for the Middle East. He regretted that such status had eluded that region years after the adoption of a resolution to create the zone.
The representative of Iraq added that the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones was essential to building confidence at the regional level. It was a “sine qua non” to strengthen nuclear disarmament and secure peace in the affected countries. His Government, too, regretted the lack of consensus at the 2015 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference. Failure to further the Middle East zone process, at this crucial stage, would continue to destabilize and heighten tensions in the region.
Indeed, non-proliferation was as dangerous in the Middle East as it was in other parts of the world, said the representative of Iran. It was crystal clear, he said, that the Israeli regime was the only obstacle to establishing such a zone. Its refusal to abandon its nuclear weapons and accede to the NPT had increased the potential for the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East and had resulted in the non-accession of some States to international instruments prohibiting such weapons.
The representative of Egypt, speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, said that the nuclear Powers had not lived up to their commitments to eliminate nuclear weapons. Creating a Middle East zone was a collective responsibility and all States should participate, lest the NPT lose its credibility. He was also concerned about humanitarian, security and environmental threats stemming from Israel’s refusal to accede to the NPT and to submit its nuclear facilities to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.
Directors of the United Nations Regional Centres on Disarmament addressed the Committee, following which some speakers, including the representative of Nigeria on behalf of the African Group, underscored the need for States and donors to provide the African Centre with the necessary financial and in-kind support.
Draft resolutions were introduced on the dangers of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East; regional disarmament; confidence-building measures in the regional and subregional context; conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels; strengthening security and cooperation in the Mediterranean region; and on the activities of the United Nations Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa.
Also speaking during the regional disarmament cluster were representatives of Indonesia (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), Uruguay (on behalf of the Union of South American Nations), Guyana (on behalf of the Caribbean Community), United States, United Arab Emirates, Malta, Latvia, Italy, Cuba, Greece, Togo, Russian Federation, Angola, Cameroon, Egypt (national capacity), Belarus and Armenia.
Representatives of Georgia, United States, Russian Federation and Ukraine spoke in exercise of the right of reply.
The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. on Friday, 30 October, to continue its thematic debate segment.
Panel on Regional Disarmament and Security
XIAOYU WANG, Officer-in-charge of the Regional Disarmament Branch, United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, in his introductory remarks said that during the past year, the three Regional Centres had undertaken activities in three main areas. The first was capacity-building and legal and technical assistance to States to accede to and implement such instruments as the Programme of Action on small arms and light weapons and the Arms Trade Treaty. The second was promoting dialogue and confidence-building by organizing conferences and workshops on issues of weapons of mass destruction and conventional weapons in the context of regional challenges. The third was undertaking advocacy and outreach activities to promote global treaties and raise public awareness on disarmament and non-proliferation. Since the last report to the Committee, the Centres had undertaken some 90 activities through extra-budgetary contributions.
TOKUNBO IGE, Director of the Regional Centre in Africa, said that the prevention of illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons had remained the primary focus of its activities. It provided assistance for the implementation of international and regional instruments to combat that issue by drafting national action plans, strengthening the capacity of governments and civil society organizations in small-arms control, and reviewing the small arms legislation of Mali, Nigeria and Togo. The Centre was undertaking a study in nine countries ranging from the Sahel to Central Africa to provide information on small arms-related challenges. That would be the basis for future capacity-building activities as envisaged under the European Union-funded programme of activities on physical safety and stockpile management in the Sahel.
In coordination with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the Centre, he noted, had provided assistance to Burkina Faso, Niger and Sierra Leone to implement the International Tracing Instrument, providing marking machines and organizing training sessions. On the Arms Trade Treaty, it had assisted the small island developing States of Africa in identifying their specific challenges. It also would focus on understanding ways to implement the Treaty’s human-rights related provisions.
YURIY KRYVONOS, Director of the Regional Centre in Asia and the Pacific, said that it had carried out seven projects reaching as many as 400 participants or trainees over the past year. Since May, it had been temporarily relocated to Bangkok because of the earthquakes in Kathmandu. It carried out several projects to assist States in implementing their commitments relating to multilateral instruments, including the Programme of Action and the Arms Trade Treaty. Those projects included workshops and discussions in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Indonesia, and an assessment and review project in the Maldives. The Centre had also co-organized two annual conferences to promote dialogue and confidence-building among States and address global and regional challenges in disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation. The Centre had also undertaken peace and disarmament education programmes, such as a project in Nepal incorporating those topics into middle school curriculums and organizing workshops for teachers.
MELANIE REGIMBAL, Director of the Regional Centre in Latin America and the Caribbean, said that the Centre had undertaken more than 50 activities in 17 States reaching more than 1,550 officials over the past year. She highlighted the Centre’s promotion of women as “agents of change” in disarmament through a publication and a risk assessment template for States. It also had provided legal and technical advice on the fight against illicit trafficking in small arms to the Dominican Republic and Peru, and launched a project in eight Caribbean States to assist Governments in gathering, maintaining and sharing information to identify sources of illicit weapons and ammunition.
On the Arms Trade Treaty, he said that the Centre had administered four implementation courses in Central American States targeting regulation and control authorities. A United Nations multi-agency framework in Peru had led recently to the destruction of more than 2,000 confiscated small arms. It also continued to support five Caribbean States in implementing Security Council resolution 1540 (2004) through improved strategic trade controls and updated legislative and policy frameworks. The Centre sought donor support to expand the programme’s scope.
Statements
KAMAPRADIPTA ISNOMO (Indonesia), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, reiterated profound disappointment that the Action Plan from the 2010 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference on the establishment of a zone in the Middle East free from nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction had not been implemented. Nor had the conference to establish that zone been held. Opposition by the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada at the concluding session of the 2015 NPT Review Conference was disappointing, preventing consensus on new measures regarding the process to establish the zone. Pending its establishment, he demanded that Israel, the only State in the region that had not joined the NPT or declared the intention to do so, renounce any possession of nuclear weapons, accede to the NPT without precondition and further delay, and promptly place all its nuclear facilities under IAEA full-scope safeguards. He also called for the complete prohibition of all transfers to Israel of nuclear-weapon-related equipment, information, material and facilities, resources or devices, including related scientific or technological help.
MARIA CLAUDIA GARCIA MOYANO (Uruguay), speaking on behalf of Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), said that all of the States in his region had joined the major international disarmament instruments, including the NPT, Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), and the Chemical and Biological Weapons Conventions, making South America a zone free of all weapons of mass destruction. In August 2009, it had decided to strengthen South America as a zone of peace and had committed itself to the establishment of a mechanism for mutual trust and security, deciding to abstain from the use or threat of use of force against the territorial integrity of any other South American State. Its member States were working together to implement security measures and monitor borders to deter illegal armed groups and strengthen democracy. His region, as a nuclear-weapon-free zone under the Treaty of Tlatelolco, expressed respect for international law and compliance with verification measures. In March 2010, the Centre for Strategic Defence Studies had been established to foster strategic thinking and disseminate knowledge on defence and security matters. Every year, the General Assembly reiterated its firm support for the Regional Centre in Latin America, which had implemented its work programmes through inter-disciplinary approaches.
TAREK MAHFOUZ (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the Arab Group and associating with the Non-Aligned Movement, submitted a draft resolution on the dangers of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. He called for the establishment of zones free of nuclear weapons, including in the Middle East, and for the adoption of measures to create them. The NPT Review Conference had failed, and the nuclear Powers had not lived up to their commitments to eliminate nuclear weapons. Creating a zone free of those weapons in the Middle East was a collective responsibility and all States needed to participate, otherwise the NPT would lose its credibility. He called on the three depositories of the NPT to live up to their responsibilities and implement the Middle East resolution of 1995. He also expressed concerns about humanitarian, security and environmental threats, stemming from Israel’s refusal to accede to the NPT and to submit its nuclear facilities to IAEA safeguards. That was a blatant threat to peace and security in the region. Establishing a zone free of nuclear weapons in the Middle East was a major pillar of the NPT and was as important as the other three pillars.
GEORGE TALBOT (Guyana), speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), said the Community had adopted a practical and innovative approach to the multidimensional security threat posed to the region, including from transnational organized crime, especially given the region’s vulnerabilities in connection with geography and capacity constraints. Regional and subregional cooperation, collective action and partnerships demonstrated the firm commitment to confronting the illicit trade in firearms, which were used in approximately 75 per cent of homicides in the Caribbean region. The Community hailed the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean as an important partner in implementing arms control and non-proliferation obligations. He recognized the importance of adequate national operational forensic ballistics systems to effectively address the illicit trafficking in weapons and ammunition, and welcomed the Regional Integrated Ballistic Identification Network. The Community was also strongly committed to the full and effective implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty, and was working on the development of a CARICOM Model Law to facilitate a harmonized approach to its implementation.
ABIODUN RICHARDS ADEJOLA (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said that the report of the Secretary-General on the year’s activities of the United Nations Regional Centre in Africa was instructive on the need for support. It highlighted the Centre’s functions, objectives and activities, including its support for States in combating the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. In that, the Centre was providing assistance to governments and civil society organizations in implementing regional action plans and building their capacity. The Centre also advocated for the broad participation of African States in the Arms Trade Treaty and for their implementation of Council resolution 1540 (2004) on weapons of mass destruction. The Centre would celebrate its thirtieth anniversary in 2016, which was an opportunity to underscore the need for States and donors to provide it with the necessary financial and in-kind support.
ABDELKARIM AIT ABDESLAM (Algeria), associating with the Non-Aligned Movement and the Arab Group, said that the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty, or Pelindaba Treaty, was a major contribution to denuclearization, peace and security in Africa and the world. It should set an example for the Middle East. He regretted that that region remained deprived of such status years after the adoption of a resolution to create the zone. Algeria had taken numerous initiatives to strengthen cooperation in the subregion for the prevention of and fight against terrorism, and for the settlement of regional crises, including leading an international mediation in Mali and contributing to the establishment of an inclusive national dialogue in Libya. He submitted a draft resolution on strengthening of security and cooperation in the Mediterranean region (document A/C.1/70/L.5).
YASAR AMMAR (Pakistan) said that as old disputes festered, new conflicts and tensions were emerging in several regions and subregions, from the Euro-Atlantic area to the Middle East and elsewhere. The promise of a new century for peace, stability and prosperity appeared to be fading in a world beset by conflict and destruction, among and within States. Most threats to peace and security continued to arise mainly among States located in the same region or subregion. South Asia was being prevented from the pursuit of peace and development by a policy of hegemony and intransigence, encouraged by some powerful States from outside the region. The General Assembly had long recognized that global peace and security depended, in large measure, on stability at the regional and subregional levels. It was for that inseparable relationship between regional and international peace and security that the United Nations Charter itself recognized regional arrangements.
Such arrangements for disarmament and arms control, he went on, should accord priority in addressing the most destabilizing military capabilities and imbalances in both conventional and non-conventional fields. Confidence-building measures had proved their efficacy over the years. However, they should not become an end in themselves. He introduced three draft resolutions, on regional disarmament (document A/C.1/70/L.30), confidence-building measures in the regional and subregional context (document A/C.1.70/L.31), and conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels (document A/C.1/70/L.34). Those texts recognized the significance of regional approaches to arms control and the complementarity between regional and global approaches.
ROBERT A. WOOD (United States) said his country was strongly committed to promoting international peace and prosperity, as well as strengthening partnerships and cooperation with regional and other inter-governmental organizations. He welcomed calls made under the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN)-U.S. plan of action to resolve any outstanding issues in the ASEAN Regional Forum, and said the United States stood ready to assist the early signature and ratification of the Protocol to the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty. The member States of the Organization of American States were using workshops and exercises to enhance their “chem/bio-incident readiness” and response capabilities. On 14 July, the United States and its international partners achieved something that years of animosity could not — a comprehensive, long-term deal with Iran that would prevent it from obtaining nuclear weapons.
He said his country remained focused on working with the international community to address the grave threat posed by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s nuclear weapons programme to the global non-proliferation regime and the common peace and security. Developing partnerships between regions and international organizations was key and organizations like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and others deserved praise for collaborative efforts to address development and security challenges at the regional level. Strong partnerships took sustained effort. Unfortunately, the Russian Federation’s deliberate and repeated violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine had undermined the security structure of Europe. He called on Russia to cease its destabilizing activities in Ukraine. On efforts to create a zone in the Middle East free from weapons of mass destruction, he said that every State in that region had diplomats with vision, creativity and determination, and the United States would not stop its efforts to work with them towards that goal.
MOHAMED AL YAMMAHI (United Arab Emirates), associating with the Non-Aligned Movement and the Arab Group, expressed deep concern regarding the international community’s inability to achieve any progress or concrete results on a Middle East zone free from nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. Achieving progress in that “file” would significantly support stability and security in the region. Undoubtedly, the international community faced major challenges today, which required hard work. The global nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament regimes were critical for achieving international peace and security. The CTBT was an important mechanism in achieving the nuclear disarmament goals, however, no treaty yet existed to ban nuclear weapons entirely, even though 70 years had now passed since their use in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. His country had consistently expressed concern regarding Iran’s nuclear activities, and he emphasized the importance of Iran’s full cooperation with the IAEA.
NATASHA MELI DAUDEY (Malta) said that security in the Mediterranean could not be discussed without mentioning the situation in Libya. Her country was very concerned about the deteriorating humanitarian and security situation in that country, and believed that the formation of a government of national unity was a crucial step. Failure to achieve disarmament and national reconciliation would provide a fertile ground for radicalization, which concerned the wider region. Malta also recognized the urgency of countering the advance of the Islamic State and the Levant (ISIL) in Syria and called for addressing the wider context, particularly neighbouring countries affected by the spill-over of fighting and the plight of refugees. Strategically situated in the centre of the Mediterranean, Malta was disappointed at the lack of agreement on a final document to further negotiations towards setting up a Middle East zone free of weapons of mass destruction. The irregular migration and smuggling of human beings in the Mediterranean seriously threatened the region’s security and claimed thousands of lives since the beginning of the year. An international anti-human-smuggling coalition, mandated by the United Nations, should be set up to disrupt culprits.
JĀNIS MAŽEIKS (Latvia), also speaking on behalf of Estonia, Lithuania and Poland, stressed the importance of best practices and information exchange among States in the field of maritime and air traffic, both civil and military, which significantly contributed to building mutual understanding and confidence. States must demonstrate their good will by ensuring that all aircraft, both civil and military, that operated in areas with heavy air traffic, made use of transponders. Each State party to the Convention on International Civil Aviation had undertaken, when issuing regulations for their State aircraft, to ensure that they operated with due regard for the safety of civil aviation navigation. Those and other practices would allow countries to avoid unnecessary misunderstanding and false interpretation of military activities in international maritime and air traffic, thus enhancing transparency and mutual confidence.
VINICIO MATI (Italy), noting that his country was located in the wider Mediterranean area close to the Middle East, expressed support for convening a conference on the establishment of a Middle East zone free of nuclear and all other weapons of mass destruction, as agreed at the 2010 NPT Review Conference. The historic agreement in July between Iran and the permanent five members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany, on a joint comprehensive plan of action would contribute to creating a more conducive environment for the process leading to the Middle East conference. He welcomed the adoption of Security Council resolution 2235 (2015) establishing a Joint Investigative Mechanism to identify perpetrators responsible for the chemical attacks in Syria. The world community could not remain silent in the face of those intolerable assaults.
REZA POURMAND TEHRANI (Iran), associating with the Non-Aligned Movement, said his country was determined to engage in all diplomatic and legal efforts to save humanity from the menace of nuclear weapons and their proliferation, including through the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones, particularly in the Middle East. However, no progress had yet been made for such a zone in that region. Israel continued to block all international and regional efforts, and had “foiled” the convening of a conference in 2012 on the establishment of the zone, mandated by the 2010 NPT Review Conference outcome. It was crystal clear that the Israeli regime was the only obstacle to establishing such a zone. Its refusal to abandon its nuclear weapons and accede to the NPT had increased the potential for the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East and had resulted in the non-accession of some States to international instruments prohibiting such weapons. Non-proliferation was as dangerous in the Middle East region as it was in other parts of the world. Nuclear weapons in the hands of the Israeli regime were the result of double standards by certain nuclear-weapon States. He called on the international community to exert utmost pressure on Israel to accede to the NPT.
IVIAN DEL SOL DOMINGUEZ (Cuba), associating with the Non-Aligned Movement, reaffirmed strong support for multilateralism as the basic principle for disarmament and arms control negotiations. Regional disarmament efforts must take due account of the particular characteristics of each region. The world could not pursue a one-size-fits-all approach. Global and regional disarmament and arms control approaches, as well as confidence-building measures, were complementary, and should be implemented concurrently where possible. The adoption and implementation of bilateral and regional confidence-building measures agreed by all stakeholders in an inclusive process helped to ease tensions, prevent conflicts and strengthen regional stability. States with greater military capacity bore a huge responsibility in that area, and compliance with and support for regional and subregional treaties played an essential role. Cuba supported the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones throughout the world and was proud to belong to such a zone. Deeply regretful of the failure of the ninth NPT Review Conference, Cuba would continue to support the establishment of a zone in the Middle East.
CATHERINE BOURA (Greece) acknowledged States’ sovereign right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. At the same time, it was crucial for prospective nuclear-energy producers to fully comply with safety and security treaties meant to safeguard the operational aspects of nuclear plants. The 2011 Fukushima Daiichi accident had renewed focus on nuclear safety, and Greece would like the lessons learned from that tragedy to be included in the IAEA Action Plan on Nuclear Safety, beyond 2015. Greece also would like to see more progress at the NPT Review Conferences, especially in creating a concrete road map to finalize a conference on a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the Middle East. Regarding nuclear security, Greece was encouraged by the momentum gathering since the Nuclear Security Conference in 2013 and looked forward to the upcoming conference, scheduled for Vienna in December 2016. It was crucial for all States to fulfil their disarmament commitments more resolutely and urgently. The international community needed a pragmatic road map that laid down the practical aspects necessary to rid the world of nuclear weapons.
MAZAMESSO KADJENDA (Togo), associating with the Non-Aligned Movement and the African Group, said that African countries, in their efforts to promote peace, disarmament and development on the continent, worked in tandem with the Regional Centre there. Thanks to that institution, reforms as well as institutional capacity-building had been implemented. The Centre had increased focus on Security Council resolution 1540 (2004), and had facilitated visits by the 1540 Committee experts to assist Togo with the integral application of that text. Togo had always recognized the Regional Centre’s importance in ensuring that the continent was stable and secure. The scope of the phenomenon of small arms and light weapons’ circulation and use was of extreme concern. However, the Regional Centre was not being used to its full potential, and thus all States should do everything possible to strengthen the dimension of its work. Discussions between Togo and the United Nations Secretariat on the country’s commitment to give the Centre new premises had begun. In fact, Togo’s stability was dependent on the Centre’s revitalization.
SARMAD MUWAFAQ MOHAMMED AL-TAIE (Iraq), associating with the Non-Aligned Movement and the Arab Group, said the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones was essential to building confidence at the regional level. It was a “sine qua non” to strengthen nuclear disarmament and secure peace in the affected countries, and would undoubtedly contribute to global peace and security as well. He called for the implementation, without delay, of the 1995 resolution on the creation of such a zone in the Middle East. Despite international support, the zone’s creation had been met with “unacceptable arguments and barriers”, including the fact that Israel remained outside the NPT. All of Israel’s nuclear facilities were beyond the IAEA’s guidelines and guarantees. His Government was disappointed at the lack of consensus at the 2015 NPT Review Conference; failure to further the Middle East zone process, at this crucial stage, would continue to destabilize and heighten tensions in the region. The co-author countries of the treaties must spare no efforts to achieve a nuclear-weapon-free Middle East. Political will and flexibility were needed to create a better future for generations to come, without nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction.
VLADIMIR YERMAKOV (Russian Federation) said that in discussing regional security, it could not be forgotten that a peaceful situation had never been sustainable. Peaceful conditions had never really existed, and “peace on the planet” had always been the product of the most serious and responsible negotiation processes and mutual compromises. Everyone knew that the cold war had ended an ideological standoff. However, many in Russia had been naïve and thought that the geopolitical discord would no longer exist. Unfortunately, the Western partners quickly changed that “sunny opinion” of the world. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)’s military bloc had quickly come to Russia’s borders, under the auspices of possible nuclear-weapons threats from Iran, and had begun to develop military potential “right on the Russian border”, while at the same time destroying many of the Non-Aligned Movement countries, such as Libya and Iraq, and even attempted to destroy Egypt and Syria. Those “Western partners” had even thought to accuse Russia of attacking Georgia and Ukraine. “You’re going to laugh, but maybe the next step would be to accuse Russia of having bombed Japan,” he said. That was what those partners called “democracy”. It was surprising that even today, the American colleagues talked about Russia carrying out destabilizing activities in Ukraine. He suggested that perhaps they were referring to the armed anti-governmental coup in Kyiv that was supported by Washington, which resulted in the brother-country of the Russian Federation, Ukraine, falling into a bloody civil war.
JULIO HELDER MOURA LUCAS (Angola), speaking on behalf of the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS) and associating with the Non-Aligned Movement and the African Group, introduced the draft resolution on regional confidence-building measures and activities of the United Nations Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa. The text would reaffirm the General Assembly’s support for the efforts aimed at promoting confidence-building measures at the regional and subregional levels.
MAMOUDOU MANA (Cameroon) supported the statement made by Angola in presenting a draft resolution, and said that for two years, Central African countries, particularly Cameroon and Chad, had been “broadsided” by heinous acts perpetrated by Boko Haram, which was also ravaging Nigeria and Niger. Given the scale of the problem, countries in the Lake Chad Basin had set up a joint multinational force complementing national efforts. Boko Haram seemed to have been militarily defeated, but was resorting now to suicide attacks. To tackle the threat of its resurgence, in addition to military operations, Cameroon had also filled a legal void with legislation that sought to try persons detained in the crackdown on Boko Haram, which was in line with international commitments. However, they could not rid themselves completely of the threat without the support of the entire international community. The transnational and global threat of terrorism required a multinational and global response.
TAREK MAHFOUZ (Egypt), associating with the Non-Aligned Movement and the Arab Group, said that since the 2012 Middle East conference had not been held in accordance with the 1995 Middle East resolution, the Arab States’ working paper had called on the 2015 NPT Review Conference to take several actions. One was to call on Israel, the only State in the Middle East outside the NPT, to immediately sign and ratify that Treaty, and call on the Secretary-General to convene a conference, within 180 days from the adoption of the 2015 Review Conference final document. That then would launch a process to conclude a legally binding treaty establishing such a zone. Once the participating States of the region agreed on a legally binding treaty, the Secretary-General would reconvene the conference to adopt it, and then inform the 2020 Review Conference and its preparatory committees on progress made and the status of implementation of the 1995 resolution.
YULIA LYASHUK (Belarus) said that his country was the first post-Soviet State to have rid its territory of nuclear weapons and accede to the NPT. Belarus was also the first country to accede to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, and had normalized its relations with its neighbours, Latvia and Lithuania. It had also been the first to develop an action plan for the implementation of Security Council resolution 1540 (2004). Belarus paid key attention to combatting international terrorist activities and had acceded to all instruments in that regard. In that context, it had provided NATO cargo transit through its territory to facilitate security efforts in Afghanistan. Belarus was also currently developing a programme for registering small arms and light weapons, along with other measures.
TIGRAN SAMVELIAN (Armenia) attached great importance to regional disarmament, since stability and security were easier to achieve with fewer armaments. He appreciated the Organization’s efforts to establish international and regional security, stability and an atmosphere of confidence through the encouragement of disarmament. He strongly advocated for efforts aimed at promoting confidence-building measures at the regional and subregional levels, and had consistently been a staunch advocate of regional cooperation in every possible sphere. Armenia had been duly informing the relevant United Nations bodies about continuing blatant violations of the ceasefire by the Azerbaijani armed forces along the lines of contact between Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan, and the Armenian-Azerbaijan border. Armenia remained committed to the proposal to introduce an investigative mechanism to ceasefire violations, which was essential for maintaining the ceasefire, while Azerbaijan continued to reject it.
Right of Reply
The representative of Georgia, exercising his right of reply, said that the representative of the Russian Federation, in a statement that was more like a lecture, had sarcastically questioned or ridiculed its invasion of Georgia. He was dismayed at the Russian Federation’s continued denial and utter rejection of reality on the ground, and wanted to bring the Committee’s attention to well-known facts. In August 2008, Russia had committed an act of aggression against Georgia, sending thousands of troops to “kill” Georgia’s sovereignty against the norms of international law. As a result of that aggression, hundreds of thousands of Georgians were subjected to ethnic cleansing. More than seven years later, the Russian Federation continued its violations of international law and of its ceasefire agreement. It occupied one fifth of Georgia’s territory and was preventing hundreds of thousands of people from returning to their homes. He called on the Russian Federation to end its illegal military occupation of Georgia’s territories.
Also exercising his right of reply, the representative of the United States said that the statement by the Russian Federation that NATO was encroaching on Russia’s borders was “nonsense”; it was the Russian Federation that was encroaching on the borders of others. Also, the United States had made clear why it was pursuing ballistic missile defence and did not need to repeat it. The Russian Federation also was threatening the territorial integrity of the sovereign Government of Ukraine, he added.
Speaking in exercise of the right of reply, the representative of the Russian Federation asked, in regard to the statement from Georgia, if anyone in the room actually thought it was true. Concerning the statement by the representative of the United States, he said it had already been discussed in great detail in bilateral meetings, and he did not see any need to bring the issue to light at the moment. It was a “clear joke” that Russia was getting closer to American bases.
Also speaking in exercise of the right of reply, the representative of the United States said he did not know how to comment on that, and so would “just leave it at that”.
The representative of Ukraine said, regarding the intervention from the Russian Federation, that this was not the right place or the right time for jokes when 8,000 people had died as a result of the Russian aggression.
Speaking in a second intervention, the representative of the Russian Federation said that it was indeed a very serious issue and it should not be discussed here. He said there had not been any aggression against the brother country of Ukraine, “so please stop saying such things”.
Also speaking on a second intervention, the representative of Ukraine said that the Russian aggression against his country was, in fact, going on.