GA/DIS/3172

UNITED STATES, ON BEHALF OF FIVE NUCLEAR WEAPON STATES, ANNOUNCES AGREEMENT ON SECURITY ASSURANCES FOR MONGOLIA IN FIRST COMMITTEE

In Continued General Debate Canada, Guatemala, Venezuela, Czech Republic, Croatia, Kenya, Angola, Bulgaria Also Speak

In the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) this afternoon, the representative of the United States, speaking on behalf of his own country and four other nuclear-weapon States -- China, France, Russian Federation and the United Kingdom -- announced that they had agreed to provide security assurances to Mongolia against the use, or threat of use, of nuclear weapons and to seek immediate Security Council action to provide such assistance.

He added that Mongolia's status as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), as well as its unique geographic status, had made it appropriate for the five nuclear-weapon States to provide such security assurances, since Mongolia was unable to obtain those normally provided by the protocols to the nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties. The five States also reaffirmed their respective 1995 unilateral pledges of negative security assurances to Mongolia. In addition, China and the Russian Federation confirmed the legally-binding commitments of their bilateral treaties with that country. The five countries, having joined consensus on the 1998 General Assembly resolution concerning Mongolia's international security and nuclear-weapon-free status, believed their agreement fully "meets this need".

The representative of Canada, noting the de facto moratorium on nuclear testing by the five nuclear-weapon States, said that the bar against any further nuclear-weapon testing was higher than it had ever been and was rising. The political cost must be seen as simply too prohibitive. Turning to landmines, he said their production and use was declining and international trade in them had all but stopped. Stockpiles were rapidly being destroyed and resources for global mine action were swelling. Such heartening trends showed how far and how fast human security could be enhanced when people were put before States and the protection of civilians was made paramount.

Also on landmines, the representative of Angola noted that his Government had continued to respect its commitment to the elimination of those weapons, which had decimated his country and its people over the years. A ban on anti-personnel landmines was a matter of priority for the international community. The Angolan Parliament had approved the ratification of the Ottawa Convention on 25 July and expected to complete ratification very soon. Meanwhile, the persistent "climate

First Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/DIS/3172 6th Meeting (PM) 5 October 2000

of insecurity and instability" in a number of regions was not solely of internal origin. Thus, the international community and the United Nations still had an active role to play in restoring peace to Angola through strengthening the sanctions against the rebel forces threatening to overturn the democratically elected Government.

The representative of Croatia said that, despite some progress, disarmament achievements had fallen "far short" of commitments and obligations. Growing global military expenditures, the stalemate in the Conference on disarmament, the spread of weapons of mass destruction, and the development of military affairs concepts were some of the potent symptoms of a persistent "disarmament malady". While the disarmament community had to work within the parameters of uncertain and contradictory political realities, the road ahead had been mapped, in part, by the consensus agreement recently reached at the 2000 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

Indeed, the representative of Venezuela said, the NPT Review Conference had created a more propitious climate in which to advance the disarmament agenda, particularly the nuclear disarmament process. At the same time, unprecedented opportunities and risks prevailed. It was impossible to achieve international security in unilateral or absolute terms; peace and security required the participation of all States. Although the possibility had existed for achieving a stable and secure world, the recent stalemates in the disarmament arena had been most disheartening. The next five years would prove decisive in terms of the credibility and viability of the nuclear non-proliferation system in achieving international security.

Statements were also made by the representatives of Guatemala, Czech Republic, Kenya, and Bulgaria.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. Friday, 6 October, to continue its general debate.

First Committee - 2 - Press Release GA/DIS/3172 6th Meeting (PM) 5 October 2000

Committee Work Programme

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this afternoon to continue its general debate. The United States was expected to make a statement on behalf of his own Country and the other nuclear-weapon- States -- China, France, Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom. Statements were also anticipated by the representatives of Canada, Guatemala, Venezuela, Malaysia, Czech Republic, Croatia, Kenya, Angola and Bulgaria.

Today�s debate was expected to focus on the recent outcome of the 2000 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), in which the nuclear-weapon States agreed to an �unequivocal undertaking� to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals. They also agreed that the achievement of that goal offered the �only absolute guarantee� against the use of such weapons.

The final document of the NPT Review Conference marked only the second time that the five-year Review produced a consensus. The outcome, according to the Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, had expressed the world�s �unambiguous� lack of confidence in the ability of either deterrence or defence to prevent another Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The NPT provides the legal foundation for multilateral actions to prohibit the proliferation of nuclear weapons and to advance nuclear disarmament. Considered by many experts to be the bedrock of the non-proliferation regime, it is the most universal of all disarmament agreements, with 187 parties.

Treaties banning the production and stockpiling of other weapons of mass destruction will also be highlighted. Those include the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (Biological Weapons Convention); and the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention).

The pending entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) will also be considered, as well as the creation and consolidation of nuclear-weapon-free zones. Existing zones include the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco), the South Pacific Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Rarotonga), the South-East Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Bangkok) and the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba). Committee drafts are anticipated for the establishment of such zones in the Middle East, Central Europe and South Asia.

Attention will also be directed at developments concerning the following bilateral arrangements: the 1972 Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM Treaty), by which the United States and the Russian Federation agreed to limit the deployment and development of anti-ballistic missiles; and the Strategic Arms Limitation and Reduction Treaties -- START I, II and III, by which the two countries also agreed to significantly reduce the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads.

The landmines issue will likely be examined in the context of the two instruments to ban or limit their use -- Protocol II of the Convention on the Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed To Be Excessively Injurious or To Have Indiscriminate Effects (Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons), and the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Ottawa Convention).

(For detailed background, see Press Release GA/DIS/3168 issued 29 September).

Statements

CHRISTOPHER WESTDAL (Canada) said that there was a de facto moratorium on nuclear testing in effect among the five nuclear weapon States and respected by all. The bar against any further demonstration of weapons capable of human extinction was surely higher than it had ever been and was rising. Canada wanted that political cost to be �- and to be seen to be -� simply too prohibitive. The bar against tests should be made decisive. That was why Canada pressed for the CTBT and why it would join nations planning for a second conference next year in accordance with the Treaty in New York, to promote its early entry into force.

He said that abundant, cheap and easy to use small arms were being used to injure and kill many thousands, mostly civilians, every year. Next year�s international conference on small arms and light weapons promised an international plan of concrete action with a timetable for implementation to lower the numbers of small arms and light weapons in circulation throughout the world, prevent problematic transfers, promote transparency and reduce the bloody cost that those weapons exacted.

Since the first meeting of the States parties to the Ottawa Convention held in Mozambique last year, burgeoning support for the principles enshrined in that pact had yielded tangible results, he said. The use of landmines was declining, international trade in them had all but stopped and production was in sharp decline -� as was the number of new mine victims. Stockpiles were being rapidly destroyed, States not yet party to the Convention were, nonetheless, acting to respect it, resources for global mine action programmes were swelling, regional organizations -- like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Euro- Atlantic Partnership Council �- were at hard, creative work; and the scope and impact of mine clearance projects were increasing. �These heartening trends show how far and how fast we can move to enhance human security when we put people before States at the centre of our analysis and make the protection of civilians our paramount goal.�

JOHN HOLUM, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security of the United States, spoke on behalf of his own country and the other nuclear-weapon States: China, France, Russian Federation and the United Kingdom. He said that it gave him great pleasure to announce that the five countries had reached agreement on the text of a statement concerning security assurances for Mongolia with respect to nuclear weapons.

Reading from the statement, he said that the five countries had welcomed the declaration by Mongolia of its nuclear-weapon-free status, took into account that country's status as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the NPT, as well as its unique geographic status. They also welcomed Mongolia's policies of developing peaceful, friendly and mutually beneficial relations with the States of the region and other States. As such, the five nuclear-weapon States reaffirmed their commitment to Mongolia to cooperate in the implementation of a resolution adopted in 1998 (53/77D) with respect to that country's nuclear- weapon-free status, in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter.

He said that the five States also reaffirmed their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Mongolia, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the NPT, in accordance with the provisions of Security Council resolution 984 (1995), if Mongolia should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons were used. They also reaffirmed, in the case of Mongolia, their respective unilateral negative security assurances as stated in their declarations issued on 5 and 6 April 1995, and referred to in the Security Council resolution 984, of 11 April 1995.

Concerning the statement, he said China and the Russian Federation recalled and confirmed the legally-binding commitments undertaken by them with respect to Mongolia through the conclusion of bilateral treaties with that country regarding those matters.

The unique geographic status of Mongolia, he said, had made it appropriate for the five nuclear-weapon States to provide security assurances in that way, since Mongolia was unable to obtain the security assurances that were normally provided by protocols to nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties. Having joined consensus on the United Nations General Assembly resolution of 1998 concerning Mongolia's international security and nuclear-weapon-free status, the five nuclear-weapon States were pleased to work out an arrangement to provide those security assurances. The statement just read into the record "fully meets" that need. The actions of the five nuclear-weapon States would further strengthen the NPT by demonstrating their flexibility in responding to the security concerns of the NPT non-nuclear-weapon States. Nonetheless, Mongolia's situation did not pertain to any other State.

Although the statement was not eligible for registration under Article 102 of the United Nations Charter, which concerns treaties and international agreements he said he wished to state clearly, for the record, however, that the five nuclear-weapon States stood fully behind the assurances provided in the statement. With its issuance, the five countries believed that they had fully carried out the commitment to Mongolia that they had undertaken as nuclear- weapon States, consistent with the terms of the 1998 General Assembly resolution. The five nations intended to ask the Presidents of the General Assembly and of the Security Council to circulate the statement as an official document of the Conference on Disarmament.

LUIS RAUL ESTEVEZ-LOPEZ (Guatemala) said that there was no purpose in carrying out lively discussions in the First Committee on disarmament matters if members lacked the political will to put the objectives of those deliberations into practice. The international community must accept its responsibility to bring about full and complete disarmament, curb illegal traffic in small arms and light weapons and establish more effective controls over the manufacture of such weapons. All Member States must work together in order to guarantee international security. He said the work carried out by the group of interested States, organized by Germany within the context of practical measures of disarmament for the consolidation of peace, demonstrated that when the will existed to put an end to a problem, it was possible to do so.

His country had, for more than 40 years, suffered the consequences of death, destruction and pain due to an internal armed struggle. As such, he appealed to all members of the international community to unite in the common struggle against: nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons; conventional weapons, and antipersonnel mines; as well as any device or thing that endangered the life and security of persons. He called on regions that had not established nuclear-weapon-free zones to advance resolutely in the creation of such zones. Being located in a region free of such weapons, Guatemala appreciated the benefits that flowed from such zones and believed that all countries were entitled to those benefits.

IGNACIO ARCAYA (Venezuela) said that the Committee's work had opened amid a climate of renewed optimism in disarmament. The successful conclusion of the Millennium Summit and of the sixth NPT Review Conference had created a more propitious climate in which to adopt specific measures and eliminate nuclear weapons, as well as sources of distrust. Regarding the achievement of peace for humankind, unprecedented opportunities and risks prevailed. Thus, it was impossible to conceive of international security in unilateral or absolute terms. Rather, peace and security required the participation of all States.

The First Committee was an ideal place for examining disarmament and arms control issues, in concert and with a sense of urgency, he said. Although the possibility had existed for achieving a stable and secure world, the doubts and fatigue of recent years in the disarmament arena had constituted one of the most disheartening aspects of the process. The goals agreed upon at all levels must be achieved through a sustained effort and by specific steps. The inertia in the Conference on Disarmament, which had been unable to move forward and shoulder its responsibilities as the only multilateral disarmament negotiating forum, had been disturbing. All must work in a spirit of flexibility. It was essential, for example, to establish an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament, as well as a committee to negotiate a fissile material cut-off treaty. Similarly, Member States might consider convening an international conference to eliminate nuclear dangers. They might also consider holding a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament.

He said that the outcome of the NPT Review Conference had reaffirmed the commitment of the international community and, without underestimating the difficulties and the existing limitations, had lent a fresh impetus to the nuclear disarmament process. Only through the elimination of nuclear weapons would it be possible to translate the obligations and rights of the NPT into reality. The next five years would prove decisive in terms of the credibility and viability of the nuclear non-proliferation system in achieving international security. A greater reduction of strategic forces was crucial. Meanwhile, the progressive establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones in various parts of the world had been gratifying. Hopefully, the southern hemisphere and adjacent areas could be proclaimed nuclear-weapon-free in the near future. Also welcome was the statement made today by the United States representative on behalf of the five nuclear-weapon States regarding security guarantees to Mongolia as a nuclear-weapon free territory. That was a major step towards implementing the 1998 General Assembly resolution and strengthening the non- proliferation regime.

The illicit trafficking in small and light weapons had revealed links with terrorism and drug trafficking, he said. Thus, that phenomenon had reached beyond national security and had also impacted regional and global security. The 2001 Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All its Aspects was expected to make a major contribution toward combating that illicit activity. In that respect, he supported a consensus-based political platform to reduce the accumulation and control of those weapons, which limited human rights and national development. An initiative designed to strengthen the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America also deserved support. Overall, multilateral action was the most appropriate path towards achieving disarmament solutions. He, thus, called for collective answers based upon dialogue and cooperation.

PAVOL SEPELAK (Czech Republic) said his country supported all practical steps aimed at prohibiting weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery. The Czech Republic advocated the speedy entry into force of the CTBT. All States that had not signed or ratified that Treaty should do so without delay. That Treaty would not be fully effective without the finalization and testing of the international monitoring system. That was why his country was participating in the building of the monitoring stations.

He said that the Czech Republic was a resolute supporter of nuclear-free zones. The establishment must, however, proceed from the principle of the free will of participating States. Pressing for the establishment of such zones in a region where the political environment was lacking would not be a promising effort.

The Czech Republic saw the road to a safer world in the context of the disarmament process and the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, he said. It was, however, worried that a unilateral approach to that process might renew the arms race. His country supported all international efforts for greater transparency and a higher level of information exchange concerning the manufacture of conventional weapons. It also supported efforts for greater control of transfers of small and light weapons. His country believed that the enlargement of the Conference on disarmament would not be to the detriment of negotiations taking place in that forum. All States wishing to participate should be free to do so. As one of the successor States of the former Czechoslovakia, the Czech Republic would be willing to be part of that conference.

ANA MARIJA BESKER (Croatia) said that the general debate of the Millennium Summit had focused on the United Nations role in maintaining peace and security. Most of the participants had addressed disarmament issues as a critical element in the evolving international security system. The Secretary-General, in his Report on the Work of the Organization, had succinctly assessed the disarmament developments and urged the pursuit of measures to enhance global security. Croatia remained committed to disarmament and to multilateralism as the optimum method of developing the rule of law in disarmament. The recent outcome of the NPT Review Conference had been gratifying and the New Agenda Initiative countries should be commended in that respect for their determination.

She said that the relatively smooth verification activities of the Chemical Weapons Convention had sent a positive message to other arms control regimes. Also the humanitarian potential of the Ottawa Convention was great. As a mine affected country, Croatia was "painfully aware" of the lack of funds for mine-action activities, which had threatened to compromise the Convention's potential. Her country also attached great importance to regional disarmament and confidence-building measures. In that respect, she welcomed the progress in regional arms control in Europe, especially within the framework of the Dayton Peace Accords, the Treaty on Conventional Aimed Forces in Europe(CFE), the Vienna Declaration, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Forum for Security Cooperation Decisions. Following recent, successful negotiations between Croatia and Germany, the first functional centre within the Working Table on Security Issues of the South-Eastern European Stability Pact -- the Regional Arms Control Verification and Implementation Assistance Centre -- had been established in Croatia.

Nonetheless, disarmament achievements had fallen far short of commitments and obligations, she said. Growing global military expenditures, the stalemate in the Conference on Disarmament, the spread of weapons of mass destruction -- in particular, nuclear weapons and their delivery vehicles -- and the development of military-affairs concepts were some of the potent symptoms of a persistent "disarmament malady". The challenges and responsibilities were simple yet daunting: simple because everyone wanted to live and wanted their children to live with peace and dignity; daunting because the disarmament community must work within parameters of uncertain and contradictory political realities. The road ahead had been mapped by the 2000 NPT Final Document, the forthcoming conference on the illicit arms trade and the existing disarmament legal body. The Department for Disarmament Affairs had provided valuable leadership. In addition, the potential of civil society must also be harnessed.

FARES M. KUINDWA (Kenya) said the proliferation of missile technology was a disquieting development. That technology was widespread and spreading still. Rockets, while playing a crucial role in bettering human life in communications and other civilian uses, at the same time were potential vehicles for delivering nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. There should be a comprehensive and balanced procedure for dealing with that threat, while preserving genuine civilian use.

The issue of mines and the proliferation of small arms and light weapons were issues of grave concern to Africa, he said. Since the Ottawa Convention on anti-personnel landmines took effect in March last year, a lot of progress had been made. The manufacture and use of deadly weapons had diminished and stockpiles of existing arsenals had been destroyed. However, numerous countries in Africa continued to suffer from mines planted in the past. The international community should render greater and faster assistance toward demining and rehabilitating the dislocated populations.

The proliferation of illicit small arms and light weapons continued to play havoc with peace, security and development in Africa, he added. The increase in criminal activities, civil wars and the number of refugees was a direct result of the easy availability of those arms. The Nairobi process, together with efforts undertaken in west and southern Africa, would eventually provide Africa�s contribution to the 2001 conference on small arms and light weapons.

JOSE PAULINO CUNHA DA SILVA (Angola) said that the Committee was meeting in an environment of intensified international and regional efforts towards achieving the disarmament goals. There was an increased global awareness about completing the disarmament agenda, particularly the final elimination of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. The end of the cold war had reduced the danger of the possible use of those weapons. It had also created a new reality whereby there was no longer any need to retain nuclear arsenals or security systems based on competing military alliances and nuclear deterrence policies.

He said that the present international political and security situation, in many aspects, was not satisfactory. There were too many conflicts threatening international peace and requiring urgent solutions. Moreover, the persistent "climate of insecurity and instability" in a number of regions could not be attributed solely to internal causes. Those had also stemmed from a weakness in the international security system. The effectiveness of actions in the area of international peace and security did not solely depend on the activities of the United Nations; each and every State must renew its commitment in that regard. The adoption of measures at the national, regional and global levels should be part of that commitment, in order to eliminate threats to international peace and security and to eliminate the source of financing for local wars.

The African continent had been most affected by the scourge of war, he said. The illicit diamond trade had been the primary source of support for wars that had been incited by some rebel groups seeking to overturn democratically elected regimes. Another serious issue was the circulation and transfer of small arms, which flowed into areas of conflict through rebel groups, with the aid of certain governments and networks of transnational organized crime. In that respect, good neighbourliness and friendly relations among States were important. The lack of international legal instruments to control such arms transactions had stimulated the creation of actual arms markets, above all in Africa. That had increased the number of conflicts and made their resolution even more difficult. The effects of such arms flows on civil populations was shocking, as already resulting in more deaths than the two World Wars combined. It was "high time" for the world to come together and tackle the problem of small arms by establishing an international norm to increase global transparency on the illicit trade and strengthen national legislation.

He said his Government had continued to respect its commitment to the elimination of landmines, which had decimated his country and its people over the years. A ban on anti-personnel landmines was a matter of priority for the international community. The Angolan Parliament had approved the ratification of the Ottawa Convention on 25 July and was expecting to complete ratification very soon. A complete ban on anti-personnel landmines must be the goal. The use of those weapons was only possible in "theatre war", as those were being produced and delivered by certain governments with ambiguous attitudes towards humanitarian principles. Those States had continued to supply arms to such groups as the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA), which -- despite Security Council resolutions -- still had access to the landmine market.

Total control of Angola's national borders and the elimination of remaining pockets of criminal armed groups had exerted a positive impact on the search for peace, but those were not the only options for the resolution of armed conflict, he went on. The international community and the United Nations still had an active role to play in the restoration of peace in Angola, through the continued implementation and strengthening of sanctions against the rebels, led by Jonas Savimbi. The recent nomination by the Secretary-General of a mechanism to monitor the application of sanctions against the UNITA rebels would contribute to greater international vigilance regarding eventual violations and would deny bases of support to the armed rebellion.

He said that the total elimination of nuclear weapons was the bedrock of international peace and security. Nuclear disarmament was a responsibility that must be shared by the international community as a whole. At the same time, the nuclear-weapon States must undeniably assume the major responsibility. In that context, nuclear reduction measures by the two largest nuclear-weapon States -- the United States and the Russian Federation -- were the most important. His country appreciated the achievements already made by those two States and called upon them to bring START II into force without further delay and to commence negotiations on START III as soon as possible.

PETKO DRAGANOV (Bulgaria), speaking in his capacity as the President of the Conference on disarmament, said that, despite the efforts by successive presidents of the Conference, consensus on its programme of work proved elusive, due to the persisting divergence of views and priorities on its agenda items. There had been a general agreement on all of the elements of a programme of work, with the exception of nuclear disarmament and the prevention of an arms race in outer space. Consequently, most of the attention and effort had focused on working out a consensus on the appropriate mechanisms and mandates for dealing with those two outstanding issues.

He said that, following a proposal by Ambassador Amorim (Brazil), the preceding President, the Conference requested him -- the current President -- and the incoming President, Christopher Westdal (Canada), to conduct intensive consultations during the inter-sessional period and to make recommendations that could help to commence early work on various agenda items in 2001.

He stated that the continuing impasse in the Conference was a source of concern to its members. The problems facing the Conference were a reflection of the much wider phenomenon of defining the common international priorities in arms control and disarmament in the post-cold-war era. The international community�s concerted effort towards a more propitious political environment and a spirit of compromise in resolving global issues at the turn of the millennium would be crucial in overcoming that impasse.

* *** *

United Nations