GA/DIS/3178

TEST-BAN MONITORING SYSTEM, NUCLEAR-WEAPON-FREE MIDDLE EAST, AMONG ISSUES DISCUSSED IN FIRST COMMITTEE GENERAL DEBATE

The earth shook on 29 July as the last nuclear-weapon test grove in Kazakhstan was put out of action, that country�s representative told the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) this afternoon, as it continued its general debate.

The data collected from the three calibration experiments made on the range, as part of a series of Kazakh-American tests, would allow the international community to detect and discriminate between nuclear explosions and those resulting from earthquakes or other explosions. That would ensure effective observance of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) and create a monitoring system rendering it impossible to keep secret nuclear tests in any part of the world. By joining that Treaty last year as a non-nuclear- weapon State, his country had proved its commitment to ridding the world of nuclear weapons.

The representative of Ukraine recalled that a decade ago his country had solemnly proclaimed its intention not to accept, produce or acquire nuclear weapons. It had reliably put those principles into practice by fulfilling the relevant treaties on nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear weapons reduction and by ensuring their strict implementation. In that context, the removal of all nuclear warheads from its territory more than four years ago was a significant event. Now, the basis for global strategic stability depended on the future of the 1972 Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM Treaty), between the United States and the Russian Federation.

Bahrain�s representative said that, despite the end of the cold war a decade ago, disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation had been a source of disquiet for the human race. States were still divided between those that developed, manufactured and possessed nuclear weapons and those that sought to do so. Clearly, regional and international security were closely linked. Security and stability in the Middle East and the Arab Gulf required confidence- building among the political entities there. Creating a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East could go far towards achieving that goal. Similarly, the representative of Saudi Arabia championed the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones around the globe, which had been based on a belief in peaceful co-existence as a step towards a nuclear-weapon-free world. Real peace should be founded on trust and good intentions between the countries of a region, and not on the possession of or threat of use of nuclear weapons, or

First Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/DIS/3178 12th Meeting (PM) 12 October 2000

attempts by one country to impose its will on others. The Israeli policies, including its unsafeguarded possession of nuclear weapons, had contradicted its declared pronouncements for peace, he said.

Concern about biological weapons had increased since the Convention banning their use had entered into force 25 years ago, said the representative of Iceland. Failure to conclude negotiations for a verification mechanism of that Treaty -- following a nearly six-year effort to do so -- would send the wrong signal to those who might be contemplating the acquisition of biological weapons. Also, for a long time the world community had recognized the value of a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons. The Conference on Disarmament should commence such negotiations at an early date, with a view to concluding a treaty within five years.

Speaking in his capacity as President of the Conference on Disarmament, the representative of Bulgaria introduced the report of the 2000 session of the Conference, as well as a draft resolution asserting the urgency for the Conference to fulfil its role as the unique multilateral forum for negotiations on disarmament. The text welcomed the strong collective interest of the Conference to commence substantive work, as soon as possible, during its 2001 session.

Statements were also made by the representatives of Georgia, Republic of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Singapore, Madagascar, Cyprus, Armenia, and the Republic of Moldova.

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

First Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/DIS/3178 12th Meeting (PM) 12 October 2000

Committee Work Programme

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this afternoon to continue its general debate. The representatives of the following countries were expected to participate in today�s discussion: Iceland, Bulgaria, Georgia, Bahrain, Macedonia, Singapore, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Madagascar, Cyprus, Armenia, Togo, Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova.

The debate was expected to focus on, among other items, the 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 included 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 those created under the following treaties: 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 new 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), 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

THORSTEINN INGOLFSSON (Iceland) said that the outcome of the 2000 NPT Review Conference had marked the high point in developments on the multilateral disarmament agenda. The unequivocal undertaking by the nuclear-weapon States to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear weapons was significant and provided an important reference point in the field of nuclear disarmament. The conclusions of the Conference undoubtedly strengthened the NPT regime. The agreement on practical steps towards nuclear disarmament had defined a common framework for the way ahead and would hopefully produce tangible results. Universal adherence to the NPT and full compliance with its provisions remained fundamental to nuclear non-proliferation.

He said that the CTBT was a central building block in the global order, aimed at halting the proliferation of and reducing the reliance on nuclear weapons. The decision by the Russian Federation to ratify that Treaty was welcome, and all those who had not yet signed were urged to do so. He especially called upon those States that had not yet ratified the CTBT to do so, especially those countries whose ratification was required for its entry into force.

Bilateral nuclear negotiations between the United States and the Russian Federation, he said, were central to the non-proliferation effort and constituted a �backbone� of the nuclear disarmament effort. In that context, he welcomed the ratification of START II by the Russian Federation in April. The Treaty was an important and integral part of the disarmament process. Hopefully, START III would include further deep reductions in the nuclear arsenals of both countries. The ABM Treaty remained a cornerstone of strategic stability. As such, he welcomed the reaffirmation by the United States and the Russian Federation, and more generally, the widely shared recognition of the need to preserve that Treaty.

He said that for a long time the international community had recognized the potential value of a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons. In that respect, he called upon the Conference on Disarmament to commence negotiations on such a treaty at an early date, with a view to concluding an instrument within five years. Concern about biological weapons had increased since the Biological Weapons Convention entered into force 25 years ago. That was the background for the nearly six-year effort to negotiate an effective verification mechanism to reinforce that Convention. Failure to complete the protocol would send the wrong signal to those who might be contemplating the acquisition of biological weapons. Clearly, such a mechanism to provide transparency in that important area was needed.

The issue of small arms and light weapons was highly important, he said. It was pleasing to note, therefore, that it was now being addressed in earnest. The problems caused by the proliferation of those arms had posed a common challenge, given the grave suffering that they caused around the world. The decision to hold a United Nations Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All its Aspects was a �step in the right direction�. The Ottawa process and Convention was showing tangible results, which were reflected in the lowered production of anti-personnel mines, an almost complete end to exports, the reduced use of those weapons, increased destruction of stockpiles, a decrease in the number of victims and an increase in demining.

PETER CHKHEIDZE (Georgia) said that his country attached high importance to the significant progress achieved in the process of international disarmament over the last four to five years. The signing of the CTBT, entry into force of the Chemical Weapons Convention, and steady progress achieved in the elaboration of the verification protocol of the Biological Weapons Convention were solid examples of the successful efforts of the international community. He did not, however, believe that the world had put the nuclear threat behind it. Much remained to be done to make such a dream. Regrettably, some of the most powerful instruments in the domain of disarmament -- the CTBT, the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Biological Weapons Convention still lacked universal reach. The political will of States, as demonstrated by developments on the issue of halting the production of fissile material was not sufficient.

It was obvious that armed conflicts were nurtured by an inflow of arms, he said. Yet, the international community had failed to establish an effective mechanism to curb the proliferation of such arms. Remarkably, the number of people killed by light arms annually exceeded considerably the number of those who died after the atomic bombardment of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He expected the international community to make good on the commitment made at the Millennium Summit to take concerted action to end illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons. It also hoped that the 2001 Conference on small arms would yield positive results based on a common responsibility for the children of the world. He placed the highest priority ensuring: transparency in arms dealings; effectiveness of the Register of Conventional Arms; and the expansion of its scope, by providing for an additional information on military holdings.

He said that Georgia had been confronting acute problems since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Abkhazia, the western province of Georgia, still remained under the control of separatist forces who vehemently neglected and obstructed the efforts of the international community to peacefully resolve the conflict.

PETKO DRAGANOV (Bulgaria), speaking in his capacity as President of the Conference on Disarmament, presented the report of the 2000 session of the Conference (document A/55/27). He also introduced the draft resolution on the report (document A/C.1/55/L.5). Like the Conference itself, the draft resolution was straightforward and to the point. The text referred to the importance of the unique multilateral forum for negotiations on disarmament and asserted the urgency for the Conference to fulfil that role and make progress on substance.

He said the text also welcomed the strong collective interest of the Conference in commencing substantive work, as soon as possible, during the 2001 session. It also welcomed the Conference decision to request the current and incoming Presidents to conduct joint consultations during the intersessional period, aimed at achieving that goal. Also by the draft, the General Assembly would further encourage the Conference to continue the ongoing review of its membership, agenda and methods of work. He hoped, as in previous years, the draft would be adopted without a vote.

NASTE CALOVSKI (The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) said that the twenty-first century should be a century of cooperation not confrontation; of integration, not of coexistence; of security and development, not of conflict and poverty. Success in reaching those goals would come as a result of efforts of the international community. The United Nations should lead the change towards the better.

He said that the unequivocal commitment of the nuclear-weapon States undertaken at the 2000 NPT Review Conference to totally eliminate their nuclear arsenals, halt the spread of nuclear weapons and strengthen the standards governing the peaceful use of nuclear energy, was the most important disarmament effort of the year. There was no reason why that trend should not continue. The most important task of the international community was to convince the Member States who were not party to the NPT to join that Treaty. Joining the NPT was the best way to eliminate the nuclear danger and strengthen international security.

He said that in the near future, absolute priority needed to be given to the start of negotiations on a universal and verifiable fissile material cut-off treaty. There was no political rationale for not doing so.

His country considered the establishment of nuclear-weapons-free zones a positive factor in strengthening international relations and in the maintenance of international peace and security, he said. It was pleased that the Commission on Disarmament had adopted principles and guidelines for the establishment of such zones. The most important of those principles was that they should be established on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among the States of the region concerned. Finally, he said, sustainable economic development and the elimination of poverty was a key for better international relations and progress. The attainment of that goal needed no nuclear option. Abandoning the nuclear option and becoming a non-nuclear State could be extremely beneficial, as had been illustrated by Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan.

SALAH ALI HASAN HELAL AL-MALKI (Bahrain) said that, despite the end of the cold war a decade ago, disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation had been a source of disquiet for the human race. The negative implications of those weapons had threatened security and peace on the planet. States were still divided between those that developed, manufactured and possessed those weapons and those that sought to do so. The international community had been focused upon the gravity of such weapons. World leaders had called for an international conference to examine ways to minimize the risks posed by nuclear weapons.

He said that nuclear disarmament negotiations should be accorded the highest priority, because of the catastrophes that those could cause. Countries that possessed weapons of mass destruction should realize that they had many more than were required for security and deterrence. That should impel the global community to redouble its efforts, in order to provide a less dangerous environment. Regrettably, the nuclear-weapon States were still unable to muster the political will to reach agreements that would reduce their nuclear arsenals, as a first step towards the elimination of all weapons of mass destruction. He hoped an agreement would soon be reached to hold a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament.

He said that, undoubtedly, regional and international security was closely linked. Thus, security and stability in the Middle East and the Arab Gulf required confidence-building among the political entities there. Creating a nuclear-weapon-free zone there could achieve that goal. Israel�s refusal to accede to the NPT and to place its nuclear installations under full-scope IAEA safeguards had presented a serious imbalance and posed a grave risk to regional security. Moreover, it had compromised the universality of the NPT, despite the fact that more than one-quarter of a century had elapsed since its entry into force.

That represented a �blatant flouting� of the international community�s political will, he said. Nonetheless, its calls had gone unheeded. What Israel had achieved by using light weapons against defenceless citizens and against a Palestinian child had provided crystal clear evidence of abuse by Israel�s internal forces. Israel�s force was not defensive or designed for deterrence only; it was destructive and could be used at any time.

He said that the illicit transfer and trafficking in conventional arms, particularly light weapons, was distressing, especially when they found their way into the hands of certain groups that �rode roughshod� over peace and tranquility. The accumulation of those arms by terrorists had destabilized societies and jeopardized their security. He attached great importance to reducing the illicit trafficking in such weapons, because of to their negative economic and social impact and their close link to organized crime and terrorism. Illicit trafficking in such weapons did not really exist in Bahrain, because the Government had taken all measures to control the flow.

World leaders at the Millennium Summit had reconfirmed their desire to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, and to consider all options towards achieving that goal, he said. They had also decided to take concerted measures to eliminate, once and for all, the illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons. That decision had confirmed the need to implement all United Nations resolutions on disarmament, as well as all relevant conventions and treaties. VANESSA CHAN (Singapore) said that her country practiced total disarmament within its borders. Its gun control laws were among the strictest in the world. That was because the citizens knew that they could rely on the efficiency and impartiality of the police and judiciary to assure their security against armed lawlessness. There was no global police or global judiciary to secure countries against external or internal violence.

Weapons of mass destruction did not belong in the category of arms whose possession could increase State security, she went on. Their potential for causing huge destruction of life, and possibly even destroying human civilization itself, rendered them utterly unsafe, not only for those against whom their use was threatened, but for neighbouring countries and their possessors. She welcomed the successful outcome of the NPT Review Conference this year and hoped for greater progress in disarmament. Universal participation and individual respect by States parties for the international legal regimes limiting the existence of weapons of mass destruction was the surest way for the international community to secure itself against their threat.

Her country recognized the suffering and loss of life caused by the uncontrolled and illicit proliferation of conventional weapons, particularly small arms and light weapons, in many regions of the world. Those weapons were now used largely in conflicts within States, rather than between them. Singapore looked forward to the 2001 Conference on small arms and hoped that it would encourage States to take substantive steps to curb the illicit trade in those weapons. The legitimate trade for purposes of self-defence and maintenance of international law and order would, however, not be an appropriate focus of the Conference. Suitable regimes for conventional weapons called for similar considerations as those that applied to the regimes for weapons of mass destruction, including universal participation, a willingness to adhere strictly to the regime and an effective verification mechanism.

MADINA B. JARBUSSYNOVA (Kazakhstan) said her country had proved its commitment to ridding the world of nuclear weapons by joining the CTBT as a non- nuclear-weapon State in December 1999. After withdrawing the last nuclear warheads from its territory in April 1995, and eliminating the remaining nuclear devices at the Semipalatinsk test site on 31 May 1995, Kazakhstan had become the second country after South Africa, to voluntarily refuse to possess nuclear weapons.

That positive contribution to the field of disarmament had been reflected in the final document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference, she said. For the first time in the past 15 years, five nuclear-weapon States made a collective and unequivocal commitment to eliminate their nuclear arsenals. She said that the decision by the United States not to deploy a national missile defence system had provided an opportunity to continue negotiations on preserving one of the cornerstones of global strategic stability -� the ABM Treaty.

The earth shook on 29 July, as a result of the explosion of 100 metric tons of granutolulol at the former Semipalatinsk test range in the test grove at the Degelen mountains. Following that explosion, the last nuclear weapon test grove was put out of action. It had been the third calibration experiment made on the range, as part of a series of Kazakh-American experiments. The destruction of the test grove and the experimental explosion had been used for calibrating the International Monitoring System for conducting nuclear tests, as created within the framework of the CTBT. The data would allow the international community to detect and more precisely discriminate between nuclear explosions and those resulting from earthquakes or other explosions. That would ensure effective observance of the CTBT and create a monitoring system, that would make it impossible to keep nuclear tests secret in any part of the world.

Other types of weapons of mass destruction posed no less danger than nuclear weapons, she said. Thus, it was vitally important not only to destroy those weapons, but to prevent the development of new types of such weapons. In 1993, her country signed the Chemical Weapons Convention, with the intention of strengthening the international non-proliferation regime of all types of weapons of mass destruction. Regrettably, international instruments aimed at eliminating that class of weapons had not yet gained universal support and, thus, could not be fully effective. The situation with regard to the ABM Treaty was also a cause for concern.

All countries should �radically change� that situation and support the Secretary-General�s proposal to hold an international conference to find ways to avert the nuclear threat, she went on. Establishing control over the manufacture of fissile material would be the first stage of that process. Stockpiles of enriched uranium and plutonium and large quantities of fissile material received from the destroyed nuclear warheads had threatened the non- proliferation process. She called for negotiations, within the framework of the Conference on Disarmament, to conclude a fissile material cut-off treaty. She welcomed the Russian initiative to elaborate and implement an international project to allow the phase-out of weapons grade materials -� enriched uranium and pure plutonium �- from use in nuclear power production.

She said her country had attached great importance to the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia. Such a zone would be an important step towards strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime and promoting general and complete disarmament. Her country would continue to participate in the work being carried out to create such a zone. The non-nuclear-weapon States had the right to expect firm legal security guarantees. Adoption of a protocol on security assurances was one possible way of solving that problem. Mongolia had contributed to the process of general and complete disarmament, and she had fully supported its tireless efforts to establish its nuclear-weapon-free status.

FAWZI BIN ABDUL MAJEED SHOBOKSHI (Saudi Arabia) said that his country had been one of the first to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention and the NPT. It had also refrained from producing nuclear weapons or allowing a third party to place nuclear weapons on its soil. His country had actively participated in the 2000 NPT Review Conference and had adopted a positive position towards efforts to reach a total ban on nuclear weapon tests. It had also participated in the Executive Council of the Chemical Weapons Convention.

He said that the successful establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones in certain parts of the world had resulted from cooperation among the countries involved and their belief in peaceful co-existence as a positive step towards ridding the world of nuclear weapons. The Middle East, regrettably, was not free from nuclear weapons, because Israel still refused to adhere to calls not to develop, produce or test them, despite invitations from the following: United Nations; International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); the Non-Aligned Movement; and the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Israel refused to join the NPT or subject its nuclear facilities to IAEA safeguards.

The Israeli position contradicted its declared pronouncements for peace, he said. Real peace should be founded on trust and good intentions between the countries of the region, and not on the possession of or threat of use of nuclear weapons, or attempts by one country to impose its will on others. Those policies would not only increase regional instability, but also threaten international peace and security. Accordingly, he called upon Israel to immediately join the NPT, as urged by the General Assembly and the Security Council. In addition, all Israeli nuclear activities should be subjected to the guarantees of the IAEA, until the Middle East was free from all weapons of mass destruction.

He said his country supported transparency in armaments as one of the means by which to consolidate international peace and security. In that regard, the United Nations Register for Conventional Arms represented a first attempt to deal with transparency globally. Unfortunately, more than half of the Member States had continuously declined to provide data to the Register. Their fears should be dealt with effectively and in a manner that guaranteed international participation in the Register. He agreed with the League of Arab States that an expanded Register -- which included data on advanced conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, and advanced technology with military applications -- might make it more balanced and less selective. That enlargement could attract more participants.

JEAN DELACROIX BAKONIARIVO (Madagascar) said that the peace and security to which the international community aspired was not yet a reality, despite the positive elements of the negotiations in certain parts of the world. The report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization showed that since the end of the cold war the nature of the menace facing world peace had evolved from international conflicts to civil wars, and from violations of frontiers to violations of the rights of individuals.

His country was satisfied with the positive outcome of the NTP Review Conference, which, for the first time in 15 years, was able to adopt a consensus final document. He hoped that decisive stage would open the way for significant and tangible advances in the area of nuclear disarmament, both multilateral and bilateral. The seriousness of the menace of nuclear weapons did not allow for any justification for the maintenance of such weapons. He, therefore, supported the convening of an international conference to identify the ways of eliminating nuclear dangers. He also hoped that the commitment of the nuclear weapons States to totally eliminate their nuclear arsenals would be translated into concrete action in the near future.

The proliferation of small arms and light weapons contributed to the spread and prolongation of conflicts, he said. Light in size, those weapons were heavy in consequences, disorganizing social and economic structures and bringing about a heavy loss of life. They were the weapons that caused the greatest destruction in the twentieth century. More than 35 million people, 90 per cent of them civilians, had lost their lives in the 170 wars that had taken place since the end of the cold war. Eradicating the scourge of light weapons required the adoption of a joint and coordinated approach by the international community, he added. It was important not to lose sight of the economic conditions of underdevelopment and other factors that fed the demand for those weapons. He hoped that the 2001 Conference on small arms would establish an international legal regime aimed at ending that illicit traffic. It should also elaborate a code of conduct for transfers of such arms. The measures from the Conference should include an international norm for marking such weapons and their munitions, as well as a system of international certificates of use.

SOTOS ZAXKHEOS (Cyprus) said he had aligned himself with the statement delivered by the representative of France on behalf of the European Union. By the adoption of the consensus document by the 2000 NPT Review Conference, the parties had bridged their differences. Despite the uncertain international context in which the Conference had taken place, the international community had demonstrated a remarkable commitment and determination to strengthen the non- proliferation regime and work towards the full realization of the Treaty�s goals.

He said he wished to congratulate the Russian Federation for its recent ratification of the CTBT and START II. Regarding the bilateral reduction process, he supported the prompt entry into force and timely implementation of START II and the early commencement of negotiations on START III, with a view to achieving further reductions in strategic nuclear weapons. His country fully supported the consolidation of the existing nuclear-weapon-free zones as an important component of the effort towards achieving a nuclear-weapon-free world. In that respect, he attached great importance to the expansion and, in particular, to the creation of such zones in areas of tension, including his region.

Two years ago, in his address to the Committee, he had raised the decision of the Turkish Government to build a nuclear power plant in a highly seismic area in southeastern Turkey. He had underscored the environmental consequences of that decision, as well as the threats to international peace and security. Fortunately, the Turkish Government had provisionally suspended that project. He hoped it would be canceled altogether. Turning to the situation in the Conference on Disarmament, he joined previous speakers in expressing his concern for its continuing inability to undertake substantive work, including the immediate commencement of negotiations on a fissile material cut-off for nuclear weapons.

The illicit trafficking in small arms was another issue of grave concern, he said. As such, he fully supported all national, regional and international efforts aimed at more effective action to eliminate that phenomenon in an increasingly interdependent world. The cost of inaction to human lives, economies and the social fabric of societies was �simply unacceptable�. Overall, much more should be done in the field of conventional weapons. At the same time, the overwhelming response of the international community to ban anti- personnel mines had been encouraging.

He said his country had signed the Ottawa Convention as an expression of its determination to join the global community in its efforts to eliminate that totally inhuman method of warfare. Against a background of the constant threat posed by the 36,000 occupation troops stationed on the island, its decision to join the Ottawa Convention was a further demonstration of its strong commitment to disarmament and respect for the multilateral norms set by that instrument.

MOVSES ABELIAN (Armenia) affirmed the crucial importance of the NPT to international peace and security. Further efforts were needed to involve those States that had not yet acceded to the Treaty in the nuclear non-proliferation regime. The problem of proliferation was a global one, but essentially regional security problems stood in the way of achieving the universality of the NPT.

His country supported the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones that were freely arrived at among countries of the region concerned, he said. He would back any new proposals for the establishment of such zones, where the concerned States reached a consensus among themselves prior to seeking international consideration. He welcomed the ratification of START II by the Russian Duma. That decision constituted an achievement in nuclear disarmament in itself and also opened the way for the commencement of negotiations on START III.

The world was facing another danger in the growing pressure to deploy national missile defences, he said. He was concerned that the deployment of such systems could lead to a new arms race, set back nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation policies and create incentives for missile proliferation. The concerned States should take those factors into consideration before taking steps that could jeopardize the ABM Treaty, thus reducing rather than enhancing global security.

He said that despite its legitimate security concerns, his country had foregone outright the option of having any types of weapons of mass destruction on its territory. On 24 September 1991, three days after it declared independence, its Parliament adopted a decision to abide by the NPT. Shortly after its formal accession to the Treaty as a non-nuclear-weapon State in 1993, it concluded a comprehensive safeguards agreement with the IAEA. That made it possible for it to activate its peaceful nuclear programme with the assistance of the IAEA, and to solve the drastic energy crisis in his country.

VALERI KUCHYNSKI (Ukraine) said that the Millennium Summit was a unique occasion for the heads of State and government to express their views on the fundamental challenges to be addressed by the international community at the dawn of the new millennium. It proved, once again, that the issues of international peace and security, arms control and disarmament remained among the imperative priorities for humankind. A decade ago, his country had solemnly proclaimed its intention to adhere to three non-nuclear principles: not to accept, produce or acquire nuclear weapons. It had reliably put those principles into practice by fulfilling the relevant treaties on nuclear non- proliferation and on nuclear weapons reduction and by ensuring, simultaneously, their strict implementation.

In that context, he said that the removal of all nuclear warheads from its territory more than four years ago was a significant event. The ratification of START II by the Russian Federation earlier this year and that Treaty�s entry into force would infuse the process of nuclear arms reduction with a new dynamic. It could provide an additional impetus to the negotiation process in which all the nuclear-weapon States participated. Meanwhile, however, the future of the agreements establishing the basis for maintaining global strategic stability depended on the future of the ABM Treaty. His country remained committed to that Treaty and recognized its fundamental value in ensuring continuity in the strategic arms reduction process.

The uncertainty surrounding the United States deferral of its decision to proceed with the development of a limited national missile defence had negatively affected the ABM Treaty�s viability and effectiveness. Ratification by the Russian Federation of the so-called package of New York agreements to the ABM Treaty, signed in 1997, was welcome. Other parties should follow. His Government would ratify those documents during its current parliamentary session. The outcome of the 2000 NPT Review Conference was encouraging, but despite the momentum it gave to the pursuit of further disarmament and non- proliferation goals, not all of the problems had been settled and much challenging work lay ahead.

At the crossroads of two millenniums, he said, the problems related to certain types of conventional weapons, such as anti-personnel landmines, small arms and light weapons, had reached the same level of importance as the issues of non-proliferation and the elimination of weapons of mass destruction. He was confident that the 2001 Review Conference of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons would elaborate steps to further marginalize the role of anti-personnel landmines in military doctrines. At the same time, his country remained devoted to the goals of the Ottawa Convention on the total ban of those weapons.

ION BOTNARU (Republic of Moldova) said that the importance of non- proliferation and disarmament had been stressed this year in several forums, including the Millennium Summit. The historic commitment made by the nuclear- weapon States at the recent NPT Review Conference was particularly relevant. The international community should capitalize on that development and should implement the package of decisions adopted at the Conference.

He was concerned that the process of nuclear disarmament could be hampered as a result of lack of entry into force of the CTBT, and the weakening of the ABM Treaty, he said. He hoped that those countries whose signatures were

required for entry into force of the CTBT would sign that Treaty. He supported transparency in disarmament. The United Nations Register of Conventional Arms was an important instrument for achieving such transparency. Moldova had provided the required data and information for the Register for this year.

He said that small arms and light weapons were responsible for thousands of injuries and deaths throughout the world. The excessive accumulation of small arms and light weapons exacerbated conflicts. In many instances, stocks of weapons were stolen for use by paramilitaries or sold to groups in other regions. Those weapons supported terrorist and criminal groups, as well as secessionist movements. Such weapons had been responsible for the devastation of parts of Moldova. The Government had taken measures to regulate such arms, including a new law on their import and export. Fighting the problem required global effort. The 2001 Conference on small arms was an important opportunity to address the problem in a comprehensive way. He hoped that the Conference would agree on a comprehensive plan for tackling the problem at the international, regional and national levels. Further, the international community should provide financial and technical support to affected countries to enable them implement effective measures.

* *** *

United Nations