Text Only | Disarmament Diplomacy | Disarmament Documentation | ACRONYM Reports
Back to the Acronym home page
British Policy
South Asia
About Acronym

Disarmament Diplomacy

Issue No. 51, October 2000

Appendix: First Committee General Debate

General Debate of the UN First Committee (Disarmament and International Security), October 2-13, 2000.

Note: unless otherwise stated, the source for the excerpts reproduced below is the website of the Women' International League for Peace and Freedom, http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org, which also includes a wealth of related material including working papers and draft resolutions.

Disarmament and the Rule of Law: Statement by Jayantha Dhanapala

Jayantha Dhanapala, UN Under-Secretary General for Disarmament Affairs, October 2: "With the opening of the first General Debate of this Committee in the new millennium - on a day that also marks the anniversary of the birth of Mahatma Gandhi - it is surely appropriate to recall some of the extraordinary events we have witnessed this year. These events remind us of the important contributions this Committee has made and can make in promoting the development of a global ' of law' in the disarmament field, even in the face of difficult obstacles. ...

Earlier this year, the Secretary-General' Millennium Report identified two important priorities in this field - the global elimination of nuclear weapons and progress in the control of small arms. These themes, among others, were echoed by over a thousand non-governmental organizations that participated in the ' the Peoples Millennium Forum' held in May. In August, the ' World Peace Summit of Religious and Spiritual Leaders' issued a universal call to abolish all weapons of mass destruction. This call was echoed in early September at the ' of Presiding Officers of National Parliaments,' organized by the Inter-Parliamentary Union. Culminating all these events, the historic UN Millennium Declaration of September 8 stressed the need for progress in eliminating all weapons of mass destruction, ending illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons, and universalising legal norms relating to landmines. The Declaration issued after the Security Council' Summit also stressed the ' importance' of disarmament in the context of post-conflict situations. We thus have a unique opportunity to convert this vision into reality.

These were not by any means the only positive developments in disarmament this year. Last May, the States Parties attending the 2000 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons agreed on practical steps to implement Article VI of the Treaty pertaining to nuclear disarmament. These included an ' undertaking' by the nuclear-weapon states to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals. They also agreed that the achievement of this goal offers the ' absolute guarantee' against the use of such weapons - a conclusion that strikes at the very foundations of nuclear deterrence and missile defence as alternative security measures. The Final Document also re-affirmed that full-scope IAEA safeguards were a ' precondition' for new nuclear supply arrangements - yet another step ahead for this new global norm.

The deliberations in this Committee over the next five weeks will reveal the degree of political will to implement these various undertakings. Because many of these commitments are legally binding, the success of international disarmament efforts will continue to depend heavily upon the rule of law, which requires careful nurturing. We have, for example, a number of important treaties that still fall short of universal membership or that have not been ratified by key states. ... We have seen progress in recent years with respect to the CTBT and START II, yet these treaties are still not in force. We have three states with well-known nuclear weapons capabilities and unsafeguarded nuclear facilities that remain outside the NPT, while many other States parties have not concluded their respective IAEA safeguards agreements - including the Additional Protocol. ...

Meanwhile, despite persistent efforts to promote universal membership in the Chemical Weapons Convention and Biological Weapons Convention, many states remain non-parties. Other efforts have long been underway to create a verification protocol for the BWC, a goal that, once achieved, will significantly enhance international confidence in full implementation by all states of their obligations under that treaty. ...

The failure once again of the Conference on Disarmament to agree on a substantive work agenda this year has also frustrated the negotiation of new international legal norms, as seen in the inability of its members to reach a consensus on terms for multilateral negotiations on nuclear disarmament, the prevention of an arms race in outer space, and the fissile material treaty, while efforts to conclude a treaty on negative security assurances continue to languish in that important forum.

In the field of disarmament, it is of course difficult to have a functioning rule of law without transparency, and in this respect it is disturbing indeed that the peoples of the world still do not know for certain the number of nuclear weapons there are around them. ...

Yet the under-development of the rule of law is perhaps most apparent in the field of nuclear-weapon delivery systems, despite the disarmament goal covering such systems found in the Preamble of the NPT. There are some grounds for hope that the international community will take up the challenge noted in April last year by the Secretary-General when he commented on the lack of multilateral norms with respect both to missiles and missile defences. As international awareness of this problem continues to grow, one can well expect increased multilateral consideration of the issue. A similar problem exists with respect to other delivery systems for weapons of mass destruction.

With respect to missile defence, the world welcomed the recent decision by the United States to postpone the deployment of a national missile defense system. Efforts must now continue to develop multilateral norms governing existing missile arsenals and the global missile proliferation threat, while preserving the ABM Treaty as the ' of strategic stability' - yet another important goal identified in the Final Document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference.

The rule of law with respect to conventional arms remains severely under-developed, though the convening next year of the UN Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects offers an excellent opportunity for significant progress. The extraordinary death and destruction - particularly in the civilian sector - that has resulted from such weapons simply can no longer be ignored by the international community. This makes it all the more important for states to reach an early decision on a date and venue for this important conference and to proceed expeditiously with the business at hand.

I am pleased in this connection to report that I have just returned from witnessing the destruction of over a thousand small arms in a ' de la Paix' in Agadez, Niger. This event - along with the moratorium on the import, export, or manufacture of light weapons announced two years ago by ECOWAS - illustrates some of the progressive disarmament activities underway in West Africa. Niger, with its desperate poverty, is endeavouring to nurture a fragile peace and a recently elected democratic government. The Department for Disarmament Affairs, along with UNDP [United Nations Development Programme], proposes to embark on a weapons-for-development programme for which the generous assistance of the donor community is urgently needed. Initiatives such as these deserve specific recognition and vigorous support throughout the world community.

Yet two important UN tools for transparency and confidence-building in the field of conventional arms continue to show signs of stagnation and even regression, in the face of the reluctance by many states to make use of them. An expert group has been examining ways and means to increase participation in the Register of Conventional Arms and I hope their views will reach a wide audience and receive close attention by all states that have neglected to use this specific tool. Many countries also have not used the standardized reporting instrument for military expenditures. At a time of rising military budgets, it becomes all the more important to have reliable information about the scope of this particular problem.

With respect to landmines, the States Parties to the Mine Ban Convention and the amended Protocol to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons are continuing their efforts to achieve full universality of membership in these important accords. Two weeks ago, the States Parties to the Mine Ban Convention held their second meeting and addressed several important issues, including victim assistance and the most fundamental goal of disarmament - namely, stockpile destruction. ...

Today, it is increasingly apparent that disarmament pays dividends that can serve virtually all the purposes and objectives under the Charter. In the years to come, as disarmament gradually becomes increasingly mainstreamed as a fundamental UN activity - as I hope it will - the impact and importance of the deliberations in this Committee will only grow as a natural result. The ultimate sustainability of disarmament - not just as a fundamental activity of the United Nations, but as a priority for action by national governments and non-governmental organizations - depends not just on the ideal it inspires, but the practical results it delivers."

I. Nuclear Weapons & Missile Defence

Armenia (Movses Abelian, October 12): "We facing yet another danger now, namely the growing pressure to deploy national missile defences. Armenia is really concerned that their deployment can lead to a new arms race..."

Australia (Les Luck, October 10): "Australia is a fully committed supporter of the IAEA' strengthened safeguards system developed to remedy the limitations exposed by Iraq' clandestine nuclear weapons programme. ... We are pleased to have been the first country to ratify an Additional Protocol, and urge all states yet to sign and ratify an Additional Protocol to do so as quickly as possible. ... Multilateral efforts to develop international norms against missile proliferation could also have value in building confidence and in supplementing non-proliferation objectives. It is also worth noting the connection between missile proliferation and interest in the development of missile defence systems. Missile defence is a direct response to the ever-increasing threat posed by missile proliferation."

Belarus (Sergei Martynov, October 4): "We are still convinced that the initiative put forward by the Republic of Belarus to establish a nuclear-weapon-free space in Central and Eastern Europe meets the interests of both...European...security itself and global security... Naturally, it is equally evident to us that presently dominating political factors make it difficult for the majority of our European partners to accept that proposal."

Brazil (Luiz de Araujo Castro, October 2): "[We hope] that the US decision to put off initial work on a missile defence system can promote understanding and progress in multilateral disarmament fora, particularly in the CD. ... Together with a number of other countries, Brazil intends to present once again...a draft resolution on the Southern Hemisphere and adjacent areas free of nuclear weapons. We are convinced that freeing the Southern Hemisphere from nuclear weapons is a common initiative of interest to all members of nuclear-weapon-free zones as well as to other countries."

Cameroon (Martin Belinga-Eboutou, October 13): "[Cameroon] deplored the fact that the Pelindaba Treaty had still not entered into force... [His government] supported the proposal by the Secretary-General for the convening of an international conference on the means of putting an end to the nuclear threat." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3179)

Canada (Christopher Westdal, October 5): "It is true...that [US missile defence] plans have provoked fears of Unilateralism, a compromised or abandoned ABM Treaty, strategic instability, a renewed arms race... [I]t is also true that President Clinton' [deferral] decision...took explicit account of the concerns and opinions of others and of the danger of spurring new regional arms races, that the ABM Treaty has been widely reaffirmed as a cornerstone of strategic stability, and that energetic and creative efforts are gaining force to stem the spread of WMD-bearing missiles... It is true that there remains an ongoing belief in the validity of nuclear deterrence and that nuclear weapons have been seen by some as symbols of status and national prestige. But it is also true...that NATO, with active Canadian commitment, is reviewing its non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament options, given ' reduced salience of nuclear weapons.' Moreover, the aggregate number of nuclear weapons continues to drop, Russia has proposed reciprocal reductions to lower levels than those foreseen in the 1997 Helsinki agreement, and the UK and France...have cut their arsenals significantly, increased transparency and stopped making fissile material for weapons."

Caribbean Community/CARICOM (Diane Quarless of Jamaica, October 9): "CARICOM considered particularly important the conclusions and recommendations of the NPT Review Conference regarding the strengthening of measures and international regulations to protect States from the risks associated with the maritime transportation of radioactive materials. It continued to call for the cessation of that practice. The international community should consider the establishment of a comprehensive regulatory framework promoting greater State responsibility in such areas as disclosure, liability and compensation in relation to accidents." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3175)

Chile (Juan Gabriel Valdes, October 4): "[W]e continue to support fully the initiative undertaken by the coalition for a ' Agenda' to include elements for a debate that more accurately reflects our contemporary realities. ... [W]e wish to insist once again on the validity of the findings contained in the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice... We believe that the mere possession of nuclear weapons, in situations of intense hostility, can give rise to what constitutes a ' of the use of force', which is prohibited by Article 2, paragraph 4 of the Charter of the United Nations, and by Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties... Chile is of the view that the advisory opinion of the ICJ constitutes an unavoidable conceptual reference framework for opening up new paths to cooperation... We believe, moreover, that it would be useful to have recourse in the future to the [ICJ]...on matters of similar importance. ... We welcome...the fact that in its report on nuclear-weapon-free zones, the Disarmament Commission recognised the cooperation to which such zones can give rise in the norms that govern the international transport of...[radioactive] substances."

China (Hu Xiaodi, October 3): "we have taken note of the recent decision by President Clinton not to deploy a national missile defence system at this time. We think this is a wise decision. Meanwhile, we have also noticed that the NMD programme has not yet been given up, and the research and development of this system is now still intensifying. ... At this UNGA session, China will join Russia, Belarus and other countries in submitting a draft resolution on the ABM Treaty for the second time. We expect more countries to support this draft... We also hope that the United States will heed the appeals of the international community, consult other countries on the issue, and drop the NMD programme as soon as possible... China holds that missile [proliferation] is a complex global issue... Adoption of cartel-style control measures...does not offer a long-term solution, though it may ease the problem temporarily. ... [A]n open, non-discriminatory global missile control regime should be established to provide uniform international criteria to guide the practice of all countries. ...

Whether or not there is an arms race at this stage in outer space should not constitute the factor deciding whether or not the international community should pay attention to the danger... Mankind will pay a high price if it takes action only after the arms race in outer space becomes reality. In this connection, we are pleased to note that, at the recent UN Millennium Summit, President Putin...proposed convening an international conference in 2001 on the prevention of militarisation of outer space. We support this initiative and expect the international community to make positive responses. ...

The Chinese government has already submitted the CTBT to the National People' Congress (NPC) for review and approval. We hope that the treaty will be smoothly ratified by the NPC, but we also expect other countries concerned to create necessary external conditions for the ratification. ... China believes that [a] FMCT will be conducive to nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation. ... At the same time, a series of negative developments, including the setback of [the] CTBT [ratification effort] and the attempt to overthrow the ABM Treaty and develop NMD in particular, make people worry that the principles and objectives of FMCT are being compromised. ... We are in favour of adopting appropriate and necessary transparency measures within the framework of eliminating nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, however, we hold that when addressing this issue, the enormous differences between nuclear-weapon states on nuclear strategy, nuclear forces, and [the] security environment, should be taken into consideration. Different states should be allowed to adopt different transparency measures at different stages."

Cuba (Rafael Dausa, October 6): "Three decades have past since the entry into force of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and the nuclear states have just decided to accept, not without difficulties, their unequivocal commitment to the elimination of their nuclear arsenals. In other words, they just have decided to admit the existence of Article VI of the Treaty. ... [O]nly a few months after the NPT Review Conference concluded, some nuclear states did everything possible, until the very last minute, to try to prevent the Millennium Summit' Final Declaration from including even a modest call for holding an international conference [on]...ways and means to eliminate nuclear dangers. ... We are also concerned about the fact that NATO' new Strategic Concept...remains intact. This concept...expands the role of nuclear weapons in security doctrines. ... Notwithstanding international rejection, the United States' to establish a powerful anti-missile defence...programme has not been discarded, but...only postponed. At the same time, the research and development plans for that system are still in progress."

Cyprus (Sotos Zaxkeos, October 12): "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." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3178)

Czech Republic (Pavol Sepelak, October 5): "In our view, pressing for the establishment of nuclear-free zones in regions lacking political conditions, and thus also the necessary consensus of all countries concerned, would not be a very promising step. ... We are worried that the unilateral approach [to missile defence] may renew the risk of the arms race..."

Egypt (Ambassador Aboulgheit, October 3): "We...welcome the proposal...to hold an international conference to determine ways and means for the elimination of nuclear risks, a proposal...adopted...in the final document of the Millennium Summit. We hope that this conference [will] be convened in the nearest future as it constitutes an additional step towards the implementation of the 1987 initiative of Hosni Mubarak regarding the holding of an international conference to study ridding the world of weapons of mass destruction... Egypt realises that facing the threat of nuclear proliferation is a necessity that cannot be delayed or reluctantly faced, [and] from this perspective Egyptian efforts have been multiplied to rid the Middle East from the nuclear threat... These initiatives have received a vast and consolidated [degree of] international support... In our view, transparency in the field of weapons of mass destruction is equal in importance to transparency in conventional weapons because security is indivisible... [The fact that the UN Register of Conventional Arms does not include] weapons of mass destruction...leads to its further rigidity and deficiency."

European Union & Associated States (Hubert de la Fortelle of France, October 2): "[T]he risk of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and its delivery systems was a fundamental problem. The international community should recommit itself to the fight against their proliferation... The Union fully endorsed efforts by the preparatory committee for the CTBT so that the Treaty verification regime could enter into force as soon as possible... The Union...[welcomed] the recent ratification of...[START II] by Russia...[and] hoped that the Treaty and its 1997 protocol would enter into force in the near future for implementation within a planned time frame. The Union also hoped that negotiations on a future START III would commence and that the ABM Treaty would be preserved and strengthened. ... [The Union] urged India and Pakistan not to resume nuclear testing...[and] expressed support for the establishment in the Middle East of a zone totally free of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems. ... The Union also awaited the entry into force of the Treaty of Pelindaba for a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Africa." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3169)

Guinea (Arafan Kabiine Kaba, October 10): "It was regrettable that the commitment made by the nuclear-weapon states on the elimination of their nuclear arsenals was not accompanied by a timetable for the dismantling of such weapons..." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3176)

Holy See (Archbishop Renato R. Martino, October 6): "The Holy See welcomes the UN Millennium Summit Declaration, which resolved ' strive for the elimination of weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear weapons...' The Secretary-General' proposal for a global conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers should be taken into consideration."

Iceland (Thorsteinn Ingolfsson, October 12): "The ABM Treaty remains a cornerstone of strategic stability. We welcome the reaffirmation to that effect by the United States and the Russian Federation, and more generally the widely shared recognition of the need to preserve the treaty."

India (Saleem Shervani, October 6): "For over half a century, the international community has failed to effectively address the threat posed by nuclear weapons. The nuclear-weapon States parties to the NPT and their allies attribute salience to the role of nuclear weapons in their security calculus; new doctrines and justifications for the continued retention of nuclear weapons have been developed and nuclear sharing arrangements maintained. ... India' initiative two years ago in the shape of a resolution entitled ' Nuclear Dangers' received wide-ranging support in the General assembly. India proposes to reintroduce this resolution this year also with the expectation that steps will be urgently taken to reduce the risks posed by hair-trigger alert postures and related doctrines of use. In this context, India fully supports the UN Secretary General' proposal...for an international conference... India remains the only nuclear-weapon state ready to commence multilateral negotiations aimed at creating a nuclear-weapon-free world, thus responding positively to the ICJ' advisory opinion. ... [O]ur policy is based on responsibility and restraint with ' nuclear deterrence' and ' use' defining the deployment posture, along with a civilian command and control structure. India stands ready to strengthen its undertaking on no-first use into bilateral agreements on no-first use or a multilateral instrument on a global no-first use... After a limited series of tests in May 1998, India declared a voluntary moratorium... Developments in other countries indicate that the CTBT is not a simple issue and requires a consensual approach. India is committed to building a consensus nationally for creating a possible environment to sign the Treaty. India also expects that other countries will adhere to this Treaty without conditions. We have made it clear that India will not stand in the way of the Treaty' entry into force. ...

India has consistently maintained that nuclear-weapon-free zones cannot do justice to the wide variety of concerns emanating from the global nature of the threat posed by nuclear weapons. At the same time, we respect the sovereign choice exercised by non-nuclear-weapon states in establishing [such] zones... At the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), India has reiterated that it fully respects the status of the nuclear-weapon-free zone in South East Asia and is ready to convert this commitment into a legal obligation. ... India is prepared to extend all necessary commitments for the early realisation of the nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia... To date, the missile proliferation challenge has been tackled through selective approaches based on alliances and informal approaches relating to technology denial regimes. In recent years, missile defence systems have been put forward as a possible answer. These are unlikely to provide a satisfactory solution and concerns relating to missile proliferation need to be addressed through genuine multilateralism and efforts to diminish the salience of weapons of mass destruction..."

Indonesia (Makarim Wibisono, October 3): "[The NPT Review Conference Final Document] skirted the critical issue of the extent and pace of negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament. ... Furthermore, a diminishing role for these weapons cannot be realistically contemplated as long as strategic doctrines remain unchanged and nuclear weapons continue to underpin the security of military alliances. The reaffirmation of first-use of nuclear weapons, the security role of these weapons, and even the utility of such weapons as a deterrent against non-nuclear attacks, is diametrically opposed to the position taken by the non-aligned countries. ... Tactical nuclear arsenals, which constitute more than half of the global stockpile of nuclear weapons, are not covered by any agreement. ... [G]enuine nuclear disarmament should begin with the elimination of these destabilizing weapons...Declaring the size of stockpiles, together with plutonium and highly-enriched uranium, will enhance overall transparency of nuclear weapon programmes which will constitute a valuable confidence-building measure. It will also reinforce other initiatives such as visits to nuclear weapons facilities...

Iran (Hadi Nejad-Hosseinian, October 8): "The United Nations Disarmament Commission ...could agree this year to start deliberations on nuclear disarmament. This is the first time in the history of the UNDC that [it has started to]...deliberate on this key issue in its broad context. The Commission had a good start this year and we hope that the deliberations in the next two years will contribute substantively to advance nuclear disarmament. ... [N]egative security assurances [are] among those important objectives which have been on the agenda for a long time... The NPT States parties have recently approached this issue afresh and now there is optimism that such arrangements might be positively addressed within the NPT context. ... Delivery systems to carry weapons of mass destruction is a legitimate concern... Iran submitted a resolution last year aimed at addressing this concern... For the first year, the result was rather promising: the resolution was adopted with wide-ranging support and with no negative vote against...""

Israel (Jeremy Issacharoff, October 13): "[W]e note that the Agenda item entitled ' Risk of Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East' is still on our agenda, reflecting a transparent political attempt to single out Israel in an amplified way. This resolution diverts attention away from real and pressing proliferation problems in our area. This item ignores the ongoing problem of Iraq and the continuing efforts of Iran in the nuclear and missile area. In short, we believe such an agenda item has no place in an objective and professional body. ... Israel [has] remained an adherent to the Missile Technology Control Regime and supported [the] efforts of the international community to prevent proliferation...through the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), the Australia Group and the Wassenaar Arrangement. We regard with concern efforts by certain countries to weaken these regimes."

Japan (Seiichoro Noburo, October 3): "I believe that this Millennium UN General Assembly should take practical steps towards the total elimination of nuclear arsenals. ... Japan has decided to introduce a new resolution which marks '' to be taken toward the realization of a world free of nuclear weapons. The previous resolutions sponsored by Japan also set out the steps that would lead to the elimination of nuclear weapons. This year, however, I believe we can better elaborate and define the road map, taking into account the agreement reached at the NPT Review Conference. ... Japan is also concerned about the ongoing proliferation of ballistic missiles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction. ... In this connection, Japan welcomes the statement made by the Democratic People' Republic of Korea to suspend missile launches while its high-level talks with the United States are underway and calls upon it to continue that suspension."

Kazakhstan (Madina B. Jarbussynova, October 12): "Estimating positively the recent [NMD deferral] decision by President Clinton...we consider it as an opportunity for continuation of negotiations on preservation of [the ABM Treaty]... Kazakhstan...attaches...great attention to the realization of the initiative to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia. ... We would like to express our gratitude to those delegations that have expressed understanding in this issue."

Kenya (Fares M. Kuindwa, October 5): "My delegation welcomes the recent decision by [the] United States [on NMD]... Kenya also believes that the best defence against missile weapons is their total elimination."

North Korea (Kim Chang Guk, October 9): "National missile defence and Theatre missile defence systems are, in essence, aimed at dominating the world by power superiority, since they are based on power politics and [a] theory of nuclear predominance. ...The ' issue' on the Korean peninsular...will be resolved with implementation of [the] DPRK-US Agreed Framework. ... Japan should rather...give up the attempt for nuclear armament than trying to take up other issues. We urge Japan to take the road to genuine peace."

South Korea (Sun Joun-yung, October 6): "The proliferation of missiles as a means to deliver weapons of mass destruction is one more factor that seriously undermines international peace and security. In view of the current absence of norms regulating the proliferation of missiles, we share the view that the international community should explore multilateral norms in this regard. Given the complexities inherent to this issue, we believe that a step-by-step approach would be most practical."

Laos (Alounkeo Kittiokhoun, October 11): "[A]lthough imperfect, the CTBT...would help prevent the nuclear-weapon states from improving their nuclear stockpiles, and the non-nuclear-weapon states from acquiring nuclear arsenals. For all these reasons, [Laos]...has on October 2, 2000 deposited [its] instrument of ratification... We appreciate the right decision...not to deploy a missile defence system and we hope that such a deployment shall never take place."

Libya (Isa Ayad Babaa, October 3): "The political commitment of the five nuclear powers to totally eliminate their nuclear arsenals, which was now greater than 35,000 nuclear warheads, was particularly welcome... [Libya] hoped those countries would respect their commitments and use their technology to assist non-nuclear-weapon states in peaceful pursuits. Meanwhile, nuclear missiles must be de-alerted, in order to maintain trust. In addition, all nuclear weapons should be withdrawn from foreign bases and international zones. The international community insisted upon the importance of the NPT, but refused to respect appeals to end the nuclear arms race in the Arab region, in particular in Tel Aviv..." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3170)

Madagascar (Jean Delacroix Bakoniarivo, October 12): "The seriousness of the menace of nuclear weapons did not allow for any justification for the maintenance of such weapons... [His government], therefore, supported the convening of an international conference to identify the ways of eliminating nuclear dangers." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3178)

Malaysia (Hasmy Agam, October 10): "The continuing impasse in the CD is a matter of serious concern... It reflects the stubborn adherence by the nuclear-weapon states to and outmoded concepts of national security based on the doctrine of nuclear deterrence. ... While we are relieved at the [US NMD deferral decision]...we would strongly urge against development and deployment...because of its ramifications to international security. ... In July 1996, the...Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice...reinforced the legal obligation of States Parties to the NPT on the implementation of Article VI of the Treaty. Regrettably, this Opinion continues to be ignored by the nuclear-weapon states. ... [E]fforts in respect of conventional weapons - important as they are - should not detract from nuclear disarmament efforts... Malaysia strongly supports the call by the Secretary-General for the convening of an international conference to consider all aspects of the nuclear weapons issue."

Mexico (Antonio de Icaza, October 2): "This year, we will submit, with Australia and New Zealand, a draft resolution on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, urging states that have not yet done so to sign and ratify the Treaty, and urging all states to maintain their moratoria on nuclear weapon test explosions pending entry into force of the Treaty. ... We recognize the historical importance of the [ABM] Treaty for strategic stability... We also recognize that archaic doctrines of deterrence and mutual assured destruction no longer make sense and must be abandoned. We finally recognize that in the last decades justified concerns on proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems have appeared. It is necessary to undertake negotiations that address both the new concerns and the need to preserve strategic stability. The announcement of the postponement of the decision to deploy [NMD]...opens the possibility for such negotiations to take place."

Morocco (Mohamed Amar, October 13): "The [NPT Review] Conference agreed, for the first time, to cite Israel as the only country of the Middle East that was not party to the NPT and made an appeal to that country to submit its nuclear installations to the guarantees of the IAEA. ... Morocco expected the international community to apply the pressure required to ensure that that appeal was heeded. ... Morocco supported the proposal by the Secretary-General to convene an international conference to study ways of eliminating the risks posed by the nuclear danger."

Myanmar/Burma (U Kyaw Thu, October 11): "As a strong advocate of nuclear disarmament, my delegation has successfully presented the resolution on nuclear disarmament with the support of ASEAN countries and the overwhelming support of [UN] member states... This year again we will submit a resolution, which reflects not only traditional outlooks but also present day realities and priorities including a call for the convening of an international conference on nuclear disarmament... [P]reservation of this [ABM] Treaty is the only way to guarantee a safer world. In this connection, the recent decision of the United States Administration...is commendable."

Nepal (K.P. Oli, October 6): "[D]espite rising tensions in the region of South Asia following the 1998 tests, his country drew satisfaction from the fact that a nuclear-testing moratorium had been observed by the countries concerned... [Nepal] hoped that the pledge made by nuclear-capable states by being parties to the CTBT would be translated into action soon. ... [T]he proliferation of nuclear weapons, the growing emphasis on military doctrines, missile proliferation and possible deployment of a national missile defence were additional factors that posed alarming dangers to international security." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3174)

New Agenda Coalition - Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and Sweden (Henrik Salander of Sweden, October 2): "The positive outcome to the 2000 Review Conference was made possible because the States parties definitively agreed to engage in nuclear disarmament as an achievable goal without further procrastination and prevarication. The five nuclear-weapon states, for their part, entered into a far-reaching political commitment. ... While the Conference reaffirmed that the ultimate objective of states in the disarmament process is general and complete disarmament, the commitment entered into in 2000 is to the singular pursuit of nuclear disarmament. ... Of course, many of the measures included in the outcome of the Review Conference were already well rehearsed. ...But what is novel and unprecedented is the recognition that all issues relating to the nuclear disarmament process...are recognised as the concern for all States Parties and have for the first time been jointly addressed by all the States Parties...

[W]e can have no illusions that the success of the Review Conference has brought about a quickening in the pace of multilateral negotiations. The Conference on Disarmament continues to be locked in...stalemate... When will we begin to deal with nuclear disarmament multilaterally? ...The resolution which we will present to this Committee will reflect the outcome of the recent Review Conference. ... It will offer no illusory fixes, but it will promise a consistent scrutiny of progress achieved and of any opportunities squandered. Our seven governments are determined to continue working together with all countries to maintain vigilant oversight of the implementation of each of the agreed elements and to develop new approaches and new tasks where we consider these constructive and necessary to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons."

New Zealand (Clive Pearson, October 2): "New Zealand has concerns about the possible deployment of a missile defence system if it were to retard or, worse, unravel the disarmament effort. We believe that great caution needs to be exercised in decisions that could impact negatively on disarmament and arms control. And we would urge equal caution in ensuring that these decisions are not inconsistent with the total elimination of nuclear weapons."

Nigeria (Simeon A. Adekanye, October 9): "We welcome the decision of the United States to postpone [NMD] deployment... This decision has created a window of opportunity to address the concern of the international community. ... There...should be new political will to negotiate an unambiguous legally-binding instrument that will assure the non-nuclear-weapon states against attack. ... We welcome the strides being made in Central Asia to create a similar nuclear-weapon-free zone [to that in Africa]... It is our hope that other member states would join in these efforts by removing the present obstacles to the creation of similar zones in their regions."

Oman (Mohamed Al-Hassan, October 11): "Regarding the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms...[Oman] supported the draft resolution calling for the expansion of the Register to also include weapons of mass destruction." (UN Press Release summary, GA/DIS/3177)

Pakistan (Munir Akram, October 13): "While nuclear non-proliferation is assiduously pressed on the vast majority of states as an article of faith, for the privileged nuclear deterrence is regarded as the ' guarantee of security' In violation of the NPT' basic obligation, nuclear weapons are stored with non-nuclear allies and are to be used jointly with them. '' and '' threats are offered as the rationale for maintaining huge arsenals of nuclear weapons, including an inflated concern about the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Military attacks, including the possible use of nuclear weapons, are envisaged even against non-nuclear-weapon states to deter or eliminate so called...WMD threats and capabilities. ... The NPT' parties seem to set great store by the '' commitment given by the NPT' five nuclear-weapon states to eliminate nuclear weapons. This is regarded as a new commitment delinked from the conditions of general and complete disarmament. We hope such assessments are correct. We hope to witness speedy implementation of steps towards nuclear disarmament. I must confess, however, that we are not holding our breath! A senior official from one major nuclear power, when asked about the ' commitment' to eliminate nuclear weapons, reportedly said, ' has changed.' A confidential communication between the two leading nuclear powers leaked to the press confirmed this. ... Pakistan welcomes the endorsement by the Millennium Summit of the Conference to Eliminate the Nuclear Danger. ...

Pakistan has demonstrated its desire for nuclear restraint in practice. We voted in favour of the CTBT and have declared a moratorium on nuclear testing. Our desire to sign the CTBT can be fulfilled as soon as we succeed in promoting a domestic consensus to do so. ... [Meanwhile,] the CTBT' rejection [by the US Senate] has not been reversed. Reports from ' society' indicate that some of the laboratory tests being conducted may be in violation of the CTBT' basic obligation not to conduct nuclear explosion tests. ... A ban on fissile material production should be promoted through a universal, non-discriminatory and verifiable treaty. We will not accept arbitrary or advance obligations which do not meet these agreed criteria, nor agree to artificial deadlines. ...

The missile issue must be addressed comprehensively and equitably. The goal should be a global treaty for the regulation and progressive reduction of ballistic and cruise missiles as part of a comprehensive nuclear disarmament programme. ... In practice, the arbitrary norms of the MTCR, with their narrow focus, have eroded rather than enhanced regional security in certain regions, including South Asia. ...

South Asia has been described as ' most dangerous place in the world' For Pakistan, the danger is ' and present' ... Aggression and attacks are being threatened, with increasing frequency, by our neighbour' political and military leaders. ... The major powers should restrain - not encourage - those who offer themselves as their ' allies' from the path of confrontation and military build-up. ... When our neighbour conducted its nuclear explosions in May 1998, we received no credible indication that our security could be assured by our means. The P-5 did not meet, nor was the Security Council convened. ... Pakistan' proposal for a Strategic Restraint Regime involves three interlocking elements: one, mutual nuclear and missile restraint; two, conventional arms control and balance; and three, peaceful resolution of the underlying sources of tension, especially the Kashmir dispute. Progress on all these elements is essential to build and sustain a stable structure of peace and security in South Asia. At the culmination of the process, it could be sanctified in a ' War Pact'"

Peru (Jorge Valdez, October 3): "[We must explore] the possibility of calling an international conference to determine the proper means to eliminate the nuclear threat. ... Peru...has firmly stated the need to strengthen the concept of a nuclear-weapons-free Southern Hemisphere... This would also facilitate coordination in subjects of common concern such as the struggle against environmental pollution with radioactive waste, the strengthening of the transportation regulations of that waste, the protection of the marine habitat and the drafting of contingency plans..."

Philippines (Felipe Mabilangan, October 10): "Negotiations with the nuclear powers on our own Southeast Asia nuclear-weapon-free zone are about to resume and we remain hopeful that outstanding issues will be resolved. ... We...support the initiatives of the New Agenda Coalition through their comprehensive resolution and recognize the uniqueness and significance of their approach. ... We commend in particular the continuing efforts by Malaysia on behalf of the historic 1996 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice. ... The ABM resolution of Russia, China and Belarus is a timely one and must be debated fully. ... Iran' resolution on missiles opens a new avenue for our work..."

Qatar (Adel Ali Al-Khal, October 9): "Qatar had acceded to the NPT and to the CTBT, in that way contributing towards the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East... The creation of such a zone was the only way to institute durable peace and justice in the region. The threat of nuclear war continued to press on the region." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3175)

Russia (Sergey Lavrov, October 4): "Russia is prepared to further reduce its nuclear weapons on a bilateral basis with the United States, as well as on a multilateral basis with other nuclear states. Certainly, this would be possible only under conditions of...preserving and strengthening the...ABM Treaty. ... [W]e suggest moving to even more drastic reductions of strategic warheads than those earlier agreed upon by the Russian and US Presidents - down to 1,500 pieces instead of 2,000-2,500... In July 2000, at the Okinawa Summit, [the] Russian President...handed over to the US...detailed proposals on the main directions of START III... We see no obstacles for an immediate commencement of such talks. ... The [NMD deferral] decision of...President Clinton...is viewed in Russia as a thoughtful and responsible step. Yet the fact is that the same decision also provides for an accelerated development of NMD. This programme is being carried out at full speed. The tests are continuing. We believe that, as last year, the General Assembly should pronounce itself in support of the ABM Treaty. The issue of preserving its viability cannot be a subject matter between Russia and the United States only. ...

Addressing the Millennium Summit, President...Putin put forward two important initiatives. Russia proposed to work out and implement with the IAEA...an international project that would allow [for the] phase-out [of] weapon-grade materials - enriched uranium and pure plutonium - from use in civil nuclear power production. ... Russia [also] proposes to hold in the spring of 2001...an international conference on prevention of outer space militarisation."

Saudi Arabia (Fawsi A. Shobokshi, October 12): "The Kingdom [has]...lauded the Opinion of the International Court of Justice in 1996... It [has] also actively participated in the efforts of the Arab League to formulate a treaty to make the Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction. ... [The Kingdom believes that the UN Arms Register should] include information on advanced conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear, and advanced technology with military applications..."

South Africa (Dumisani S. Kumalo, October 3): "[W]e reiterate our concern over the negative implications...of the testing, development and possible deployment of anti-ballistic missile defence systems and retain our firm belief that international peace and security requires the involvement of the entire international community."

Sri Lanka (S. Palihakkara, October 6): "While [a] state of inaction on nuclear disarmament continues, doctrines as well as weapons development have not remained static. They have evolved, upholding the continued utility of nuclear weapons. Regional tensions and conflicts have been accentuated as new nuclear weapon countries sought to employ old nuclear doctrines to deter new war situations. ... [T]he recent [NMD deferral decision]...was welcomed. As pointed out by many within and outside the group of non-aligned countries, the rationale for a new missile defence system is debatable at best, whereas the testing and deployment of such a system could certainly provoke yet another round of [the] arms race... If we do not foreclose opportunities for the weaponization of space now, the international community may have to grapple with cries for non-proliferation in outer space later. ... The overwhelming majority of member states here in the General assembly...have therefore called for multilateral work, perhaps exploratory at the beginning, to address this complex issue..."

Sudan (Elfatih Mohamed Ahmed Erwa, October 13): "[T]he United Nations Register of Conventional Arms was far from transparent. It was high time to expand the Register to include data on weapons of mass destruction and advanced technology for military purposes. ... Israel' defiance and the encouragement it had received from a superpower - as well as the silence of that superpower concerning Israel' aggressive intentions and practices - had reflected a policy of hypocrisy and double standards. At the same time, that superpower was placing all of its nuclear technology and experience at Israel' disposal. It was also exerting pressure on vulnerable States to join conventions less important than the NPT." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3179)

Switzerland (Christian Faessler, October 4): "[W]e welcome the recent [US NMD deferral decision]... The Swiss government [has] always expressed itself in favour of an agreement between the United States and the Russian Federation...that should not only take into account the bilateral treaty of 1972...but also give due consideration to the stability of the international strategic and security system."

Syria (Fayssal Mekdad, October 11): "Israel enjoyed the support of some major powers, which had allowed it to acquire nuclear weapons. The possession of those weapons by Israel endangered not only the Middle East, but also Africa and Europe. Israel was overloaded with nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction and possessed the airplanes to deliver those weapons. ... On the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms...member states should take into consideration Arab concerns and include weapons of mass destruction in the Register." (UN Press Release summary, FA/3177)

Tanzania (Daudi N. Mwakawago, October 6): "[Tanzania]...recognized and welcomed the ratification of START II by the Russian Federation and looked forward to the commencement of negotiations on START III. ' is our view, however, that these bilateral measures could be incorporated in a more inclusive multilateral framework' ... [Tanzania] would support a draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free Southern Hemisphere and adjacent areas. It also supported the efforts to establish a nuclear weapon-free-zone in Central Asia and called for such a zone in the Middle East." (UN Press Release, GA/3173)

Thailand (Asda Jayanama, October 11): "[W]hile we welcome President Clinton' [NMD] decision...we would like to urge that the greatest transparency be exercised on this important issue. ... At this stage of the nuclear disarmament process, we are...convinced that it is crucial to promote confidence-building activities. ... This is why Thailand has supported the initiatives undertaken by the New Agenda Coalition, which has done so much to inject greater impetus and fresh perspectives to nuclear disarmament. And it is why we welcome the Secretary-General' proposal to convene an international conference... [Ensuring] support of the NWS for the Protocol to the SEANWFZ Treaty is central to future efforts in consolidating [the Treaty]... For the first time in over three years, we expect face-to-face consultations to be held over the coming year with NWS representatives..."

Turkey (Umit Pamir, October 6): "[W]e welcome the steps taken by states to conclude further nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties, especially the initiative launched by Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan in Bishkek in 1998 to establish such a zone in Central Asia. We pledge our full support to this commendable initiative and encourage all nuclear-weapons states to work constructively towards its realization."

Ukraine (Valeri Kuchynski, October 11): "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' 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." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3178)

United States (John Holum, October 4): "With respect to nuclear disarmament, we too would like to see more done, and faster. But we' on track...The US will continue to support nuclear-weapon-free zones... We' ratified the Latin America protocols and signed the African and South Pacific protocols. ... [T]he number of non-nuclear-weapon states eligible for legally binding security assurances from all five nuclear states is almost at 100. ... With the wise and effective counsel of former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili, we are exploring with members of the US Senate how we can build support for the CTBT' ratification. In the meantime, the US will continue to adhere to its moratorium...

Had the CD begun FMCT negotiations five years ago, or even if it had picked up where it left off in 1998, when negotiations briefly began, the negotiations may very well have been completed by now. Many of you would be demanding next steps, and you' be standing on firm ground. Now such demands get lost in the ether. There is little incentive to consider other proposals for multilateral arms control absent progress on FMCT. ... Some CD states are demanding that the CD undertake outer space arms control negotiations as the price for moving ahead with FMCT, even though there is no arms race in space, and the 1967 Outer Space Treaty prohibits the stationing of weapons of mass destruction in outer space. Those states that point to our NMD initiative as justifying CD negotiations on outer space - including, ironically, some whose proliferation practices helped to make national missile defence a priority in the first place - need to come down to earth. Our NMD plans do not envisage activities that contravene existing constraints on the placement of weapons in outer space, including those in the ABM Treaty."

Uruguay (Alberto Guani, October 6): "[W]e are ready to keep supporting the creation of the Southern Hemisphere and adjacent areas as free of nuclear weapons... We also subscribe to the need recalled during the...[NPT] Review Conference...to support the need of coastal states...[with regard to rules governing] the transportation of plutonium and radioactive waste...[S]pent fuel should be recycled in reactors to avoid unnecessary risks in order to comply with Article IV of the [NPT]..."

Venezuela (Ignacio Arcaya, October 5): "Member States might consider convening an international conference to eliminate nuclear dangers. ... 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." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3172)

Yemen (Mohamed Abdo Al-Sindi, October 6): "Regarding transparency in armaments...[Yemen] supported the Arab position that the success of any transparency mechanism should be guided by specific balanced and non-discriminatory principles, which would support national, regional and international security for all countries. Given the special situation in the Middle East, it was worrisome that transparency had been applied to only seven types of conventional weapons, while ignoring other, more sophisticated and lethal weapons. That had led to undesirable and unbalanced results." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3173)

II. Chemical & Biological Weapons; Iraq & Sanctions

Brazil: "The Brazilian government is sparing no effort to fulfil its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention, including...by successfully hosting...the first simulation of a challenge inspection in a private industry."

China: "The [BWC] Protocol negotiations should follow the principle of equality... Any attempt to inspect others while exempting oneself, or to conduct more inspections on others while less on oneself, will only hamper and mislead... Promoting international cooperation in the field of biology is an important aspect for comprehensively enhancing the effectiveness of the BWC. The countries concerned should undertake to abolish those export control cartels that are incompatible with the BWC or its Protocol..."

European Union: "[The Union] urged Iraq to give full cooperation to a new inspection commission and to the IAEA. It should also provide necessary access to implement the Security Council mandate. The Union expressed concern that a large number of signatories had yet to ratify the Chemical Weapons Convention..."

Iceland: "The dateline [of] next year specified in the mandate of the [BWC] Ad Hoc Group is rapidly approaching. A failure to complete the protocol would send the wrong signal to those who might be contemplating the acquisition of biological weapons."

India: "India has been an active and constructive participant...for a Protocol that not only strengthens the implementation of the [BWC]...from the security angle but also gives full expression to...developmental needs."

Iran: "The General Assembly should [repeat]...its strong call to all states to join the BWC and CWC without delay. ... The full implementation of the provisions for promoting the transfer of relevant equipment, material and technology for peaceful purposes for the States Parties, and the denial and limitations of such transfers to the states not party to these instruments, would be a key element in moving towards universality."

Iraq (Saeed Hasan, October 9): "Iraq' plight had illustrated the effects of the use of brute force in international relations. The United States, in the name of the United Nations, had imposed comprehensive sanctions against Iraq in 1990. Those had led to the death of 500,000 children under the age of five, as confirmed in a report of the United Nations Children' Fund published on August 12, 1999. Combined with the death of 1 million other Iraqis, the number of deaths was greater than the number of all of the victims of the use of weapons of mass destruction worldwide. ... [T]he sanctions against Iraq had violated the United Nations Charter, international and humanitarian law, as [was stated in]...the report of the subcommittee to promote the protection of human rights at its fifty-second session, held in Geneva from July 31 to August 18. ... [T]he United States had dropped more than 100,000 tons of bombs on Iraq, equal to six or seven nuclear bombs of the kind that were dropped on Hiroshima. Those had destroyed Iraqi infrastructure and had obviously sought to return the country to the pre-industrial age. In the course of their aggression, the United States and the United Kingdom had fired more than 1 million shots of depleted uranium on Iraq, representing the first time that radiological weapons were used in war. Their use had led to health and environmental catastrophes, which would endanger several future generations of Iraqis. Those had also led to the suffering of thousands of American and British soldiers in what had been called the ' syndrome' That crime against humanity should be punished and those responsible should compensate his country for the damages and restore the environment. ... [T]here was an urgent need to conclude an international agreement prohibiting the production and use of depleted uranium for weapons. Since 1991, the United States and the United Kingdom had imposed a no-fly zone in northern Iraq, which it expanded in 1992 to include southern Iraq. Those two countries had used their aircraft extensively over Iraqi territories to bomb them '' It had been ' declared and continued war' since 1991, and the use of force had contravened the United Nations Charter. ... Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey had collaborated in that aggression by providing air bases for American and British aircraft. ... [T]he use by the United States of the United Nations as a cover for its aggression had not ceased. Moreover, the United States had used the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) to spy on Iraq and provide false reports about its non-compliance with the relevant Security Council resolutions. The United States had actually '' the Special Commission on December 16, 1998, so that its spying activities might not be revealed. Nonetheless, the facts had emerged. So had confirmation that Iraq had fulfilled its disarmament obligations. ..." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3175)

Israel: "Israel is profoundly concerned about the present situation with regard to Iraq and the lack of any monitoring and inspection mechanism in Iraq for the last two years. Saddam Hussein has not changed and he continues to constitute a real threat to his neighbours and the region. The United Nations bears a critical responsibility to the countries of the Middle East to ensure that Iraq is disarmed of all of its WMD and missile capabilities in accordance with the relevant Security Council resolutions. ... Israel signed the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1993 and is committed to its objectives. We note with concern that certain Arab countries have not signed or ratified this Convention, particularly bearing in mind that such weapons have been used more than once in our area."

Laos: "[M]y delegation shares the view that a [BWC] verification protocol should follow the principle of equality and strike a balance between rights and obligations. Any attempt to inspect others while exempting oneself, or to conduct more inspections on others while less on oneself, will not serve the very purpose we all aim to achieve. ... [T]he use of biotechnology for economic development and peaceful purposes should be accorded due consideration."

Mexico: "Mexico has approached this [BWC Protocol] negotiation from two fundamental aspects: strengthening the prohibitions through a broad verification mechanism; and strengthening and promoting international technical cooperation by implementing a series of specific measures that will include, for the first time, the establishment of a Cooperation Committee within the future organization."

New Zealand: "[A]fter almost six years of negotiations, the pace of the [BWC] Ad Hoc Group' work now appears to be faltering in the balance. ... To ensure that the protocol can be an effective watchdog against biowarfare proliferation, it must have the prerequisites of: a sensitive nose to sniff proliferators out, a loud bark to alert the international community and, when necessary, sufficient bite to deter those who would cheat on the prohibitions of the Convention. We remain strongly committed to these goals... But we are disturbed by those who talk of compliance activities aimed at others but persistently resist accepting that transparency requires reciprocity if it is to be credible. The same applies for those who call for the abolition of arrangements which help ensure compliance."

Pakistan: "The ' [BWC Protocol] text' which reflects the positions of all delegations must remain the sole basis for negotiations. ' inputs, such as non-negotiated texts, could create unnecessary controversy and delay. To have universal appeal, the BWC Protocol must contain: one, meaningful provisions on cooperation and exchange for peaceful activities; two, replace ad hoc export control regimes by multilateral measures for trade facilitation, including powers to redress unjustified export barriers; and three, cover the extensive bio-defence activities and relevant commercial programmes in all countries."

South Africa: "The submission by the United States of its [CWC] industrial declarations in May this year has significantly strengthened, as well as brought a sense of balance to, the international verification regime. ... The destruction of chemical weapons stockpiles is a costly and dangerous undertaking, and the efforts of the possessor states, and in particular the Russian Federation, to pursue the goals laid down by the Convention in this regard should be supported to the fullest extent possible."

Switzerland: "With respect to the Chemical Weapons Convention, Switzerland welcomes the recent progress made in the field of industrial inspections and standards for such inspections. We also welcome the agreement on the concentration of mixtures of controlled chemicals. These decisions will reinforce the proliferation pillar of the Convention. ... Switzerland has intensified its efforts for more effective implementation of Article X in the field of assistance and protection against chemical weapons... An important problem remains, however, the destruction of chemical weapons. We hope that the recent decision to modify the order of destruction will help the Russian Federation to complete the destruction of its chemical weapons within the timeframe set out by the Convention."

United States: "Right now, there is no shared view among the participants in the BWC negotiations over what the focus of the Protocol should be, or what it should actually accomplish. The negotiations are bogged down, when they should be finding solutions that improve the security of all participants. We must, for example, improve transparency, through relevant and meaningful declarations and through on-site activity. But the negotiations cannot be allowed to hamper the ability of any state to defend against those that would ignore the international norm against biological weapons, nor to rob us of our ability to make progress in biotechnology for the benefit of all mankind. And we must not divert these negotiations onto a course that would undermine already working non-proliferation instruments. The United States will not allow that to happen."

III. Conventional Weapons, Small Arms & Landmines

Angola (Jose Paulino Cunha da Silva, October 5): "The Angolan Parliament...has already approved the ratification of the Ottawa Convention on July 25 this year, and [it] is now in the office of the Angolan President for ratification, which will be done very soon. ... The use of anti-personnel mines is only possible...because these weapons are being produced and delivered, demonstrating the ambiguity of some governments' attitudes towards humanitarian principles in general. These states continue to supply armed groups, as in the case of...UNITA..."

Armenia: "The adaptation of the [CFE Treaty]...constitutes an important achievement... Armenia...has undertaken to move forward expeditiously to facilitate completion of national [CFE] ratification procedures... Armenia is not a party to the [CCW]... However, the Armenian government is considering the possibility of acceding to the Amended Protocol II on landmines. In the light of this we decided, on a voluntary basis, to submit the annual report required under [the Protocol]..."

Australia: "[A]t a meeting this month, leaders of the South Pacific Forum countries will consider model legislation designed to encourage a common regional approach to weapons control. Australia has been closely involved in the development of this model legislation which, if approved, will mark a positive step forward in that region' efforts to effectively regulate weapon flows. Australia firmly believes that regional programmes such as these serve as building blocks for a broader international response to the problems posed by small arms. ... Australia is working with the Australian Network of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines to develop a collaborative programme to encourage support for the [Ottawa] Convention among the countries of South East Asia. Until a comprehensive global ban on landmines is achieved, the [CCW]...will continue to play an important part in limiting the humanitarian impact of landmines..."

Brazil: "Brazil has been providing detailed information to the Register [of Conventional Arms] since its inception and would invite other countries to do the same. ... [I]t is our opinion that the First Committee should pay attention to the worrisome trend of...the increased sophistication of conventional arsenals, especially among the major military powers. We believe this tendency contradicts the disarmament goals of the international community and ignores the calls this Committee and the General Assembly have made repeatedly for a decrease in military expenditures."

Burkina Faso (François Oubida, October 10): "The problem of the traffic in such weapons could not be solved without getting to its roots, of which was their excessive manufacture. governments of producer states had a role to play in controlling the trafficking. Arms manufacturing should cease to be a private sector activity. Instead, it should be controlled by governments." (UN Press Release summary, GA/9176)

Cameroon: "The impetus gained since the Ottawa process should...not be allowed to weaken. Cameroon would soon ratify the Ottawa Convention."

Canada: "Canada hopes our collective progress against illicit small arms and light weapons might compare to the progress we' made together against landmines. ... [B]urgeoning support for the principles enshrined in [the Ottawa Convention]... has yielded tangible results...[which] 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."

CARICOM: "In the Caribbean, traffic in illicit arms, fuelled mainly by the illegal drug trade, continued unabated, undermining the security of the region and destroying the social fabric of communities... The CARICOM looked forward to a meaningful outcome of the first Conference on small arms next year. It hoped that the meeting would decisively address the establishment of a comprehensive legal framework defining national, regional and international measures to curb the illegal traffic in those arms. ... [CARICOM] called for more assistance to those states addressing the difficult task of demining and for support to the victims of landmine explosions."

China: "[T]o resolve the complex issue of small arms, the international community should first urge all countries to improve and strengthen relevant national measures... [S]tate sovereignty should be respected, and legitimate manufacture, possession and transfer of small arms should be protected."

Colombia (Alfonso Valdivieso, October 4): "Colombia considers that an international instrument [on small arms]...should be focussed mainly on those measures that guarantee the legitimate trade of weapons and prevent its deviation to illicit channels."

Costa Rica (Bernd Niehaus, October 3): "[Costa Rica was] a country without arms, without armies. It had schools, not barracks. It had not entrusted its national security to the force of weapons, but rather to international law and multilateral mechanisms. The only security guarantee it possessed was a prohibition on the use of force, as incorporated in the United Nations Charter. Thus, his country had placed its trust in the United Nations and its multilateral mechanisms. The drive to possess all forms of weapons was contrary to peace and development, the guiding light of the modern world. ... At the Millennium Summit, world leaders had promised not to spare any effort to eliminate the scourge of war, as well as to support regional disarmament efforts. The First Committee should implement those instructions, which emanated from the highest political authorities. For example, it should follow the guidelines of those heads of state who had called on all states which had not yet ratified the Ottawa Convention to do so as soon as possible. ... [I]t was worrisome that the main exporters of...[small arms] were the permanent members of the Security Council, who were entrusted with maintaining peace and security. Those that produced and marketed such weapons should exercise firm control and combat their illegal manufacture and trafficking. A multinational campaign aimed at strengthening customs and border controls should also be organized... [Costa Rica] had submitted a draft resolution on an international code of conduct for weapons transfers." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3170)

Cuba: "As decided by the General Assembly, the scope of the [small arms] conference should be limited to the illicit aspects of arms traffic. As discussions move away from that mandate, it will be more difficult to reach broadly accepted results."

Cyprus: "[Cyprus] 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."

Czech Republic: "The Czech Republic supports all international efforts for greater transparency and a higher level of exchange of information on the manufacture and trade in conventional weapons, including the possibility [of] introducing a new register for certain kinds of small arms and light weapons used for military purposes...[and the possibility of extending] the existing UN Register for the so-called heavy conventional weapons in the form of an Annex."

Egypt: "[T]he responsibility for illicit trade in small arms and light weapons does not fall on the recipient parties only, but is also a legal and moral obligation on the manufacturing and exporting states that must apply firmer exporting measures. ... [T]he Ottawa Convention...lacks the vision to deal comprehensively with all the aspects related to landmines."

Eritrea (Amare Tekle, October 13): "[T]he destruction caused by small, medium and light weapons...posed an even more immediate threat to international peace and security than weapons of mass destruction. While conflicts had caused much damage in other parts of the world, those had been ' devastating' in Africa... That, in turn, had caused the loss of millions of lives and the violation of human rights and humanitarian law. Among the most sordid violations was the use of civilians as human shields, or ' sweepers' ... Urgent international action must be taken to eliminate the indiscriminate use of small arms and the barbarity of the mercenaries... A widely accepted agreement should be adopted that would prohibit and/or restrict the use of such weapons. Even that would not be enough, however. Not only did the importing state bear responsibility, but the country that was exporting or allowing the direct or indirect exportation of those weapons and the recruitment of mercenaries in its territory, must also be held accountable, both morally and legally. On the other hand, governments were duty bound to defend their territorial integrity and the well being of their populations. ... [Eritrea] had been victimized by the irresponsible and indiscriminate use of landmines... [A] major success of the last century had been the entry into force of the Ottawa Convention. On the other hand, however, his country had been constrained by its present security concerns. The Horn of Africa was a volatile region, which had not experienced real peace during the past half-century. Throughout those years, and long before Eritrean independence, landmines had been used, including by those who had signed the Ottawa Convention. ... [His government] urged understanding by the international community of the '' faced by Eritrea and other small, but strategically located states in dangerous neighbourhoods. There must also be a legal mechanism to ensure the compliance of rogue states, or enable the United Nations to impose sanctions in order to stop the contemptuous threats directed at their smaller neighbours, which endangered the lives and livelihoods of their own citizens and those of other states." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3179)

Ethiopia (Meheret Getahoun, October 11): "Ethiopia is one of the countries most affected by landmines. ... [O]f grave concern to Ethiopia is the lack of adequate assistance in the rehabilitation of populations affected by these deadly weapons. Ethiopia as one of the signatories of the Ottawa Convention is satisfied with the ongoing trend to outlaw and eradicate landmines. ... Ethiopia, having signed the Convention in 1997, is taking steps for its ratification."

European Union: "[The Union] advocated a wide-ranging general scope for the international conference on small arms and light weapons. It should be a means to combating and eliminating stockpiling to reducing existing weapons stocks to levels compatible with national security needs. Those decisions could be in the form of a programme of action and should address issues from a social and economic standpoint. ... On the [Ottawa] Convention...the Union welcomed the large number of signatories and called on States to bring about the total elimination of landmines. It would continue to call on producing countries to put an end to exports."

India: "The process of complete elimination of APLs will be facilitated by addressing the legitimate role of anti-personnel landmines for operational requirements under the defence doctrines of the countries concerned, through the availability of appropriate militarily-effective, non-lethal and cost-effective alternative technologies."

Israel: "Israel participated in the UN Register of Conventional Arms over the last years. We believe that a significantly wider participation of our Arab neighbours in the UN Register would serve to enhance mutual confidence and underline the continued importance of focussing attention on the dangers of conventional weaponry. Israel also shares the concern...regarding the indiscriminate use of anti-personnel landmines, but in view of its security situation is unable to subscribe to a total ban on their use. Nevertheless, Israel ratified the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons in 1995 and recently ratified that Convention' Amended Protocol II and Protocol IV. ... Israel has maintained a moratorium on the export of anti-personnel landmines since 1994 and it intends to continue [with it] indefinitely. We remain willing to contribute to an agreement banning the transfer of all anti-personnel landmines and have ceased the production of such mines."

Kazakhstan: "[T]he movement for the complete prohibition of anti-personnel mines should be an ongoing and step-by-step process based on the ' protocol' to the [CCW]..."

Kenya: "Kenya hosted a Regional Conference on Small Arms and Light Weapons in March this year and will host a follow-up meeting before the end of the year. The Nairobi Process, together with efforts undertaken in West and Southern Africa, will eventually provide Africa' contribution to the preparatory process and the 2001 Conference. ... [Our] concerns should prick the conscience of manufacturers and arms merchants to abandon illicit trade in these weapons."

South Korea: "[T]he scope of the [small arms] Conference should be comprehensive, covering both reduction and prevention measures. It is important to ensure that the preparatory process for the Conference and ongoing negotiations on the Firearms Protocol in Vienna are complementary. Another related issue deserving close attention is that of anti-personnel landmines. This year, my government plans to accede to the CCW and its Amended Protocol II. We also support the negotiation in the CD of [a] treaty banning the transfer of APLs."

Laos: "[W]hile noting the Ottawa Convention, we maintain the view that states have the legitimate right to use such weapons for the defence of their national independence and territorial integrity..."

Republic of Macedonia (Naste Calovski, October 12): "Of particular interest is the Swiss-French proposal of adopting a legal instrument on marking, recording and tracing small arms."

Mali (Cheickna Keita, October 4): "[In addition to] the moratorium undertaken two years ago by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), following the Mali initiative on small arms, several countries had developed strategies to control the illegal possession of arms by civilians. Programmes of community assistance created by ECOWAS had sought to strengthen security and development schemes. Some progress had been made towards achieving the objectives of the moratorium. For example...all of the member States of ECOWAS last year undertook the following commitments, among others: the creation of commissions to fight the proliferation of small arms; the creation of an arms register; border control to combat trafficking; strengthening and controlling technology for information and communication; and the organization of workshops. In Guinea-Bissau, a plan for the collection of weapons to finance development was devised. In Niger, a flame of peace was organized with the support of the Department of Disarmament Affairs division of United Nations, and a similar ceremony was organized in Liberia. ... [I]n addition to holding workshops on the preparation of a register of small arms and light weapons, Ghana had hosted a conference on the possession of small arms by children. Also, Mali would host a similar conference in the near future. Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone had been working towards overcoming the dangerous security situations." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3171)

Mexico: We are actively participating in the preparatory work [for the 2001 CCW Review Conference and we fully support prohibitions of use of cluster bombs and a solution to the problem of explosive remnants of war... We are also considering the possibility to propose restrictions of use of spent uranium munitions."

Mozambique (Cesar Gouveia, October 9): "[Landmines] continued to kill, maim and threaten the lives of innocent people around the world, including in Mozambique. ... [S]ince the entry into force of the Ottawa Convention, its parties had grown steadily, as a testament to the vitality of that legal instrument. It must be underscored, however, that the Convention' ultimate objective of universal adherence had remained elusive. ..." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3175)

New Zealand: "[T]he international community might take a deep breath and re-examine the strengthening of the [CCW]... An issue that might usefully be addressed in this context is how to deal with the unexploded remnants of war."

Nicaragua (Mario H. Castellon Duarte, October 9): "[Nicaragua] supported the convening of the Conference on small arms. In that regard, a major effort should be made to encourage a global approach. ... [E]ver since the end of the civil war in Nicaragua the government had been buying weapons in order to destroy them. Moreover, former combatants had been trained and reintegrated. Major progress had also recently been made to ban the use of landmines. The Ottawa Convention had played a fundamental role and ' a ratification record' with more than 100 States Parties. Nevertheless, much remained to be done to overcome the challenges of anti-personnel mines, especially in light of the number of victims, particularly women and children. Sensitive to the destruction caused by the mines, the Nicaraguan armed forces, beginning in 1999, had already destroyed some 60,000 mines, representing 40 per cent compliance with the treaty... [Nicaragua'] mine destruction programme would conclude in 2004. On the northern borders, which were once impenetrable due to the implantation of mines, crops were now being raised and coffee producers could harvest." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3175)

Pakistan: "It is ironic that while international publicity has been so focussed on the issue of anti-personnel landmines, the resources required for demining are being reduced. We deplore, in particular, the 50% reduction in the UNHCR' demining budget for Afghanistan. ... Although our security environment does not permit us to accept a comprehensive ban on APLs, Pakistan will strictly abide by its commitments and obligations under the amended [CCW] Protocol II on landmines."

Philippines: "In spite of inherent difficulties, the recent destruction of over a thousand small arms in Agadez, Nigeria, has shown that with sheer determination and the cooperation of the UN, donor communities and civil society, small arms can be collected and destroyed. In the area of collecting and destroying weapons, the Ottawa Convention also stands out and serves as an inspiration. ... More states are becoming parties and in record time. ... The momentum is indeed building and was given a massive push when our leaders called for the universality of the Ottawa Convention during the Millennium Summit."

Senegal (Ibra Deguene Ka, October 4): "[Senegal] shared the view of many regarding the ' priority' which should be given strategies and policies designed to curb those [small arms and light] weapons and eliminate their trafficking. As a member State of ECOWAS, Senegal was firmly resolved to seek a regional solution to that scourge. The political will and action in the subregion had led to specific achievements, including the adoption last year by ECOWAS of a moratorium on the manufacture, import and export of small arms in West Africa. ... The flame of peace ceremony in Niger, which had followed similar ceremonies in Mali and Liberia, had demonstrated the will of the member states of ECOWAS to eliminate the proliferation and accumulation of small arms on their territories. Such actions had not been isolated. Rather, those were part of the broad international campaign to halt the accumulation, circulation and illicit use of small arms. ... [G]lobal action to combat the proliferation of small arms and light weapons should include strengthened rules and regulations in the transfer of those weapons and greater transparency in commercial transactions. More decisive cooperation in implementing national and regional programmes for the collection and destruction of those weapons was also crucial. The 2001 conference should adopt an action programme containing provisions, which were legally binding." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3171)

Singapore (Vanessa Chan, October 12): "We look forward to the 2001 UN Conference on [small arms]... We hope that it will encourage steps to take substantive and concrete steps to curb the illicit trade in these weapons. In this context, however, we reiterate that legitimate trade for purposes of self defence and the maintenance of international law and order would not be an appropriate focus for the Conference."

South Africa: "South Africa has adopted policies that give preference to the destruction of redundant and obsolete small arms rather than selling them... As a practical manifestation of this policy, and with the generous assistance and cooperation of the government of Norway, South Africa was able to recently initiate the process to destroy over a quarter of a million redundant small arms from its military stockpile. ... [C]onsideration should be given to extending the scope of application of the [CCW]...to be in conformity with that of Amended Protocol II as well as an effective verification mechanism which the Convention lacks. In addition, a process should be launched to urgently consider and develop an additional Protocol to deal with the explosive remnants of war."

Sri Lanka: "[T]he [small arms] Conference should not be weakened or defused in its focus by seeking to convert this forum into a venue that will address the more complex and the larger issue of the legitimate arms transactions between governments. ... [E]xtended conceptualisation and contrived integration of licit and illicit trade can render the substantive discussion at this Conference an extremely difficult exercise involving issues touching upon the fundamentals of the UN Charter - self-defence of states. The real issue is the illicit arms trafficking by terrorist groups and other irregular non-state actors..."

Switzerland: "At the first session of the preparatory committee [for the 2001 small arms conference], France and Switzerland distributed a food-for-thought document on a possible international legal instrument on the marking, recording and tracing of small arms. ... Switzerland initiated a project for the publication of a yearbook on small arms and light weapons. A number of other states have associated themselves with this project. The first volume of this ' Arms Survey' will be published at the beginning of next year... [In the context of the CCW Review Conference], Switzerland grants a particular importance to the problem of sub-munitions of cluster bombs and of other non-exploded munitions."

Turkey: "We attach importance to the timely entry into force of the Agreement on Adaptation of the [CFE] Treaty signed in Istanbul on November 19, 1999. To this end, we expect all the States parties to work for the creation of the conditions necessary for the ratification of this Agreement. ... Turkey encourages transparency in the transfers of conventional weapons. In this context, she advocates the expansion of the United Nations Register...to include small arms and light weapons categories. ... We attach importance to the Mine Ban Treaty and consider that this...is one of the major achievements of the international community towards the total elimination of anti-personnel mines... However, the security situation around Turkey is distinctly different from that which the proponents of the Ottawa process face. This has prevented us from signing the Treaty. However, our commitment to the Treaty' goals was manifested by our participation in the First and Second Meetings of the States Parties..."

Uganda (Fred Beyendeza, October 13): "[Uganda] appealed to those 70 countries that manufactured and traded small arms and light weapons to review their trading practices and ensure that those dangerous weapons were not sold to non-state actors." (UN Press Release summary, GA/3179)

Zambia (Mwelwa C. Musambachime, October 10): "My government has been working within the framework of the Southern African Regional Police Chiefs Cooperation Organization (SARPCC) to seek a regional solution to the problem posed by surplus stocks and illicitly held small arms in the region. My government appreciates the support the Kingdom of Norway and the Organization of African Unity have been providing to this effort... The UNDP [UN Development Programme] Trust Fund for support for Prevention and Reduction of the Proliferation of Small Arms is one initiative that deserves the support of all member states."

IV. Disarmament Processes & Institutions

Australia: "[T]he continuing deadlock in the Conference on Disarmament defies credibility. ... [T]he CD has a clear agenda and well-defined work programme on which there is a broad measure of agreement. While the vast majority of countries represented at the CD want to get on with that work programme, regrettably we remain idle essentially because of the insistence of a few on linking all the elements of the proposed work programme on an ' or nothing' basis. It is of concern to Australia that the legitimate aspirations of the majority continue to be held hostage in this way."

Bangladesh (Anwarul Karim Chowdhury, October 2): "[W]e attach high importance to the United Nations regional centres for peace and development. ... As regards the Centre for Asia and the Pacific...we remain very disappointed that despite repeated decisions of the General Assembly the Centre is not operating from Kathmandu and is being run from here in New York ... We are disappointed to see that the Secretary-General' report on the Centre does not provide any positive indication about moving the Centre to Kathmandu. The argument of financial constraint does not seem plausible. The report is silent about the funds required."

Chile: "The Assembly should...pay special attention to new proposals, and we therefore intend to strive for the broadest possible participation by non-governmental organizations active in the field of disarmament and welcome...the creative contributions that they continue to make."

Cuba: "We are concerned about the...virtual stagnation of the Conference on Disarmament. We are even more concerned about the insinuations of some countries saying that, in light of this situation, negotiations on disarmament and arms control would have to be carried out without the involvement of the Conference. The Conference has to be preserved since it is the only multilateral negotiating body on disarmament. ... This year, the sessions of the Disarmament Commission were...confined to two weeks. ... The General Assembly' decision for the UNDC to hold three-week sessions should be respected in the future..."

Indonesia: "The decision by the United Nations General Assembly to convene SSOD [Special Session on Disarmament] IV has begun to show some forward movement. From its vantage position as Chairman of the Disarmament Commission' Working Group on SSOD IV from 1997-1999, Indonesia has noted the progress made with regard to its objectives and agenda... [T]he Assembly, in a major departure from the Disarmament Commission' practice of considering each issue only for a three-year period, mandated the Commission to renew its consideration of this issue for an unprecedented fourth consecutive year. This reflects the importance which an overwhelming majority of states attach to [holding another Special Session]..."

Republic of Macedonia: "Our view is that the Conference [on Disarmament] will continue to struggle and it is doubtful whether it will be able to start to function in the way [the] majority [of UN] states would like to see... I will mention two reasons... One is that the arrangement of the work is outdated. ... The second reason...is the non-universality of the Conference. ... [W]e have to face the fact that the fundamental problem of the Conference' crisis is in itself, not outside... It is an outdated mechanism...which needs to be seriously reformed. The sooner we face this fact openly, the better for the CD."

Mexico: "The problematic of disarmament and its role in the field of international security cannot wait indefinitely for the Conference [on Disarmament] to come out of its drowsiness. If it is to continue its inactivity, it will be sidelined. Negotiations on arms control and disarmament will have to continue without it. Let us recall, in this respect, that...the Millennium Declaration...resolved to keep all options open for achieving the aim of eliminating all weapons of mass destruction...including the possibility of convening an international conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers. We would like to express our satisfaction on the agreement reached in the 2000 substantive session of the Disarmament Commission to establish a working group to examine an item entitled ' and Means to Achieve Nuclear Disarmament.' ... The successful outcome of the NPT Review Conference and the preliminary exchange of views in the past session of the Disarmament Commission demonstrate the viability of approaching nuclear disarmament from a multilateral perspective."

Nepal: "His government had made it clear to the United Nations Secretariat that it was prepared to meet the obligation of having the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific start operating from Kathmandu, where it belonged. The government was fully prepared to house the Centre and remained ready to provide the operational cost necessary for it to begin operation at short notice."

New Zealand: "The CD cannot distinguish itself with failure for another year in 2001. ... Despite evident shortcomings in its working methods - which require attention - we cannot realistically hold the institution itself responsible for its failure. Accountability rests squarely with the governments of its 66 member states. ... There are now risks to the Conference' credibility. And a body that does not produce results in today' world may begin to have a hard time convincing the General Assembly to allocate resources to it."

Philippines: "The time is ripe for us to hold...SSOD IV... We must hold it in the next few years and we must begin by agreeing to hold a Preparatory Committee meeting next year before the 56th [UNGA] Session..."

South Africa: "The inability of the Conference on Disarmament to undertake substantive work this year, the fact that most First Committee resolutions do not enjoy the support of all member states, and that the work of the Disarmament Commission is often ignored, are reasons for concern. Part of the problem is that these disarmament mechanisms that were created 22 years ago do not reflect today' realities. Our institutions and mechanisms, their membership, financial implications and methods of work are in need of serious re-evaluation and overhaul."

Sri Lanka: "[The CD] remained in a state of no substantive work for the third year running. The major powers have not yet struck a balance in their strategic interests between the rule-based systems and the weapon-based systems."

Switzerland: "Switzerland does not hide its disappointment that the Conference on Disarmament was not able, this year, to translate the results of New York into reality. This shows clearly the disequilibrium resulting from the lack of progress in the field of nuclear disarmament on the one hand, and from the perfectionism of the international non-proliferation system on the other."

V. Security Assurances for Mongolia

P-5 Statement

' on Security Assurances in Connection with Mongolia' Nuclear-Weapon-Free Status,' delivered on behalf of the P-5 by John Holum of the United States, in the First Committee General Debate, October 5.

"[The P-5],

Welcoming the declaration by Mongolia of its nuclear-weapon-free status,

Taking into account Mongolia' status as a non-nuclear-weapon state party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons, as well as its unique geographic status,

Welcoming Mongolia' policies of developing peaceful, friendly and mutually beneficial relations with the states of the region and other states,

Confirm the following:

1. [The P-5] reaffirm their commitment to Mongolia to cooperate in the implementation of UN General assembly resolution 53/77D of December 4, 1998 with respect to Mongolia' nuclear-weapon-free status, in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

2. [The P-5] reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Mongolia, as a non-nuclear-weapon state party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, in accordance with the provisions of UN Security Council resolution 984 of April 11, 1995, if Mongolia should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.

3. [The P-5] reaffirm, in the case of Mongolia, their respective unilateral negative security assurances as stated in their declarations issued on April 5 and 6, 1995 and referred to in UN Security Council resolution 984 of April 11, 1995.

4. The People' Republic of China and the Russian federation recall and conform the legally-binding commitments undertaken by them with respect to Mongolia through the conclusion of bilateral treaties with Mongolia regarding these matters."

Explanatory Statement on behalf of the P-5 by John Holum, October 5: "We believe that the unique geographic status of Mongolia made it appropriate for our five countries to provide security assurances in this way since Mongolia is unable to obtain the security assurances that are normally provided by protocols to nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties. ... We also believe that our actions further strengthen the NPT by demonstrating our flexibility in responding to the security concerns of NPT non-nuclear-weapon states. In this regard, the nuclear-weapon states note that Mongolia' situation does not pertain to any other state. The Statement is not eligible for registration under Article 102 of the UN Charter. We wish to state clearly for the record, however, that the five nuclear-weapon states stand fully behind the assurances provided in the Statement."

Statement by Government of Mongolia (delivered by J. Enkhsaikhan, October 6): "In 1992...Mongolia declared its territory a nuclear-weapon-free zone. The aim of the initiative was not only to strengthen Mongolia' security...but also to promote nuclear non-proliferation, security and mutual trust in the region. ... As a result of the consultations undertaken by Mongolia with the nuclear-weapon states, the latter have issued a joint Statement providing nuclear security assurances to Mongolia in connection with its nuclear-weapon-free status. ... The government of Mongolia expresses its appreciation to the international community for the support of its initiative. It believes that the Statement by the nuclear-weapon states represents an important step towards institutionalising Mongolia' nuclear-weapon-free status at the international level. ..."

© 2000 The Acronym Institute.