<b>XI LOK SABHA DEBATES<i> Session II, Budget </i> </b> XI LOK SABHA DEBATES Session II, Budget Monday, August 26, 1996 / Bhadra 4, 1918 (Saka)
Type of Debate: STATEMENT BY MINISTER
Title: STATEMENT RE: COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN TREATY
Text:
THE MINISTER OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS (SHRI I.K. GUJRAL): Madam, this honourable House will recall that I had made two Suo Motu Statements regarding the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) on 15th and 31st July, setting out the Government's policy on this issue. The discussion that followed was indeed helpful and it represented a national consensus on this subject. This is reflected in the steps taken by the Government to continue to safeguard our national interests in the deliberations in the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva. Today, may I, Madam, with your permission, take this opportunity to brief the honourable House on recent developments in Geneva.As hon. Members are aware, the Government has been following a consistent and principled policy on nuclear disarmament and the CTBT. We have always considered that the CTBT should be the first definitive and irreversible step in the nuclear disarmament process. For this, it is necessary that the Treaty bring about an end to development and refinement of nuclear weapons in a comprehensive manner. It is also necessary that the Treaty be securely based within the nuclear disarmament framework by reflecting a commitment to the achievement of a nuclear weapon-free-world within a time bound framework.
Our approach during the negotiations was in keeping with this policy. In fact, the mandate of the Adhoc Committee is clear. It says:
"to negotiate intensively a universal and multilaterally and effectively verifiable Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which would contribute effectively to prevention of proliferation of nuclear weapons in all its aspects, to the process of nuclear disarmament and therefore to the enhancement of international peace and security."
During the course of these negotiations, we found that the draft Treaty text was moving away from the mandate. Our proposals, put forward in a constructive spirit were in keeping with the mandate.
We are disappointed that the negotiations have been terminated prematurely and without consensus. The reason behind lack of consensus is clear - the desire of the nuclear weapon States to retain their nuclear hegemony. An artificial deadline was imposed and a flawed text was presented to the Adhoc Committee.
We stated and maintain that India cannot subscribe to such a draft. Not only did this text fall far short of the mandate, it also had other unacceptable features, particularly the formulation on Entry into Force in Article XIV. This formulation was suddenly introduced on 28 June after we had announced our decision not to subscribe to the draft text and withdrawn our stations from the International Monitoring System on 26 June. Hon'ble Members would recall that the Government has been firm and unequivocal in stating that any language that would impose an obligation on India directly or indirectly, either today or at a later date, would oblige us to indicate our opposition. Even though a large number of countries appreciated the logic of our position, the rigid position taken by the small number of nuclear weapon States prevented any change in this Article.
As a result, in keeping with our stated policy, we had to oppose the adoption of the draft Treaty text in the Ad hoc Committee. we also opposed the attachment of this draft Treaty text to the Report of the Ad hoc Committee, on the grounds that it was not a consensus text. On 16th August, the Ad hoc Committee adopted its Report, without the draft Treaty text with the conclusion that "despite the assessments of (CD/NTB/WP 330/Rev.2) contained in Section VI above and support for a proposal to transmit it to the Conference on Disarmament for its consideration, no consensus could be reached either on the text or on the action proposed". This Report was presented to the Conference on Disarmament and adopted by the Plenary on 20 August.
On 22 August, a large number of delegations suggested that this Report be transmitted to the present session (50th session) of the United Nations General Assembly which concludes on 16th September. After due consideration, we were obliged to point out that such a step was unnecessary because the Report did not have a consensus text accompanying it. Therefore, in our view, the Report would, in due course, as part of the Annual Report of the Conference on Disarmament, be transmitted to the 51st session of the UN General Assembly scheduled to begin on 17th September. Thus, the move to transmit any special report was blocked by us. In taking these steps, we were guided by the national consensus and our commitment to safeguarding our national interests.
We are aware that many countries are determined to take the draft Treaty text to New York and have it opened for signature in September 1996. I would like to assure the Hon'ble Members that the Government is monitoring these developments and will take all necessary actions, consistent with our policy, to indicate our opposition to this text. At the same time, I would like to point out that unlike the Conference on Disarmament which takes decision by consensus, the UN General Assembly has its own rules of procedure. Nevertheless, we have a position of principle which will be made known in this forum too.
Madam, many countries with whom we have close bilateral relations have adopted a position on this issue which is different from our stand. We have, through our dialogue, tried to explain the rationale of our position. We believe that agreement on all issues is not a pre-requisite for close bilateral relations but mutual respect for each other's vital national concerns is. We are committed to strengthening our relations with all countries and remain confident that our differences on this issue will not affect our bilateral ties.
(ends)
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
