DISARMAMENT COMMISSION CONCLUDES 1997
SESSION AT HEADQUARTERS, 21 APRIL - 13 MAY
Press Release DC/2586 13 May 1997
Concluding its 1997 substantive session, the Disarmament
Commission this morning "generally" agreed that a fourth General
Assembly special session devoted to disarmament could be
convened, subject to the emergence of a consensus on its
objectives and agenda.
The Commission took that action by adopting, without a vote, its
report to the fifty-second session of the General Assembly, along
with the reports of its working groups on the establishment of
nuclear-weapon-free zones, on the fourth special session of the
General Assembly devoted to disarmament and on guidelines on
conventional arms control/limitation and disarmament. The
working groups on the nuclear-weapon-free zones and on arms
control/limitation were convened for the first time at this session.
According to the Chairman of Working Group I, Abdelkadar
Mesdoua (Algeria), the group's work resulted in the establishment
of a promising beginning for tangible results in the future. The
Chairman had proposed to structure discussions during the first
year around four elements: general overview; scope; principles
and objectives; and recommendations. The wide range of the
topics under consideration by the working group was
demonstrated by the large number of working papers and other
written submissions introduced by delegations.
In introducing the group's report, Mr. Mesdoua said that if
positive results were obtained by the working group, it was due
to the hard work and dedication of all the delegations involved.
To help prepare the ground for subsequent in-depth deliberations
at next year's session, a Chairman's paper had been presented
that contained reflections on the issues involved, which was
annexed to the working group's report.
The Chairman of working group II, Sudjadnan Parnohadiningraj
(Indonesia), said the first three of the working group's 12
meetings had been devoted to a general exchange of views. In
addition, throughout the session he had held informal consultations
with individual delegations. The working group took as a basis for
its work a non-paper submitted by the Chairman, which had been
prepared in consultation with delegations. The paper organized
issues around four elements: elements for understanding, elements
for objectives of the special session, issues to be taken up at
special session, and the preparatory process. Revisions were
made to the non-paper which drew upon suggestions by the
delegations.
Unfortunately, there were fundamental differences of approach
among delegations regarding the convening of the special session,
he said. In spite of strenuous efforts on everyone's part, it was
impossible to bridge the gap, but there was a general feeling that
progress had been made. The working group had recommended
that the Commission continue its consideration of an item on the
special session at its next session.
Michael Hoey (Ireland), Chairman of Working Group III, said
that during the working group's deliberations, seven working
papers had been submitted by delegations. The Chairman also
submitted a non-paper for consideration. The working group
completed its consideration of the Chairman's non-paper, which
had enjoyed support as a contribution for the consideration of
future guidelines. It was agreed, however, that some elements of
the non-paper required further elaboration and refinement.
Debates in the working group were particularly enriched by the
contribution of delegations that had recently experienced
post-conflict situations and practical disarmament measures that
were undertaken to help consolidate peace. Their views served to
remind the working group of the very real problems it was
addressing.
When the working group focused its attention on the regional and
global aspects of arms control, it was reminded of the enormous
importance of reinforcing efforts to combat the illicit arms trade,
which continued to have disproportionately large effects on the
internal security and socio-economic development of affected
States. It was hoped that the valuable papers submitted by
individual delegations could serve as a source of ideas and
principles and provide a constructive and balanced basis to
continue work at next year's session.
The report of the Commission on its 1997 session was introduced
by the Rapporteur, Genevieve Hamilton (Australia).
Statements were also made by the representatives of Australia,
China, Netherlands (on behalf of the European Union), Mexico,
Iran, Belarus and Cuba, as well as by the Commission Chairman,
Andelfo J. Garcia (Colombia).
Commission Reports
Working group I considered the item entitled "Establishment of
nuclear- weapon-free zones on the basis of arrangements freely
arrived at among the States of the region concerned" based on a
wide range of working papers and written submissions which will
be forwarded to the 1998 substantive session of the Disarmament
Commission for further analysis. The report of the group is
contained in document A/CN.10/1997/CRP.3.
At its 1998 session, the working group recommended, the
Commission might consider the following topics:
nuclear-weapon-free zones as means for enhancing peace,
security and stability, regionally and globally; characteristics of the
region concerned, including the geographical definition of the
zone; elements conducive to the establishment of
nuclear-weapon-free zones, taking into account characteristics of
existing treaties or agreements establishing the zones; the role of
verification mechanisms and of the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) safeguards; consultation and negotiating
processes leading to the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free
zones; and relationships between nuclear-weapon-free zones and
other existing nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament treaties.
To facilitate discussion of the issues at hand, the Chairman
prepared a paper which is contained in the annex to the report.
The paper states that nuclear-weapon-free zones should be
established on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among
the States of the zone concerned and the full compliance with
those agreements. Such arrangements should ensure that the
zones are genuinely free from nuclear weapons. Also, respect for
such zones by nuclear-weapon States constitutes an important
disarmament measure.
Working group II dealt with the proposed fourth special session
of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament and its report is
contained in document A/CN.10/1997/CRP.4*. The group
generally agreed to the convening of the special session, subject
to the emergence of a consensus on its objectives and agenda.
Although no consensus on objectives or the agenda was reached,
some progress was made, according to the report. It was also
generally agreed that the decision on convening a fourth special
session should follow the procedure set for previous special
sessions of the Assembly devoted to disarmament. The working
group recommended that the item be included on the 1998
agenda of the Commission.
The working group took note of a paper presented by its
Chairman, upon which their was no consensus, containing
elements for the objectives of the fourth special session. That
paper recognized that the special session should emphasize the
importance of multilateralism in disarmament, bearing in mind the
historic significance of the Final Document of the Tenth Special
Session of the General Assembly -- its first devoted to
disarmament.
The Chairman of the working group also suggested that the
special session should review the international situation in the
context of changes after the cold war; identify new challenges and
the means for addressing them; establish a new plan of action
which would strengthen the central role of the United Nations in
disarmament; establish priorities for future disarmament
efforts; and build upon past accomplishments in the field of
disarmament in order to strengthen international peace and
security.
Working group III considered guidelines on conventional arms
control/limitation and disarmament, with particular emphasis on
consolidation of peace in the context of General Assembly
resolution 51/45 N. It undertook a general exchange of views
which were consolidated in a Chairman's non-paper. That paper
enjoyed general support as a contribution for the elaboration of
the guidelines, although the working group agreed that some of its
elements would require refinement and elaboration. The report of
working group III is contained in document
A/CN.10/1997/CRP.5.
According to the non-paper, a comprehensive approach was
required for disarmament with regard to light weapons. The illicit
arms trade, in particular, continued to have disproportionately
large effects for the internal security and socio-economic
development of many States. Conventional weapons guidelines
should be neither mandatory nor prescriptive, and should be
adopted by consensus; they should emphasize the consolidation
of peace in post-conflict situations and should be used to promote
peace and stability.
The non-paper suggests that the guidelines would be of assistance
to the United Nations and other multilateral bodies, regional
organizations, governments and to conflict parties -- particularly in
the context of peace agreements. The guidelines should
encompass practical disarmament measures such as arms
collection and destruction, demining and demobilization. Those
measures should be of particular relevance to conflicts
approaching solution, to recently ended conflicts, and to
preventing the re-emergence of conflicts. The non-paper also
suggests that the guidelines should encompass other conventional
arms control and limitation measures, including transparency in
armaments and control of the illicit arms trade.
The working group also developed a non-inclusive list of further
measures which might be undertaken including: arms collection
and disposal, destruction, turn-in/buy-back programmes;
demobilization; demining; the reintegration of combatants;
conversion; public information campaigns; regional arms control
and confidence-building measures; post-conflict moratoria on the
import and manufacture of small arms; the United Nations
Register of Conventional Arms; and the establishment of
voluntary, global and non-discriminatory codes of conduct for
arms transfers. Other measures include the development of
national laws and regulations of arms, including import and export
licensing; border controls; international cooperation in criminal
law; and coordination and assistance by the international
community.
Statements
GENEVIEVE HAMILTON (Australia) said that in keeping with
the practice of a rolling three-item, three-year agenda, the
Commission should conclude its deliberations on the special
session next year. Regardless, the special session could not be
convened without consensus on its agenda and its objectives. The
proponents of the special session needed to make more
determined efforts to bridge the gap between the extreme and
unrealistic positions adopted by a small minority of delegations at
this year's session. It was quite unnecessary to prioritize the issues
for the special session in advance, and it was similarly pointless to
insist on the value of the special session.
Regarding the work of working group II, she said, it was
necessary to focus on the General Assembly resolution on
consolidating peace through practical disarmament measures
(51/45N) and, in particular, on operative paragraph 1 of that
resolution. The resolution supported all issues that delegations had
proposed should be considered under that item, including illicit
trafficking, transparency and so on. Exclusion of any issue,
including humanitarian issues, was not justified now that the
agenda item had already been adopted, although there was
obviously a need to approach carefully issues which were outside
the usual expertise of the Commission.
WANG XIAOLIN (China) said that the groundwork had been
successfully laid for future discussions on the two new items of the
Commission this year -- those on nuclear-weapon-free zones and
on guidelines for disarmament.
ONNO KERVERS (Netherlands), speaking on behalf of the
European Union, said that in its first year of existence working
group I had been able to make an inventory of all the issues
involved in the establishment of nuclear- weapon-free zones. In
view of the political, technical and legal complexities of the issue,
that could be qualified as a positive result. A first attempt had
already been made to identify topics for further discussion, which
might be helpful in structuring the Commission's discussions next
year. While the Union would have hoped that more agreement
could have been reached on those topics, they provided a useful
basis for further work and delegations should work constructively
next year towards real progress on that issue.
The Union regretted that working group II had not been able to
reach consensus on the objectives and agenda for the fourth
special session, he said. If a useful special session was to take
place, delegations had to be more forthcoming than they had been
so far. Therefore, the Union called on all delegations to show the
necessary flexibility if the Commission returned to that subject
next year. Working group III had been very productive. The
Chairman's paper could form the basis for the development of
guidelines in the field. The issue had only been under
consideration for the first time this year, and it was clear
that attention would have to be given to a number of
concerns voiced by Member States on the scope and
other elements of substance of that complex item.
The European Union was concerned about the time allocated to
the Commission's work, he said. This year's session was over
three weeks long. Taking into account that during the first two
weeks the meetings of the working groups did not use the
precious time allocated to them, serious consideration should be
given to whether the Commission's session could not be
shortened without eliminating substantive debate. At the very
least, it should not last longer than three full weeks.
ANGELICA ARCE DE JEANNET (Mexico) expressed regret
that no consensus had been reached concerning the proposed
fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to
disarmament. Divergent views expressed in that regard had
demonstrated a lack of political will on the part of certain
delegations with regard to the abolition of nuclear weapons.
Mexico believed that the 8 July 1996 advisory opinion of the
International Court of Justice had provided an interesting juridical
basis for challenging the legality of the possession and use of
nuclear weapons.
MEHDI DANESH-YAZDI (Iran) expressed thanks for those in
the international community that had offered condolences to Iran
regarding the recent earthquake that had devastated parts of his
country.
ALEG LAPTSENAK (Belarus) said that the present session of
the Commission had laid the foundation for ongoing work on
important topics related to disarmament. He recalled that his
Government had introduced to the working group on
nuclear-weapon-free zones a text on the establishment of such a
zone in Central Europe. He was pleased that the Commission had
reaffirmed the principle of consensus in its decision-making.
BRUNO RODRIGUEZ PARRILLA (Cuba) said his country had
recently been the object of bacteriological aggression which had
caused serious damage to Cuba's crops and to its children. Cuba
was suffering from the presence of the "Thrips Palmi Karay"
insect in its territory. That insect, which was resistant to
insecticides, destroyed crops and existed throughout several
provinces of Cuba.
On 21 October 1996 at 10:08 a.m., an aircraft registered in the
United States had been observed by the crew of a Cuban aircraft
to be flying 10,000 feet over Cuba, he continued. The Minister
for Foreign Affairs of Cuba had protested to the United States,
requesting clarification. The United States had responded that the
United States pilot had employed a "smoke screen" to signal its
presence.
The United States plane had been of a type which had been used
to spread defoliants to fight the production of illegal drug crops,
he said. The pilot of the Cuban plane, for his part, believed that
the United States plane had not been issuing smoke, but rather
some other substance. The appearance of the "Thrips Palmi
Karay" insect in Cuba, previously known only on the
neighbouring islands of Haiti and Jamaica, was quite suspicious,
as the insect had surfaced near the area where the United States
plane had been sighted. Biologists had determined that the insects
had been in Cuba for some two or three generations --
approximately the time dating from the appearance of the United
States aircraft.
The United States had confirmed the presence of the plane over
Cuban airspace, he said. Analysis by his Government had
allowed a correlation to be drawn between the presence of the
"Thrips Palmi Karay" insect and the presence of the United States
plane. The evidence justified the conclusion that, once more,
Cuba had been the object of biological aggression.
ANDELFO J. GARCIA (Colombia), the Commission Chairman,
said again that the organization and progress of the Commission's
work had been supported by the tireless work of the chairmen of
the working groups and by the individual delegations. As usual,
items for discussion were entrusted to the working groups, and
the chairmen of the three groups displayed great leadership,
dedication and professionalism in carrying out their duties.
The Commission was a universal body dealing with disarmament
issues as well as issues which were also considered elsewhere,
including climate and the environment, he said. Throughout the
session, discussions were frank, and there had been sincere
dialogue on all matters. The dynamic nature of the discussion held
throughout the meetings was reflected in the number of
documents submitted in the working groups, he said, adding that
those groups' work was a valid contribution to the Commission's
work and their reports were valuable contributions to the next
session. Holding simultaneous working group meetings, however,
might weaken the universal aspect of the Commission. Therefore,
at the next session, there should not be concurrent meetings of the
working groups.
Background on Commission
The Disarmament Commission, a subsidiary organ of the General
Assembly with universal membership, was set up to make
recommendations on specific disarmament issues and to follow up
on the decisions of the Assembly's special sessions on
disarmament. The Commission, which resulted from a decision of
the first special session in 1978, replaced a limited-membership
body which existed from 1952 to 1965.
In recent years, the Commission has streamlined its work under
reforms adopted in 1990. Since 1993, it has limited its discussion
to three specific items. In recent years, the Commission has
negotiated such confidence and security-building measures as the
United Nations Register of Conventional Arms, and guidelines
and recommendations for objective information on military
matters and for regional approaches to disarmament.
Commission Officers
The officers of the Commission in 1997 are Andelfo J. Garcia
(Colombia), Chairman. Representatives of the following States
are Vice-Chairmen: Belarus, Cuba, Gabon, Ghana, Luxembourg,
Mongolia, Romania and Viet Nam. Genevieve Hamilton
(Australia) is the Rapporteur. Also, Chairman, working group I,
Abdelkadar Mesdoua (Algeria); Chairman, working group II,
Sudjadnan Parnohadiningraj (Indonesia); and Chairman, working
group III, Michael Hoey (Ireland).
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
