UN First Committee

2007 First Committee Resolutions

Other Disarmament Measures and International Security

Back to the Index of Resolutions

UNGA 62/26 (L.12) National legislation on transfer of arms, military equipment and dual-use goods and technology

Introduced by the Netherlands.

This biennial resolution seeks to strengthen national control over the transfer of arms, military equipment, and dual-use goods and technology by encouraging and facilitating exchange of national legislation, regulations, and procedures, useful for developing such legislation in other states. As in previous years, the resolution, without prejudice to the implementation of Security Council resolutions 1540 (2004) and 1673 (2006), encourages states to enact or improve national legislation for the purpose stated above and to voluntarily provide this information to the Secretary-General, where it will be made accessible to member states. New language welcomes the establishment by the Office of Disarmament Affairs of an electronic database that contains all information exchanged by states pursuant to this resolution and its predecessors.

First Committee: without a vote
UNGA: without a vote

Back to the top of page

UNGA 62/27 (L.13)
Promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation

Introduced by Indonesia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

This annual resolution was first introduced in 2002, following resolution 56/24 T (2001) on multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation and global efforts against terrorism, from which it greatly departed as a response to the build-up for the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq. The resolution, unchanged in recent years, reaffirms the primacy of multilateralism in negotiation of non-proliferation and disarmament norms and in addressing related concerns, and urges the non-transparent and non-discriminatory participation of all interested states in such matters. It requests states parties to relevant non-proliferation and disarmament instruments to resolve cases of non-compliance according to procedures defined in those instruments and "to refrain from resorting or threatening to resort to unilateral actions or directing unverified noncompliance accusations against one another to resolve their concerns." It again directs the Secretary-General to seek the views of member states and to submit a report to the next session of the General Assmebly.

First Committee: 112-4-51
UNGA: 123-6-51

The vote on this resolution is the same as in past years-Israel, the United Kingdom, and the United States and its dependencies vote against, European and other states not affiliated with the Non-Aligned Movement abstain. As in previous years, Canada, speaking on behalf of Australia and the Netherlands, expressed disappointment at once again being unable to support the resolution due to its assertions in OP1 and OP2 that multilateralism is core principle in arms control and disarmament agreements, ignoring the potential for overlapping and complementary unilateral and plurilateral initiatives. The Canadian delegation further pointed out that this broader perspective is expressed in the PP8 and questioned why this was not also reflected in the operative paragraphs, citing this as a key contradiction preventing the three delegations from signing onto the resolution.

Back to the top of page

UNGA 62/28 (L.14) Observance of environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of agreements on disarmament and arms control

Introduced by Indonesia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

First introduced by Cuba in 1994, this resolution emphasizes the need to observe environmental norms in negotiation and implementation of disarmament and arms control agreement and specifically refers to "the detrimental environmental effects of the use of nuclear weapons," It calls on states to adopt measures to ensure scientific and technical progress in international and disarmament do not undermine environmental and sustainable development concerns, and to provide information on measures adopted to the Secretary-General.

First Committee: 162-1-3
UNGA: 175-1-3

While no discussion, the vote on this resolution remained the same as in previous years with the United States casting the lone vote against and with France, Israel, and the United Kingdom abstaining.

Back to the top of page

UNGA 62/14 (L.16)
Implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace

Introduced by Indonesia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

This biennial resolution supports the General Assembly Ad Hoc Committee on the Indian Ocean in order to facilitate focused discussion on practical measures to ensure conditions of peace, security, and stability in the region. It argues the participation of all the permanent members of the Security Council in the Ad Hoc Committee would greatly benefit the objective of the resolution. It requests the chair of the Committee to continue consultations and requests the Secretary-General to continue rendering assistance within existing resources.

First Committee: 120-3-45
UNGA: 130-3-47

As in previous years, with no discussion, this resolution was supported by Non-Aligned states with France, the United Kingdom, and the United States voting against, and with most European and NATO-aligned states abstaining.

Back to the top of page

UNGA 62/30 (L.18/Rev.1)
Effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium

Introduced by Indonesia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

Introduced for the first time this year, the text, drafted by Cuba, considers the potential harm caused by depleted uranium (DU) armaments and ammunitions on human health and the environment, and requests the Secretary-General "seek the view of Member States and relevant international organizations" on these harmful effects and submit a report to the General Assembly next year. The final version of the draft text omitted a request to states to "refrain from using armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium until studies to determine the effects of such armaments and ammunitions on human health and the environment are completed."

First Committee: 122-6-35
UNGA: 136-5-36

Though the revised text is less substantive than the original, the deletion of operative paragraph 2 was key to its adoption-and was instrumental in dividing NATO member states. Of the 26 NATO countries, only five voted against the resolution: Czech Republic, France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States (Israel cast the sixth vote against). Although most NATO states abstained, Germany and Italy voted in favour. This is not the first time a draft resolution on DU has been voted on in First Committee. In 2002, Iraq tabled draft resolution L.14, entitled "Effects of the use of depleted uranium in armaments." Only 35 states voted in favour of the resolution and it was not adopted.

In statements made to the First Committee, the European Union and United States argued that scientific studies by NATO, the World Health Organization (WHO), and the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) had found no evidence that DU in armaments has a notable impact on human health or the environment. However, the Cuban delegation argued that the issue can no longer be ignored by the international community, and pointed out that resolutions adopted in other forums reflect the levels of concern over the issue. Indonesia's delegate, speaking on behalf of the NAM to present the revised text before the vote, argued, "There is not yet a clear understanding of the full impact that fine particles of DU may have on the human body," and the International Atomic Energy Agency, the WHO, and UNEP "have all stated that more research is needed with respect to the immediate and/or long-term health or environmental effects of DU munitions."

The WHO has noted that uranium released from embedded fragments (shrapnel wounds) may accumulate in the central nervous system tissue, though it is difficult to draw firm conclusions from the few studies reported. Other studies suggest liver and kidney damage, as well as cancer and birth defects, could be linked to DU, but this has not been irrefutably established.

The Indonesian delegate also indicated that L.18/Rev.1 "excludes controversial issues that were introduced in a previous resolution on this issue to the First Committee." However, in her explanation of vote before the vote, US Ambassador Rocca insisted that L.18/Rev.1 ignores scientific evidence on the subject, and encouraged delegations to "wisely defeat" the resolution as they did in 2002. Argentina, which voted in favor of the resolution, said any restrictions on the use of DU armaments must be based on solid scientific knowledge. The Argentine delegate, noting that the resolution seeks the views of member states, suggested a GGE should be established to consider the issue in a more comprehensive way. Japan, which also voted in favour, expressed concern that no definitive conclusions on the issue have been drawn from scientific studies.

The Cuban delegate expressed regret that certain states did not vote in favour-not because they necessarily disagreed with the text, but because they felt they needed to show political solidarity to their respective alignments. However, Cuba and the rest of the NAM are encouraged that the issue is now inscribed on the First Committee's agenda, and intend to return with a stronger resolution in the sixty-third session.

Back to the top of page

UNGA 62/13 (L.33)
Objective information on military matters, including transparency of military expenditures

Introduced by Germany.

This biennial resolution is aimed at strengthening and broadening participation in the UN system for standardised reporting on military expenditure, as first established in UNGA 35/142B (1980) and reinforced in subsequent resolutions. It calls on states to report annually on their military expenditures, recommends implementation of the guidelines and recommendations for objective information on military matters, encourages international and regional bodies to promote transparency on military expenditures and enhance complementarity among reporting systems, and takes notes of various UN reports on these issues. It requests the UN to continue with and augment various procedures and practices related to promoting standardised reporting on military expenditure and encourages states to continue to provide information, views and suggestions to the Secretary-General, and to alert the Secretary-General about any possible problems with the standardised reporting system and their reasons (where relevant) for not submitting the requested data. This year, the resolution requests the Secretary-General to establish a Group of Government Experts in 2010 to review the operation of the instrument and to submit a report to the 66th (2011) session of the General Assembly.

First Committee: without a vote
UNGA: without a vote

Back to the top of page

UNGA 62/45 (L.43)
Confidence-building measures in the regional and sub-regional context

Introduced by Pakistan.

First introduced in 2003, this annual resolution urges states to comply with existing restrictions on the threat or use of force and on the peaceful settlement of disputes. It resolution calls on states to pursue confidence- and security-building measures, as set out in the report of the Disarmament Commission in its 1993 session, through sustained consultations and dialogue. It further encourages promotion of bilateral and regional "to avoid conflict and prevent the unintended and accidental outbreak of hostilities." Lastly, it requests the Secretary-General to seek the views of government on regional and sub-regional confidence-building measures and to submit a report to the next session of the General Assembly.

First Committee: without a vote
UNGA: without a vote

This resolution built on resolution 57/337 (2003), entitled "Prevention of armed conflict," which called for states to settle their disputes by peaceful means. While this resolution was initially adopted with only 70 states in favour, outweighed by the negative votes and abstentions, after undergoing revision in 2004 it has been adopted annually by consensus since.

Back to the top of page

UNGA 62/17 (L.45)
Developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security

Introduced by Indonesia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

This resolution, first introduced in 1998, calls on states to consider the range of threats to information security, notes that scientific and technological developments can have dual-use applications, and expresses concern regarding the abuse of information resources and technologies in ways that may "adversely affect the integrity of the infrastructure of states to the detriment of their security in both civil and military fields." Further, requests the Group of Government Experts, established by resolution 61/54 (2006), to continue studying "existing and potential threats in the sphere of information security and possible cooperative measures to address them" and concepts for strengthening security of global information and telecommunications systems, and to submit its report to the 65th session of the General Assembly.

First Committee: 168-1-0
UNGA: 179-1-0

The United States cast the lone vote against this resolution due to its strong objection to the establishment of another Group of Government Experts (GGE). Although the US delegation expressed the sentiment that network and infrastructure security is important, they pointed to the existing EU Convention on Cyber Crime, which has 34 signatories, as an existing instrument that serves the purpose of the resolution. Referring the report of the last GGE, submitted to the General Assembly in 2005, the US delegation explained that the Group had been unable to find any common ground and that any attempt to negotiate a treaty beyond the EU convention would be fruitless. The EU stated it supported the resolution in part because it supports the definitions contained in the resolution. It further called on the GGE to explore the issue of attacks on infrastructure.

Back to the top of page

UNGA 62/21 (L.47)
Verification in all its aspects, including the role of the United Nations in the field of verification

Introduced by Canada.

This resolution recalls resolution 59/60 (2004), takes notes of the 2007 report of the Panel of Government Experts and that it was unanimously approved by the Panel. It requests the Secretary-General to circulate the report, invites states to offer their views on it, requests the Secretary-General to submit a report to the 63rd (2008) session of the General Assembly, and puts the issue on the agenda of the 64th session (2009) of the General Assembly.

First Committee: without a vote
UNGA: without a vote

This resolution represents the very meager results of Canada's effort to follow up on its controversial 2004 resolution that established a Panel of Government Experts to "explore the question of verification in all its aspects, including the role of the United Nations in the field of verification." Canada's stated objective was to build upon the gains in multilateral arms control and disarmament made in the 1990s that "made verification an integral tool to reinforce disarmament agreements". Although the Panel's report may not have gone as far as Canada would have liked, particularly it did not propose any specific solutions, the Canadians did point to some positive aspects of the report including that its 21 recommendations were approved by consensus and that it noted the technical means of verification have continued to evolve. The Canadian delegations urged states to consider how the report's recommendations might be further developed and implemented.

Driven by a number of factors, including the decline in the application of verification to arms control and disarmament agreements and regional issues, some states have proposed taking a more universal approach. Such initiatives have included the ambitious goal of establishing a single verification mechanism under the auspices of the UN, or simply finding some method to retain the knowledge and capacity contained in unique organs such as UNMOVIC. However, for an equally varied number of reasons, states remained unwilling to contemplate any "new verification paradigm", as Pakistan termed it in 2004, that might result in a new instrument.

Back to the top of page

UNGA 62/48 (L.50)
Relationship between disarmament and development

Introduced by Indonesia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

This annual resolution "stresses the importance of the symbiotic relationship between disarmament and development and the role of international security in this connection," and expresses concern "at increasing global military expenditure, which could otherwise be spent on development needs." The resolution recalls the 2004 report of the Group of Government Experts and requests the Secretary-General to strengthen role of the UN and the high-level Steering Group on Disarmament and Development, and to continue implementing the 1987 action programme of the International Conference of the Relationship Between Disarmament and Development. It also encourages the international community to make reference to the role of disarmament in meeting the Millennium Development Goals and for sub-state organizations and institutions to incorporate issues pertaining to the relationship between disarmament and development in their agendas. A new paragraph invites states to submit information to the Secretary-General regarding measures to devote resources freed by implementing disarmament agreements to development and for the Secretary-General to include this information in the report on the implementation of the resolution to be submitted to the next session of the General Assembly.

First Committee: 166-1-2
UNGA: 179-1-2

As in previous years, the United States voted against, while Israel and France abstained. The US delegation delivered its usual statement, reiterating its well-known belief that disarmament and development are two distinct issues and that the United States is not bound by the decisions of the 1987 conference on Disarmament and Development, as it did not participate in it. The UK delegation again supported the resolution but expressed reservations regarding the expert group report and disagreed with an automatic link between disarmament and development. While the French delegation explicitly did not challenge the link between disarmament and development, nor does France challenge the financing of development, France abstained in due to elements in the resolution it could not support, specifically pointing to the need to expand OP3.

Back to the top of page

UNGA 62/ (L.51)
Decision Review of the implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security

Introduced by Indonesia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

This decision places the item, "Review of the implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security", on the agenda of the 64th (2009) session of the General Assembly.

First Committee: without a vote
UNGA: without a vote

This resolution refers to General Assembly resolution 2734 (XXV), adopted on 16 December 1970. The Non-Aligned Movement continues to place this item on the agenda every two years to reaffirm its importance as, according the Indonesian delegation, it "emphasizes the need for the United Nations to exert continuous efforts in the strengthening of international peace and security."

Back to the top of page

Back to the Index of Resolutions

© 2007 The Acronym Institute.