United Nations (UN)

General Debate of the UN First Committee

October 8-17, 2001

Nuclear Weapons, Missile Defence and Outer Space

Algeria (Abdullah Baali, October 9): "[It] d that it could not be forgotten that the path to be travelled in the field of nuclear disarmament had remained 'the priority of priorities'... Bold action would have to be undertaken, such as the promotion of a renewed strategic approach ending doctrines of nuclear deterrence and any measures that would jeopardise the climate of détente. The commitment made by nuclear-weapon states to totally eliminate their nuclear arsenals should be implemented. Also, the Conference on Disarmament must begin to deal with the preparation of an instrument banning the production of fissile material for weapons purposes, and preventing an outer space arms race. ... [T]he ABM Treaty could only consolidate the disarmament process. It was comforting that nuclear-weapon-free zones had been established under various treaties. However, the absence of progress concerning the establishment of such a zone in the Middle East was of grave concern." (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3199.)

Armenia (Movses Abelian, October 17): "Though national missile defence was a direct response to missile proliferation, the deployment of such systems would endanger the whole process of nuclear disarmament and set a bad example for other disarmament regimes." (United Nations Press Release GA/DIS/3206.)

ASEAN: "ASEAN countries would like to reiterate that we view the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons as a very important contribution to the international community's efforts for peace and security. ASEAN countries recognise that, in view of recent political developments, there now exist conditions for the establishment of a world free of nuclear weapons. ... Last year we were able to bring about a positive outcome to the 2000 [NPT] Review Conference... In this connection, we reaffirm our conviction that there exists an urgent need for the nuclear-weapon states to take concrete measures to fulfil their obligations under the NPT, in particular Article VI on nuclear disarmament and Article IV to provide technical assistance in the application of nuclear energy... ASEAN countries note the recent dialogues...on the national missile defence [issue] and express our hope that such dialogues would narrow down the differences and bring new constructive approaches... ASEAN members welcome the commitment made by states party...at the 2000 NPT Review Conference to preserving and strengthening the ABM Treaty as a cornerstone of strategic stability. ... We note that a Panel of Governmental Experts was established pursuant to General Assembly resolution 55/33 A to consider the issue of missiles in all its aspects. We continue to believe that the concerns related to missile proliferation are best addressed through multilaterally negotiated, universal, comprehensive and non-discriminatory agreements. ... The ASEAN countries through sustained efforts have successfully established a nuclear-weapon-free zone in south east Asia [SEANWFZ, also known as the Bangkok Treaty]. ... A protocol is annexed to the treaty for accession by nuclear-weapon states. IN welcoming the announcement by China at the ASEAN Post-Ministerial Conference in July 1999 of its readiness to accede to the protocol, we wish to reiterate our call to [the] NWS to accede to the protocol as soon as possible. ... In this connection, we welcome the first direct consultation between ASEAN and the NWS in Hanoi on May 19, 2001..."

Australia: "We are deeply disappointed that another Conference on Disarmament year has ended without a start to [fissile material] cut-off negotiations, despite the efforts of several states to build support for negotiations. In this regard, in May this year Australia co-sponsored, with Japan, a workshop on the role and significance of the cut-off treaty. Prior to the start of formal negotiations, Australia sees value in further informal work along these lines outside the CD. Pending negotiation of an FMCT, we call upon all relevant states to join a moratorium on production of fissile material for nuclear weapons. Universal implementation of the IAEA's strengthened safeguards system is another key non-proliferation priority. ... We are pleased to have been the first country to ratify and implement an Additional Protocol and [we] urge all states yet to take this important step to do so as quickly as possible. ... Australia strongly supports the adoption by the international community of an International Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation. We are pleased to be associated with the developed of an augmented draft Code at the recent Missile Technology Control Regime meeting in Ottawa. The Code represents a genuine effort to increase transparency in relation to missile activities and to build confidence regarding the peaceful intentions of states. The Code will now be circulated among the international community for further negotiation and finalisation ahead of a proposed adoption conference in late 2002. We urge all states to subscribe to the Code as an important signal of the international community's commitment to ballistic missile non-proliferation. As a participant in the UN Panel of Experts on missiles, Australia is also working in that forum to develop practical recommendations..."

Bangladesh: "We are convinced that the role of the [ABM] Treaty...should be preserved to ensure [the] progressive development of the entire disarmament process. The implications of doing otherwise are enormous and seriously destabilising to the implementation and verification of strategic offensive nuclear arms treaties and to existing moratoria on test explosions. ... As a least developed country, Bangladesh reiterates [its] major concern about the financial obligations that devolve on the states parties on account of the implementation of the [Comprehensive Test Ban] Treaty including [the] expenses of the Preparatory Commission...and the verification regime including the International Monitoring system and the Technical Secretariat. Some burden-sharing mechanism must be evolved to take care of this concern."

Belarus: "Belarus, as a state that voluntarily rejected an opportunity to continue to possess nuclear weapons and completed their withdrawal in 1997, is convinced that it is necessary to provide legally-binding assurances to non-nuclear states. At the same time, we welcome unilateral declarations made by nuclear states with respect to their policies of rejecting the use or the threat of use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states. ... Deployment of a national ABM defence system in violation of the ABM Treaty will undermine the existing nuclear non-proliferation regime and will affect in the most negative manner the entire system of global strategic stability that has taken decades to form. ... Belarus continues to believe that the initiative on setting up a nuclear-weapon-free space in Central and eastern Europe is extremely important for promoting regional and global security and stability. We are convinced that the time will come when this initiative will become a reality."

Brazil: "We welcome unilateral initiatives that lead to reduction in arsenals, but they cannot be...substitutes for an international disarmament structure. ... The proliferation of shields may reverse the current logic of the advantages of disarmament. ... We should strive to curb proliferation and to fulfil disarmament obligations contained in treaties so that there are less arms threatening humanity. ... I am personally honoured for having been chosen to chair the work of the Panel of Governmental Experts on the issue of missiles in all its aspects. I am glad to report that the exchange of ideas during the first session was very encouraging. The UN Group of Experts will make every effort to submit to the next GA its contribution to the international discussion of the issue... In our understanding, the question of missiles should be dealt with in a process involving the broadest possible participation."

Cambodia (Sun Suon, October 11): "We...anticipate that the recent dialogues on disarmament issues, in particular on national missile defence, between the major powers will diminish the differences and pave the way towards maintaining global peace and stability. While looking forward to the progress, Cambodia stresses the importance of the [ABM] Treaty... As a member state of the [Bangkok Treaty]...we take note of the recent consultation held in Hanoi in May this year...between ASEAN and [the] nuclear power states. We urge...accession by all nuclear power states to the Protocol [to the Bangkok Treaty]... In the light of the...Millennium Declaration adopted last year by our leaders, we urge all member states to undertake...negotiations...leading to total nuclear disarmament... This stems not only from moral but legal aspects of our obligation, which has been duly enshrined in the UN Charter and unanimously supported by the decision of the International Court of Justice in July 1996."

Cameroon: "[T]he promising trends of last year had not been met. Those had included the encouraging results of the 2000 NPT Review Conference and the commitments made by world leaders at the Millennium Summit, particularly in the realm of nuclear disarmament. The picture was sombre, as those commitments had essentially remained a 'dead letter'."

Canada: "The first priority, surely, is nuclear disarmament, the fulfilment of our solemn pledge to rid the world of nuclear weapons. We already have a template, the NPT Plan of Action, 13 practical steps agreed by all the parties to the NPT last year and endorsed by the General Assembly. And we have the unequivocal commitment of the nuclear-weapon states to fulfil it, along with a renewed promise of accountability. We need to protect those valuable assets and use them in years to come to sustain the NPT's vital protections for us all. To strengthen the NPT's norm, we reiterate the call by the NPT Review Conference for those few states not yet party to the treaty to accede to it as non-nuclear-weapon states. That nuclear disarmament commitment applies to both horizontal and vertical proliferation of existing arsenals. It surely means no more nuclear weapons tests. We need neither further demonstrations nor further refinements of their catastrophic force. The moratorium on tests must endure and the CTBT must come into force. Moreover, we need to make sure stockpiles are secure and launch FMCT negotiations, with parallel attention to stocks. And we need to focus on tactical as well as strategic weapons. ... If the ABM Treaty is to be amended or replaced, it would be important that the new strategic framework make a comparably strong contribution to global security. ... [W]e have also emphasised the need to keep space free of weapons. Outer space remains the only environment where weapons are not present; hence the importance and urgency of preventative diplomacy, to forestall an aims race in outer space, by establishing a multilateral ban on space-based weapons. ...

Canada will chair the Missile Technology Control Regime through the coming year. We fully subscribe to the MTCR's preventive approach to the clear dangers of missile proliferation and will devote great energy as its Chair to reach out to non-member states. We also strongly support the draft International Code of Conduct on missiles, originally crafted by the MTCR in consultation with non-members but now independent of the Regime and released for consideration by the international community as a whole. The universalisation of the draft Code should take place through a transparent arid inclusive negotiating process open to all states on the basis of equality. Finally, we support other initiatives designed to focus multilateral attention on missile issues in all their aspects, including the UN Group of Experts established earlier this year, of which Canada is a member."

Chile: "[T]he negotiation of a [fissile materials] treaty...has not yet started [at the CD]... Nor has it been possible to implement a mandate to discuss nuclear disarmament within a subsidiary organ of the Conference, a discussion which by its very nature cannot but be viewed as a stage prior to negotiations... In our view, this is an essential step towards translating into action the 'unequivocal undertaking' of [the] nuclear-weapon states to the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals...as stated in the Final Document of the [2000 NPT Review Conference]... Based on the strict respect of Chile for international law, we again insist on the value of the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice when it emphasised the 'obligation to undertake in good faith and to conclude negotiations on nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict international control.' That advisory opinion constitutes a solid doctrinal base that should not be disregarded. We are faced here with an important link between questions of disarmament law and humanitarian law."

China: "Complete nuclear disarmament and a nuclear-weapon-free world is the common aspiration of all people across the world. The 20th century was a century of nuclear weapons, and the 21st century should be a century free of nuclear weapons. In this regard, countries having the largest and most sophisticated nuclear arsenals shoulder special and primary responsibilities. Progress in nuclear disarmament on their part will create favourable conditions for the medium- and small-sized nuclear-weapon states to join in the process. The Chinese delegation appreciates the expressed intention of the country concerned to reduce its nuclear weapons unilaterally. In the meantime, it must be pointed out that genuine nuclear disarmament must be irreversible and verifiable. Therefore, it should be carried out in a legally binding manner.

The end of the Cold War marked the closure of the international relations characterised by the confrontation between military blocs. For the nuclear-weapons states to abandon the Cold War thinking they should first and foremost readjust fundamentally their offensive nuclear strategies by renouncing the policy of the first use of nuclear weapons. Therefore, the Chinese Government wishes to renew its appeal that the five nuclear-weapon states undertake never to be the first to use nuclear weapons against one another, and undertake unconditionally and in a legally binding manner never to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon states. ... We hope that all countries in the world, the nuclear-weapon-states in particular, remain loyal to the objective of establishing a world free of nuclear weapons by consolidating rather than undermining the strategic stability and mutual trust...and by advancing rather than impeding the early entry into force of the CTBT. Furthermore, we should proceed to negotiating a fissile material cut-off treaty and an agreement on the security assurance for non-nuclear-weapon states, banning the first use and the use of nuclear weapons, as well as withdrawing the nuclear weapons stationed on the territory of other countries and abandoning the policies of nuclear umbrella and nuclear sharing. ...

The terrorist attacks in the United States will have far-reaching ramifications for the international security. In face of this horrendous human tragedy, every government needs to seriously reflect upon its own security strategy and priorities. The bloodshed and the terror have amply testified that a Maginot type missile defence simply is not the way to counter the threat of terrorism. Such a defence can only bring to the world a false sense of security... Here we call upon the country concerned to heed the appeal of the international community, stop the development and deployment of destabilizing missile defence systems. ... [T]he only effective way to address missile proliferation is to build a comprehensive and non-discriminatory multilateral mechanism. China agrees to a leading role for the UN in dealing with the missile issue, supports the work of the UN Governmental Expert Group on Missiles, and stands ready to make its contribution to this process.

Outer space belongs to all humanity and mankind has a common desire for its peaceful utilisation. However, it is most worrying that outer space is faced with an increasing danger of weaponisation. As a means of pursuing unilateral military supremacy, a strategic concept on the control of space and related long-term plans have been developed, with a view to putting weapons into outer space. Such moves will lead to grave consequences. Indeed, the prevention of the weaponisation of and an arms race in outer space has stood Out as an urgent and realistic issue. Therefore, the international community must act without delay to negotiate and conclude as soon as possible a necessary international legal instrument so as to protect Outer space from the threat of war. The Chinese delegation holds the view that, as the only multilateral disarmament negotiating body, the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva is the best venue for such negotiations."

Costa Rica: "The possession of nuclear weapons by any country, for which there was no justifiable rationale, was [to be] condemned. ... Anti-missile defence systems were of great concern, because of the threat they posed to stability."

Cuba: "Despite the results of the sixth Review Conference of the NPT, time had passed without any concrete action towards nuclear disarmament. Indeed, actions that ran contrary to the obligations assumed by states parties under that Treaty had been witnessed. ... [T]he establishment of a national anti-missile system, besides being a flagrant violation of the ABM Treaty, would reopen the arms race and encompass outer space. ... [Cuba] urged the establishment of a universal and non-discriminatory multilateral regime in the area of missile proliferation. The work of the expert group on missiles was an important starting point."

Czech Republic: "We are seriously concerned about the increased risk of proliferation of ballistic missiles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction. ... In this regard, we strongly support efforts aimed at finalisation and universalisation of the MTCR-proposed International Code of Conduct. ... Given the complexity of the missile defence issue and its security impact on the world community, we support all efforts undertaken with a view to achieving an understanding between both parties to the ABM Treaty. The latest rounds of bilateral consultations between the United States and the Russian Federation have sparked off hopes that it may be possible to reach an agreement on a new strategic framework which will correspond to the latest developments in the global security situation."

Egypt: "Egypt will follow closely the implementation of the results of the Sixth [NPT] Review Conference. These have reaffirmed the importance of Israel's accession to the NPPT... All states parties to the treaty, particularly the nuclear-weapon states and other interested states, should submit their reports to the Preparatory Committee on the review of the treaty in its meeting to be held next April. These reports must contain the steps they have taken to promote the achievement of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East and the realisation of the goals and objectives of the 1995 Resolution on the Middle East. ... In June 1998, President Mubarak launched his...comprehensive initiative on the holding of an international conference on freeing the world from all weapons of mass destruction, foremost among which are nuclear weapons. This initiative is in consonance with the call of the UN Secretary-General for the convening of a major conference to consider ways of eliminating nuclear risks. ... Egypt participates in the work of the [UN] Group of Governmental Experts [on missiles]... [A]ny attempt to deal with this subject outside the UN is doomed to certain failure. ... Shortcomings still plague the work of the [UN Conventional Arms] Register. ... [T]ransparency in armaments should encompass all types of weapons and weapon technologies, including weapons of mass destruction... In the Final Document of the Sixth Review Conference, the states parties reiterated the need for the nuclear-weapon states to increase transparency with regard to the[ir] nuclear weapon capabilities... Those very same states are the ones opposing this call [to expand the scope of the Register]..."

European Union: "It is necessary to step up efforts to continue implementing the results of the [2000] NPT Review Conference... [T]he Union welcomes indications from the United States and the Russian Federation that these states are actively working to bring about a considerable reduction in their nuclear arsenals. It is of the utmost importance that these reductions are verifiable and irreversible. ... While noting with satisfaction the United States' intention to maintain its moratorium on nuclear tests, we can only regret its announcement that [it]...will no longer take part in certain activities arising from the Treaty and that it is not intending to review its position regarding ratification. This is a matter of concern for us, especially since the United States has up to now played an important role in nuclear arms control, particularly in the framework of the CTBT. ...

We ask India and Pakistan to cooperate in the efforts of the international community to strengthen the non-proliferation and disarmament regime. ... The European Union [urges North Korea] to comply fully with its [IAEA] safeguards agreement and to cooperate fully with the Director-General of the IAEA as soon as possible... The European Union also attaches great importance to the DPRK continuing its moratorium on missiles and expresses its concern with regard to DPRK exports of missiles and missile technology. ... We continue to support efforts to establish an effectively verifiable Middle East zone free of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems. We repeat our request to the only state in the region not to have acceded to the NPT to sign and ratify it. ... The situation in Iraq is...a matter of major concern for us. More than two years have now elapsed since the IAEA Action Team's departure from that country and inspections have still not resumed. ... The Union notes that a routine [IAEA] inspection made it possible this year once again to carry out effective verification of the physical inventory of nuclear material in accordance with the safeguards agreement signed by Iraq under the NPT. This verification cannot, however, be a substitute for the activities which the Agency needs to conduct...

I would like to congratulate all those states which have signed or ratified Additional Protocols [with the IAEA]... On September 22, 1998 each EU member state signed an additional protocol. Since then, most member states have ratified and the others are currently completing the ratification process. ... The European Union supports the universalisation of the draft International Code of Conduct drawn up by the members of the [MTCR]... An open and transparent ad hoc international negotiating process accessible to all has just been launched. A first preparatory meeting will be organised in France at the beginning of 2002. All states wishing to participation in the finalisation of the International Code of Conduct will be able to do so on an equal footing and on a consensual basis. The Code should be ready for adoption at the end of 2002. ... The European Union considers that after its adoption the Code could be of interest to the United Nations and have a positive influence on other initiatives to address the proliferation of ballistic missiles such as, for example, the proposed Global Control System. I would emphasise that the EU welcomes the creation of the United nations group of missile experts... as a potentially useful forum for multilateral discussion of the missile question."

Haiti: "Nuclear, chemical and biological weapons were not for deterrence, but to preserve the strategic advantages of some countries... Haiti had never understood the doctrine of nuclear deterrence. With the disappearance of the Cold War, it was imperative to redouble efforts for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. ... Efforts should be made to safeguard...[the ABM] Treaty, which was a guarantor of strategic stability."

Holy See (Archbishop Renato R. Martino, October 15): "The Holy See has frequently, in this Committee, urged implementation of the obligations all states hold under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, obligations reinforced by the International Court of Justice. That obligation was expressed succinctly in the 2000 Review of the NPT, in which all 187 signatories pledged 'an unequivocal undertaking to the total elimination of nuclear weapons.' We must now tackle the central problem of nuclear weapons; especially the mentality of those who possess them and claim that they are essential to security. Now is the time to dispel this claim and to declare that the continued possession of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction is endangering all humanity and that they must be abolished. ... Having signed the CTBT on September 24, 1996, the Holy See deposited the Instrument of Ratification on 18 July 2001. The Holy See. reiterating the firm conviction that 'nuclear weapons are incompatible with the peace we seek for the Twenty-first Century,' added: 'The Holy See is convinced that, in the sphere of nuclear weapons, the banning of tests and the further development of these weapons, disarmament and non-proliferation are closely linked and must be achieved as quickly as possible under effective international controls.' Today, the Holy See adds its voice to the appeal to the States whose ratification is necessary for the entry into force of the treaty. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Preparatory Commission has done commendable work in enabling the world community to have confidence that a CTBT will produce positive results. The Independent Commission on the verifiability of the CTBT provides assurance that the various scientific instruments and networks will be able to detect, locate and identify with a high probability any deviation from the demands of the Treaty. The continued success of the Non-Proliferation Treaty requires the entry into force of the CTBT."

India: "India's exercise of its nuclear option by conducting a limited series of tests in 1998 and subsequent weaponisation was a decision that we were forced to take due to the nuclearisation of our region and the failure of existing non-proliferation regimes to deal with it. It was a decision characterised by moderation and voluntary restraint. The concepts 'minimum nuclear deterrent' and 'no-first-use' define our deployment posture, combined with a civilian command-and-control structure. ... There can be no justification in this post-Cold War period for thousands of weapons to be maintained in a state of hair-trigger alert with possible disastrous consequences. ... India's declaration of a voluntary moratorium on further underground nuclear test explosions meets the basic obligation of the CTBT. India is also committed to building a consensus nationally for creating a possible environment to sign the treaty. Developments in other countries have demonstrated that it is not a simple issue and that consensus-building in democracies needs considerable time and patience. Meanwhile we have made it clear that India will not stand in the way of the entry into force of the CTBT. India also expects that other countries will adhere to this treaty without conditions. India is committed to participate constructively and in good faith in [FMCT]...negotiations... India respects the sovereign choice exercised by non-nuclear-weapon states in establishing [NWFZs]...on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among the states of the region concerned, as recognised by the guidelines formulated in the UN Disarmament Commission in 1999. India is prepared to extend all necessary commitments to such [zones]... We do so while recognising that regional approaches underlying nuclear-weapon-free zones cannot do justice to the concerns emanating from the global nature of the threat posed by nuclear weapons. ...

[I]t is evident that existing legal instruments are inadequate to deter imminent attempts for the further militarisation and weaponisation of outer space. ... India is participating in the Panel of Governmental experts [on missiles]... There is widespread recognition that club-based, discriminatory export control measures have failed to address the issue of missiles. India wishes to see the norms against the proliferation of missiles strengthened through transparent, multilateral agreements on the basis of equal and undiminished security, that also ensure that civilian space-related applications are not adversely affected. The issue of export controls is one that goes beyond missiles to a whole range of dual-use technologies. ... Persistence of discriminatory mechanisms, some of which run contrary to existing treaty provisions, deprive developing countries of the benefits of scientific and technological developments."

Indonesia: "More than a year after the 'unequivocal undertaking' at the 2000 NPT Review Conference to accomplish the total elimination of nuclear arsenals, measures have not been identified, much less acted on. Consequently, the goal of nuclear disarmament today seems more distant than ever. ... My delegation shares the foreboding of other member states that delaying the entry into force of the [Comprehensive Test Ban] Treaty increases the risk that nuclear testing could resume... The Bangkok Treaty...epitomises the problems posed to strengthening [the] efficacy of [NWFZs]... In its continuing endeavours to render the Treaty fully operable by the accession to its protocol by the nuclear powers, member states of ASEAN have been engaged in a series of intensive consultations... We are gratified that important progress has been made and [hope that] these consultations will be continued, leading ultimately to the consolidation of the Bangkok Treaty. ... In a document circulated last year, the Group of 21 [non-aligned states at the CD] stated that 'the prevention of an arms race in outer space has assumed greater urgency because of legitimate concerns that existing legal instruments are inadequate to deter imminent attempts for the further militarisation of outer space.' Unless urgent action is taken, including the strengthening of the current legal regime, there is little doubt that the last frontier of human endeavour will soon turn into a new battleground. ... Indonesia hopes that the establishment of a Panel of Governmental Experts on missiles...would be a first step leading to an outcome that would take into account the security interests of all nations. ... While missile defence will have global consequences, Asia will be the region most affected, where it may trigger a new and vicious arms race."

Iran: Five years after the ICJ in its advisory opinion...recalled the legal commitment of all states to implement Article VI of the NPT...no tangible efforts have been made to move towards total elimination. ... The 2000 NPT Final Document, adopted by consensus, has called [on] Israel to join the NPT and place its nuclear facilities under IAEA full-scope safeguards. This international call needs to be pursued with vigilance and in all seriousness. ... We welcome the establishment of the [UN] Panel of Governmental Experts [on missiles]... Any initiative or arrangement short of multilateral negotiations and agreement would not have the credibility to achieve universality. This panel...is therefore the best mechanism to address different aspects of missiles and make accordingly its recommendations on the follow-up mechanism."

Israel: "Israel continues to view the regional context as a primary and essential framework to forward critical arms control measures predicated on a comprehensive and durable peace in the area of the Middle East. Indeed, after the Madrid Conference in 1991 a working group for arms control and regional security was established and quickly became an important regional forum for addressing security issues. Unfortunately, these activities were discontinued by 1995 by other countries in the region. ... Iraq has yet to comply with all the relevant resolutions of the Security Council. Indeed, the prevention of Iraq from reconstituting its weapons of mass destruction and missile capabilities will remain a critical strategic factor in the quest for any regional stability in the Middle East. In addition, Iran has done nothing to conceal its unconditional hostility towards my country's existence or the fact that it is procuring ballistic missiles capable of reaching Israel and beyond. ... [O]ne of the resolutions of the First Committee that serve no useful or constructive purpose is submitted under the agenda item entitled 'The Risk of Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East'. This resolution seeks to single out Israel on a matter that is central to its security, totally ignoring the immense security problems and inherent instability of the Middle East. ... An alternative and far better approach would be to consider ideas and initiatives that actually improve the situation on the ground. We hope that our neighbours would become partners in rebuilding a regional mechanism for consultation on arms control and regional security matters and also view the adoption of confidence-building measures in a more positive light. CBMs are not a prise for one side, but rather an essential means of reducing tensions and misunderstandings, particularly in times of crisis. They most definitely have a crucial role today."

Japan: "We are...gravely concerned about the lack of momentum toward the entry into force of the CTBT, which is a linchpin for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. It is truly regrettable that some states seem to be losing their political will to adhere to the treaty. ... Japan has taken initiatives to promote the universality of the IAEA full-scope safeguards agreement and its additional protocols. In June 2001 it hosted an international symposium in Tokyo to urge the Asia-Pacific countries to join them. At the same time, it is of utmost importance for the nuclear-weapon states to renew their commitment to, and to demonstrate tangible progress in, nuclear disarmament... [T]he international community must create universal rules to prevent and curb the proliferation of ballistic missiles... Leading the regional efforts in Asia, where ballistic missile proliferation directly affects its own security environment, Japan hosted in Tokyo this March the first ever discussion with Asian countries on international measures to cope with this issue. Japan will also continue to actively participate in the discussions on the International Code of Conduct and in the work of the United Nations Panel..."

Jordan (Ramez Goussous, October 8): "We cannot but reiterate our conviction...that the chances for a comprehensive, just and durable peace in the Middle East look too gloomy without confidence-building between the parties involved. Confidence, however, can never be attainable with the existence of nuclear weapons in the region..."

Kazakhstan (Madina B. Jarbussynova, October 11): "We attach great [importance]...to the realisation of the initiative to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia... Kazakhstan will further continue to participate...in the work being carried out to establish this zone. ... In view of [its] unique situation we also positively estimate the contribution of Mongolia to the process of general and complete disarmament and fully support its tireless efforts on establishing [itself as a] nuclear-weapon-free zone."

Kenya: "Last year, this Committee endorsed the importance of the [ABM] Treaty...as the cornerstone of strategic stability. My delegation holds onto this position most strongly. It is for this reason that we deem any unilateral measure which will diminish the importance of the ABM Treaty a threat to global security and stability."

North Korea (Kim Chang Guk, October 17): "The national missile defence system, a reproduction of Star Wars, is explicitly aimed at dominating the world by gaining absolute military and strategic superiority. ... What should be underlined is that the United States is taking the so-called 'missile threat' of the DPRK as a pretext for its NMD system. ... As long as the US continues to provoke us with a view to pursuing...NMD, we cannot but take strong countermeasures in response... Another dark shadow cast on global security, particularly the security environment in northeast Asia, is the attempt of Japan to become a military power and reviving [its] militarism... On August 29, Japan carried out a test-firing of a large-scale carrier rocket H-2A, easily convertible into an intercontinental ballistic missile. Japan did not hide the fact that the rocket would be 'exclusively used for a military purpose'. ... Japan continues to adhere policy of hostility to the DPRK in collaboration with the United states, clamouring about the 'missile threat' from us. The Japanese authorities even claimed that their recent test-firing...was to 'cope with North Korea's missile'. The DPRK's missile programme is of a peaceful nature and it...does not pose any threat to those countries which respect its sovereignty. The United States and Japan should not misjudge the DPRK's stance whereby it declared a moratorium on its satellite launches. ... My delegation wishes to conclude by making clear once again its position on [its] safeguard agreement with the [IAEA]... The issue of implementing the safeguard agreement will automatically be resolved when the hostile relations between the DPRK and USA are eased and the DPRK-US Agreed Framework is implemented. In this regard, my delegation refers to the statement of the EU at the current Committee meeting on October 8 [see above]. It is the expectation of my delegation that the above explanation on the so-called 'nuclear issue' in the DPRK will help give [a] correct understanding to the EU..."

South Korea: "With respect to the FMCT, it is certainly frustrating that the CD has yet to commence negotiation of the treaty, which is the next logical step on the nuclear arms control and disarmament agenda. ... Pending negotiation of the FMCT, we call upon all relevant states to join a moratorium on the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons. I wish to note that the governmental expert panel on missiles held its first session...confirming the seriousness of the risks associated with missile proliferation... Though we, as a panel member, noted different priorities and approaches on the issue, as well as some arguments that are remotely related to the urgent priorities, we look forward to the expert panel's development of constructive recommendations... In this context, my delegation welcomes the recent adoption of the draft International Code of Conduct...initiated by the [MTCR]... We...look forward to the early launching and universalisation of the Code, which carries significance as the first international norm against the proliferation of ballistic missiles."

Kuwait: "Keeping nuclear weapons was no longer a viable option, as had been agreed at the Millennium Summit. The international community called on the nuclear-weapon states to eliminate all of their nuclear weapons and to remember the 1996 International Court of Justice decision, which says states must take steps to eliminate their nuclear weapons. ... All Arab states had signed the NPT, but one state, Israel, continued to flout the treaty, posing a threat to international peace and security as a result. ... Kuwait was especially sensitive to the use of weapons of mass destruction, because it had been the victim of such weapons at the hands of Iraq. Iraq continued to pursue the development of weapons of mass destruction and had used such weapons against its own people..."

Laos (Alounkeo Kittikhoun, October 16): "Many countries are of the view that the ABM Treaty is...a cornerstone of strategic stability. For these countries, it has served over two decades for the maintenance of world security...and is a basis for further reductions of strategic offensive weapons. We share this view and express the hope that the states parties to the treaty comply fully with its provisions."

Lithuania: "The regime against [missile] proliferation is riddled with holes. We therefore support stepping up anti-proliferation diplomacy. The creation of the United nations governmental experts group on missiles is just one welcome development. The universalisation of the draft International Code of Conduct drawn up by the MTCR is another crucial endeavour...because the power of this regime must match the power and range of missiles."

Republic of Macedonia: "My delegation welcomes the intensive consultations between Russia and the United States on possible adaptation of the global strategic framework to the new circumstances and emerging threats. We share the views expressed by many delegations that if the ABM Treaty is to be amended or replaced it should be for the reason that the new strategic frameworks make at least a comparably strong and effective contribution to maintaining global security and stability."

Malaysia: "[T]he nuclear disarmament objectives agreed upon [by NPT states parties] in 1995..., while modest, have not been attained; hence, the need for the concrete implementation of the objectives and principles of the Final Document of 2000 without delay. ... We look forward...to the realisation of the commitment made by the United States and the Russian Federation that they would work actively to bring about a considerable reduction in their nuclear arsenals. We hope that these [declarations] will not remain platitudes - mere statements of intent that will be repeated at every Review Conference... We...strongly urge against the development and deployment of the missile defence system because of its serious ramifications for international security. We delegation would therefore call for a strengthening of the existing Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty while addressing, in serious fashion, the threat of global missile proliferation. ... The historic...advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legality of the threat and use of nuclear weapons...was a major and positive development... Regrettably, this Opinion continues to be ignored by the nuclear-weapon states. ... My delegations attaches great importance to the promotion of [NWFZs]...and strongly supports their establishment in other parts of the world, particularly in West Asia and the Middle east... Malaysia...commends the Secretary-General for his call for the convening of an international conference to consider all aspects of the nuclear weapons issue and would strongly encourage him to follow up on his laudable proposal."

Mali (Cheickna Keita, October 9): "Mali attached great importance to the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones on the basis of arrangements freely concluded among the states of the region. In that respect, the [Africa Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone] Treaty of Pelindaba had had been a useful instrument." (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3199.)

Mexico (Gustavo Albin, October 8): "Despite the decision of the international community to give priority to the full implementation of the nuclear disarmament programme agreed upon in the [NPT]...the absence of progress is without doubt inconsistent with the unequivocal commitment given by the nuclear-weapon states to completely eliminate their nuclear arsenals. ... The international controversy surrounding the development and deployment of anti-ballistic missile defence systems has further complicated the process of promoting understanding and easing tensions among nuclear-weapon states. The link that some countries have established between these programmes and the so-called international strategic balance has served to bog down even further the multilateral negotiations on arms control and disarmament. Mexico recognises the importance of the [ABM Treaty]...as the basis for future reductions in offensive strategic systems. ... The establishment of [NWFZs]...strengthens the [NPT]... We wish to reaffirm our support to the five states of Central Asia for the early conclusion of their [NWFZ] negotiations... We also support a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere..."

Mongolia: "My delegations hares the view that there is a real need to make tangible progress in the areas of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, which, ironically, has eluded us in the post-Cold War decade. ... Mongolia still believes that, in the absence of an alternative solution, unilateral abrogation of the ABM Treaty...could adversely affect the overall existing strategic balance... [M]y delegation also urges the Conference on Disarmament to engage in earnest negotiations on an early conclusion of a universal and verifiable Fissile Materials Cut-Off Treaty. Pending the negotiation of that treaty, we would welcome a moratorium on the production of weapons-grade fissile materials and greater transparency through disclosure of...present stocks. In this context, my delegation reiterates its call upon the United Nations to establish....a register of all stocks of weapons-grade fissile material as an important addition to the existing UN Register of Conventional Arms. ... [N]uclear-weapon-free zones are important factors for strengthening non-proliferation... Mongolia, based on its unique geopolitical location, strives to make its modest contribution to this cause. I would like to...express my delegation's gratitude to the DDA...for organising last month in Sapporo a meeting of independent experts of the P-5 and Mongolia to look for the ways and means of strengthening Mongolia's nuclear-weapon-free status. The experts have concluded that further steps need to be taken at the international level to strengthen the status. We believe that institutionalisation of Mongolia's status would be an important measure towards strengthening predictability, confidence-building and non-proliferation in the region."

Morocco: "Agreements between great powers to reduce their nuclear arsenal were welcomed and should be followed by efforts to eradicate those weapons... The complete eradication of nuclear weapons must be the result of multilateral instruments, however. ... The establishment of a nuclear weapon-free zone in the Middle East would ensure disarmament and non-proliferation in the region."

Mozambique (Carlos dos Santos, October 15): "In 2000, we applauded the successful conclusion of the NPT Review Conference, with the adoption of the relevant plan of action. Through its 13 agreed practical steps, we had hoped that the scourge of nuclear weapons would have its days numbered... For the first time in 15 years, states parties were able to reach an historic consensus and establish an international standard for nuclear disarmament and curbing nuclear proliferation. We are seriously concerned that there is no movement in the implementation of this agenda."

Nepal: "Non-proliferation is now overshadowing disarmament. Even in this area, progress has been much too slow. The [CTBT]...lacks sufficient ratifications... [T]he treaty's coming into force seems still remote."

New Agenda Ministerial Communiqué, October 8: "The Foreign Ministers of Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and Sweden have, in their preparation for the fifty-sixth session of the United Nations General Assembly, evaluated progress on nuclear disarmament and considered further measures to be taken in pursuit of their joint initiative to achieve a nuclear-weapon-free world. They recalled the substantial outcome of the 2000 Review Conference of the [NPT]... They noted with satisfaction the level of support given to the New Agenda resolution adopted by the General Assembly on November 20, 2000. They also recalled the constructive dialogue with the nuclear-weapon states that was started at the 2000 NPT Review Conference and agreed to continue this dialogue with a view to accelerating negotiations on all fronts, leading to nuclear disarmament. The New Agenda Ministers were determined to pursue the complete implementation of the agreements reached at the 2000 NPT Review Conference. That outcome provides the requisite blueprint to achieve nuclear disarmament further progress on disarmament must be a major determinant in achieving and in sustaining international stability.

The Ministers made it clear that they remain deeply concerned at the continuing possibility that nuclear weapons could be used. They welcomed the indications of further cuts by the United States and Russian Federation to their nuclear arsenals. They noted that, despite past achievements in bilateral and unilateral reductions, the total number of nuclear weapons deployed and stockpiled still amounts to tens of thousands. The Ministers also expressed their concern that the commitment to diminish the role of nuclear weapons in security policies and defence doctrines bad not so far been pursued. This lack of progress is inconsistent with the unequivocal undertaking by the nuclear-weapon states to achieve the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals. And, in the context of disarmament it clearly represents a failure to grasp the opportunities of the post-Cold War security environment. The Ministers reaffirmed that any presumption of the indefinite possession of nuclear weapons by the nuclear-weapon states would be incompatible with the integrity and sustainability of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and with the broader goal of the maintenance of international peace and security.

The seven Ministers looked forward to the resumption in 2002 of the NPT review process where states would need to account for progress in achieving nuclear disarmament. Accountability will be assessed in the context of the reports that states parties have agreed to Submit. To date there have been few advances in the implementation of the thirteen steps agreed to at the 2000 NPT review Conference. A particular disappointment was the continuing failure of the Conference on Disarmament to deal with nuclear disarmament and to resume negotiations on fissile material. ...

The Ministers expressed concern at challenges to the non-proliferation regime. They urged the international community to redouble its efforts to achieve universal adherence to the NPT and not to take any steps that would undermine the determination of the international community to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. They repeated their call on those three states, which are not parties to the NPT and which operate unsafeguarded nuclear facilities, to accede to the Treaty as non-nuclear-weapon states and to place their facilities under comprehensive International Atomic Energy Agency agreements.

Ministers stressed that the participation of the international community as a whole is central to the maintenance and enhancement of international peace and stability. International security is a collective concern requiring collective engagement. They emphasised that unilateral and bilateral nuclear disarmament measures complement the treaty-based multilateral approach towards nuclear disarmament. They underlined also that internationally negotiated treaties in the field of disarmament have made a fundamental contribution to international peace and security. The importance of early entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty remained crucial in this context.

Ministers emphasised the imperative of irreversibility in arms control. They expressed the view that international treaties in the field of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation must be respected and that all obligations flowing from those treaties must be duly fulfilled.

Ministers stressed the importance of the [ABM] Treaty...in the promotion and maintenance of international stability and as a basis for further reductions of strategic offensive weapons. Abrogation of the ABM Treaty could hold grave consequences for the future of global security. Further reductions of nuclear arsenals to lower limits must not be put at risk. They called upon all States to refrain from any action that could lead to a new nuclear arms race or that could impact negatively on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.

The Ministers reaffirmed their determination to pursue the New Agenda initiative with continued vigour. They agreed that the priority would be to pursue their initiative in the context of the forthcoming NPT review process beginning in 2002. ..."

New Zealand: "The new undertakings agreed at the 2000 NPT Review Conference provide the contemporary blueprint for action in a way that ensures international security. ... A year later, it is difficult to identify progress... Implementation will take time. New Zealand is realistic about that. We welcome the indications of further cuts that have been given by the United States and the Russian Federation. But when we look for evidence of a wider determination to move forward it is difficult to find."

Nigeria: "We share the conviction that the unilateral declaration [on tactical nuclear weapons] by the US and the Russian Federation in 1991 should be consolidated in a legally-bonding instrument to effectively advance towards the reduction of the nuclear arsenals in the two countries. Nigeria. ... We reaffirm our recognition of the importance of the 1972 [ABM] Treaty...to the promotion and maintenance of international stability, as well as the basis for future reduction in offensive strategic weapons. ... The existence of the African [NWFZ]...not only reflects the resolve of the states of the region to achieve the goal of regional peace but also their [desire for] legitimate access to peaceful uses of nuclear energy. We therefore urge...states who are yet to ratify the treaty to do so to enable its entry into force. We support the initiative to strengthen similar regimes... It is our hope that the efforts to establish a similar zone in Central Asia will soon materialise."

Pakistan: "The NPT-recognised nuclear-weapon states have committed themselves to the goal of eliminating nuclear weapons. They should therefore agree to negotiations on nuclear disarmament within the Conference on Disarmament. Pakistan is also committed to the commencement of [FMCT] negotiations... We also believe that talks on negative security assurances within the CD can help evolve agreed practical measures to reduce the danger of the use of nuclear weapons and help to counter new and old doctrines which contemplate the actual use of nuclear weapons. The CD's work in this area could be useful input to an International Conference on Reducing Nuclear Danger. ... The ABM Treaty is widely regarded as a pillar of global strategic stability. A change in the present arrangement - if at all required - should be evolved through a cooperative approach among all concerned states. ... [T]he implications of theatre missile defences for stability in some of the world's most sensitive regions needs much greater attention. Pakistan is especially concerned that ABM systems are being introduced into South Asia. These could destabilise the deterrence which presently exists in the subcontinent. ... [A] concerted endeavour [is needed] to prevent the spread of the arms race to outer space. This 'common heritage of mankind' can be utilised to enhance international peace and security only within a cooperative framework. ... [T]he threat posed by missiles must [also] be addressed within a comprehensive and cooperative framework responsive to the security concerns of all states. Pakistan has proposed that the item on 'Missiles in all its aspects' should be added to the agenda of the CD with a view to negotiating a global treaty. ... Pakistan cannot endorse arrangements for selective non-proliferation evolved by states which themselves retain the right to possess missiles while seeking to prevent others from acquiring or developing these even for the purpose of legitimate self-defence and deterrence. We shall be prepared, of course, to consider equitable and practical interim measures designed to reduce missile-related threats at all levels."

Qatar (Nassir Abdulaziz al-Nasser, October 11): "[Qatar] hoped the international community would make all possible effort to convince states that still possessed nuclear arsenals to join others in acceding to the relevant treaties, in particular on weapons of mass destruction. Regrettably, some states were still building their military arsenals, and modernizing them to create even more deadly weapons. ... [Qatar] appealed to the international community to exert pressure on Israel to place its nuclear facilities under full-scope IAEA safeguards. The negative consequences of a nuclear explosion would endanger all states of the region." (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3202.)

Rio Group: "The countries members of the Rio Group note with concern that no progress has been made toward the full implementation of the 13 measures to achieve nuclear disarmament contained in the Final Document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference. We appeal to all states, in particular the nuclear-weapon states, to honour the commitments undertaken in article VI of the Treaty and in the Final Document of the Conference. In this connection also, we wish to underscore the importance of the [Latin America Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone] Treaty of Tlatelolco and of its Organisation (OPANAL), which has been entrusted with the task of ensuring the fulfillment of the objective of strengthening the first inhabited region of the planet to be nuclear weapons free. We consider that the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones is one of the most significant advances in the field of disarmament in the last few decades. ... As representatives or the first region of the world to have prohibited nuclear weapons, we support the initiative to promote the gradual development of a Southern Hemisphere and adjacent areas to the north of tile Equator, where applicable in conformity with specific treaties, as a nuclear-weapon-free zone. ... In this regard, we also encourage the five states of Central Asia in their initiative to create a nuclear-weapon-free zone in that region."

Russia: "Having successively ratified a number of key disarmament instruments, such as START II with the New-York package agreements on START-ABM of 1997 and the CTBT, Russia has confirmed in deed, not in word, its commitment to its nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation obligations. And we urge other countries to follow our example. Russia supports the outcome of the 2000 NPT Review Conference. We would like to underline that the Conference has graphically demonstrated that the NPT remains one of the most significant mechanisms in the field of arms control and disarmament, a model of interaction for the members of the international community and an example of an effective multilateral diplomacy.

You are well aware of the initiatives put forward by the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir V. Putin in the field of nuclear disarmament. Russia proposes a genuinely radical reduction of the strategic nuclear weapons of Russia and the United States - down to the level of 1,500 nuclear warheads for each of the parties by the year 2008 and, possibly, to even lower levels afterwards. ... We are looking forward to a concrete reply from the American side in the framework of the intensive dialogue we started with the United States on the interrelated issues of strategic offensive and defensive armaments.

Our positive agenda in the field of nuclear security is simple and understandable: lasting peace and real disarmament can only be achieved through common efforts and through a real contribution by each state to the common system of strategic stability subject to the preservation and strengthening of the existing instruments in this field. For example, the Russian concept of the global system of control in the area of non-proliferation of missiles and missile technologies makes it possible to solve concrete issues of international security through constrictive interaction while strengthening, rather than destroying, whatever positive has been created in this area in recent years. In our dialogue with other nations, we continue to pursue a policy aimed at a more active use of the UN potential, primarily that of the permanent members of the Security Council. In this connection, it would be relevant to recall the Russian proposal to start a process of consultations on strategic stability issues within the P-5 framework with a view to unblocking the process of genuine nuclear disarmament. ...

In the context of the above, I cannot but mention again the role and significance of the ABM Treaty which was and still remains a system-creating backbone of strategic stability. The need to preserve and strengthen the Treaty was also clearly reiterated in the final document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference. At this session of the UN General Assembly, Russia, together with the delegations of China and Belarus, has again introduced a draft resolution on the preservation and strengthening of the ABM Treaty. In doing so, we proceed from the need to further mobilise the efforts of the international community to prevent undermining the existing system of treaties and agreements in the field of arms control and disarmament.

In his statement at the 56th session of the General Assembly on September 24, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Igor S. Ivanov addressed in detail the important subject of preventing the arms race in outer space. He listed concrete elements that could form the basis of a comprehensive agreement on the non-deployment of weapons and the non-use of force or the threat of force in outer space. Igor S. Ivanov also came up with a new proposal to declare a moratorium on the deployment of weapons in outer space pending such an agreement. We are open for a frank discussion on how to finally set in motion the negotiations on these important issues."

South Africa (Sipho George Nene, October 11): "The ABM Treaty remains important in the maintenance and promotion of strategic stability and as a basis for further reductions of strategic offensive weapons. Grave consequences for the future of global security may result from abrogation of the treaty. States must refrain from any steps that could lead to a new nuclear arms race or undermine the international community's determination to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation."

Sri Lanka: "[I]t is evident that the post-Cold War search by major powers as to how to achieve strategic balance...with or without nuclear weapons is not yet settled. This is obviously at the expense of a very large number of bystanders. ...[T]he approach of some countries to de-link the efforts of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons from that of nuclear disarmament is a matter of serious concern. Such an endeavour is not only preposterous but fraught with danger. ... My country, together with Egypt, has had the honour for long years to bring to the attention of this Committee the issue pertaining to the prevention of an arms race in outer space... This is a manifestation of our...belief that the last frontier of humankind...should remain peaceful as our common heritage."

Sudan: "[Sudan] supported the call for a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East and called on Israel to join the NPT's comprehensive safeguard system. Israel continued the expansion of its arsenal..."

Syria (Milad Atieh, October 11): "[T]he Millennium Declaration had denounced the continued accumulation or possession of nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction. All Member States must respect that Declaration and work to eliminate those weapons. At a time when some were refusing to allow people to exercise their right to defend their dignity, land and self-determination, others had been permitted to acquire all types of weapons and to use light and heavy arms. In addition, all kinds of weapons were being provided to the aggressor and the doors were being opened for it to acquire expertise in nuclear weapons. ... [Syria] had always stressed its deep attachment to the creation of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. As such, it was gravely concerned at the obstruction presented by Israel to such a zone. ... . In light of the 1996 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the destructive capability of nuclear weapons, a timetable should be set up for the elimination of those weapons under effective international control." (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3201.)

Tanzania: "We had hoped the [2000 NPT Review] Conference would give a new momentum to nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. ... It is disappointing, however, that these commitments have not been translated into action or even a promise to act. ... [W]e wish to once again call on nuclear-weapon states to embark on negotiations leading to legally-binding arrangements to non-nuclear-weapon states against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. ... [W]e support efforts being made to create a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia. In the same vein, we support Mongolia's declaration of a single-state [NWFZ]..."

Thailand: "At a time when there appears to be some lethargy or setback in the nuclear disarmament process, concrete and practical confidence-building activities are called for. ... In this connection, we welcome the indications of further cuts in their nuclear arsenals by the [US and Russia]... Thailand also supports the initiatives of the New Agenda Coalition (NAC) which has brought fresh impetus in the effort towards nuclear disarmament. We take note with great interest of the recent communiqué...by the Foreign Ministers of the NAC. We would also like to reiterate our support for the Secretary-General's proposal to launch an international conference on ways to eliminate nuclear dangers... With the Philippines having recently deposited its instrument of ratification to the [Bangkok] Treaty with Thailand, we now have all ten ASEAN members fully participating in the SEANWFZ Commission. ... We...welcome the first ever direct consultations between ASEAN and the NEWS in may 2001. We hope that this will eventually lead to the accession of the NWS to the Protocol of the Treaty."

Ukraine: "I should mention Ukraine's essential contribution to the process of practical disarmament... Having voluntarily given up its nuclear arsenal Ukraine has proved to be a strong supporter...of nuclear disarmament... Recently, the last inspection on Ukraine's territory has been conducted within the [INF] Treaty framework. Ukraine has also ratified the Memorandum of Understanding relating to the ABM Treaty, signed in New York in 1997. ... Ukraine proceeds from the need to ensure a non-conflict adaptation of the ABM Treaty in the context of the problems that arise from the continuing proliferation of missiles and missile technologies as well as weapons of mass destruction. We are convinced that the revision of the ABM Treaty must not result in deterioration of the general strategic situation... Ukraine considers it exceptionally important to reach a mutual understanding between the Russian Federation and the United States on this issue."

United Arab Emirates (Abdulaziz bin Nasser al-Shamsi, October 16): "We call anew upon the nuclear-weapon states to take their full responsibilities in implementing their obligations [to engage in disarmament]...and also conclude an unconditional international instrument that provides security assurances to the non-nuclear-weapon states... We call upon the international community again...to put pressure on the Israeli government to unconditionally join [the NPT]... We also call for the discontinuation of all financial, technological and scientific aids used in developing these dangerous Israeli nuclear installations..."

United States: "As a nuclear-weapon state, the United States understands its special responsibility under Article VI to take steps related to nuclear disarmament. President Bush has made clear that the US will reduce its nuclear forces to the lowest possible level that is compatible with the security of the US and its allies. NPT parties and UN member states...have repeatedly called for the immediate commencement of negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty... We are extremely disappointed that the continuing deadlock in the CD is preventing the start of these negotiations. ... Earlier this year my government began a strategic policy review that is beginning to bear fruit. As one example, you are aware that the US government and the government of the Russian Federation have been intensively discussing a new strategic framework. This framework will be premised on openness, mutual confidence, and real opportunities for cooperation. It will reflect a clean and clear break from the Cold War. It will also include substantial reductions in offensive nuclear forces, cooperation on missile defence, enhanced non- and counter-proliferation efforts, and measures to promote confidence and transparency. In this context, I must reiterate that the United States is firmly opposed to the UN inserting itself into issues regarding the ABM Treaty, which remains a matter for the parties. As I just noted, discussions between [Russia and the US]...have intensified in recent months and will continue. In these circumstances, it is even more inappropriate for the ABM Treaty to be dealt with here in this forum. If a resolution on the ABM Treaty is introduced again this year, the United States will vote 'no' on it. We urge our friends and allies to do the same."

Venezuela (Milos Alcalay, October 11): "[Venezuela] supported the convening of an international conference on reducing nuclear dangers, an initiative that would seek to identify the ways and means of achieving the ultimate elimination of those weapons and build confidence. ... Venezuela was taking steps to ratify the CTBT, which was a foreign policy priority. It also supported the establishment of a legally binding instrument through which the military powers would commit unequivocally not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against States parties to the NPT. In accordance with the Treaty of Tlatelolco, he supported the non-use of those weapons against countries of Latin America and Caribbean." (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3201.)

Vietnam: "[I]t is now a matter of urgency, and, in many ways, of survival for humankind that the United Nations should redouble its efforts to galvanise the world community to work together for a world free from nuclear [weapons]... One way to do this...endorsed by all the heads of state and governments [in the Millennium Declaration]...is to convene an international conference to identify ways and means to eliminate the danger of weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear weapons. It is high time that preparation for such a conference goes ahead... Once again, we wish to underline that that the ABM Treaty is a cornerstone of international strategic stability and its abrogation holds grave consequences for world peace and security. We therefore call on the state parties...to respect the integrity and comply fully with the provisions of this important treaty."

© 2001 The Acronym Institute.