United Nations (UN)

UN First Committee General Debate: September 30-November 1

II. Terrorism, Disarmament and Weapons of Mass Destruction

Australia (Michael Smith, October 7): Australia applauds the recent efforts taken by the UAEA to counter the threat of nuclear terrorism through the work undertaken on the security and physical protection of nuclear material and facilities. ... It is our firm view that, at this critical point in history, the momentum of the IAEA's work must be maintained to allow it to deliver continued security benefits to the entire international community. In particular, we make a plea that the Legal and Technical Group considering an amendment to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials work constructively and expeditiously to achieve a consensus text which strengthens the Convention.

Bahrain (Sheikh Turki bin Rashid Al Khalifa, October 9): Last year the whole world witnessed the horrors of terrorism. While renewing the expression of our heartfelt condolences to the US government and its friendly people, we express our fervent hope that the terrorists will never have an opportunity to acquire weapons of mass destruction. If that should happen, God forbid, we would all be at the mercy of those who have no regard for life or humanity. At the same time, we stress the importance of studying and addressing the root causes of terrorism with a view to its total elimination.

Belarus (Aleg Ivanov, October 10): Last year's tragic events clearly demonstrated ...a link between the problems of international security, disarmament and terrorism. The implementation by states of their obligations in the field of international security, non-proliferation and disarmament - above all the NPT, BWC and CWC - is becoming a key factor.

Brazil (Celina Assumpcao, October 9): [T]errorism threats have highlighted the importance of the total elimination of...weapons [of mass destruction]. The discussion of measures to countenance [counteract] the possible use of such weapons by terrorists should not result, however, in any justification for their indefinite retention.

Cameroon (Martin Chungong Ayafor, October 10): [T]he backdrop to the Committee's work had been the odious attacks of 11 September 2001 and the clear message they conveyed of a new potential threat of nuclear, biological and chemical terrorism. Regrettably, the perception of that new threat had led not only to an increase in military spending and a reversal of promising disarmament and arms control trends, but had also broken the forward momentum of the disarmament commitments made at the Millennium Summit. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3231.)

Canada (Christopher Westdal, September 30): We met a year ago in the shadow of horror that made us all feel vulnerable to new threats to our security. Without a vote, we endorsed multilateralism as a core principle in our fight with terrorism. We knew we had to make multilateralism work to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. ... Many states have [since] taken decisive action. For its part, the G-8...launched a Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction...

China (Hu Xiaodi, October 1): China supports the efforts of the United Nations, IAEA and OPCW in preventing terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. We welcome the valuable report submitted by the UN Panel of Governmental Experts on Missiles. China is in favour of making necessary amendments to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials, and hopes that all parties will bridge their differences in a constructive manner so as to enable the early conclusion of the amending process. ... IN view of the new situation after its entry into [the] WTO and the September 11 terrorist attacks, Chin ahs intensified its efforts to enhance its export control[s]... Recently, the Chinese Government promulgated the 'Regulations on Export Control of Missiles and Missile-Related Items and Technologies Export Control List'. ... Moreover, to further improve export controls of chemical and biological dual-use items, the Chinese Government will promulgate in the near future 'Administrative Rules on Export Control of Chemical Items and Related Equipment and Technologies' and 'Regulations on Export Control of Biological Dual-Use Items and Related Equipment and Technologies'. With the promulgation of the above-mentioned regulations, China will establish a comprehensive system of export controls over sensitive items covering nuclear, biological, chemical and missile fields. ... We would also like to further broaden and deepen exchanges and cooperation with other countries in the non-proliferation field so as to make [a] greater contribution to the international non-proliferation process.

Colombia (Alfonso Valdivieso, October 10): During last year's General Debate, when we still felt in its entire dimension the acts of international terrorism that took place in this city and in other parts of the United States, Colombia proposed to this First Committee to make an important contribution towards the eradication of this problem which has become the most serious threat to peace and security. We cited among other items of our agenda, the [Biological Weapons] Convention..., the Convention on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons..., or the implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention. We must once again appeal for universal accession to these Conventions and insist on the explicit prohibition of the use of these weapons of mass destruction, on restricting the development of new technologies for these weapons and, naturally, on ensuring that the chemical and bacteriological weapons that already exist do not fall into the hands of terrorists. We again insist that the best guarantee for this is the total elimination of such weapons. The countries that possess chemical weapons should proceed to destroy them in fulfilment of the Convention and submit detailed plans on this process of destruction. We must also work towards the inclusion of new arms within the scope of implementation of the Convention on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons and towards the adoption of new protocols in this field. With regard to the Convention on Bacteriological Weapons, we continue to await agreement on a Verification Protocol.

Republic of the Congo (Basile Ikouebe, October 3): [O]nly collective action would be able to forge the necessary response to the events of 11 September 2001. In the face of the real threat of mass destruction weapons, an "imperative necessity" was thrust upon everyone to eradicate those weapons and work towards the universality of the various disarmament instruments. ... But, today, there was little cause for optimism. Unfortunate trends existed, such as the dizzying increase in global military expenditures in excess of $850 billion and the proliferation of small arms. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3227.)

Costa Rica (Bruno Stagno, October 2): [Costa Rica] had been the first to comply with United Nations resolution 41 (I), approved by the General Assembly in 1946 and entitled "General Arms Reduction." As early as 1949, Costa Rica had abolished its armed forces and given social development priority as an inherent component of security. ... [Given its] history in the area of disarmament...[Costa Rica] was disappointed by the meager advances in international disarmament. Terrorists, the common enemy, were taking advantage of the lack of progress in disarmament. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3226.)

El Salvador (Guillermo Meléndez-Barahona, October 10): [T]he 11 September 2001 attacks had changed the way the world needed to approach security. Because terrorism cut across borders, in today's world a multilateral, united approach was needed to combat it. ... [El Salvador] would do its part by hosting the Inter-American Committee against Terrorism. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3231.)

European Union & Associated States (Erling Harild Nielsen, Ambassador of Denmark, current holders of the EU Presidency, also speaking on behalf of Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, September 30): The terrorist attacks of September 11 have given an even greater sense of urgency to the common efforts required from al states to prevent these weapons [of mass destruction] and their means of delivery from reaching the hands of terrorist groups. The EU responded quickly to the challenge... On 10 December the EU Council of Ministers launched a Targeted Initiative within the field of non-proliferation, disarmament and arms control to counter the threat of terrorism. To add further substance and direction to the Initiative, the Council of Ministers adopted a list of concrete measures in April 2002. This list identifies four areas of action: a review and strengthening of relevant multilateral instruments in the field of non-proliferation, disarmament and export control; full implementation of export controls; international cooperation in the field of protection and assistance against the use or threat of use of chemical and biological weapons; and enhanced political dialogue with third countries in the field of non-proliferation, disarmament and arms control.

Gabon (Alfred Moungara-Moussotsi, October 7): The horrific terrorist attacks against the United States recalled the urgent need to keep weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, from falling into the hands of "outlaws" willing to stop at nothing to achieve their goals. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3229.)

Georgia (Revaz Adamia, October 10): [C]onditions for the storage of radioactive materials at the Institute of Physics and Technology in Sokhumi, Abkhazia, Georgia were deplorable, according to the IAEA. At least on one occasion, the uranium that disappeared from the Institute could have fallen into the hands of terrorists. The Institute was still under the control of Russian authorities, who, against all odds, still insisted on the construction of a nuclear waste storage site in that lawless, separatist region. That same porous section of the Georgian-Russian border would be unable to stop the smuggling of radioactive materials. Since 1995, more than 197 unaccounted sources of radiation had been found in Georgia, deliberately left by the Russian Army; among them, uranium, strontium, and cesium. In general, the situation in Abkhazia had important security and disarmament dimensions, due to the illegal presence of the Russian military base in Gudauta... The illegal operation of the Gudauta base itself was a good example of Russia's selectivity in honouring its commitments in the field of disarmament. Russia had not only flagrantly flouted the 1999 Istanbul agreement on the withdrawal of Russian military bases, within the framework of the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE Treaty), but now demanded 11 years for the withdrawal of 3,000 servicemen from Georgia. It had even declared the Gudauta based closed, but denied all requests for global verification. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3231.)

Guatemala (Luisa Bonilla, October 3): [D]isarmament could no longer be discussed without taking terrorism into account. ... [T]he events of 11 September had produced divergent views on how disarmament should be carried out. ... [N]ow, however, that now was not the time to back away from progress made in that arena. On the contrary, the best way to guarantee international security was to respect commitments already made in the field of disarmament. ... [Guatemala] expressed hope that the feelings that had united the world after 11 September would not diminish. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3227.)

Guinea (Alpha Oumar Diallo, October 10): The most urgent duty now was to save the world from self-destruction. ... [Guinea] deplored the serious misunderstandings that had prevented the Conference on Disarmament from agreeing on its programme of work. The bloody terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 had made utterly clear the urgent need for greater progress in the multilateral disarmament sphere. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3231.)

Holy See (Archbishop Renato R. Martino, October 1): When we met last year, the horror of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington was fresh in our minds and our resolve to stamp out terrorism strong. While governments continue to be deeply concerned about terrorism, our role in this Committee is to ensure that the processes of disarmament continue.

India (Rakesh Sood, October 7): Let me begin with the grave threat that confronts and preoccupies all of us. Addressing the General Assembly last year, the UN Secretary-General said: "While the world was unable to prevent the 11 September attacks, there is much we can do to help prevent future terrorist acts carried out with weapons of mass destruction..." The UN Secretary-General's Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters has since dealt with the threat posed by terrorism and WMD and has made certain useful recommendations. ... Given the global implications, it will not be sufficient to address the problem behind [the] closed doors of selective clubs. Hence, India proposes to introduce a new resolution in this Committee, requesting the Secretary-General to undertake a study on issues related to "Terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction", with the assistance of a Panel of Governmental Experts. Given the need for urgency, the resolution proposes that the study be completed during the first half of 2003 and submitted to the General assembly at its fifty-eighth session, next year.

Indonesia (Nugroho Wisnumurti, October 4): The problem of controlling the spread of weapons of mass destruction has emerged to be more important today than at any time in the nuclear age. The rising spectre of these weapons, particularly nuclear weapons, being acquired and used by non-state actors is of concern to us all. ... In this context, the early adoption of an international convention for the suppression of nuclear terrorism...would be an important first step towards eliminating this threat. ... Such a convention will add significantly to the existing legal norms such as the Vienna Convention of the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials.

Iran (Dr. Javad Zarif, October 4): The new threats to national, regional and even international security emanating from non-state actors in fact [have] shattered traditional security perceptions and calculations. Yet, the response in terms of [an] exacerbated recourse to unilateralism, greater reliance on military hardware and emergence of national security strategies founded on a new doctrine of pre-emption and an unprecedented new nuclear posture [has] further aggravated the situation. The emergence of a new phase in [the] international arena requires a different perspective on world affairs. ... In this context, the preservation of nuclear weaponry for future use not only questions the credibility of bilateral arms control efforts but ignites more dangers for security through their possible submission [and vulnerability] to accidents, misuse and terrorist attacks.

Israel (Jeremy N. Issacharoff, October 10): The central danger of terror merging with weapons of mass destruction casts as dark a shadow on the strategic environment as it does on the regional one, particularly the Middle East. It is clearly all the more alarming in a region in which certain countries have nurtured and sponsor terror as an everyday tool of diplomacy and also seek to develop weapons of mass destruction in contravention of their international commitments. If such countries are so willing to finance and supply rockets and conventional weaponry to terrorists, what will prevent them from providing these same terrorists [with] non-conventional weapons? The international community cannot wait and allow this question to remain unanswered. ... During the last year, particularly in the aftermath of 9/11, we conducted a thorough review of various areas that could merit more concerted governmental action. For example, Israel attaches great importance to the strengthening of the physical protection of nuclear materials and recently ratified the relevant Convention (CPPNM). We are also currently examining and expediting internal procedures in our evaluation of other international conventions against terrorism. In addition, Israel is currently nearing the conclusion of legislation that would consolidate the control of exports of chemical, biological and nuclear materials including dual-use items. We have sought through this legislation to harmonise our export controls with the provisions of the suppliers' regime such as the Australia Group and the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Israel...some years ago adopted the relevant legislation to implement the provisions of the MTCR. We hope that other countries will also take the necessary steps to enhance and tighten export controls of sensitive hardware and technology that could reach terrorist groups or states that could retransfer these materials to terrorists. Indeed, Israel fully supports and is keenly interested in being associated with these regimes... We look forward to being able to expand our dialogue with these regimes and develop our policy in this regard in the coming year.

Japan (Dr. Kuniko Inoguchi, October 1): The initiative launched by the G-8 at the Kananaskis Summit to prevent the spread of weapons and materials of mass destruction has great relevance to the fight against terrorism. My country will contribute more than US$200 million for this initiative. We also commend the efforts made by the IAEA to upgrade worldwide protection against acts of terrorism involving nuclear and other radioactive materials. Japan has pledged to contribute US$500,000 to the special fund set up for the implementation of the IAEA "Action Plan for Protection against Nuclear Terrorism".

Kazakhstan (Madina B. Jarbussynova, October 4): The terrorist acts in the United States a year ago demonstrated the fragility of the world we live in and the importance for all states to join the efforts to ensure security and stability. These barbaric acts should lead us to double and renew our adherence to the body of disarmament and arms control agreements. We believe that the international nature of contemporary threats...requires multilateral efforts for their prevention.

Kenya (Bob F. Jalang'o, October 9): The spectre of asymmetric warfare and terrorism with the possibility of the use of WMD has all nations [feel] most vulnerable. The terrorist attacks without prior warning in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998, and the terrorist attacks here in the United States...which resulted in colossal loss of lives and property, call upon all nations to act in concert to avert future attacks, as unilateralism can no longer guarantee security in any country, however well armed. ... The world must...seriously address the root causes of terrorism founded in despair, denial of basic human rights, poverty, hunger and marginalisation. It is disquieting, therefore, that the post-Cold War era has seen a rising curve in military expenditure, running in 2001 at $839 billion...

South Korea (Sun Joun-yung, September 30): [M]y delegation fully supports the initiatives of the IAEA, particularly its programs designed to safeguard nuclear material against non-peaceful uses, to ensure the safety and security of nuclear facilities and to deter the illicit trafficking of nuclear material and radiation sources. These measures aim to reduce the likelihood of nuclear terrorism and enhance our capabilities to combat such threats. In recognition of the importance of achieving the universality of the Additional Protocol, my government is taking the domestic measures necessary for its implementation.

Norway (Leif A. Ulland, October 2): We recall that last year's session of this Committee adopted by consensus a resolution recognising the close link between international terrorism, illicit arms trafficking and the illegal movement of chemical, biological and other potentially deadly materials. In order to build a common response to global threats, the resolution reaffirmed multilateralism as a core principle for disarmament and non-proliferation and expressed concern about the lack of progress in this area. Now, a year later, we should ask ourselves whether we have lived up to our commitments? Or are we still dealing with multilateral non-proliferation and disarmament in a "business as usual" manner? I am thinking of the lack of progress in important areas such as the negotiation of a fissile material treaty, universalisation of important treaties such as the NPT and the CTBT< and compliance measures for the bwc. ... the "10+10+10" initiative taken by the g-8 this summer to intensify and improve coordination of international efforts against the spread of weapons and materials of mass destruction is an important initiative that has our full support. since the mid-nineties, norway and russia have cooperated closely on nuclear safety and waste issues and, more recently, also on chemical weapons destruction. this cooperation grew out of environmental concerns, but clearly there is a close link between environmental issues, such as the safe disposal of nuclear waste, and nuclear non-proliferation and prevention of terrorism. norway believes that strengthening the bwc must be a priority for the international community, especially in light of the use terrorists could make of such weapons.

Peru (Oswald de Rivero, September 30): One year ago, this Commission began its work when the world was under the effects of the terrorist attacks that shook New York and the world. These attacks proved that the world faces a new threat against international security - the asymmetric conflict. The asymmetric conflict renders useless expensive and huge nuclear and conventional weapons systems as a basis of security; these systems do not deter terrorism. Neither aircraft carriers, nor ballistic missiles, nor tank divisions, nor great armies are effective in this context - even less [so] for poor countries where social exclusion and the feeling of losing one's dignity is a root cause that can spread subversion and terrorism.

Philippines (Enrique A. Manalo, October 10): The delays in concrete progress towards eliminating nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, now referred to as a "crisis in multilateral disarmament diplomacy", now require priority attention in the aftermath of 9/11. Terrorist acts, especially with possible uses of weapons of mass destruction, threaten international peace and security. At the same time, policies to counter terrorism also influence international peace and security. My delegation believes that mow, more than ever, it is imperative to strengthen negotiations in the multilateral disarmament area to respond to the threats posed by global terrorism.

Qatar (Jamal Nassir Al-Bader, October 1): [P]roliferation was of primary concern to all countries and constituted a constant threat to sustaining human life. The acquisition of unconventional weapons and the proliferation of their technology, as well as the danger of their falling into irresponsible hands, was a "Damocles sword" that could spin out of control. The acquisition of those weapons and their technologies had occurred, in part, because of the relocation of many physicists around the world. Such weapons technology might fall into the hands of gangs, which might sell them to anyone willing to pay their price. The promotion of international peace and security, and confidence-building between States would go a long way towards controlling the spread of those weapons. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3225.)

Russia (Andrey Granovsky, October 9): The recent G-8 Summit decision on the Global Partnership against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction deserves special attention in the light of the necessity to coordinate the international efforts to eliminate the risks of nuclear terrorism. It is also of great importance to enhance international legal documents on physical protection of nuclear materials and handling of radioactive materials and spent fuel. Russia urges the world community to promptly draft and conclude an international convention on combating nuclear terrorism.

Senegal (Cheikh Niang, October 7): [T]he plague of our era - terrorism - had emerged as one of the most serious threats to world peace. The international community did the right thing by adopting measures against that terrible evil, as did the Committee when it adopted a resolution last year condemning terrorism and highlighting the dangerous link among terrorism, illicit arms trafficking and weapons of mass destruction. ... [Senegal] regretted the absence of meaningful progress, however, in the realms of arms control and non-proliferation. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3229.)

Singapore (Brigadier-General Yap Ong Heng, October 1): The illicit and uncontrolled proliferation of conventional weapons, particularly SALW [small arms and light weapons], is already contributing to terrorism. With the diversion of SALW to terrorist networks, acts of terrorism have increased in number and magnitude around the world. ... The UN [small arms] Conference...came up with a comprehensive Programme of Action... But more can be done to specifically stem the traffic of SALW to terrorists. The First Committee must take up this responsibility, in parallel with the UN's focus on combating terrorism. The looming terrorist threat also means that the First Committee should look at disarmament by nation states in the proper context. Certainly, the UN must address the economic and social conditions that encourage terrorism. At the same time, however, the terrorism threat makes it imperative for all countries to maintain the capacity to defend themselves. States should not give the upper hand...to terrorists who have no qualms in attacking society in the most vicious ways.

Sri Lanka (Prasad Kariyawasam, October 10): The jolt of 9/11...appears to have shaken the foundation of multilateral infrastructure, including in the field of disarmament and international security. ... Long held security paradigms and concepts are being challenged, sometimes unilaterally... In this regard, we join those who reaffirm the efficacy of multilateral approaches as means of achieving greater security for all. In our view, multilateral measures, in particular in disarmament and security issues, by their inherent nature favour dialogue over monologue, accommodation over domination, consultation over prescription, and cooperation over confrontation. ... The virtues of such action have been repeated in this forum and elsewhere ad nauseum, but with little effect. ... Against the backdrop of new challenges to international security, including threats of terrorism, and that a "dirty bomb" could be a terrorist's weapon of choice, we welcome the recent initiative taken by Germany at the CD to explore the issue of radiological weapons once again.

Switzerland (Christian Faessler, October 2): Switzerland actively pursues the objective that arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation efforts should also contribute to the global fight against terrorism. In the nuclear area, my country supports measures which prevent non-governmental entities...[having] uncontrolled access to entire weapons, to fissile materials, to radioactive substantives or to delivery systems. With respect to biological weapons, Switzerland, together with the WHO, has initiated a training programme for specialists in order to respond more effectively to bio-terrorist attacks. In the chemical area, my country actively supports all efforts aimed at improving assistance and cooperation in case of terrorist incidents.

Syria (Milad Atieh, October 3): Highlighting recent discussions about the seriousness of the proliferation of mass destruction weapons and the possibility of their use by terrorists...[Syria stressed] that [that] danger was not restricted to any specific region. Yet, some circles were undertaking an unjust campaign against Arab and Islamic countries, while turning a blind eye on Israel's acquisition of mass destruction weapons, including a huge nuclear arsenal. Israel had also rejected the appeal to rid the region of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. If it was really seeking peace and security, both regionally and internationally, it should join the quest for such a zone, and subject its nuclear facilities to full-scope IAEA safeguards, as all other Arab and Islamic countries in the Middle East had done. (UN Press Release GA/DIS/3227.)

Thailand (Dr. Suriya Chindawongse, October 7): The outrageous attacks that led to the sad loss of lives of thousands of innocent civilians on 11 September last year serves to remind us of the desperate and unimaginable measures which terrorists are willing to take to achieve their ends. We can never dismiss the possibility that weapons of mass destruction and related technologies could some day fall into the hands of international terrorists. ... It is essential that we reinforce multilateralism and support multilateral regimes, particularly those in the disarmament field, for the challenge posed by terrorism and its position acquisition of WMD can only be met effectively through the concerted and coordinated action of all states, large and small.

Turkey (Alper Coskun, October 10): We are all aware that many of the technologies associated with WMD programs also have legitimate civilian or military applications. As dual-use technology and expertise continue to spread internationally, the prospects for nuclear, biological and chemical terrorism are also growing. The relative ease with which such weapons are produced, coupled with the willingness of some states to cooperate with terrorist, extremist or organised crime groups, increase our concern... We observe with concern the ongoing transfers of WMD and related material and technology. If this trend continues, the primary customers of these materials might themselves become the suppliers for possible other proliferators over the next decade. Therefore, we also believe in the necessity of extreme vigilance in the transfers of sensitive material and technology to the regions which are of particular concern, such as the Middle East. While the main responsibility for effective international cooperation for the prevention of proliferation lies mainly wit supplier countries, countries located on the routes of transfer should also should their responsibility and cooperate with the suppliers to prevent unauthorised access to these materials and technologies.

Ukraine (Markiyan Kulyk, October 10): In the face of the aggravation of the world's security and stability situation following the terrorist attacks of September 11, the international community focuses its attention on the role of the existing instruments that serve as a basis of [the] disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation regimes. The universal adherence to, and enhancement of, the NPT and CTBT...remain among the major tasks in this field. ... We are concerned that some non-state actors have aspirations to gain access to WMD... In this regard Ukraine welcomes the...Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction which was launched by the G-8...and expresses its willingness to start appropriate negotiations within this framework, since our country faces serious problems which have to be resolved as complementary measures to [the] nuclear disarmament process already completed in Ukraine. ... Ukraine supports the 10 December 2001 decision of the European Union to launch the "Targeted Initiative" to respond effectively in the field of non-proliferation, disarmament and arms control to the international threat of terrorism...

United States (Stephen G. Rademaker, October 3): Regrettably, just as the world is turning away from the balance of terror between the superpowers, we find ourselves confronted with a dramatically increased threat of terrorism. We Americans have seen first hand the havoc terrorists could wreak when armed with knives. We shudder to imagine how much more death and destruction they would seek to inflict if they chose to use weapons of mass destruction. This is nothing less than a fight between civilization and barbarism. There are roles in this fight for the law enforcement community, the military, public health workers, and others. What the arms control community can do is to strengthen the international framework to prevent weapons of mass destruction from falling into the hands of terrorists, or into the hands of states that support terrorism as a matter of national policy. The arms control community can also better enforce obligations undertaken in the existing frameworks. Obligations must be lived up to if they are to serve a useful purpose. We believe every country in the world should belong to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the Biological Weapons Convention, and the Chemical Weapons Convention; that every country belonging to them should fully comply with their provisions; and that Parties must hold each other accountable and take appropriate steps to deter violations. The universal adoption of the IAEA Additional Protocol would give us greater assurance of compliance with the NPT. In this regard, I am pleased to report that earlier this year the President submitted to the United States Senate the US Additional Protocol. Through IAEA safeguards and other means, the international community must sustain efforts to reduce the threat of diversion of nuclear materials, equipment, and technology. ... Measures to assist in verification of compliance are key features of most traditional arms control regimes, which often include provisions for declarations, inspections, and even the establishment of implementation bodies. There are instances, such as biological weapons, where other approaches are more appropriate, but in general it is the policy of the United States to support fully the efforts of such organizations as the IAEA and the OPCW. The international community must use all means at its disposal to ensure not just that key multilateral arms control treaties are complied with, but also that we keep weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery out of the hands of terrorists and state sponsors of terrorists. The United States will introduce a resolution in this session of the First Committee that reiterates the value the international community places on compliance with arms control and non-proliferation treaty regimes. In the past, similar resolutions have achieved unanimous support. In current circumstances, I hope we can count on no less. ... The terrorist threat has also forced us to focus renewed attention on radiological weapons. We must foreclose the possibility of terrorists obtaining possession of radiological material and constructing a radiation dispersion weapon or "dirty bomb." The IAEA and other bodies are working on ways of improving the physical control of such material. I appreciate the hard work and commitment of First Committee delegates in bringing forward more than 50 resolutions every year. But the grave new threats we presently face demonstrate the urgent need for actions on the part of each member state. The number of resolutions we push through every year will be of little comfort if our efforts fail to reverse the spread of weapons of mass destruction and do not prevent such weapons from falling into the wrong hands. The overriding goal of the United States through our international arms control and non-proliferation efforts is to make the world safer and more secure. (Text - State official urges strengthening of existing arms control accords, US State Department, Washington File, October 7.)

Uruguay (Dr. Felipe H. Paolillo, October 4): [We are disappointed in the CD's] failure to renew negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty. A treaty of this nature would be a significant step towards non-proliferation, contributing also in a direct way to the prevention of nuclear terrorism.

Vietnam (Pham Thi Nga, October 3): the tragic event of 11 September 2001 was a wake-up call to all of us, giving rise to greater concern about the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by terrorist groups. Therefore, we express our serious concern about the decision of one nuclear-weapon state to withdraw from the ABM Treaty. This action contravenes the principle of irreversibility of nuclear disarmament agreements and constitutes a threat to international peace and security.

Back to the Top of the Page

© 2002 The Acronym Institute.