United Nations (UN)

UN First Committee General Debate: September 30-November 1

VII. Regional and Multilateral Disarmament Processes, Institutions and Initiatives

ASEAN (U Mya Than (Myanmar), October 9): We reiterate once again our support for the convening of the Fourth Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly devoted to Disarmament [SSOD IV]. We reiterate our deep concern over the lack of consensus on the deliberations held by the United Nations Disarmament Commission in 1999 and [its] agenda and objectives. ... ASEAN countries continue to attach special importance to confidence-building efforts among the countries in the region. ... We note the positive developments in the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF)... We are encouraged that the 9th ARF has adopted the ARF Statement on Measures Against Terrorist Financing and has welcomed the establishment of an Inter-Sessional Meeting on Counter-Terrorism and Transnational Crime (ISM on CT-TC) as a specialised response to the challenge posed by international terrorism. We are also encouraged that the ARF will continue to build on the concept papers on Preventive Diplomacy, the ARF Experts/Eminent Persons Register, and the enhanced role of the ARF Chair as a means to further advance the ARF process, and that it has welcomed the Concept Paper submitted by the United States of America and Malaysia as a good basis for the work of new ISM. We also note with satisfaction the progress in implementation of the overlapping measures between confidence-building measures (CBMs) and preventive diplomacy (PD). ... We are greatly dismayed at the continued impasse in the Conference on Disarmament... The ASEAN countries believe the expansion of the CD is necessary and we fully endorse the application of Thailand and the Philippines. ... Once again, we should like to express our appreciation to the United Nations Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament...for their effective contributions towards international peace and security. Regional Seminars and Forums...organised by these Centres effectively contribute to the progress of ongoing security and disarmament processes...

Bangladesh (Shamsher Mobin Chowdhury, October 2): Bangladesh...calls on all member states of the UN...to seriously consider the growing negative trends in the area of disarmament and coordinate their efforts to bring renewed vitality in its pursuit, keeping in view the ultimate goal of general and complete disarmament. ... To this end, my delegation would to particularly call for a few concrete steps... i) Revitalisation of the Conference on Disarmament by pushing seriously for progress on deadlocked negotiations. The CD should be used as the primary forum to negotiate all global treaties and conventions on disarmament. Attempts to bypass the UN system for such negotiations would give rise to questions of legitimacy and credibility. ii) Ensuring regular holding of meetings of the Disarmament Commission in order for it to be able to complete the tasks assigned to it by the GA and to undertake new tasks as they arise. ... viii) Promoting regional disarmament arrangements by encouraging dialogue in different regions. The UN DDA and the Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament could play a proactive role to facilitate such dialogues. In this context, I must mention the continued failure of the concerned authorities to shift the Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific to Kathmandu, its designated located... [Thos failure] defies our comprehension.

Belarus (Aleg Ivanov, October 10): Being convinced of the necessity to adopt effective measures in order to prevent the emergence of new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons, the Republic of Belarus has submitted...[a] draft resolution [on this theme]... The Belarussian delegation hopes that this...resolution will again be supported by all delegations and will adopted without voting.

Burkina Faso (Michel Kafando, October 4): There was an absolute need to strengthen the United Nations Regional Centres on Peace and Disarmament, particularly in Togo, which covered the West African region. The usefulness of those Centres was widely recognized. Still, they continued to face difficulties, owing to a lack of resources.

Caribbean Community (CARICOM - Stafford Neil of Jamaica, October 7): CARICOM continues to call for the cessation of the transhipment of irradiated material through the Caribbean Sea. We continue to place emphasis on the conclusions and recommendations of the Sixth Review Conference of the NPT [2000] on this issue. At the same time, while recognising the right of states to the peaceful uses of nuclear material, we believe that the time is now opportune for the international community to consider the establishment of a comprehensive regulatory framework to promote state responsibility in areas dealing with disclosure, liability and compensation in the event of accidents during such transhipments. ... In relation to the machinery for carrying forward the disarmament agenda, there is need to review its functioning and to come to some more acceptable arrangements for disarmament negotiations. The current deadlock has to be broken, especially in relation to the programme of work of the Conference on Disarmament and on the issue of [the Conference's] enlargement. In addition, we should make greater use of the Disarmament Commission as a forum within the United Nations to deliberate on issues on the disarmament agenda. In light of all the current issues affecting disarmament, a review of progress and of existing institutional arrangements is needed. Wee therefore believe it is important that a decision be taken during this General Assembly for the convening of a Fourth Special Session on Disarmament and for the necessary preparatory arrangements to be made.

Republic of the Congo (Basile Ikouebe, October 3): As president of the Economic Community of Central African States...[the Republic of the Congo] wished to enlighten the Committee about some of the main concerns of the 11 countries in that subregion... In the face of armed conflicts, waves of refugees and displaced civilian populations, large-scale destruction and the absence of an effective regional organization, the member countries had called for United Nations support. In May 1992, it set up the Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa. That was aimed at evolving confidence-building measures, encouraging disarmament and promoting development. In 10 years, it had indeed worked out important confidence building steps, such as the establishment of an early warning system. That had also led to the creation of a subregional parliament and centre for human rights and democracy. ... [T]he greatest achievement of the Economic Community so far had been the organization of a framework for meeting regularly to discuss specific national, as well as subregional, situations. Still, there were many murderous conflicts in the subregion and millions of dollars were spent each year to feed those war efforts, which, beyond their humanitarian tragedy, had impeded development financing. Perpetual war had created a security environment that was hardly propitious for the achievement of development programmes. That, in turn, led to further conflict and a rise in insecurity. On the celebration of the tenth anniversary of the Standing Committee, the members of the Economic Community recently recommitted themselves to revitalizing their organization, to better promote subregional peace and security.

Croatia (Vice Skracic, October 3): Croatia once again calls on Conference members to look closely at CD expansion. Croatia has been on the waiting list for CD membership for 10 years, and it seems that we are no closer to entering this body than we were when we first applied. We appeal to Conference members not to hold hostage the expansion issue to other as yet unresolved problems faced in the CD.

Cuba (Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla, October 1): The Department for Disarmament Affairs is the smallest one in the UN and the First Committee is the one that meets...[less than the other main] Committees. Yet...an even more concise session was actually proposed this year, which fortunately did not succeed. The UN Disarmament Commission, the only universal deliberative specialised body on disarmament, could not convene this year's session, for the other events were considered of higher priority in the UN agenda. The Conference on Disarmament remains stagnant and it has not been able to begin negotiations on the highest priority disarmament issue, nuclear disarmament, due to some countries' inflexible positions. Cuba considers of major importance the adoption by the First Committee this year of a resolution on the full validity of multilateralism in the field of disarmament.

Dominican Republic (Juan Ramon Gonzalez, October 7): Of considerable importance to his delegation was the fate of the Caribbean Sea... [The Dominican Republic] expressed concern that the transport of nuclear waste constituted a serious threat to security, tourism, marine life, and the environment of the whole region. ... [There were numerous studies showing] that containers of nuclear waste were often shoddy, there were no appropriate emergency plans to deal with accidents, and there was a lack of sufficient liability rules for cases of damage. ... [T]he IAEA and International Maritime Organization [should] put in place safety measures to monitor the transport of radioactive waste.

Egypt (Alaa Issa, October 7): While there is recognition that the issues of nuclear disarmament, prevention of an arms race in outer space, and a fissile material treaty, are all issues of concern to the CD membership and to the broader international community, there has been no reciprocity in understanding and accepting the legitimate security concerns among CD members. In our view, the crisis in the CD transcends the tactical procedures and linkages between the elements of the Programme of Work and is symptomatic of a much deeper ailment in the state of international relations and the role that multilateral action and institutions should play.

El Salvador (Guillermo Meléndez-Barahona, October 10): [El Salvador] supported the Secretary-General's proposal to consider the creation of a group of experts to discuss the relationship between disarmament and development...[and] expressed disappointment that many countries devoted large amounts of resources to defence, instead of to developmental assistance for underdeveloped countries.

European Union (Danish Ambassador Erling Harild Nielsen, September 30): It is regrettable that the CD has now finished its fourth consecutive year without consensus on a work programme. The EU, however, welcomes that new and creative ideas for a work programme have been put forward during this year's session...including a cross-group effort and other efforts by EU member states... Furthermore, the European Union would like to recall its attachment to the follow-up of the enlargement process of the CD... The follow-up on this process is of great importance in particular to those members of the European Union that are not yet members of the Conference as well as the associated countries with the Union which have submitted their request for admission to this Conference.

Gabon (Alfred Moungara-Moussotsi, October 7): [Gabon] stressed the importance for Africa of the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Togo. Sufficient resources should be supplied to enable the Centre to conduct its critical activities. ... Additional effort must be made to revitalize multilateral diplomacy in the disarmament realm. The relationship between disarmament and development on the one hand, and disarmament and the environment on the other hand, should no longer be disregarded.

Ghana (Yaw O. Osei, October 10): [O]ur disarmament machinery continues to grind even more slowly, with its linch-pin, the United nations Conference on Disarmament, having failed to agree on a work programme for commencing negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty. Overcoming the CD's paralysis will...require flexibility and compromise on the part of the nuclear-weapon countries. ... In this uncertain environment, my delegation perceives the last session of the United Nations Disarmament Commission opportune not only in challenging the international community to consider new ways and means to achieve disarmament, but also...[in examining] new measures on confidence-building for restoring much-needed trust in negotiations. ... Equally so...the proposal...[from Under-Secretary-General Dhanapala] for the establishment of an International Commission on Weapons of Mass Destruction deserves careful and sober consideration. Its projected objective of examination of problems related to the production, stockpiling, proliferation and terrorist use of such weapons as well as their delivery means by a panel of experts from many member states, under the joint leadership of North/South chairpersons, would help bring to the fore...latent issues that have stalled progress in this area. ... [A]t a period of increasing military expenditure ...the debate about the relationship between disarmament and development stands to benefit immensely from the proposal of the Secretary-General for the establishment of a group of governmental experts to undertake a reappraisal of this issue.

India (Rakesh Sood, October 7): As President-designate of the CD, India, along with the outgoing President from Hungary, will engage in extensive consultations on the margins of this Committee in an attempt to untie the Gordian knot [of the work programme]. Our attempt will not be to seek procedural fixes but to ascertain whether there is preparedness on the part of all concerned to display the necessary political will to find a solution. The validity of multilateral disarmament negotiations in the sole forum designated for the purpose needs to be upheld. It should be possible for us to translate our lamentations about the current state of global security issues into a collective effort to breath life into the CD... There has been in recent years an excessive reliance on export controls, in the name of non-proliferation, by select groups of countries. ... There is no place for discriminatory mechanisms, some of which run contrary to existing treaty provisions, that deprive developing countries of the benefits of path-breaking scientific and technological developments. In order to address this critical issue, India will bring to this Committee, as it has done since 1989, a resolution entitled "Role of Science and Technology in the Context of International Security and Disarmament". ... India welcomes the report of the Group of Governmental Experts on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Education, in which India was represented. We note in particular the emphasis in the report on new thinking and the need for reinvigorated international efforts and cooperation in this field. There is an urgent need to strengthen the societal dimensions of disarmament in which the academic/research/NGO communities can make a substantial contribution.

Indonesia (Nugroho Wisnumurti, October 4): Of the numerous global problems requiring [a] multilateral response, few can be as obvious as disarmament. In view of the deadlock that has persisted in our endeavours, we believe that the time has come to convene the fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament... It is...pertinent to recall that the Disarmament Commission has considered this question exhaustively during an unprecedented four consecutive years and identified the essential elements for further elaboration. This reflects the importance that an overwhelming majority of states attach to its convening. ... Before concluding, my delegation wishes to commend the Regional Center for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific for its contributions in facilitating the exploration of new vistas, delineating areas for negotiations and agreements, and thereby strengthening the prospects for disarmament. For these reasons, it is essential that the activities of the Center be continued.

Japan (Dr. Kuniko Inoguchi, October 1): Education on disarmament and non-proliferation should be promoted at various levels. We have just received the report of the UN experts group on this issue and look forward to its implementation by member states and relevant organisations. My country has received as many as 400 participants in the UN Disarmament Fellowship Programme over the past twenty years. The Programme includes visits to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It enables junior diplomats, in particular, to gain a deeper understanding of different disarmament issues, and many former fellows are now diplomats active in this field. Japan will continue to support this worthwhile Programme.

Kazakhstan (Madina B. Jarbussynova, October 4): Kazakhstan appreciates the work of the UN Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific... The Centre has been rendering...essential assistance to the five Central Asian states in their work on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia. ... In...[1992] the President of Kazakhstan, His Excellency N. Nazarbaev, put forward the initiative on the convening of a Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA), aimed at the creation of a security system in Asia. This goal has been advanced by the summit meeting of the CICA convened in June this year in Almaty. For the first time ever, the heads of the major Asian states have come together to express their political will and interest in a joint search for ways to strengthen peace and security in the vast Asian region. The adoption of the final documents - the Almaty Act on the Institutionalisation of the CICA, and the Declaration on Eliminating Terrorism and Promoting Dialogue Among Civilisation s- has extraordinary...significance as...as a valuable attempt to contribute to regional and global security. In this regard, we call on all interested states to continue their work to implement confidence-building measures in Asia.

Kenya (Bob F. Jalang'o, October 9): The Conference [on Disarmament] has an obligation to the global community to faithfully discharge its mandate... The resort to use of Special Coordinators is an attempt to wiggle out of the stalemate but it is not enough... We note that the stalemate has been caused by lack of political will on the part of some major players. My delegation calls upon the Conference on Disarmament to refocus its efforts on the resumption of substantive work and not to waste resources on procedural matters.

North Korea (Pak Gil Yon, October 4): My delegation considers it urgent to convene [as suggested by the Un Secretary-General] a United Nations Conference to identify ways of eliminating nuclear dangers and adopt an effective action programme for comprehensive disarmament and, particularly, nuclear disarmament.

Lebanon (Ibrahim Assaf, October 7): [W]eapons, instead of promoting security, had become a true threat to the people of the world. Thus, it was the duty of mankind to destroy them. ... [T]he political will needed by States to destroy weapons could be reinforced through public education about disarmament, provided by the Internet, or through the work of Non-Governmental Organizations.

Libya (Ahmed Own, October 7): Failure to convene a fourth special session of the General Assembly on disarmament, despite persistent calls by the majority of States, made it imperative to consolidate and implement the Final Document of the first such session in 1978.

Malaysia (Hasmy Agam, September 30): While Malaysia is gratified at its membership of the Conference on Disarmament, we are disappointed and disheartened with the continuing impasse in the Conference. Its continued deadlock would undermine whatever credibility the CD may have as the single multilateral negotiating forum on disarmament. ... Malaysia would urge the international community to support and respond positively to the call by the Secretary-General during the Millennium Summit for the convening of an international conference to consider all aspects of the nuclear weapons issue.

Mongolia (J. Enkhsaikhan, October 2): In 2000, through the Millennium Declaration, the heads of state and government of member states expressed their solemn resolve to...free people from the scourge of war and eliminate the dangers posed by WMD. However, during the past two years neither a breakthrough nor any significant progress has been made... Moreover, the United Nations Disarmament Commission could not hold its session this year, while the CD could not agree on its work programme [again]... In view of the widely recognised urgency of nuclear disarmament this lack of genuine progress defies logic. Is it because of the accumulation of "rust" in multilateral disarmament machinery that the Secretary-General spoke about...? ... My delegation shares the view of Under-Secretary-General Dhanapala concerning the daunting challenges presented by non-proliferation education... On the initiative of Mongolia, years 2003 to 2013 have been declared a decade of literacy. My delegation is confident that literacy will empower the poor and neglected [and] enable them to participate actively in the life of society, including in the struggle for disarmament.

Nepal (Murari Raj Sharma, October 4): While overall progress in disarmament is rather disappointing, what dismays us most is that the Conference on Disarmament could not agree on its programme of work in its last four successive sessions. The Commission on Disarmament also did not meet in the last session. ... We call on the world community to put these multilateral mechanisms to their best use. ... The regional centres for peace and disarmament are an important tool to promote the goals of disarmament and peace. Nepal is grateful to member states for the honour they have conferred on Nepal by designating it as host for the regional centre for Asia and the Pacific. I wish to reaffirm the abiding and resolute commitment of His Majesty's Government to transfer the centre where it belongs, at the earliest [opportunity]... For this, the Government has already decided to contribute the operational cost of the Centre when it relocates in Kathmandu. We seek your continued moral and material support in relocating the centre to Nepal and strengthening its activities.

New Zealand (Deborah Panckhurst, September 30): It continues to be a major disappointment to New Zealand that yet again the Conference on Disarmament has failed to agree on a Programme of Work. It is a great pity that linkages between issues should be allowed to hold the CD to ransom. At a time when other international organisations have opened to the participation of NGOs and broadest memberships, we find the CD out of step with reality and with the aspirations of civil society. ... New Zealand is a strong supporter of the UN Experts Group on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Education. ... We are convinced that the dissemination of information on disarmament and the raising of awareness about disarmament in general are essential in order to ensure that future generations steer our world away from conflict and towards peace.

Namibia (Gerhard Theron, October 9): My delegation appreciates the activities of the United Nations Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament. They have been of tremendous assistance to the regions where they are located, and help us focus and conduct in-depth analyses of disarmament issues in relation to broader and urgent global problems... These Centres should therefore receive all the necessary support [they require]...

Nigeria (E.E. Onubu, October 3): My delegation will again this year sponsor...a resolution on the United Nations Disarmament Fellowship Programme. The programme, which was initiated in 1979 has benefited many participants from member states. We appreciate the efforts of member states, which have provided and continue to provide resources and facilities for participants. We are equally grateful to the Secretary-General for the able manner the Organisation has implemented the programme over the years.

Norway (Leif A. Ulland, October 2): It is with great regret that we note the continuing stalemate in the Conference on Disarmament. This situation is undercutting the credibility of the Conference as well as of multilateralism in disarmament and arms control. We sincerely hope that the present consultation's on the Conference's work programme will finally be successful, and that it will be able to start substantive work by 2003. In this respect, we support the cross-regional initiative by five former presidents of the Conference.

Pakistan (Shaukat Umar, October 10): At the deliberations of the First Committee last year, Pakistan...underscored the necessity of addressing the threats to global and regional peace and stability from [the] increasingly sophistication of conventional weapons, i.e. the so-called Revolution in Military Affairs. As a first step, it was suggested that the United Nations or UNIDIR be tasked with preparing a study with the participation of governmental experts on the subject. We reiterate our proposal.

Peru (Oswald de Rivero, September 30): Peru has been heading and promoting a series of initiatives at the subregional, regional and international level... Among the efforts that my country has been promoting these stand out: (A) The creation of an Andean Zone of Peace. Last July 17, the countries of Bolivia, Ecuador, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela adopted the Compromise of Lima that establishes the Andean Charter for Peace and security and commits these five countries to jointly work for the limitation and control of defense spending. ... (B) The creation of...South America as a Zone of Peace and Cooperation, approved on this past July 27 by the presidents of the twelve countries of the South American continent. We hope that this 57th General Assembly picks up this initiative and that it receives the recognition and the cooperation of all the countries of this Organization so that it reaches the goals of disarmament, security and development that we have assumed. (C) The proposal to reduce defense expenditures, introduced to our friends in the region, with the goal of reorienting these funds to the fight against poverty... (D) The initiative to negotiate the proscription of missiles in Latin America with the goal of strengthening security in the region. This proposal includes not only air-to-air missiles bit also long- and medium-range strategic [ballistic] missiles. An ad hoc meeting of experts will take place shortly, in Lima, during which we hope [for] the presence of all the countries of the region to analyse this proposal and its cope. (E) The strengthening of the United nations Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean as a focal point of these and other regional initiatives. To the fulfilment of these objectives my country hopes that the Organization can grant it [the Centre] with greater resources.

Philippines (Enrique A. Manalo, October 10): [M]uch work has already been done over the years in this Committee and on the Disarmament Commission on the agenda and objectives of SSOD IV, Let us build on this, mindful of the fast developing events in the international peace and security situation. ...I note the importance of the United Nations Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific... The operations of the Centre should therefore be continued and I take this opportunity to thank its Director for his participation and contribution to the meaningful outcome of the Regional Seminar on Small Arms and Light Weapons which was hosted by my country.

Rio Group (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Dominican Republic, Uruguay and Venezuela), statement by Bruno Stagno of Costa Rica, October 1: [T]he state members of the Rio Group would like to express their gratitude for the work performed by the Regional Center of the United Nations for Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean, located in Lima, Peru. This entity has supported innumerable regional initiatives on disarmament, has stimulated deliberations on security, and has contributed to coordination of the United Nations' efforts in favour of the peace and security of the region.

Russia (Andrey Granovsky, October 9): [W]e would like to mention the new initiatives on the program of work of the Conference on Disarmament, which were proposed in the end of its 2002 session aimed at releasing its work [programme from deadlock]. Russia thinks that this unique forum has a great, though underused at present, potential. Russia has already submitted its proposals on this matter. We are ready to work further with a view to reach a mutually acceptable compromise. Emerging threats and challenges to international security, the topicality and versatility of modern issues of disarmament, arms reduction and limitation and non-proliferation are compelling arguments in favor of convening a special UNGA session on disarmament. Russia supports it.

South Africa (Ncumisa Pamella Notutela, October 2): It is obviously with deep regret that the Conference on Disarmament...has again been unable to agree on a Programme of Work. ... This is despite the fact that there is general agreement that nuclear disarmament, the prevention of an arms race in outer space, and the negotiation of a fissile material treaty...are concerns of the entire international community... Despite the valiant efforts and leadership shown in the CD by certain countries...some delegations continue to refuse to recognise the legitimate concerns of other states, whole insisting that respect and understanding be shown for theirs. This continued intransigence has only exacerbated the situation and left the CD - an institution of great potential - exclusivist, undemocratic, unreformed, expensive and ineffective.

Sri Lanka (Prasad Kariyawasam, October 10): The apparent lack of tangible results in the CD...is not the fault of the institution. ... My work as the Special Coordinator on the Improved and Effective Functioning of the CD...which spanned almost four sessions of the CD...from its last session in 2001, provided me with an opportunity to reflect on the current procedures in the CD. It was obvious that most delegations were keen to reform the functioning of the CD, including the method of decision-making and procedures for the establishment of subsidiary bodies. However, there was reluctance on the part of others who wish to continue with the status quo. Reform of procedures...was not seen as a panacea for [curing the] substantive ills of the CD. It seems that procedural innovations are neither feasible nor welcome as [a] means to address substantive security issues concerned with [the] strategic balance and larger security interests of states or groups of states. ... Sri Lanka believes that the time has come to take a decision to launch [SSOD IV]... During the Millennium Summit...Secretary-General Kofi Annan proposed to convene an international conference to focus on eliminating nuclear dangers. Perhaps SSOD IV will provide a forum for this proposal as well and set a stage for another major multilateral attempt at agreeing on an agenda for the 21st century in the field of disarmament, international security and peace.

Switzerland (Christian Faessler, October 2): My country appreciates the expertise and the professional competence of the UN Department for Disarmament Affairs in New York, of the Secretariat of the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, as well as of the United nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) in Geneva. These institutions, together with the regional centres in Latin America, in Africa, and in Asia and the Pacific region, make highly welcomed conceptual and practical contributions in the area of arms control and disarmament with respect to the implementation of existing agreements as well as to the negotiation of new ones. Switzerland is determined to maintain its financial support to these institutions and to continue the cooperation with the United Nations in this area.

Syria (Milad Atieh, October 3): [Syria] supported the convening of a fourth special session on disarmament, in order to review and evaluate implementation of the conclusions of the first such session held in 1978.

Thailand (Dr. Suriya Chindawongse, October 7): [W]e need to support new initiatives to strengthen multilateral disarmament regimes. The launching of the Fourth Special Session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament...is long overdue.

Togo (Roland Kpotsra, October 3): [Togo] was pleased that the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa was located [on its territory]... [Togo did,] however, express concern over the fact that it was suffering from a severe lack of funding. Although it was Africa's desire to become a self-sufficient continent...[Togo] reiterated [its] gratitude to countries that had offered financial support to the Centre.

Tunisia (Noureddine Mejdoub, October 9): A fourth special session devoted to disarmament should be convened, in order to find a way to restart the multilateral disarmament process.

Turkey (Alper Coskun, October 10): Turkey believes that the CD mist retain its role as the sole multilateral negotiating forum in the field of disarmament. However, the lack of progress in the CD for the last four years has been a major cause of disappointment. We believe that we should avoid creating the wrong impression that the CD is becoming an ineffective body.

United States (Stephen G. Rademaker, October 3): Beyond the existing regimes, the United States has repeatedly expressed support for efforts to ban the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. We support negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament of an FMCT that would advance the security interests of the negotiating parties. The effort by some CD members to hold up progress on a matter which all agree is ripe for negotiation in an attempt to force negotiations in unrelated areas is a perversion of the consensus rule of the Conference. Persisting in these efforts most assuredly will not succeed in forcing the premature commencement of negotiations in other areas. The continued deadlock in the CD will serve only to further marginalize it in international security affairs, and lead more nations to question the continued utility of the forum.

Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Dejan Sahovic, October 9): [W]e actively support and implement the Agreement on Sub-Regional Arms control, concluded in Florence in 1996, on the basis of Article IV, Annex I-B of the Dayton/Paris Agreement. Furthermore, we also support the Macedonian initiative within the First Committee, entitled "Maintenance of International Security: Good-Neighbourliness, Stability and Development in South Eastern Europe". My country also supports the initiatives contained in the resolution entitled "Strengthening of Security and Stability in the Mediterranean Region".

Back to the Top of the Page

© 2002 The Acronym Institute.