CHAPTER IV Regional disarmament

The draft resolution was introduced by Nigeria, on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the Group of African States, on 23 October. On 4 November, Spain submitted an amendment to the draft resolution¹ in connection with operative paragraphs 2 and 3 relating to the Treaty's Protocols. These amendments were later withdrawn and the original draft resolution was adopted without a vote by the First Committee on 4 November and by the General Assembly on 8 December.

The draft resolution called upon African States that had not yet done so to sign and ratify the Pelindaba Treaty as soon as possible so that it might enter into force, and also called upon States contemplated in Protocol III that had not yet done so to take all necessary measures to ensure the speedy application of the Treaty to territories for which they were internationally responsible and that lay within the limits of the geographical zone established in the Treaty.

Speaking before the vote, Spain stated that despite its concern that the language in operative paragraph 3 was discriminatory to the effect that Spain was singled out, it would not stand in the way of a consensus. It added that in the future an appropriate solution needed to be found with regard to its concern with the relevant Protocol of the Treaty.

After the vote, the United States, and Italy,² speaking on behalf of the European Union and other countries that aligned themselves with its explanation of vote, said that they shared Spain's legitimate concern about being singled out in the draft resolution and called upon the parties concerned to continue to find an acceptable solution to all that takes into account the specific circumstances and the diversity of the situation existing within the Treaty's area of application.

The draft resolution was introduced by Mexico, on behalf of the sponsors (see page click here for the sponsors), on 20 October. It was adopted without a vote by the First Committee on 27 October and by the General Assembly on 8 December. For the text of the resolution, see page click here.

The draft resolution highlighted that, with Cuba's ratification, the Tlatelolco Treaty was now in force for the 33 States of the region, thereby consolidating the first NWFZ established in a densely populated area. It also urged the countries of the region that had not yet done so, to ratify the amendments to the Treaty as approved by the General Conference of the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (OPANAL).

The draft resolution was introduced by Egypt, on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the League of Arab States, on 23 October. It was adopted without a vote by the First Committee on 27 October and by the General Assembly on 8 December. For the text of the resolution, see page click here.

The draft resolution urged all concerned parties to take practical and urgent steps required for the implementation of the proposal to establish a NWFZ in the Middle East, to adhere to the NPT and comply with all its provisions, and to place all their nuclear activities under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. It once again called upon Israel to accede to the NPT without delay and to subject its nuclear facilities to the comprehensive IAEA safeguards.

Speaking before the vote, Israel, which joined the consensus, maintained that it supported the establishment of a mutually verifiable NWFZ in the Middle East that would also be free of chemical and biological weapons and ballistic missiles provided that certain conditions in the region were met. Moreover, it advocated a practical, incremental approach that would embrace confidence-building and possibly conventional and non-conventional arms control measures, only after full peaceful and diplomatic relations were established among the concerned States. It held that there were certain obstacles to achieving that goal, including exporting WMD-related technologies and non-compliance with international obligations by some States.

The draft resolution was introduced by Brazil, on behalf of the sponsors (see page click here for the sponsors), on 20 October. The draft resolution was adopted by the First Committee on 27 October as a whole: (146-3-9); operative paragraph 5 as a whole: (145-1-11); and operative paragraph 5 retaining the last three words, "and South Asia": (142-2-11) and by the General Assembly on 8 December as a whole (168-3-8); operative paragraph 5 as a whole: (163-2-9); and operative paragraph 5 retaining the last three words: (159-3-9). For the text of the resolution and the voting, see pages click here and click here.

The draft resolution welcomed the continued contributions that the Antarctic, Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok and Pelindaba treaties had made towards freeing the southern hemisphere and adjacent areas covered by those Treaties from nuclear weapons. It also called upon concerned States to continue to work together in order to facilitate adherence to the protocols to NWFZ treaties by all relevant States that had not yet done so.

India and Pakistan expressed objection to retaining the last three words of operative paragraph 5, "and South Asia", claiming that it contradicted the well-established principles for creating NWFZs and that the contradiction was even starker in the context of current realities in the region. India voted against operative paragraph 5 as a whole, against retaining its last three words and abstained on the draft as a whole, while Pakistan voted affirmatively for the draft resolution as a whole, abstained on the vote on paragraph 5 as a whole, and voted against keeping its last three words.

The United Kingdom, speaking also on behalf of the United States and France, had concerns that a NWFZ in the southern hemisphere would interfere with the freedom of the high seas and rights of passage through maritime space. The three States therefore voted against the draft resolution as a whole, and abstained on both votes on operative paragraph 5.

Spain abstained on the three votes based on its reservations about holding an international conference of States parties and signatories to the NWFZ treaties as stated in operative paragraph 8. It held that the consensus reached in the April 1999 Report of the Conference on Disarmament and in the final document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference was satisfactory and did not merit additional legal or political elements to justify holding such an international meeting.

Uzbekistan felt that in light of the ongoing consultations with the nuclear-weapon States on a draft treaty to establish the zone and a protocol on negative security assurances from the NWS, there was a need to keep this issue on the Assembly's agenda.

Conventional disarmament at regional levels

The draft resolution was introduced by Pakistan, on behalf of the sponsors (see page click here for the sponsors), on 22 October. It was adopted without a vote by the First Committee on 28 October and by the General Assembly on 8 December. For the text of the resolution, see pages click here.

The draft resolution took note of the guidelines and recommendations for regional approaches to disarmament within the context of global security adopted by the UNDC in 1993. It also stressed the need for sustained regional and subregional efforts; affirmed that regional approaches to disarmament complemented each other; and called on States to conclude agreements wherever possible. It also welcomed initiatives towards disarmament, non-proliferation and security undertaken by some countries at the regional and subregional levels and supported confidence-building measures.

The draft resolution was introduced by Pakistan, on behalf of the sponsors (see page click here for the sponsors), on 22 October. It was adopted by the First Committee on 28 October (158-1-1) and by the General Assembly on 8 December (172-1-1). For the text of the resolution and the voting, see pages click here and click here.

By its operative parts, the draft resolution would have the Assembly give urgent consideration to conventional arms control issues at the regional and subregional levels, and request the CD to consider formulating principles that could serve as a framework for regional agreements on the issue. It would also request the Secretary-General to seek the views of the Member States and submit a report to the fifty-ninth General Assembly session.

After the vote, India explained its negative vote. In its view, the request for further work in the CD was not persuasive, since guidelines and recommendations within the context of global security had already existed in the UNDC's 1993 consensus document. Moreover, the draft's restrictive definition of the region did not fully reflect India's security concerns.

The new draft resolution was tabled by Pakistan, on behalf of the sponsors (see page click here for the sponsors), on 24 October. Pakistan submitted a significantly revised text on 3 November after consultations with concerned States. On 4 November, the revised draft resolution was adopted by the First Committee (68-47-34) and the General Assembly on 8 December (73-48-46). For the text of the resolution and voting, see pages click here and click here.

Pakistan explained that there was a link between lowering tensions through regional and subregional confidence-building measures, the peaceful settlement of disputes, socio-economic advancement, and arms control and disarmament. To that end, the new draft resolution called upon Member States to refrain from the use or threat of use of force; reaffirmed the Assembly's commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes under Chapter VI of the Charter; called upon Member States to open consultations and dialogue in regions of tension without preconditions; urged States to strictly comply with bilateral, regional and international arms control and disarmament agreements to which they were parties; urged the maintenance of military balance in the regions of tension; and encouraged the promotion of bilateral and regional confidence-building measures to avoid conflict and prevent the unintended and accidental outbreak of hostilities. It also requested the Secretary-General to seek the views of Member States with a view to exploring possibilities of furthering efforts towards confidence-building measures in the regional and subregional context, particularly in the regions of tension.

Before the vote, the United States and India, which would cast negative votes, and Argentina which would abstain, expressed concern that the text distorted the accepted use of confidence-building measures as set out in the 1993 UNDC consensus documents. India noted other shortcomings such as the draft's omission of the UNDC's invaluable contribution in this field, the artificial construct of regions of tension in operative paragraph 7 which would assign a questionable role to the UN Secretary-General, and no references to either threats from international terrorism or from terrorists acquiring weapons of mass destruction.

Speaking after the vote, Italy, on behalf of the EU and associated countries which aligned themselves with its explanation of vote,³ explained its negative vote. Overall, it considered that the draft was not balanced. The EU favoured the principle of introducing CBMs into other regions, especially regions of tension, and of adapting them to specific local or regional situations. However, some provisions of the draft resolution seemed to reflect national views with regard to a specific area of tension which were not in line with an overall and balanced approach. Furthermore, the EU believed that the request for the Secretary-General's involvement with the States of the regions concerned acquired special meaning if applied to the context of specific geographic areas.

Brazil, which voted in favor of the draft, affirmed that implementation of CBMs had a positive impact on consolidating a more cooperative environment essential to national and regional progress, and that CBMs should not be imposed or monitored by any actor other than countries that voluntarily engaged in that exercise.

The draft resolution was introduced by the Central African Republic, on behalf of the sponsors (see page click here for the sponsors), on 22 October. The revised draft resolution was adopted without a vote by the First Committee on 4 November and by the General Assembly on 8 December. For the text of the resolution, see page click here.

In its introductory remarks, the Central African Republic, on behalf of the Committee members, highlighted the importance of stabilizing the region by taking concrete disarmament measures to maintain peace, to promote sustainable development, to respect human rights, and to continue the fight against HIV-AIDS. It also announced that the twentieth ministerial meeting of the Committee, in operational paragraph 4 (d) of the proposal, would officially launch the Council for Peace and Security in Central Africa (COPAX) - an early-warning mechanism.

The draft resolution was introduced by Algeria, on behalf of the sponsors (see page click here for the sponsors), on 24 October. The draft resolution was adopted without a vote by the First Committee on 29 October and by the General Assembly on 8 December. For the text of the resolution, see page click here.

By its operative parts, the draft resolution called on States in the region that had not yet done so to adhere to the legal instruments relating to disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation within the multilateral context; it encouraged all States to promote confidence-building measures, openness and transparency; and encouraged all States in the Mediterranean to strengthen further their cooperation to combat, among other things, the illicit arms transfers.

The draft resolution was introduced by Malaysia, on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, on 23 October. It was adopted by the First Committee on 29 October (110-3-42) and by the General Assembly on 8 December (130-3-42). For the text of the resolution and the voting, see pages click here and click here.

Malaysia explained that, by adopting this resolution, the Assembly would reaffirm its determination to preserve the Indian Ocean as a zone of peace for all time, as called for in the Declaration. The Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Indian Ocean would also be requested to continue his informal consultations with the Committee members on the implementation of the Declaration.

Regional centres

The draft resolution was introduced by Costa Rica, on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States, on 23 October. It was adopted without a vote by the First Committee on 29 October and by the General Assembly on 8 December. For the text of the resolution, see page click here.

Costa Rica drew attention to operative paragraph 6 of the draft resolution which welcomed the establishment of the Group of Governmental Experts on the relationship between disarmament and development, whose report to the fifty-ninth General Assembly session would be of utmost interest for the Centre's role in promoting peace and disarmament and economic and social issues in the region in accordance with its mandate.

The draft resolution was introduced by Nigeria, on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the Group of African States, on 22 October. The draft resolution was adopted without a vote by the First Committee on 28 October and by the General Assembly on 8 December. For the text of the resolution, see page click here.

Among other things, the draft resolution appealed to the Regional Centre, in cooperation with the African Union, regional and subregional organizations and African States to take steps to promote the consistent implementation of the UN PoA on SALW.

The draft resolution was introduced by Nepal, on behalf of the sponsors (see page click here for the sponsors), on 23 October. The orally revised draft resolution was adopted without a vote by the First Committee on 29 October and by the General Assembly on 8 December. For the text of the resolution, see page click here.

Nepal explained that technical changes had been made with a view to bringing the draft in line with the Secretary-General's report on the Centre.⁴ The draft resolution therefore urged the Secretary-General to ensure the physical operation of the Centre from Kathmandu within six months of the date of signature of the host country agreement and enable it to function effectively.

The draft resolution was introduced by Malaysia, on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the Non Aligned Movement on 23 October. It was adopted without a vote by the First Committee on 30 October and by the General Assembly on 8 December. For the text of the resolution, see page click here.

Malaysia maintained that these centres were instrumental in promoting understanding and cooperation among States in their respective regions in the fields of peace, disarmament and development, and hoped that they would continue to receive the support, especially of Member States, with a view to the implementing and strengthening their activities and programmes.

²Italy spoke on behalf of the European Union and the acceding countries of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Malta, Slovakia and Slovenia, the associated countries of Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey and the European Free Trade Association countries of Iceland and Norway, members of the European Economic Area.

³Italy spoke on behalf of the acceding countries of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Malta, Slovakia and Slovenia, the associated countries of Bulgaria and Romania and the European Free Trade Association countries members of the European Economic Area: Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway.