Official Records
General Assembly
Fiftieth session
First Committee
8th meeting
Friday, 20 October 1995, 3 p.m.
New York
Chairman: Mr. Erdenechuluun ……………………….. (Mongolia)
In the absence of the Chairman, Mr. Hoffman (Germany), Vice-Chairman, took the Chair.
The meeting was called to order at 3.15 p.m.
/…
Agenda items 57 to 85 (continued)
General debate on all disarmament and international security items
/…
Mr. Yativ (Israel): It is a privilege for me to extend to Mr. Erdenechuluun my congratulations on his election as Chairman of the First Committee. The members of my delegation and myself wish to assure him of our fullest cooperation in the deliberations of this Committee. We are confident that the Chairman and the other distinguished officers of the Bureau will steer the work of this Committee with wisdom, skill and competence.
The international community has recently witnessed a remarkable development enhancing the momentum of the peace process in the Middle East. The Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority have embarked on a new stage on the road to peaceful relations and reconciliation. Following the signing of the Declaration of Principles in September 1993, and the Gaza-Jericho Agreement in May 1994, Israel and the Palestinian Authority signed, in Washington on 28 September 1995, the interim agreement that prescribes the gradual broadening of Palestinian self-government in the West Bank. This breakthrough is another milestone facilitating the ushering in of a new era in the relations between the two peoples — an era of cooperation, mutual respect and common interests.
Building confidence is an absolute prerequisite for defusing tensions and hostilities. The long-desired goal of comprehensive and lasting peace in the region can also benefit from the enhancement of confidence-building. This in turn can lay the basis, at an appropriate time, for a meaningful process of arms control in the Middle East.
The multilateral talks are a central component of the peacemaking process. The Working Group on Arms Control and Regional Security is dedicated to the task of seeking cooperative solutions to security problems pertaining to our region. At a time when the bilateral process is producing tangible results, it is necessary to recall that the multilateral talks are meant to complement the bilateral process. In our view, all States in the region have to join this forum and take part in the overall effort to address regional security problems.
It is also high time to recall and acknowledge the fact that the Working Group on Arms Control and Regional Security is and will continue to be the exclusive forum for addressing matters of regional security. It is our hope that such acknowledgement not only by regional States but also by the United Nations and the international community at large. Problems of regional security can be addressed only by the States of a given region. Hence the concept of regionality is the cornerstone of our approach to the matters of security and arms control, and the Working Group is a good illustration of this — a point on which I should like to elaborate.
Israel has repeatedly declared its unqualified support for the principle of non-proliferation. It voted in favour of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) when it was adopted by the General Assembly. Israel also supports the indefinite extension of the NPT.
At the same time, Israel must give due consideration to its position on the nuclear issue. Support for the principle of non-proliferation does not prevent Israel from assessing its own situation. Given the volatile nature of our region, Israel continues to advocate the establishment, in due course, of a nuclear-weapon-free zone —freely and directly negotiated — including mutual verification and encompassing all States of the region. On the effectiveness of such an arrangement, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his report on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon- free zone in the Middle East, said:
Israel looks forward to the day when conditions in the region will be auspicious for the launching of discussions on a nuclear-weapon-free zone. In progressing towards this end, Israel subscribes to the premise — a premise guiding the peace negotiations — that no issue can be settled in isolation, but that progress in one area, especially that of political accommodation, may lead to progress in other areas as well.
In this respect, Israel supports the following statement of the United Nations Secretary-General in his report of 25 October 1993:
Therefore, in Israel’s view, a credible nuclear-weapon-free zone can only set the seal on a durable peace. It cannot possibly precede it. It needs to be recalled that, for the time being, there are regional States that still consider themselves in a state of war with Israel. That being the case, the nuclear issue must not be the subject of any premature attempt to apply an agenda or timetable that does not reflect the reality in the region or the relevant priorities that govern the peacemaking process.
Furthermore, when the nuclear issue is addressed, the process will take place in a regional context, and not in any bilateral framework. Israel’s policy on the nuclear issue is therefore based on several principles. The first of these is comprehensiveness. The nuclear issue should be dealt with in the full context of the peace process, as well as of all security problems, conventional and non-conventional. The second principle is that of a regional framework. Nuclear non-proliferation will be achieved and secured only through the establishment of a mutually verifiable nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. Thirdly, there is the step-by-step approach. Practicality dictates that the process be begun with confidence- and security-building measures, the parties establishing peace relations and, in due course, complementing the process by dealing with conventional and non-conventional arms control, where priorities are assigned to systems that experience has proved to be destructive and destabilizing. The fourth principle is the primacy of the peace process. Negotiations on all issues concerning the security of the region must be free and direct, as they are, in fact, conducted in the bilateral and multilateral talks, within the framework of the peace process.
In this regard, the Secretary-General’s report of 2 August 1995 on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East says:
Israel feels that the challenges to its security, as well as to the peace process, coupled with the volatility of the region, call for caution against any precipitate renunciation of its agenda for the realization of a Middle East nuclear-weapon- free zone. Israel cannot jeopardize its security. Solutions to regional problems need to be tailored to the needs of the region. In this regard, time has an important role to play.
On 3 March 1995 a joint declaration was made by President Mubarak, King Hussein, Israel’s Prime Minister, Mr. Yitzhak Rabin, and Chairman Arafat. This stated:
Notwithstanding its concept of regionality, Israel feels that, where appropriate, global arrangements can complement regional agreements. In March this year Israel acceded to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects. The Government of Israel views this Convention as being primarily humanitarian in nature. As such, it has a supportive role to play at the regional level. The accession of Israel to the Convention on certain conventional weapons demonstrates that, where appropriate, regional-security, arms-control and disarmament agreements in the Middle East could be complemented by global arrangements. Therefore Israel hopes that all States in the Middle East will accede to this Convention as an important step towards regional security and stability.
Israel has manifested a similar effort in respect of the global land-mines crisis. Of all forms of post-conflict crisis, this is undoubtedly is the most widespread and pernicious. Its scope and magnitude are of daunting proportions. Anti-personnel mines are, in effect, real weapons of mass destruction. Thus, mine clearance constitutes a serious humanitarian challenge facing the international community today. The continuing existence of such weapons haunts many countries and prevents both reconciliation and reconstruction.
Addressing the world-wide effort to reduce the damage caused by anti-personnel land-mines, the Government of Israel decided on a two-year moratorium on the transfer of such devices. Israel is also prepared to consider extending know-how and assistance where they are needed.
The principle of transparency in armaments should be supported by all countries of our region. However, as each country has different security considerations, perceptions on such issues differ. Since transparency in armaments has an impact on the security of the region, it is necessary to subject any security measures to relevant regional considerations. Measures such as the exchange of information, advance notification of certain military activities and the exchange of information on unusual military activities have been dealt with in the multilateral talks. This is a cooperative effort in confidence- and security-building that it is to be hoped will yield positive results and will contribute to the defusing of tensions.
As it has stated hitherto, Israel continues to maintain a constructive and positive attitude towards the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction. Israel has repeatedly called for the elimination of chemical weapons and the establishment in the Middle East of a zone free from chemical weapons. Israel was among the first original signatories of the Chemical Weapons Convention in January 1993 in Paris. Referring to our region, the Foreign Minister of Israel, Mr. Shimon Peres, said on that occasion:
We still hope that all States of the region will adhere to this Convention, which should be treated on its merits and its universality guaranteed. No linkage should be acceptable between this Convention and any other issue. Unfortunately, several States of the region are still armed with chemical weapons and we sincerely hope that this will come to an end. The abolishment of chemical weapons and the creation of a region free of chemical weapons are important to the consolidation of the peace process and the stability of the region.
Israel has on a number of occasions expressed its support in principle of a total ban on nuclear-test explosions. Consequently, Israel is playing an active role in the comprehensive test-ban treaty negotiations currently taking place in Geneva. Israel hopes that these negotiations will bear fruit and lead to a universal and verifiable convention that will totally ban nuclear-test explosions. Israel believes that the future organization to be set up under the convention should enable each State party to exercise its rights in the various organs on an equal and non-discriminatory basis. A global and universally applicable comprehensive test-ban treaty will no doubt play a supportive role at the regional level as well. Hence, Israel expects all States in the Middle East to adhere to the treaty as an important step towards regional security.
Israel’s bold decisions within the peace process and the actions it takes in the multilateral Working Group on Arms Control and Regional Security and in non-proliferation issues in general demonstrate its positive contribution to peace and the goal of non-proliferation.
Let me conclude by saying that this is indeed an opportune moment in the history of our region which augurs well for the solution of regional problems and the achievement of peace and stability. It is incumbent upon us to use this momentum for further progress and at the same time to inculcate in all a sense that the peace process in all its facets, bilateral and multilateral, deserves the unqualified support and encouragement of the international community.
The United Nations is celebrating its fiftieth anniversary. This is an auspicious and unique opportunity to bestow its unreserved support upon the peacemaking process and thus contribute to peace and reconciliation in the region.
/…
Mr. Al-Hassan (Oman) (interpretation from Arabic): …
/…
With regard to the Middle East, while we welcome the recent positive developments in the region — the signing in Washington of the second phase of the peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and the upcoming economic summit in Amman, the Jordanian capital, at the end of this month, October 1995 — we hope that the natural step that follows will be a realistic in-depth study of the important issues, especially those which would lead to ridding the region of all weapons of mass destruction and ensure strict respect for the international borders and sovereignty of all the region’s States. In this regard, my delegation wishes to reiterate its call to all the countries of the region to engage in serious dialogue and constructive negotiations with the aim of translating into concrete reality the proposal of declaring the Middle East a zone free of weapons of mass destruction. Until such time as this objective is achieved, all the States of the region should refrain from any hostile acts that could damage the ongoing peace process or overshadow future prospects.
/…
Mr. Alkubaisi (Qatar) (interpretation from Arabic): …
/…
The State of Qatar, along with other Members of the United Nations, should like to see the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. My country supports the establishment of such a zone in the Middle East as one of the important measures of arms control in the region.
In his report (A/50/325) the Secretary-General stated that the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East is a question that continues to receive attention in the framework of the multilateral Middle East peace process particularly in the context of the Working Group on Arms Control and Regional Security.
The State of Qatar had the honour of hosting from 2 to 5 May 1994, the fifth meeting of this Working Group. A number of the participating States made concrete proposals on ways to continue examining the question and the Secretary-General expressed his satisfaction with regard to the resolution on the Middle East which was adopted without a vote at the Conference of the Parties to the NPT. The resolution stated that the Conference:
The Conference called on all States parties to the NPT, particularly the nuclear-weapons States, to extend their cooperation and do their utmost to help the States in the region establish, as soon as possible, a nuclear-weapon-free zone that would be free also of other weapons of mass destruction and of their delivery systems.
On numerous occasions, the State of Qatar, along with other States of the region, has stated that it is committed to the establishment of such a zone, in keeping with the Final Document of the Tenth Special Session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament and with relevant General Assembly resolutions, the most recent being resolution 49/71, which was adopted by consensus on 15 December 1994. The recent positive developments in the Middle East peace process have created conditions which favour the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region. It is obvious that the establishment of such a zone, along with arms limitation in general are among the principal objectives of the peace process. The achievement of those objectives would work in favour of peace and prosperity for all the region’s peoples.
It is not contestable that regional security should be ensured for all States on an equal footing, in all its dimensions. Today, no State can build its own security alone by its own means. Therefore, the maintenance of security in the region is the responsibility of all the countries of the region, without exception. Proceeding from this, the State of Qatar hopes that all States in the region which have not yet become parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) will accede to the Treaty and will refrain from developing, producing or testing nuclear weapons or acquiring them by any other means and will renounce nuclear weapons. Qatar hopes that all States of the region which have not yet done so will soon place all their nuclear facilities under the safeguards regime of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as an important confidence-building measure and a forward step in the process of promoting peace and security.
We share the concerns expressed at the IAEA General Conference held in September 1995 with regard to the existing grave threats to peace and security created by ongoing nuclear activities in the Middle East that are not solely for peaceful purposes. Similarly, the Conference welcomed initiatives for the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones and for the prohibition of other weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, in the Middle East, as well as other recent steps taken to achieve arms control in the region.
We feel that the efforts of IAEA to establish safeguards in the Middle East emphasize the urgent need for all States in the region to agree to implement the IAEA safeguards regime with regard to all their nuclear activities as an important confidence-building measure and as an important step in promoting peace and security within the framework of nuclear-weapon-free zones. We support the Agency’s decision to invite all interested parties to undertake a serious examination of the possibility of taking concrete and appropriate measures to implement the proposal to create a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East subject to effective and mutual verification.
The advantages of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East are not confined solely to questions of international peace and security or to the consolidation of the disarmament process, particularly nuclear disarmament, at the global level. Indeed, the achievement of this goal has other advantages for all the States of the region in the economic and social spheres as a large part of the budgets of these States is swallowed up by the cost of armaments and the maintenance of large defence forces. If the peace process now under way achieves its desired results, that would facilitate the creation of mutual confidence and peaceful coexistence. It could also promote cooperation in various areas, which would make it necessary to continue to pursue efforts in the fields of armament and military preparedness and, thereby, free financial resources for the region’s economic and social problems, raise living standards and make it possible for future generations to hope for a better future.
We have emphasized the importance of establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East to security and stability in the region and in the world, as well as to the region’s economic and social development. In order for us to attain that goal, we hope that all States will redouble their efforts to achieve the greatest possible degree of rapprochement in the region with regard to these questions. We hope for serious discussions amongst the States concerned and look forward to the adoption of confidence-building measures. Support for and acceleration of the peace process will make it possible to achieve these goals and lead to the creation of a climate favourable to world peace and security.
Mr. Sulaiman (Syrian Arab Republic) (interpretation from Arabic): …
/…
Syria was one of the first Middle Eastern States Parties to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1968. In 1989 it called for the Middle East to be declared, through the United Nations, a region free of all weapons of mass destruction, be they biological, chemical or nuclear. Israel, however, did not respond to that call, neither has it responded to the many calls by the United Nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Non-Aligned Movement and the Organization of Islamic States. The possession of nuclear weapons by any State in our sensitive region will continue to be cause for concern not only to the peoples of the region but to the world at large. We have repeatedly drawn attention to the danger of Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons and its refusal to accede to the NPT or to subject its nuclear facilities to international monitoring and inspection, especially in the existence of the ongoing Middle East peace process. Accession by all States in the Middle East to the NPT would be a vital step towards turning the region into a zone free of all weapons of mass destruction.
/…
It is high time the Middle East region enjoyed peace and stability. However, peace and stability can never be achieved by half-measures, by droplets of peace or by agreements that surrender the nation’s interests. Israel’s failure to abide by United Nations resolutions despite four years of negotiations constitutes a stance of defiance, not only to the Arabs, but also to the rest of the world. The latest developments in the peace process have shown that Israel does not seek a genuine, lasting and comprehensive peace that would put an end to conflict, occupation and settlement and guarantee peace and stability to all.
The aim of the United States’ initiative on the basis of which the Madrid conference convened was the achievement of comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and the principle of land for peace. It was on that basis that Syria opened the door for peace. It was also on that basis that Syria repeatedly committed itself to peace on the basis of the determining principles of the peace process. The negotiations between Syria an Israeli over the past four years have made it clear that Israel negotiates only with no other aim in mind but to equivocate and to elude the requirements of peace. …
/…
The meeting rose at 5.45 p.m.
Document Type: Meeting record
Document Sources: General Assembly
Subject: Arms control and regional security issues
Publication Date: 20/10/1995