Clouds Darken Disarmament.

The rejection of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) by the United States Senate in October 1999 helped, along with a fluid international climate, to cast a shadow over deliberations in the General Assembly's First Committee (Disarmament and International Security). Delegates struggled to find common ground before the Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in April 2000. In concluding remarks, Committee Chairman Raimundo Gonzalez of Chile said negotiations had strongly reflected the international community's deep concern at the impasse on nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation. "The situation is at best static and perhaps worsening", he said. In an interview, Roger Smith, Network Coordinator for the NGO Committee on Disarmament, said simply: "The political environment of disarmament is in a downward spiral."

At its fifty-fourth session, the General Assembly adopted 47 resolutions and 4 decisions on disarmament and international security at the Committee's recommendation; 17 focused on nuclear issues, which remain a key concern of United Nations Member States. It also adopted a resolution on Antarctica to preserve the only demilitarized continent on earth.

Heated discussion focused as well on a new resolution urging compliance with the 1972 Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM Treaty) by the Russian Federation and the United States, which is considered a foundation of international stability. The Russian Federation and China, who sponsored the resolution along with Belarus, argued that the United States development of a national missile defense system would tip global strategic balance and trigger a new arms race. The Russian representative warned against attempts to revise the ABM Treaty.

The resolution calling for the preservation of and strict compliance with the ABM Treaty was adopted by a vote of 80 to 4 (Albania, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, United States), with 68 abstentions. Taking strong exception to the ABM text, the United States representative said his country had not made a decision to deploy a national missile defence system, nor would such a decision change the basic strategic calculus underlying the ABM Treaty. The United States could not ignore the emergence of new threats or new technologies that might be used to protect against them.

The Assembly also adopted a new resolution on missiles by which the SecretaryGeneral was requested to seek the views of Member States on the issue in all its aspects and submit a report to the General Assembly at its next session.

The news of the United States Senate's rejection of the CTBT drew sharp criticisms from delegates. The Russian delegation called the decision a "serious blow" to the entire system of agreements on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. The representative of Canada said it was deeply disturbing that the country that had championed the cause of disarmament had now "retreated from the battle" to bring the Test-Ban Treaty into force. The United States delegate insisted that despite the recent Senate rejection, "we will complete the task of bringing the Treaty into force".

The delayed entry into force of the CTBT prompted a resolution calling on Governments to sign and ratify the Treaty and maintain their nuclear testing moratoriums. The Treaty still requires the ratification of 18 countries.

Of the necessary ratifications by nuclear-weapon States, three are pending: the United States, the Russian Federation and China. Also needed are ratifications by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, India and Pakistan.

None of the nuclear Powers voted for a resolution calling for a Convention on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. While most developing countries voted in favour France, the United Kingdom and the United States voted against the text; the Russian Federation and China abstained.

Reflecting the Committee's concern at the impasse on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, the Assembly adopted, for the second time, a resolution on the need for a new agenda for a nuclear-free world. Sponsored by the "New Agenda Coalition" of Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, Sweden and South Africa, the resolution calls for the examination of ways and means to diminish the role of nuclear weapons in security policies, so as to enhance strategic stability, facilitate the process of the elimination of those weapons and contribute to international confidence and security. It also calls on the "nuclear-weapons-capable" States of India, Israel and Pakistan to reverse all development and deployment of nuclear weapons and adhere to the NPT. The resolution was adopted by a vote of 111 to 13 (Bulgaria, Estonia, France, Hungary, India, Israel, Monaco, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, Russian Federation, United Kingdom and United States).

The troubling climate prompted Canada to withdraw a resolution that urged the Conference on Disarmament to negotiate a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear devices. Although the resolution was adopted last year without a vote, China and other members of the Non-Aligned Movement requested a vote this year. Instead of risking a setback, the Western sponsors withdrew the resolution with the intention of pursuing the matter in the Disarmament Conference.

Another setback occurred on the creation of a nuclearfree zone m Central Asia. While a resolution on such a zone was adopted without a vote in 1998, the sponsors (the five Central Asian States) in 1999 failed to reach agreement on a text and submitted a draft decision rather than a resolution. Consequently, this once promising initiative became more hesitant this session. Nuclear-free zones already exist in Latin America and the Caribbean, the South Pacific, South-East Asia, and Africa.

Although the nuclear question dominated the debate, the Committee also addressed the regional and international security threat posed by conventional weapons. At the Committee's recommendation, the General Assembly decided to convene a conference on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in the summer of 2001. This is a priority concern for many African countries that are hard-hit by their proliferation. During debate, the representative of Sierra Leone said the bitter experience in his country had convinced him that conventional arms could pose perhaps as much of a threat to both national and international peace and security as weapons of mass destruction.

The representative of Libya said that in the last decade, developing countries had bought some 70 per cent of arms on the global market at the expense of development, while the superpowers had sold 80 per cent of all weapons.