First Committee's disarmament debate: towards fewer weapons, more hope.

First Committee's disarmament debate: Towards fewer weapons, more hope

"In the matter of disarmament, we may be at a crossroads of crucial importance", Chairman Ali Alatas (Indonesia) told the First (Political and Security) Committee as it began its substantive work on 14 October.

Down one road, he said, lay the "threat of mutual annihilation . . . propelled by an unceasing accumulation and qualitative refinement of weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons". Down the other road lay a "ray of hope", marked by such recent achievements as the "small but perceptible progress" in the work of the Conference on Disarmament, the adoption by consensus of a Final Declaration by the Third Review Conference of States Parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the summit talks between United States President Ronald Reagan and USSR General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev.

The First Committee addressed 23 disarmament questions during meetings held in October and November. Despite expressions of concern over the continuing proliferation of nuclear and conventional weapons, and fears the nuclear arms race would extend to outer space, debate participants agreed that international disarmament efforts showed some encouraging trends. Cited in that regard were the new round of bilateral talks between the Soviet Union and the United States and the international conference on disarmament and development planned for 1986.

As in previous years, nuclear issues were the main focus of the Committee's agenda. But the 1985 debate also reflected increased interest in such questions as preventing an arms race in outer space and at sea, a chemical weapons ban, limiting the proliferation of conventional weapons, and reducing military spending.

Nuclear issues

Nuclear disarmament issues and proposals discussed by the First Committee related to the prevention of nuclear war, cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament, a nuclear freeze and a comprehensive nuclear test ban.

Warsaw Treaty countries reported on initiatives "to eliminate the nuclear threat and bring about a positive reversal of the situation in Europe and throughout the world", adopted at their October 1985 summit meeting in Sofia, Bulgaria. A series of measures to be undertaken by both the United States and the USSR were proposed.

It was suggested that all work on developing and testing of space weapons, including anti-satellite systems, be suspended; that nuclear weapon stocks be frozen at existing levels; that development, testing and deployment of new types of weapons of mass destruction be suspended; and that deployment of medium-range missiles in Europe be halted. A separate agreement to halt deployment of nuclear arms in Europe and reduce existing arms could be implemented even before the United States and the Soviet Union had reached an agreement on issues relating to space and strategic weapons, many participants declared. Other proposals that received support included a call for a joint United States-USSR commitment not to deploy nuclear weapons on the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States and not to increase or renew stocks of nuclear weapons in countries where they were already deployed.

"The entire body of practical measures aimed at preventing war should be given the most serious consideration", said the USSR, calling on the United States and its allies "to abandon their obstructionist policy in this matter". It wanted negotiations on the subject to take place at the Conference on Disarmament.

China elaborated on a four-point proposal it had put forward in the Assembly's general debate to curb the arms race and avert nuclear war. The heart of the proposal was the conclusion of an international convention on non-first use of nuclear weapons by the nuclear States, particularly the United States and the Soviet Union, and on the non-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear States or nuclear-free zones.

China called for the Soviet Union and the United States to stop testing and manufacturing nuclear weapons and to drastically reduce existing stockpiles, with corresponding measures to be taken thereafter by other nuclear countries. "However, we should not lose sight of the fact that the United States and the Soviet Union have already acquired nuclear arsenals, so huge that even if they could cut down their existing nuclear arsenals by 50 per cent, they would still have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world several times over. Therefore . . . other efforts must also be taken to reduce the threat of nuclear war."

China also urged the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Warsaw Treaty States to agree on "drastic" conventional arms cuts; called on the United States and the Soviet Union to immediately stop the arms race in outer space, and for all countries with space capabilities to refrain from developing testing or deploying space weapons; urged an international agreement on the prohibition and destruction of space weapons; and called for conclusion of a chemical weapons convention, recommending that countries capable of producing chemical weapons pledge in the meantime not to test, produce, transfer, deploy or use them.

Western countries maintained their basic position that arms control and disarmament should be reached through negotiations aimed at concluding binding and verifiable agreements, aimed at substantial and balanced reductions at the lowest possible levels. A mutually agreed and verifiable nuclear weapons freeze must be accompanied by regional security initiatives, they said.

The United States reiterated its position that the way to arms limitation and disarmament was through strict adherence to the principles set out in the Charter for peaceful relations between States, and through full compliance with existing international agreements and restraints that promote peace and stability. Appropriate and effective verification measures for determining compliance with arms-control agreements remained essential.

"Today", said the United States, "only the gullible can believe that a State with scores of divisions, tens of thousands of tanks and artillery pieces, fleets of warships and submarines, thousands of missiles, aircraft, and nuclear weapons and a sky filled with satellites is too weak to provide information about its activities comparable to that which other States readily make available. The United States would not ask for more information of others than it provides itself. [But] the insistence on withholding information . . . remains a significant obstacle to successful arms limitations and disarmament agreements. Secrecy begets suspicion, suspicion begets fear and fear can beget conflict rather than cooperation."

"We are convinced", said the Netherlands on behalf of the European Community, Portugal and Spain, "that the main threat to international peace and security is not only the weapons that States possess but especially the way States behave towards each other. The process of disarmament cannot go very far unless accompanied by a reduction of fear, mistrust and misunderstanding."

Non-aligned countries continued to support proposals aimed at a qualitative and quantitative nuclear arms freeze, a nuclear-test ban and a treaty banning nuclear-weapon use in which all nuclear-weapon States would participate.

India said that simple prohibition of the use of nuclear weapons and outlawing their possession would not bring about their elimination. "However, by stripping those weapons of the prestige conferred on them and reiterating its condemnation of their use as a monstrous crime against humanity, the General Assembly will help in catalysing a process towards their elimination."

Test ban: Along with a nuclear-weapons freeze, a comprehensive nuclear test-ban treaty continued to be widely favoured among Committee members as a means to reduce the nuclear threat and halt the nuclear-arms race. The Conference on Disarmament was asked by the General Assembly to establish a subsidiary body to consider a nuclear test ban, but indicated in its report to the Assembly (A/40/27) that in 1985 it had again been unable to do so, as there was still no agreement on a mandate for such a body.

In the First Committee debate, nuclear-weapon States retained essentially the same positions as in the past on the test ban issue. The Western countries insisted that adequate verification measures must be worked out before a comprehensive test-ban treaty could be agreed on. "Meaningful arms control agreements that will endure cannot be negotiated on the basis of trust alone", argued Canada. A number of speakers put forward views on a proposed global seismological system for monitoring nuclear explosions.

The United States held to its position that although complete cessation of nuclear explosions was an important goal, the "central and most urgent arms control objective" was to radically reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world. In the meantime, however, verifiable limits on nuclear testing could play a "useful, although more modest, role".

Socialist countries again pressed for immediate negotiations for a treaty banning all...