DISARMAMENT: Non-Aligned Bloc Attempts to Break Deadlock

By Gustavo Capdevila Reprint | | Print |

Gustavo Capdevila

GENEVA, Jun 6 1997 (IPS) - Non-aligned countries took the initiative this week at the Disarmament Conference in an attempt to break the current deadlock on the questions of nuclear disarmament and a ban on anti-personnel landmines.

Esther Mshai Tolle from Kenya, the coordinator of the Group of 21 (G-21) which links the non-aligned countries in the Conference, proposed the creation of special committees in order to overcome the impasse on the most tension-fraught issues.

Since January, the Conference’s 61 member States have been delaying approval of a programme of work for negotiating the three main points on their agenda: nuclear disarmament, a ban on landmines and the prohibition of production of fissionable material.

The G-21 initiative is based on the suggested creation of ad hoc committees to jump-start negotiations on three of the most heated points on the Conference agenda: “cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament”, “prevention of an arms race in outer space”, and “effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapons States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.”

The G-21 proposal includes the appointment of special coordinators to seek Conference members’ views on a “comprehensive programme of disarmament” and “transparency in armament,” with a special reference to anti-personnel landmines.

The initiative of the non-aligned nations to overcome the standoff came nearly five months after the renewal of the Conference’s sessions.

But differences exist within the G-21 itself. South Africa, one of the dissidents, said at Thursday’s session that it had backed the non-aligned proposal out of a spirit of solidarity. It underlined, however, that its position had not changed regarding its objections on “linkages” between negotiations topics and assurances to non-nuclear-weapons states.

South Africa, and Chile to a lesser extent, differ with the majority view of the non-aligned nations, which want to work toward disarmament through the establishment of a timetable of goals. The two countries would prefer to make progress toward nuclear disarmament based on ideological rather than pragmatic foundations.

To overcome the objections raised by South Africa and Chile, Tolle added a declaration to the proposal, which states that a more specific definition of the task of the ad hoc committee on nuclear affairs will be presented in the future. But the declaration fails to specify whether the G-21 will be in charge of the future presentation, a fact that indicates that perhaps only one sector of the non-aligned bloc has reached agreement on the issue.

A source from a non-aligned country, who asked not to be identified, said that along with South Africa and Chile, Morocco, Mongolia and to a certain extent Egypt were attempting to prevent a position completely opposed to the nuclear powers from frustrating the constitution of the ad hoc committee.

The United States, Russia, Great Britain, France and China, the five countries with declared nuclear arsenals, object to the issue of nuclear disarmament being treated in multilateral negotiations.

The director of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, John Holum, recently said that the appropriate scenario for discussions on nuclear disarmament was “negotiations between the United States and Russia.”

Meanwhile, India and Pakistan, also members of the G-21, say the topic of nuclear disarmament should take priority over all other questions negotiated by the Conference.

Within the G-21, South Africa and Chile are at the vanguard of a current that wants a more gradual focus. The Conference, they say, should not limit itself to negotiations, but should also intervene in deliberations on nuclear affairs and additional issues debated in other multilateral forums.

Although none of the nuclear powers accept either thesis, they are shared by several countries outside of the non-aligned bloc.

The source consulted by IPS highlighted “Iran’s very interesting gravitation toward positions closer to the moderates” within the G-21.

The non-aligned group also failed to take a unified stance on the question of anti-personnel landmines, because countries such as Mexico and Syria were opposed to the topic being discussed in the Conference.

Mexico is in favour of the Ottawa Process, a faster route which should give rise to a ban on production, stockpiling, use and transport of landmines by December. According to the Mexican delegation, a ban will be delayed too long if the topic is negotiated in the Conference.

The United States admits that the Conference could slow negotiations, but maintains that it is the only forum in which an accord could obtain the binding force necessary for the effective eradication of landmines.

The diplomat added that Syria is part of a group of countries that do not believe a ban on landmines is necessary.

The Russian Federation’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Evgueny Primakov, highlighted at Thursday’s session the importance of the recent accord reached between his country and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.