DISARMAMENT: Conventional or Nuclear, that is the Question

By Gustavo Capdevila Reprint | | Print |

Gustavo Capdevila

GENEVA, Jan 20 1998 (IPS) - The first annual session of the Conference on Disarmament Tuesday reproduced the same profile of dissent which led to the failure of last year’s multilateral negotiations.

Delegates from the 61 member nations once again differed on the prioritisation of nuclear disarmament within the international security consolidation process.

For the nuclear powers prioritise advances in negotiations for conventional disarmament – as was reflected in the message from US President Bill Clinton, read in Tuesday’s session by his representative, Robert T. Grey.

“No issues are more important today to this body’s work that a cutoff of fissile material production for nuclear explosives and a worldwide ban on the export of anti-personnel landmines,” read the message.

Meanwhile, the majority of non-nuclear countries prefer the creation of an Ad Hoc Committee on Nuclear Disarmament charged with proposing measures for the conference to advance toward this objective.

With this in mind, South Africa’s representative, Jacob Sello Selebi, formally backed the creation of this ad hoc committee, which will “take into account existing proposals and views, as well as future initiatives on nuclear disarmament.”

The South African proposal, which was supported by representatives of Burma, New Zealand and Brazil, must be discussed in a new plenary session.

But the club of nuclear powers (the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France), as Clinton had said, preferred to work toward the reduction of nuclear arms through bilateral negotiations.

A diplomatic source from a European nuclear power told IPS the interests of international balance dictate moving toward nuclear disarmament through bilateral negotiations or through unilateral measures “as occurs at present.”

Meanwhile, Selebi vindicated the multilateral nature of the negotiations, stating that nuclear disarmament is a concern of the entire international community.

And to keep the nuclear powers quiet, he said the ad hoc committee would not, and should not, undermine or threaten the nuclear disarmament negotiations between Russia and the United States.

In 1997, the nuclear powers blocked the advance of negotiations by opposing a similar initiative for the creation of an Ad Hoc Committee for Nuclear Disarmament, presented by the Group of 21 non-aligned countries.

The idea of this Committee was supported by the United Nations General Assembly in a resolution approved during the period of sessions currently underway.

However, the message UN Secretary General Kofi Annan gave at the opening session of the Disarmament Conference Tuesday omitted all reference to the creation of the committee backed by the General Assembly.

For the three periods of session this year, the Conference approved an agenda similar to that of 1997. The body must now discuss the work schedule needed to apply this agenda.

The document includes the issues of the cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament, along with the prevention of nuclear war and related matters.

It also mentions the prevention of the arms race in outer space and the adoption of international agreements to protect the non- nuclear weapon States from the use or threat of nuclear weapons.

The agenda goes on to mention new types of weapons of mass destruction, like radiological weapons, a comprehensive disarmament programme and transparency on the issue of armaments available.

The 1997 negotiations stagnated precisely at this point, after approving the agenda and before discussing the work schedule for attacking the issue of nuclear disarmament.