A/34/PV.97 General Assembly

Tuesday, Dec. 11, 1979 — Session 34, Meeting 97 — New York — UN Document ↗ — OCR ✓ — ⓘ 54 unattributed speechs
▶ This meeting at a glance
74
Speeches
14
Countries
32
Resolutions
Resolutions: 34/71, A/34/745], A/34/809, A/34/747], 34/81, 57/60, 57/61, 31/37, 57/69, 57/70, A/34/812, 32/132, A/34/757], A/RES/34/76A, A/RES/34/77, A/RES/34/73, A/RES/34/78, A/RES/34/79, A/RES/34/80A, A/RES/34/80B, A/RES/34/83B, A/RES/34/83E, A/RES/34/83G, A/RES/34/83J, A/RES/34/84, A/RES/34/85, A/RES/34/86, A/RES/34/87C, A/RES/34/87D, A/RES/34/87E, A/RES/34/88, A/RES/34/89
Topics
Arab political groupings UN resolutions and decisions General statements and positions Nuclear weapons proliferation Israeli–Palestinian conflict Global economic relations

121.  Israeli nuciear armament REPORT OF THE FIRST COMMITTEE (A/34/757) jl. The PRESIDENT: I regret that through no fault of ours, and particularly no fault of the delegations, we have had to start our meeting rather late. That was not because representatives were not here punctually—all of them were—but because the documents. were not ready. In order to give time to all delegations to go through the documents, I thought it more prudent to wait until all members had the documents before start- ing the meeting. 2. Mr. SUCHARIPA (Austria), Rapporteur of the First Committee: I have the honour of presenting to the 3. The First Committee this year held a combined general debate on these items having regard to the review of the implementation of the recommendations and decisions adopted by the General Assembly at its tenth special session [resolution S-10/2] as well as other disarmament items. The general debate on these items took place at the 4th to 30th meetings of the First Committee from 16 October to 5 November. Subse- quently, the First Committee devoted 15 meetings, from 6 to 27 November, and again part of one meeting on 30 November, to an in-depth consideration of and action on the draft resolutions that had been presented. As a result of its deliberations, the Committee adopted 38 draft resolutions and one draft decision. 4. Before introducing the individual reports on the various agenda items, I wish to apologize to delegations for the fact that it was not possible for the Secretariat to publish all the reports in time for distribution to the permanent missions. I have been assured, however, that all the reports are now available at the documents ootn. 5. The report of the First Committee on agenda item 30, entitled ‘Implementation of General Assembly res- olution 33/58 concerning the signature and ratification of Additional Protocol [ of the Treaty for the Prohibi- tion of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America (Treaty of Tlatelolco)’’, is in document A/34/740, and the relevant recommendation of the Committee is to be found in paragraph 6 of the report. 6. The report of the Committee on agenda item 31, entitled *“‘Chemical and bacteriological (biological) weapons’, is in document A/34/741, and the relevant recommendation is contained in paragraph 7 of the report. 7. Document A/34/742 contains the report of the Committee on agenda item 32. entitled ‘‘Implementa- tion of General Assembly resolution 33/60°". The rec- ommendation of the Committee appears in paragraph 8 of the report. 8. The report on agenda item 33, entitled **[mplemen- tation of General Assembly resolution 33/61 concerning the signature and ratification of Additional Protocol IT of the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America (Treaty of Tlatelolco)” is to be found in document A/34/743, and the relevant recommendation is in paragraph 6 of the report. 9. Document A/34/744 deals with the report of the First Committee on agenda item 34. entitled **Consid- eration of the declaration of the 1980s as a disarmament decade’, and the relevant recommendation is in paragraph 8 of the report. 10. The report on agenda item 35, entitled **Imple- mentation of the Declaration on the Denuclearization of Africa’’. is contained in document A/34/745, and in paragraph 10 of its report the First Committee recom- mends to the General Assembly the adoption of two draft resolutions, A and B, entitled, respectively. “*Im- Il. Document A/34/746 contains the report on agenda item 36, entitled ‘‘Establishment of a nuclear-weapon- free zone in the region of the Middle East’’. The rele- vant recommendation is to be found in paragraph 6 of the report. 12. The report on agenda item 37, entitled **Establish- ment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in South Asia”’, is in document A/34/747, and the recommendation of the First Committee is in paragraph 7 of the report. 13. The report on agenda item 38, entitled **Prohibi- tion of the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons”’, is contained in document A/34/748, and the relevant recommendation is to be found in paragraph 7 of the report. Here I wish to indicate that after the vote in the First Committee, 11 delegations indicated that if they had been present they would have voted in favour of this draft resolution, and I regret that this fact has not been mentioned in the report. 14. The report on agenda item 39, entitled “‘Imple- mentation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace”’, is contained in document A/34/749. In paragraph 8 of this report, the First Committee recom- mends adoption of draft resolutions A and B. 15. The report on item 40, entitled **World Disarma- ment Conference’’, appears in document 4/34/750 and the relevant recommendation appears in paragraph 7. 16. Document A/34/751i cuntains the report on agenda item 41, entitled “‘United Nations Conference on Pro- hibitions or Restrictions of Use of Certain Conven- tional Weapons which May be Deemed to be Exces- sively Injurious or to have Indiscriminate Effects**: the draft resolution recommended for adoption by the Gen- eral Assembly appears in paragraph & of this report. 17. The Committee’s report on item 42, entitled **Re- view of the implementation of the recommendations and decisions adopted by the General Assembly at its tenth special session’’, appears in document A/34/752. Under this item the Committee adopted 13 draft resolu- tions entitled, respectively: *‘Disarmament and inter- national security’*: ‘“Report of the Committee on Dis- armament”; ‘Implementation of the recommendations and decisions of the tenth special session’’: **United Nations programme of fellowships on disarmament”: ‘‘Monitoring of disarmament agreements and Strengthening of international security’: **Freezing and reduction of military budgets’: ‘‘Non-use of nuclear weapons and prevention of nuclear war’’: **Re- port of the Disarmament Commission” ’: **Disarmament Week’: **Nuclear weapons in all aspects**: **Study on the relationship between disarmament and develop- ment’: “Committee on Disarmament”: and *‘*Pro- gramme of research and studies on disarmament”. These draft resolutions appear in paragraph 38 of the report. 18. Furthermore, under the same item. the Commit- tee adopted also a draft decision concerning a study on a comprehensive nuclear test ban. The relevant recom- mendations of the Committee are contained in 19. The report on item 43, entitled “Strengthening of guarantees of the security of non-nuclear-weapon States’’, is in document A/34/753 and the relevant rec- ommendation of the Committee is in paragraph 7. 20. Document A/34/754 contains the report on agenda item 44, entitled ‘‘Strengthening of the security of non- nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear-weapons’’. Under this item the First Com- mittee recommends for adoption by the General As- sembly two draft resolutions which appear in paragraph 10 of the report and are entitled, respectively, *“Conclu- sion of an international convention to assure the non- nuclear weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons”’ and ‘*Strengthening of the security of non-nuclear-weapcn States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons’’. 21. Under item 45, entitled “General and complete disarmament’’, the Committee adopted six draft resolu- tions, on the following subjects: ““Conclusion of an international convention prohibiting the development, production, stockpiling and use of radiological weapons’’; **Confidence-building measures’’; **Non- stationing of nuclear weapons on the territories of States where there are no such weapons at present’’; Prohibition of the production of fissionable material for weapons purposes’; ‘Study of the institutional arrangements relating to the process of disarmamentTM’; and "Strategic arms limitation talks’. The report of the Committee on this item is contained in document A/34/ 755 and the relevant recommendations are to be found in paragraph 18 of the report. 22. The report on agenda item 120, entitled *-Adop- tion of a declaration on international co-operation for disarmament’’, is contained in document A/34/756 and the relevant recommendation is in paragraph 6. Finally, the report on agenda item 121, entitled **Israeli nuclear armament’’, is contained in document A/34/757 and the recommendation is contained in paragraph 7 of this report. 23. The Jarge number of proposals adopted by the Committee and the fact that no less than 105 statements were made in the general debate on disarmament items are again a clear expression of the intensified interest of all delegations in these pressing issues as well as a reflection of the serious efforts made by the General Assembly to solve questions of disarmament within the framework of the United Nations which, in the words of the Final Document of the tenth special session, which was devoted to disarmament, has, in accordance with the Charter, a central role and primary responsibility in the sphere of disarmament [see resolution S-10/2, sect. Hl, para. 27\. Most, if not ail, of these proposals are designed to ensure the earliest implementation of the recommendations and decisions adopted by the Gen- eral Assembly at its tenth special session. 24. Onbehalf ofthe First Committee, itis my pleasure to recommend to the General Assembly for adcpiion the draft resolutions and the draft decision to which I

The President unattributed #6555
Statements will be limited to explanations of vote. The positions of delegations in respect of the recommendations contained in the reports of the First Committee to the Assembly are reflected in the relevant records of the Committee. May I remind members of the decision taken by the General Assembly at its 4th plenary meeting, on 21 September 1979, that “when the same draft resolution is considered in a Main Committee and in the plenary Assembly, a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once, that is, either in the Committee or in the plenary Assembly, unless that delegation’s vote in the plenary Assembly is different from its vote in the Committee.” [4th meeting, para. 349]. 26. We shall consider first the report of the First Committee on agenda item 30 [A/34/740]. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution appearing in paragraph 6 of the Committee's report. The First Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 34/71).
Vote: A/RES/34/76A Recorded Vote
✓ 128   ✗ 0   11 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (128)
Vote: A/RES/34/77 Recorded Vote
✓ 136   ✗ 0   1 abs.
Show country votes
— Abstain (1)
✓ Yes (136)
Vote: A/RES/34/73 Recorded Vote
✓ 137   ✗ 0   2 abs.
Show country votes
— Abstain (2)
✓ Yes (137)
Vote: A/RES/34/78 Recorded Vote
✓ 96   ✗ 2   40 abs.
Show country votes
✗ No (2)
✓ Yes (96)
Vote: A/RES/34/79 Recorded Vote
✓ 117   ✗ 0   24 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (117)
Vote: A/RES/34/80A Recorded Vote
✓ 117   ✗ 0   23 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (117)
Vote: A/RES/34/80B Recorded Vote
✓ 126   ✗ 0   14 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (126)
Vote: A/RES/34/83B Recorded Vote
✓ 130   ✗ 0   11 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (130)
Vote: A/RES/34/83E Recorded Vote
✓ 124   ✗ 0   11 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (124)
Vote: A/RES/34/83G Recorded Vote
✓ 112   ✗ 16   14 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (112)
Vote: A/RES/34/83J Recorded Vote
✓ 120   ✗ 2   19 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (120)
Vote: A/RES/34/84 Recorded Vote
✓ 114   ✗ 1   25 abs.
Show country votes
✗ No (1)
✓ Yes (114)
Vote: A/RES/34/85 Recorded Vote
✓ 120   ✗ 0   22 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (120)
Vote: A/RES/34/86 Recorded Vote
✓ 110   ✗ 1   29 abs.
Show country votes
✗ No (1)
✓ Yes (110)
Vote: A/RES/34/87C Recorded Vote
✓ 99   ✗ 18   19 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (99)
Vote: A/RES/34/87D Recorded Vote
✓ 118   ✗ 9   12 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (118)
Vote: A/RES/34/87E Recorded Vote
✓ 121   ✗ 9   9 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (121)
Vote: A/RES/34/88 Recorded Vote
✓ 116   ✗ 0   27 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (116)
Vote: A/RES/34/89 Recorded Vote
✓ 97   ✗ 10   38 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (97)
The President unattributed #6556
The General Assembly will now consider the report of the First Committee on agenda item 31 [A/34/741]. The draft resolution, entitled “Chemical and bacteriological (biological) weapons’, recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 7 of its report, was adopted without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do ikewise? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 34/72).
Vote: 34/71 Consensus
The President unattributed #6557
We now turn to the report of the First Committee on agenda item 32 [A/34/742]. May I invite members of the Assembly to turn their attention to the recommendation of the First Committee in paragraph 8 of its report, concerning the draft resolution entitled “Implementation of General Assembly resolution 33/60°°. A separate vote has been requested on operative paragraph 4. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau. Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, [vory Coast. Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: None. Abstaining: Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, China, Czechoslovakia, France, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Operative paragraph 4 of the draft resolution was adopted by 124 votes to none, with 13 abstentions.
The President unattributed #6558
I now put to the vote the draft resolution as a whole. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portuga!, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: None. Abstaining: China, France. The draft resolution as a whole was adopted by 37 vatesc ta nano with 2 ahetoatiane frocaliutinn 324172) The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 34{74).
The President unattributed #6560
The General Assembly will now consider the report of the First Committee on agenda item 34 [A/34/744]. I invite members to turn their attention to the recommendation of the First Committee in paragraph 8 of the report. That Committee adopted without a vote the draft resolution entitled ‘*Consideration of the declaration of the 1980s as a disarmament decade’’. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do the same? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 34/75).
The President unattributed #6561
We turn now to the report of the First Committee on agenda item 35 [A/34/745]. 33. I call on the representative of Portugal, who wishes to explain his vote.
Mr. Rebelo De Andrade PRT Portugal #6565
Portugal will vote in favour of draft resolution A/C. 1/ 34/L.16 bearing in mind the importance for peace of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Africa and especially taking into account the tensions that characterize the situation in southern Africa. 35. However, the Portuguese delegation wishes to put on record some reservations concerning various aspects of the draft resolution. In the first place, in the view of the Portuguese delegation, the draft resolution should not be based on the assumption of a threat that has not been confirmed, namely, the explosion of a nuclear device by South Africa. Furthermore, the Portuguese delegation is of the opinion that the prohibition of collaboration with South Africa in the nuclear field should not embrace collaboration for peaceful purposes, and has doubts about whether, at the present Stage, the allusion to the Security Council to that effect iS warranted. 36. However, Portugal adheres to the spirit of the draft resolution, which is to ensure the objective of a nuclear-weapon-free Africa. That is why we have decided to vote in favour of it.
The President unattributed #6567
The General Assembly will now take a decision on the two draft resolutions recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 10 of its report [A/34/745]. I shall first put to the vote draft resolution A, entitled ‘‘Implementation of the Declaration on the Denuclearization of Africa’’. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Australia, Austria Rahamac Rahrain Ranaladech Rarhadac epublic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: None, Abstaining: Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Draft resolution A was adopted by 128 votes to none, with 11 abstentions (resolution 34{76 A).
The President unattributed #6569
We turn now to draft resolution B, entitled ‘‘Nuclear capability of South Africa’. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of this draft resolution is contained in document A/34/809. The First Committee adopted draft resolution B without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same? Draft resolution B was adopted (resolution 34[76 B).
The President unattributed #6571
The next report of the First Committee is on agenda item 36 [A/34/746]. The Assembly will now vote on the draft resolution entitled ‘*Establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East’’, recommended by the Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Australia. Ausiria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Comores, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Diibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: None. Abstaining: Israel. The draft resolution was adopted by 136 votes to none, with 1 abstention (resolution 34[77).
The President unattributed #6572
We turn now to the report of the First Committee on agenda item 37 [A/34/747]. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution entitled ‘‘Establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in South Asia’’, recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. 41. I call on the representative of Sri Lanka, who wishes to explain his vote before the vote.
Mr. Fernando LKA Sri Lanka #6574
In conformity with our position last year regarding a similar draft,' the Sri Lanka delegation will vote in favour of the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in South Asia as proposed by the draft resolution submitted this year. This vote reflects Sri Lanka’s continuing support for the concept of establishing nuclear-weapon-free zones in Various parts of the world. We believe that effective nuclear-weapon-free zones in various regions of the world would contribute to creating conditions that would strengthen peace and security in those regions. 43. While it supports the draft resolution, Sri Lanka believes that consultations must be held by the States of the South Asia region so as to ensure unanimous support and approval of the establishment of such a zone— without which we do not believe that the purpose for the establishment of the zone will be achieved. We believe also that the limits of the zone should be adequately defined. 44. My Government is mindful of and appreciates that India, which is our friendly neighbour, supports proposals for the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones in well-defined and distinct geographical regions of the world, provided that the initiatives for the establishment of such zones come on an entirely voluntary basis from all the States of the regions concerned.
Vote: A/34/745] Recorded Vote
✓ 96   ✗ 2   40 abs.
Show country votes
— Abstain (1)
The President unattributed #6577
The Assembly will now vote on the draft resolution recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 7 of its report [A/34/747]. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Costa Rica, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mexico, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philipines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, audi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Zaire, Zambia. Against: Bhutan, India. Abstaining: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Ethiopia, Fiji, France, German Democratic Republic, Greece, Hungary, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Maldives, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Norway, Poland, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sweden, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Viet Nam, Yugoslavia. The draft resolution was adopted by 96 votes to 2, with 40 abstentions (resolution 34/78).*
The President unattributed #6579
I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their vote after the vote. 48. Mr. van BUUREN (Netherlands): The Netherlands voted in favour of the draft resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in South Asia. Why did we decide to maintain our traditional positive vote with regard to this annual initiative of the delegation of Pakistan? It cannot be denied that the rospects of achieving a nuclear-weapon-free zone in outh Asia have not improved at all over the last year. In this respect the Netherlands Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. van der Klaauw, in his address to the General Assembly on 26 September (i6th meeting], ? The delegation of Mauritius subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wished to have its vote recorded as having been against the draft resolution. 49. It is true that nothing irreparable has happened so far. In spite of recent press reports, the context of which we all know, there still is room for hope that reason will prevail and that the nations of South Asia will succeed in keeping their countries free from nuclear weapons. As Mr. van der Klaauw pointed out, we have received repeated assurances from both India and Pakistan on the peaceful nature of their nuclear programmes. 50. In order to express our strong support for those assurances of the political leaders of those two nations, and convinced of the general validity of the concept of nuclear-weapon-free zones as well as of the applicability of this concept to the region of South Asia, this year so we have voted in favour of the Pakistani draft resolution. Our support for this resolution should not, however, be interpreted as an endorsement of attempts to impose this concept on the States in region against the wishes of one of the major Powers in the area. Nor should it be seen as our taking sides in an issue on which we realize very well that there still is no consensus among the States concerned. Our positive vote should be taken as an expression of the Netherlands position that the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones is in itself desirable as a major contribution to the cause of non-proliferation and, in this case, also as a particular and strong appeai to all States in South Asia for restraint. 51. When I stated, a few moments ago, that the Netherlands strongly hopes that the peoples of South Asia will succeed in keeping their countries free from nuclear weapons, I was using that term to include other nuclear explosive devices. Our support for this resolution should be interpreted accordingly. To us a nuclearweapon-free zone means an area exempt from all nuclear explosive devices; as was expressed in General Assembly resolution 3484 A (XXX), it is not possible to develop nuclear explosive devices for peaceful purposes without at the same time acquiring a nuclearweapon capability. This view has been repeatedly put forward by the delegation of Pakistan also, here, in the Committee on Disarmament and elsewhere. 52. To conclude, I wish to repeat the appeal that the Netherlands Minister for Foreign Affairs made on 26 September. He said: *“We have received repeated assurances from both India and Pakistan on the peaceful nature of their nuclear programmes. While understanding their economic need for energy, I would urge and invite the two countries to confirm these assurances by becoming parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty or by agreeing on all the necessary safeguard and guarantee. measures which would eventually turn cuth Asia into a zone free of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.”’ [Ibid, para. 100.]
Mr. Pham Ngac VNM Viet Nam #6583
My delegation supports the establishment of zones of peace and nuclear-free zones in general. However, we are of the view that the establishment of such zones must have the agreement of the countries in the region and can in no way be imposed upon them, especially if they are nonaligned countries. That is why, together with many countries, my delegation could not vote today in favour of this draft resolution and abstained in the vote. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, [vory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: None. Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Guatemala, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. The draft resolution was adopted by 117 votes to none, with 24 abstentions (resolution 34[79).
The President unattributed #6586
We shail now consider the report of the First Committee on agenda item 39 [A/34/ 749]. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolutions A and B, appearing under the title ‘‘Implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace’’, recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of draft resolutions A and B is contained in document A/34/8 10. 56. We shall vote first on draft resolution A. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: None. Abstaining: Belgium, Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, France, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Mongolia, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Draft resolution A was adopted by 117 votes to none, with 23 abstentions (resolution 34/80 A).
Vote: A/34/809 Recorded Vote
✓ 96   ✗ 2   40 abs.
Show country votes
✗ No (2)
✓ Yes (96)
The President unattributed #6588
We now turn to draft resolution B. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Reublic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, inland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan,Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Re- Against: None. Abstaining: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Draft resolution B was adopted by126 votes to none, with 14 abstentions (resolution 34/80 B).
The President unattributed #6590
We now turn to the report of the First Committee on agenda item 40 [A/34/750]. The draft resolution entitled ‘World Disarmament Conference’’, recommended in paragraph 7 of the report, was adopted without a vote in the First Committee. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 34/81).
The President unattributed #6592
The Assembly will now consider the report of the First Committee on agenda item 41 [A/34/751]. The draft resolution entitled ‘‘United Nations Conference on Prohibition or Restrictions of Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminatory Effects’, recommended by the First Committee, is contained in paragraph 8 of its report. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution appears in document A/34/811. The First Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 34/82).
Vote: A/34/747] Recorded Vote
✓ 112   ✗ 16   14 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (116)
The President unattributed #6594
The General Assembly will now consider the report of the First Committee on agenda item 42 [A/34/752]. The Assembly will now take a decision on the 13 draft resolutions recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 38 of its report, which appear together under the title ‘Review of the implementation of the recommendations and decisions adopted by the General Assembly at its tenth special session’. 61. Draft resolution A, entitled ‘‘Disarmament and international security’’, was adopted by the First Committee without a vote. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to do likewise? Draft resolution A was adopted (resolution 34/83 A).
The President unattributed #6597
We now turu to draft resolution B, entitled ‘‘Report of the Committee on Disarmament’’. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Kampuchea, Demo- United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: None. Abstaining: Afghanistan, Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United States of America. Draft resolution B was adopted by 130 votes to none, with 11 abstentions (resolution 34/83 B).
The President unattributed #6599
We now turn to draft resolution C, entitled ‘‘Implementation of the recommendations and decisions of the tenth special session’. The First Committee adopted it without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft resolution C was adopted (resolution 34/83 C).
The President unattributed #6601
Draft resolution D is entitled ‘*United Nations programme of fellowships on disarmament’’. The First Committee adopted draft resolution D without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft resolution D was adopted (resolution 34/83 D).
Vote: 34/81 Consensus
The President unattributed #6603
We now turn to draft resolution E, entitled ‘‘Monitoring of disarmament agreements and strengthening of international security’’. The report of the Fifth Committee on administrative and financial implications of this draft resolution is contained in document A/34/812. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Kampuchea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Finland, France, ambia. Against: None. Abstaining: Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Reublic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet ocialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United States of America, Viet Nam. Draft resolution E was adopted by 124 votes to none, with 11 abstentions (resolution 34/83 E).3
The President unattributed #6605
Draft resolution F is entitled **Freezing and reduction of military budgets’. A separate vote has been requested on the fourth preambular paragraph. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea- Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of . 3 The delegations of Iraq, Israel and the Netherlands subsequently informed the Secretariat that they wished to have their vote recorded Against: None. Abstaining: Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Yugoslavia. The fourth preambular paragraph was adopted by 127 votes to none with 10 abstentions.
The President unattributed #6607
A separate vote has been requested also on operative paragraph 2 of draft resolution F. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea- Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, In-* donesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: None. Abstaining: Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Operative paragraph 2 was adopted by 127 votes to none, with 9 abstentions.
The President unattributed #6608
May I now take it that the General Assembly wishes to adopt draft resolution F, as a whole, without a vote? Draft resolution F, as a whole, was adopted (resolution 34/83 F).
The President unattributed #6610
Draft resolution G is entitled *‘Non-use of nuclear weapons and prevention of nuclear war’’. A recorded vote has been requested. Against: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Israel, Japan, Mongolia, Poland, Spain, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Draft resolution G was adopted by 112 votes to 16, with 14 abstentions (resolution 34/83 G).
Vote: 57/60 Consensus
The President unattributed #6613
We shall now turn to draft resolution H, entitled ‘‘Report of the Disarmament Commission’’. The First Committee adopted draft resolution H without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft resolution H was adopted (resolution 34/83 H).
The President unattributed #6616
We now turn to draft resolution I, entitled ‘‘Disarmament Week’’. The First Committee adopted draft resolution I without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 34/83 I).
Vote: 57/61 Consensus
The President unattributed #6617
We now turn to draft resolution J, entitled ‘‘Nuclear weapons in all aspects’*. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanisten, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Com- Againsi: France, United States of America. Abstaining: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.* Draft resolution J was adopted by 120 votes to 2, with 19 abstentions (resolution 34/83 J).
The President unattributed #6618
I call on the representative of Morocco for an explanation of vote after the vote.
Mr. Cherkaoui MAR Morocco [French] #6619
My delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution that has just been adopted. In so doing, it wishes to pay a tribute to the spirit of understanding and flexibility shown by the authors of this text and the points of view that were expressed in the course of consultations with the Group of 215 of the Committee on Disarmament. My country, which has never been of the opinion that the participation of all the nuclear Powers should be a sine qua non for any nuclear negotiations, interprets the phrase ‘‘with the participation of ail nuclear-weapon States’’ in operative paragraph 2 as expressing a hope, and not a condition that must be met before the beginning of the negotiations referred to in the resolution.
The President unattributed #6621
Next, we turn to draft resolution K, entitled ‘‘Study on the relationship between disarmament and development’’. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of this draft resolution is contained in document A/34/812. The First Committee adopted draft resolution K without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft resolution K was adopted (resolution 34/83 K). * The delegation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wished. to have its vote recorded as having been against the draft resolution. * Composed of the following countries: Algeria, Argentina. Brazil, Burma, Cuba, Egypt. Ethiopia. India. Indonesia, Iran. Kenya. Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan. Peru. Sri Lanka, Sweden, Venezuela, Yugoslavia and Zaire. sider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft resolution L was adopted (resolution 34/83 Z).
The President unattributed #6623
Draft resolution M is entitled ‘*Programme of research and studies on disarmament’’. May I take it that the General Assembly adopts this draft resolution? Draft resolution M was adopted (resolution 34/83 M).
The President unattributed #6626
Finally, we come to the draft decision contained in paragraph 39 of the report 0: the First Committee [4/24/752]. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft decision is contained in document A/34/812. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti. Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netheriands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Parauay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, amoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Repubiic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ugan a, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, er Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Resublic, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Repubic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Abstaining: France, Portugal, United Kingdom of Great, Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. The draft decision was adopted by 126 votes to 9, with 4 abstentions.
The President unattributed #6628
We now turn to the report of the First Committee on agenda item 43 [A/34/753]. I invite members to turn their attention to the draft resolution entitled ‘Strengthening of guarantees of the A recorded vote was taken. In favour; Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Re- Public, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, ganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against; Albania, Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bhutan, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom of Great. ritain and Northern Ireland, United States of merica. The draft resolution was adopted by 114 votes to 1, with 25 abstentions (resolution 34/84).
The President unattributed #6630
We now tum to the report of the First Committee on agenda item 44 [A/34/754]. The Assembly will now take a decision on the two draft resolutions recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 10 of its report. The Assembiy will vote first on draft resolution I, entitled ‘‘Conclusivn of an international convention to assure the non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons’’. A recorded vote has been requested. A revorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Buigaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cypmus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Against: None. Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bhutan, Denmark, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan. Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Draft resolution I was adopted by 120 votes to none, with 22 abstentions (resolution 34185 ).
Vote: 31/37 Consensus
The President unattributed #6632
Next, I put to the vote draft resolution II, entitled ‘‘Strengthening of the security of non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons’’. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Democratic Kampuchea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, _Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, ‘Mali, Malta, auritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, audi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: Albania. Abstaining: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina. Bhutan, Brazil, Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet ocialist Republic, Cape Verde, Congo, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Ethiopia, German Democraiic Republic, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Hungary. India, Madagascar, Mongolia, Mozambique, Niger, Poland, Sao Tome and Principe, Syrian Arab Draft resolution II was adopted by 110 votes to 1, with 29 abstentions (resolution 34/86).
The President unattributed #6633
I now call on the representative of Morocco, who wishes to explain his vote after the vote.
Mr. Cherkaoui MAR Morocco [French] #6634
In voting in favour of the two draft resolutions that have just been adopted, my delegation wishes to reiterate its position that the international action in question must take the form of a binding international instrument, in this case an international convention.
The President unattributed #6636
We shall now consider the report of the First Committee on agenda item 45 [A/34/ 753). The Assembly will now take a decision on the six dratt resolutions appearing under the title ‘‘General and complete disarmament’’ and recommended by the Committee in paragraph 18 of its report. 85. Draft resolution A is entitled ‘Conclusion of an international convention prohibiting the development, production, stockpiling and use of radiological weapons’’. Since the First Committee adopted draft resolution A without a vote, may I consider that the General Assembly also adopts draft resolution A? Draft resolution A was adopted (resolution 34|87 A).
The President unattributed #6639
Draft resolution B is entitled **Confidence-building measures’’. A separate vote has been requested on operative paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 taken together. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. in favour: Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Democratic Kampuchea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexicc, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Upper Volta, Uruguay. Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire. Zambia. Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Viet Nam. Operative paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 were adopted by 126 votes to none, with 12 abstentions.
Vote: 57/69 Consensus
The President unattributed #6643
The First Committee adopted draft resolution B as a whole without a vote. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to do ikewise? Draft resolution B as a whole was adopted (resolution 34/87 B).
The President unattributed #6646
We now turn to draft resolution C, entitled ‘‘Non-stationing of nuclear weapons on the territories of States where there are no such weapons at present’. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua,New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Camercon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen. Against: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Abstaining: Algeria, Angola, Austria, Benin, Brazil, Burma, Congo, Cuba, Ghana, Ireland, Israel, Malawi, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Draft resolution C was adopted by 99 votes te 18, with 19 abstentions (resolution 34/87 C).
Vote: 57/70 Consensus
The President unattributed #6651
I cali on the representative of Morocco, who wishes to explain his vote after the vote.
The President unattributed #6654
We now turn to draft resolution D, entitled ‘‘Prohibition of the production of fissionable material for weapon purposes’’. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Democratic Kampuchea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coasi, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Repubic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Abstaining: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angela, Argentina, Bhutan, Brazil, Congo, Cuba, France, India, Mozambique, Viet Nam. Draft resolution D was adopted by 118 votes to 9, with 12 abstentions (resolution 34/87 Dj.
Vote: A/34/812 Recorded Vote
✓ 126   ✗ 9   4 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (124)
The President unattributed #6658
We now turn to draft resolution E, entitled ‘‘Study of the institutional arrangements relating to the process of disarmament’’. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of the draft resolution is contained in document A/34/813. A recorded vote has been requested. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Reublic, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Repubic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Abstaining: Afghanistan, Angola, Brazil, Congo, Cuba, Ivory Coast, Niger, Sierra Leone. Viet Nam. Draft resolution E was adopted by 121 votes ta 9, with 9 abstentions (resolution 34187 E).
The President unattributed #6661
Lastly, we turn to draft resolution F, er.titled ‘‘Strategic Arms Limitation Talks’. A separate vote has been requested on operative paragraph 2. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad Chile, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cypru: Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Dc..mark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea- Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sn Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Against: None. Abstaining: Afghanistan, Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United States of America. Operative paragraph 2 was adopted by 128 votes to none, with 12 abstentions.
The President unattributed #6663
The First Committee adopted draft resolution F, as a whole, without a vote, May I consider, that the General Assembly wishes to do ikewise? Draft resolution F, as a whole, was adopted (resolution 34/87 F).
The President unattributed #6667
We will now consider the re- P61 of the First Committee on agenda item 120 [A/34/
Vote: 32/132 Recorded Vote
✓ 110   ✗ 1   29 abs.
Show country votes
✗ No (1)
✓ Yes (108)
Mr. Kochubey UKR Ukraine [Russian] #6671
In the First Committee we indicated that we had joined the sponsors of the draft resolution. That is not appropriately reflected in the summary record. I wish that to be corrected and the record to show that my country is a sponsor of this draft resolution.
The President unattributed #6674
The record will reflect the remarks of the representative of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. 98. The Assembly will now vote on the draft resolution entitled ‘“‘Adoption of a declaration on international co operation for disarmament’’, recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour’ Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast? Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya,* Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libesia, Liban Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, aldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Reublic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, ganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Against: None. Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom ofGreat Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Zaire. The draft resolution was adopted by 116 votes to none, with 27 abstentions (resolution 34/88).
The President unattributed #6677
I shail now call upon those representatives wishing to explain their vote after the vote.
Mr. Mendez-Montenegro GTM Guatemala [Spanish] #6685
The delegation of Guatemala wishes to explain its vote in favour of the draft resolution in document A/34/756 on the adoption of a declaration on international co-operation for disarman:snt. 101. In the First Committee we abstained in the vote on the drafi resolution. My delegation has now voted in favour of the draft because we accept the principles and pu.poses of the draft resolution. However, we wish to place on record cur reservations on section IV of the operative part as regards the reference to means at the end of operative paragraph 2, because this signifies authorization by an Organization created. for the maintenance of peace, security and the peaceful settlement of disputes, of the use of force.
Mr. Rahhali MAR Morocco [French] #6688
The delegation of Morocco abstained in the vote of the draft resolution on the adoption of a declaration on international co-operation for disarmament. I wish to say that my country firmly supports any initiative designed to promote concerted efforts and international co-operation for the implementation of the decisions and recommendations of the first special session of the General Assembly to be devoied to disarmament. Morocco agrees with most of the elements contained in the draft declaration that has just been adopted. For that reason we wish to pay a tribute to the delegation of Czechoslovakia for its praiseworthy efforts. However, my delegation, was unable to vote in favour of the draft or the following reasons. 103. First, my delegation considers that in principle the drafting of a declaration of such importance and of such wide-ranging scope as the Czechoslovak text requires careful preparation, and at this stage we wish to recall the manner in which important declarations have been drafted in the past—for example, the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning F riendly Relations and_Co-operation among States im accordance with the Charter of the United Nations {resolution 2625 _(XXV), annex] and the Declaration contained in the Final Document of the tenth special session of the General Assembly, devoted to disarmament [resolution S-10/2, sect. I]. 104. Secondly, my delegation considers it preferable and indeed necessary for such a declaration to be adopted bv consensus. 106. Interrational cooperation in the field of disarmament, just as in other fields of international life, is a uestion of primary importance. The strengthening and eepening of that co-operation, which is the purpose of the Declaration just adopted, is the basic prerequisite for progress. If the international community does not embrace the task of mutual beneficial active cooperation in the field of disarmament it may go too far along the road of continuing armaments and dangerous military confrontation, The Deciaration should therefore serve as a political and moral code of international co-operation in the field of disarmament. Its purpose is to be an effective instrument that will assist States in unifying theiz efforts for the solution of the pressing problems of disarmament and in finding common approaches to the achievement of that objective in a constructive spirit and on the basis of the political principles of mutual co-operation. 107. That basic idea, which was the intent behind and a starting-point for the elaboration of the Declaration, was expressed on 1 May 1979 by the President of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, Gustdy Husdk. The idea was also an expression of the peaceful aspirations of our people, which, like other European peoples, experienced the immense suffering and disruption of two world wars. It was also a reflection of the firm and consistent policy of peace pursued by my country, which, as was this year emphasized before the Assembly by the Czechcslovak Foreign Minister, Bohuslav Chrioupek, has ‘no aspiration other than to continue consistent along the road of peaceful, dynamic policies on which we have started, to open up new horizons of broad international co-operation, to direct people towards what brings them closer together, and away from what divides them, and to overcome patiently the Somes among peoples. . . ”’ [10th meeting, para. hat is why_we are also deeply concerned by the fact that, instead of the needed Progress in disabmament, new programmes of increased armaments arise in direct contradiction of all the peace efforts of the international community. These very plans could in fact throw doubt on the seriousness of the peace efforts exerted by the United Nations, and on the authority of the Final Document of the tenth special session of the General Assembly, devoted_to disarmament. Therefore any steps taken by the United Nations in support of the aims of disarmament cannot, as sometimes happens, be described as superfluous. 108. The elaboration and adoption of the Declaration on International Co-operation for Disarmament is an important positive result of a long-term process of negotiation in which the decisive role has been played by the constructive approach and understanding of the overwhelming majorit of States Members of this Cranization. The Czechoslovak delegation would like rst of all to express its high appreciation and gratitude to all those delegations that sponsored the Declaration in the olitical and security Committee of the General Assembly, inspired by thé same concern, views and 109. Equally, we want to express our genuine ratitude to.our closest allies and friends, the countries of the socialist community, for their full and unequivocal support for the Declaration during the whole process of its elaboration and adoption. 110, Our sincere thanks go to all the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America that supported the Declaration in the true spirit of the traditional mutual solidarity and cg-operation. Specifically, we are grateful to the non-aligned countries, whosé valuable assistance and support played an important positive role in the draftin ofthe Declaration. P P 8 111. We should like to believe that the countries of the Western group, on whose positions depends to a large degree the possibility of progress in the field of disarmament, also understand the principal purpose of the Declaration just adopted, despite their possible reservations of some of its provisions. 112. The important idea of constructive international co-operation among States for the achievement of the aims of disarmament has found appropriate expression in the Declaration. We trust that this positive step will facilitate the achievement of the necessary progress and will contribute to intensive negotiations and to the gradual attainment of the objectives of real disarmament set out in the Programme of Action at last year’s tenth special session of the General Assembly, which was devoted to disarmament [resolution $-10/2, sect. IT]. The next special session, to be held in 1982, will provide the first measure of progress reached along this
The President unattributed #6691
I thank the delegation of Czechoslovakia for the timely initiative it took leading to the adoption of this important comprehensive Declaration. We shall now consider the report of the First Committee on agenda item 121 [A/34/757]. The Assembly will now take up the draft resolution entitled ‘‘Israeli nuclear armament’’, recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. In explanation of vote before the vote, I call on the representative of Israel. I first call on the representative of Kuwait on a point of order.
Mr. Imam KWT Kuwait #6697
Mr. President, you reminded us at the beginning of the meeting that those representatives who explained their vote in the Committee could not do so in the plenary meeting, unless they wished to change their vote. Could you ascertain whether the representative of Israel wishes to change his vote or whether his purpose is to disregard the ruling of the General Assembly.
The President unattributed #6703
I wish to point out to the representative of Kuwait that the General Assembly has not adopted a firm decision. It has adopted a recommendation tn that regard. It ha: appealed to delegations as far as possible not to explain their vote in the Committee and in the plenary meeting on the same item. This, however, does not exclude the possibility of any delegation, or a number of delegations, explaining their vote on the same item both in the Committee and in the
Mr. Blum ISR Israel #6707
I should like to say, ona point of clarification, that my delegation did not explain its vote in the Committee. The draft resolution contained in document A/34/757, though draped in sheep’s clothing, is a continuation of the Iraqi initiative of a year ago. That initiative was criticized by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute [SJP2J] and was adopted with manifest reluctance at the thirty-third session of the General Assembly. 117. By abandoning mention of conventional weapons and by accusing Israel of either trying to acquire or of possessing a nuclear capability, Iraq has now shifted into a safer area of siander, where it can offer hearsay, rumour and speculation as “‘irrefutable evidence’’. The draft resolution does precisely this in its first preambular paragraph. 118. No ‘“‘increasing information and evidence’ whatsoever has been produced to substantiate the sponsor’s allegation that Israel is “aiming at the acquisition and deve'apment of nuclear weapons’’. Indeed, attention is being deliberately diverted from the very real efforts being made by Iraq, Libya and Pakistan to establish a nuclear axis. ; 119. The condemnation of Israel in operative paragraph 4 is thus based on an empty allegation which as not been proved, except perhaps to the satisfaction of Iraq and its allies. 120. Other operative paragraphs articularl paragraph 3, single out israbl fee special exhortations and treatment. Israel has enumerated in the First Committee a long list of 87 Member States of the United Nations which, in one way or another, are in the same position as Israel. Operative paragraph 3 of this draft resolution, therefore, discriminates clearly against Israel, instead of addressing its call to the majority of Member States of this Organization. 121. The hypocrisy contained in this draft resolution reaches its height in the list of the sponsors, the majority of whom do not comply and have no intention of complying with what Israel is called upon to comply with. 122. Operative paragraphs 6 and 7 underwrite the continuation of the injustice of singling Israel out. The Secretary-General is requested to establish a study group to Prepare a study of Israel's ‘‘nuclear armament’’ and only Israel’s, without regard to that of any other country, and then to report to the next session of the General Assembly and to the one after that, the thirty-sixth session. To make matters worse, an impartial study has been rendered impossible by the prejudicial language of the terms of reference under which the study in question is to be prepared, As if that were not enough, over a quarter of a million dollars from the United Nations’ overstretched budget is to be wasted on this wholiy unwarranted project, when real humanitarian and social needs have had to go unattended. 123. Israel wishes to take this opportunity of reaffirming our consciousness of the danger to the survival of mankind presented by the existence and proliferation of nuclear weapons. Hence, Israel remains faithful to 124. Evensince the problem of nuclear armament was raised at the United Nations, Israel has consistently supported resolutions with that aim. Thus, in 1968, Israel voted in favour of General Assembly resolution 2373 (XXII) in the matter of the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. We supported that resolution in the belief that practical and satisfactory solutions would be found for the prevention of nuclear weapons proliferation. 125. As far_as Israel is concerned, direct negotiations with the participation of all the States in the Middle East region could commence without pre-conditions at any time and in any place. Such negotiations could contribute significantly to the implementation of a process leading to the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East in the manner by which the Tlateloico Treaty for Latin America was achieved.” 126. In this connexion, it should be noted that in a recent vote in the First Committee on another nuclearweapon-free zone, a significant group of States abstained on the ground that ‘‘insufficient consultations have taken place among the countries’’ of the region concerned. As one of the representatives explained in that Committee on 21 November 1979, his country’s abstention was in line with the ‘‘basic approach that initiatives and decisions on nuclear-weapon-free zones cannot be taken against the will of the States directly concerned but must be freely and voluntarily pursued by all of them’’. 127. Inthe Middle East today, two parallel processes are taking place—peace-making and warmongering. These processes have distinct ramifications with regard to disarmament in the region. 128. On the one hand, there is an ominous threat to peace in the region in the frenetic arms build-up by the ‘rejectionist’’ Arab States. The “‘Eastern Front” alone Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and_other Arab Gulf States—created by those reiectionist States, is at present equivalent to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] in terms of manpower and tanks, and already possesses twice as much artillery as NATO. The staggering number of petrodollars accumulated by certain Middle Eastern countries has become a significant and an independent factor, with a momentum of its own, which both accelerates and escalates the arms race. 129. On the other hand, during the last 12 months, we have witnessed an historic breakthrough in the Arab- Israel conflict with the signing of the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty.2 As the current SIPRI Yearbook points out, there is a self-evident link between that Treaty and the reduction of the military budgets of Israel and Egypt. For its part, Israel, in 1978, reduced its military budget by 23 per cent. In these circumstances, we regret that these significant measures contributing to confidencebuilding in the Middle East have not been reciprocated by other Arab States. We also regret that the First Committee, devoted as it is to the cause of disarmament, did not take the opportunity of commending the 7 Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America. United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 634, No. 9068, p. 326. 8 Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel. sioned at Washineton on 26 March 1979. 130. The draft resolution before us now is intended to exploit, for partisan and belligerent ends, the genuine concern felt by various States about the proliferation of nuclear weapons. At its root, however, it is in reality nothing but a4 vehicle for the continuation of the anti- Israel political warfare conducted by the Arab States and their supporters at the United Nations. Consequently, the draft is in flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and all it stands for, since it turns the Organization against its very raison d’étre, namely, the promotion of international peace. Israel will, therefore, vote against this draft resolution and treat it with the disdain it deserves. *
The President unattributed #6709
The Assembly will now vote on the draft resolution entitled ‘‘Israeli nuclear armament,’ recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 7 of its report [A/34/757]. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of the draft resolution is contained in document A/34/814. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Chad, China, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: Belgium, Denmark, Guatemala, Honduras, Iceland, Israel, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, United States of America. Abstaining: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bolivia, Burma, Canada, Central African Republic, Chile, Cosia Rica, Dominican Republic, Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Haiti, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Liberia, Malawi, Nepal, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Portugal, Samoa, Singapore, Spain, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Upper Volta, Uruguay. The draft resolution was adopted by 97 votes to 10, with 38 abstentions (resolution 34/89).
The President unattributed #6712
A number of representatives have asked to be allowed to exercise the right of reply. the time used for this purpose. I should also like to remind them of another decision by the General Assembly that any subsequent statement should be limited to five minutes. I intend to apply those decisions strictly.
Mr. Pojani ALB Albania #6720
The delegation of the People’s Socialist Republic of Albania expressed its viewpoint on disarmament problems in the course of the debate that took place in the First Committee during October and November last year. Now that the pertinent resciutions have been adopted by the General Assembly and with your permission, Mr. President, the Albanian delegation considers it necessary to present briefly some o% the reasons and considerations by which it was led during the vote. 134. First ofall, we should like to point out, as we did in the First Committee, that we have voted in favour of the draft resolution on Israeli nuclear armament contained in document A/34/757, and bv this vote we wish to reiterate the stand of our country in condemning the warmongering policy and activities of Israel. We condemn that country’s aims and efforts to strengthen its war machine and intensify its preparations for new aggression against the Arab countries. We consider that the efforts of the Israeli Zionists in the field of nuclear armament further increase the dangers to peace and international security. 135. The Albanian delegation would like at the same time to express its strong condemnation of the activities of the racist régime of South Africa in the field of nuclear armament. The nuclear programme of the Pretoria régime is a great danger to peace and security in Africa and in the entire world. The Albanian delegation also condemns the collaboration of the imperialist Powers with, and their aid to the racists of South Africa in carrying out their nuclear programme. 142. It is for the same reasons that we should like to state that our delegation did not join the consensus ona number of resolutions adopted today. 136. We deem it necessary to state at the same time that the Albanian delegation has not participated in the vote on draft resolution A—on the Implementation of the Declaration on the Denuclearization of Africa— contained in document A/34/745 and this is in line with our stand on all resolutions concerning the creation of the so-called nuclear-weapon-free zones in various parts of the world. As we have made clear on other occasions, the Albanian delegation does not participate in the voting on such resolutions. We hold that the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones does not remove the danger posed by nuclear weapons. That idea has been and is being used by the imperialist super-Powers to create the false impression that peoples can be safe, provided they participate in the formation of a so-called nuclear-weapon-free zone. This is despite the fact that imperialists and social-imperialists—the most dangerous enemies of the people—reserve nuclear weapons for themselves and exercise pressure and blackmail through them. 137. The Albanian delegation would like to place on record our stand regarding draft resolution F in document A/34/755 on strategic arms limitation talks. Albania should not be considered as having taken part in the consensus on this issue. Our delegation cannot go along with the ‘‘satisfaction’’ expressed in this resolution regarding the demagogic statements of the two super-Powers, the United States and the Soviet Union, about their alleged readiness to reduce the existing 138. We have voted against the draft resolution on the conclusion of an international convention on the strengthening of guarantees of security to non-nuclearweapons States, contained in document A/34/753, because we do not believe that suggestions made in that draft resolution will remove or reduce the dangers posed by the nuclear weapons and the policies of the super-Powers for the non-nuclear-weapon States. 139. For the same reason, we have voted against the draft resolution presented by the United States and contained in document A/34/754. We consider that these two resolutions aim at legalizing nuclear blackmail on the part of the two super-Powers against nonnuclear-weapon States. 140. The Albanian delegation has not participated in the voting on a number of resolutions concerning disarmament. We have had the opportunity on previous occasions to explain our reasons for taking such a stand. We are of the opinion that it is quite clear by now that disarmament cannot be accomplished. by discussion and resolutions. It is an undeniable fact that the more said about disarmament and the greater the number of resolutions adopted, the more intensive the arms race grows. 141. Thus, although resolutions are constantly being adopted, the world is not moving towards disarmament. It may even be said that a number of resolutions on disarmament are used by the imperialist super- Powers to camouflage their arms race and their hegemonistic policy and preparations for war.
Mr. Nuseibeh JOR Jordan #6725
I wish to express at the outset my delegation’s deep appreciation ta_all the countries which have shown such incisive awareness of what we are talking about. But I must also confess that I am totally baffled by the attitude of some of the countries which have either voted against the draft resolution or abstained in the vote. 144. I think that not all of us realize that we are literally playing with fire. If there is one issue that poses imminent, present and continuing danger, it is Israel’s nuclearization. In my opinion—and this is in answer to the Ambassador of Israel—this question transcends politics and conflicts in the Middle East, because it has universal dimensions that concern the entire world and it may very well, some day, somehow, bring about a nuclear holocaust not only to the Middle East region and beyond but also to the entire world. 145. We are convinced that, in transferring the conceptual framework of the East-West strategic game to the Middle East, the most serious consideration must be paid to ensuring that the concept is not allowed to affect regional conditions. We are now talking about one of the most volatile and highly explosive regions of the world, which is fundamentally different and must be subject to far greater limitations and strictures. 147. Whether Israel is maintaining its ratio of capability or has indeed chosen the nuclear option and acquired its own arsenal as a means of achieving its political and strategic objectives is not the crux of the matter, even though almost all knowledgeable people are thoroughly convinced on the basis of credible evidence that it has. 148. In my statement before the 32nd meeting of the First Committee, I cited almost incontrovertible evidence derived from American intelligence, from records of the United States Congress, indeed from a statement by a former President of Israel delivered on television, and from a statement only a month ago by a very senior Israeli military official who, on a visit to South Africa, openly admitted that Israel had acquired the nuclear capability. Therefore, we are not talking ina vacuum; we are talking about reality. Indeed, our own people under occupation have been told, and one of our mayors was told by his counterpart: “If you do not agree to our conditions, we shall let loose our nuclear arsenal and let the world explode.”’ 149. Some have asked why it is that Israel has been singled out. Israel has been singled out because there is overwhelming--almost — incontrovertible-—evidence that it has acquired a nuclear arsenal. ; 150. Secondly, the Ambassador of Israel asked why the parties concerned did not come to an agreement so as to achieve denuclearization of the area. My answer is that this question pertains to the whole world; it is a universal problem and does not concern merely two, three or four parties. When we signed and ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons [resolution 2373 (XXII), annex], we did not have to negotiate with anyone, because it was a matter of universal importance to all. 151. Knowing full well that Israel has acquired a nuclear capability and is building up its arsenal, as has been proved in our discussions in the First Committee, I think that the allocation of $160,000 is a very, very small price to pay to save humanity from the horrors of a nuclear war. 152, Whatcan the world say when a great country like India, with 700 million people, is told ‘‘Do not developa nuclear capability’’, when Brazil, a great country with 150 million people, is told not to develop a nuclear capability, while Israel has been permitted—and in fact has been aided—to acquire and enhance its nuclear capability? How can we explain this double standard? 153. Alli that we ask is, to begin with, that the world community be allowed to ascertain for itself, through neutral inspection, the facts of the case. Secondly, we are requesting that there should be international inspection of Israeli nuclear installations. 154. I know that in 1967 one Israeli Mirage was shot down—and it was identified as Israeli—over the Dimona installation, because simply overflying that area was considered dangerous and an intrusion. 155. Israel has refused international inspection; Israel hac refused to ratifv the Non-Proliferation Treaty. 156. This is, in my opinion, one of the most momentous decisions that the General Assembly has taken today—and history will prove this—and we are grateful to the vast majority of this General Assembly for realizing the terrible dangers that lurk behind Israel’s acquisition of nuclear capability.
Mr. Bafi IRQ Iraq [Arabic] #6729
We are now certain that Israel possesses the nuclear weapon and that it chose that weapon as being essential for the execution of its aggressive and expansionist policy—a policy of occupation of Palestine and of the territories of three neighbouring Arab States, in contravention of the resolutions of the United Nations which call for the withdrawal of Israel from those territories. We need not repeat here the highly specific information that was submitted by the representative of Iraq in the course of the discussion of this item in the First Committee. Iraq and the 38 other countries which submitted this draft resolution wish to eliminate the danger of nuclear arms from the region of the Middle East, and this is why those States have introduced the draft resolution in question in the First Committee, hoping that the other States would understand the noble aims they sought. In that connexion, the delegation of Iraq, on behalf of the sponsors of that draft resolution, warmly thanks all the States which supported it in the conviction that the draft resolution contains valid material and because of their profound understanding of the objectives of the United Nations in the field of disarmament and particularly nuclear disarmament. - 158. As for the countries which abstained during the vote, we feel that that shows a positive and not a negative attitude.
Mr. Burwin LBY Libya #6730
1 should like to apologize for speaking at this late hour, but I think that it is necessary to express certain truths clearly. 160. Co-operation between Libya and Pakistan in the nuclear field is devoted to peaceful activities and Libya has signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. 161. Qn the other hand, co-operation between Israel and South Africa in the nuclear field and their acquisition of uranium, by legal or by illegal means, is well known. If Israel is right, why does the Israeli representative fear studies on its nuclear armament? As regards military budgets and quantities of arms, I wish to state that the quantities which are at the disposal of the Zionist entity, which only has 3 million inhabitants, go well beyond the armaments of many countries with populations of more than 50 million inhabitants. 162. In this connexion, the Israeli newspaper Davar stated on 24 July 1978 the following: ‘*The American arms control agency has stated that between 1967 and 1976 Israel was the second largest importer of arms in the world. It has also stated that, in 1976, 38 per cent of the gross national product of Israel was devoted to armaments. The share for security in the Israeli budget in 1967 reached 40 per cent of governmental expenditures. 163. The Israeli newspaper Al Hamismar quoted Shimon Peres on 3 May 1977 as saying that the available Israeli armaments far exceeded Israel’s immediate needs. While giving his approval to the criticisms expressed, he could not ignore the strong efforts made over the last three years to double the number of military personnel. Thus, the human potential was increased by 40 per cent, the number of tanks has been increased by 50 per cent and the air and naval forces have increased by 55 per cent. 164. The difference between Israel and the other countries of the third world is that Israel, by various means, is obtaining Brea quantities of arms as gifts and aid from the United States of America. 165. The New York Times of 15 September 1979, reporting the visit of the Israeli Minister of Defence, stated: **, .. the Administration last year agreed to sell Israel 75 F-16s, but the Israeli Air Force is interested in replacing its entire force of older American F-4 jets in the 1990s.’”? 166. No mention is made of denuclearized zones and they have not yet been created, in certain regions of South Asia, for example. As for the Peace Treaty between Israel and Egypt, it did not bring peace. On the contrary, it has contributed to making the problem more complex, contravenes the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences, the Islamic Conference and the United Nations, and has been condemned at all levels, and most recently by the General Assembly. 167. The representative of the Zionist entity has just told us that he was going to deal with this resolution with the contempt that it deserves. This is not surprising, because we are accustomed to that entity’s contempt for the resolutions of the United Nations. The time has come to apply sanctions against all those who do not respect the will of the international community represented by the General Assembly. _ Vietnamese combat pilots to strengthen the Iraqi Air
Mr. Blum ISR Israel #6734
It is not surprising that the representative of Iraq, leading the Arab rejection:st troika—Libya, Syria and Iraq—has bellowed forth allegations of an Israeli arms build-up. What better way exists to divert members’ attention from the fact that $48 billion has been spent on arms by Arab States since 1973? The most dramatic build-up, according to the New York Times of 4 March 1979, has been by three of the so-called rejectionist Arab States, Syria, Iraq and Libya, all of which refuse to negotiate with Israel. 169. Indeed, Iraq has set out to become the strongest military Power in western Asia. In this context it has been looking for ways to extend its spheres of influence. In the first place, Iraq seeks hegemony in the Arab world. It will be recalled in this respect that Iraq walked out of the Summit Conference of the National Front for Steadfastness and Confrontation, held at Tripoli in December 1977, insisting on even more extreme action. Iraq’s inter-Arab ambitions came a step closer to realization when a year later, in November 1978, the Baghdad Conference of rejectionist Arab States set out its objectives in its struggle against peace in the Middle East. Secondly, Iraq seeks to dominate the Eastern Front, a military alliance of Arab rejectionist States 170._ In this context, members may recall an amusing incident that happened this summer. In the midst of the pasoline shortage, when New Yorkers were waiting in ong lines to fill their tanks, none other than Iraq called for an urgent meeting of the United Nations Committee on. Relations with the Host Country to air its special grievance. I refer to document A/AC. 154/180, of 6 July 1979. When the meeting was summoned, the representative of Iraq complained that the gasoline shortage wes affecting the work of his Mission. The Deputy Permanent Representative of Iraq, representing a leading radical among oil producers, therefore requested special treatment for his diplomats. One of his suggestions was to allow Mission vehicles the right to go directly to the head of any gas line. Perhaps the tradi delegation should have arranged to send an oil tan er directly from the Persian Gulf for its own individual use. 171. In order to realize its ambitions, Iraq has since 1973 embarked on a road of arms acquisition on a scale affordable only by countries which can barter oil for arms. The military balance reports of 1978-1979. published by the International Institute of Strategic tudies in London, records a 25 per cent increase in Iraq’s military budget. The New York Times elaborated on this huge increase in military expenditure in its report of 4 March 1979. There we learn that Iraq has doubled both its. ground and air forces, increased its anti-aircraft missile batteries from 3 to 50 and virtually tripled its helicopter fleet. Moreover, a Reuters report of 31 October 1979 gives cause for even greater concern. The report informs us of the decision to send 75 Force in return for a loan of $70 million. 172. Iraq’s army and armament constitute today the backbone of the Eastern Front against Israel. The Iraqi navy, too, has undergone considerable expansion. The Christian Science Monitor recently quoted reliable diplomatic sources to the effect that iraq is determined to assert itself as a dominant Power in the oil-rich Persian Gulf and has begun doubling the size of its navy. 173. It is not surprising that Iraq should take the lead in making allegations concerning Israel’s armament. It is, after all, a thinly veiled effort to conceal the fact that much of the world’s latest and most sophisticated weaponry makes its debut in the Middle East in the bottomless arsenals of the Iraqi army. 174. Libya has leapt into this debate. Libya is reported by SIPRI to be the largest importer of arms in North Africa. Only recently, the Washington Post of 30 July 1979 noted the sale of arms in the value of more than $1 billion to Libya by the Soviet Union. Such arms transactions continue despite the fact that Libya’s army is unable to absorb and integrate these huge arsenals of sophisticated weapons. None the less, those weapons do not lie idiy around. Some 3,000 Soviet military advisers and technicians, as well as North Korean pilots and maintenance personnel. are renorted hv the New York 175. In view of the formidable quantities of arms deployed in Libya and the way in which they have been used, the remonstrances of that country’s representative must be taken with a grain of salt, to say the least. This vast accumulation of the most sophisticated instruments of death best explains Colonel Al Qadaffi’s boast that the Libyans—and I am quoting from a Libyan news agency release of 8 October 1977—‘‘are a people that goes to war as easily as it goes to a party’’. 176. The representative of the Palestinian Arab State of Jordan reminded us of the danger of flames that could erupt in our region. I invite him to remove the blinkers from his eyes to look around in all directions in the Middle East and to ascertain for himself where these dangers and these flames emanate from.
Mr. Naik PAK Pakistan #6735
In the statement that the representative of Israel made earlier, before the adoptioa of the resolution on agenda item [21, he referred to what he described as a ‘‘nuclear axis’? between Iraq, Libya and Pakistan. I have asked to be allowed to spe in order to reject categorically this baseless assertion. It is evidently a clumsy attempt on the part of the Israeli representative to divert the attention of the world community from his country’s nuclear weapons programme. {78. Itake this opportunity to declare once again that Pakistan’s nuclear programme is entirely for peaceful purposes. It is based on entirely indigenous financial resources and is not dependent on external financing or assistance. 179. In conclusion, Pakistan's commitment to the cause of nuclear non-proliferation is second to none, and indeed my delegation is grateful to the members of the General Assembly who just a few minutes ago gave overwhelming support to the initiative that Pakistan has been taking on behalf of the cause of nuclear nonproliferation in South Asia and in our region.
Mr. Nuseibeh JOR Jordan #6738
I started my statement in the exercise of my right of reply by saying that the subject matter before us far transcends politics or regional conflicts. The representative of occupied Palestine has tried to divert the attention of the General Assembly to irrelevant issues and, even on that score, he was totally inaccurate. 181. According to all credible reports which we, and i am sure my colleagues, read and which the Israelis do not deny, Israel’s military capability in the conventional weapons field is now such that it is able to cope with the combined forces of all the Arab States. The 3 million Israelis are in a position, according to the claim made by monitoring experts, to deal with and to overcome the combined forces of the whole Arab world. At any rate, his statement is a purely diversionary one. Is it not enough that the representative of occupied Palestine should not only not repent of having uprooted 182. I hope that this General Assembly will realize what a dangerous and serious situation we are facing today when this nuclear danger hovers over our heads. If the Israelis are thinking in terms of another Masada, which involved between 100 and 200 people, they should realize that we are now talking in terms of 100 million to 200 million—if not several hundred million— victims of a nuclear holocaust, and this problem that I have referred to is one of the issues of paramount importance that the General Assembly has confronted and tackled during this current session. 183. They are still continuing to uproot our people. They are seizing the lands on even the occupied West Bank and in Gaza, which are only a tiny portion of occupied Palestine, and yet the Israelis claim that they are trying to bring about peace. We have done everything in our power to bring about peace in accordance with United Nations resolutions, but not the peace of the grave, not the peace that comes from having an entire population driven out of its country to live in the wilderness of nowhere. 184. That is no peace. 'f they want surrender, we will never surrender. We shall regain our legitimate rights and return to our country, and the nuclear capability that Israel has acquired to prevent the redemption of our rights is not going to prevent us from regaining those legitimate rights in our ancestral homeland.
Mr. Bafi IRQ Iraq [Arabic] #6742
The allegations of the Zionist entity, in its continuing attempt to include in the debate subjects which are not part of the item—Israeli nuclear armament—are well own. 186. The international community has condemned the Zionist entity because it has repressed the Palestinian people and prevented it from returning to its homeland, despite the United Nations resolutions recognizing its right to self-determination and to the establishment of an independent State, the latest of which is resolution 34/65 A, adopted by the General Assembly on 29 November last. 187. It is the Zionist entity, and not Iraq, which is condemned by the overwhelming majority of the international community, because Israel continues to refuse to withdraw from the occupied Palestinian and other occupied Arab territories.
Mr. Blum unattributed #6748
The Iraqi representative has again attempted to divert attention from his country’s frenetic armaments race. The Iraqi army has since 1973 undergone the most impressive expansion of all the Arab armies, and now has a total of 11 combat divisions. Though Iraq has virtually unlimited access to Soviet weaponry, it too has shown a tendency to diversify its sources of supply in order to acquire Western technologies, particularly with regard to air power and anti-tank weapons, 190. The Iraqi air force has nearly doubied its numerical strength since the Yom Kippur War, through the addition of large quantities of the most sophisticated Soviet fighters and bombers, including 90 MIG-23s, Sukhoi-20s and TU-22s, which are capable of bombing targets in Israel from Iraqi air bases. According to recently published reports, negotiations are in an advanced stage with the USSR for the supply of Ilyushin- 76 transport aircraft and 36 Mirage F-1 combat aircraft have recently been purchased from France. 191. The Iraqi land forces have expanded tremendously, with the absorption of some 1,000 tanks—mostly T-62s—hundreds of armoured personnel carriers and artillery pieces, SCUD surface-to-surface missiles, a variety of night-fighting and electronic warfare equipment and an advanced anti-tank system based on MI- LAN and HOT missiles, some mounted on French Panhard armoured personnel carriers and others on French Gazelle helicopters. Negotiations are in progress with the Soviet Union for the delivery of T-72 tanks and other sophisticated items. 192. The Iraqi potential for dispatchirg an expeditionary force to Israel's north-eastern fini in time of war has doubled since the Yom Kippur War. With amodern fleet of West German tank carriers and an improved road and rail network which today links Iraq with Jordan and Syria, the Iraqis are now capable of rapidly transporting a force of some five divisions—including 1,300 tanks, hundreds of armoured personnel carriers, artillery pieces, surface-to-air missile batteries and other equipment—to the arena of battle. 193. This enormous arsenal of arms is not directed against a military alliance such as NATO or the Warsaw Pact, but against a tiny country upon which Iraq declared war over 30 years ago and to the destruction of which it has been dedicated ever since. 194. The representative of the Palestinian Arab State of Jordan, in his now customary use of vulgar language about my country and my people, has again displayed the territorial aspect of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Mr. Glaiel SYR Syrian Arab Republic #6751
I greatly admire the President’s patience and the patience of this Assembly. The representative of the Zionist entity has asked three times to be allowed to speak and this has meant that we have lost one hour on a single draft resolution, as much time as we spent on all the other draft resolutions on disarmament that we have adopted this morning. I believe therefore that I am entitled to speak for one minute. I had expected that you would have interrupted the representative of the Zionist entity when he said that he despised this draft resolution and would have prevented him from continuing to speak when he made that announcement. Some days ago, we saw a film on television entitled ‘‘Mary and Joseph”’ that was produced by an Israeli company. The film distorted Christianity and distorted the truth regarding the Virgin Mary. It is the duty of Christians to prevent Zionism from changing history.
Mr. Nuseibeh JOR Jordan #6756
On a point of order, I think I am justified in asking the Chair’s indulgence in order to reply to the extremely abusive language that was uttered by the representative of occupied Palestine.
The President unattributed #6759
The rules are the rules, and our rules provide that on any given item, representatives can only exercise the right of reply twice. You have done so, as has the representative of Israel, I am not in a position to allow any representative who has spoken twice in exercise of his right of reply to do so again. I apologize to the representative of Jordan. He knows the respect I have for him, but I must abide by the rules. i98. Mir. IMAM (Kuwait): Iam sorry to speak at this late hour, but the representative of Israel has left me no alternative. 199. ‘The representative of Israel tried to sow dissension among the Arab States by claiming that Iraq was seeking te control our part of the world. I would like to assure this Assembly that the only enemy we have in the Middie East is Israel, and that Israel’s allegations are designed merely to divert the attention of this Assembly from the issue before us, namely, the danger posed by Israel’s nuclear armament. This danger poses a threat not only to the security of the Middle East, but to the security of Africa, in view of Israel’s nuclear collaboration with South Africa, and to the security of the entire world. 200. So the least the representative of Israel can do in the future is to refrain from intervening in the domestic affairs of the Arab States. The meeting rose at 1.20 pm.
Vote: A/34/757] Recorded Vote
✓ 97   ✗ 10   38 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (97)
▶ Cite this page

UN Project. “A/34/PV.97.” UN Project, https://un-project.org/meeting/A-34-PV-97/. Accessed .