Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09USUNNEWYORK1070
2009-11-25 00:39:00
UNCLASSIFIED
USUN New York
Cable title:  

SUMMARY OF UNGA FIRST COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS:

Tags:  CD CDG KN PARM PREL UNGA 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO7710
RR RUEHSK RUEHSL
DE RUCNDT #1070/01 3290039
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 250039Z NOV 09
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 7698
INFO RUCNDSC/DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE COLLECTIVE
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 07 USUN NEW YORK 001070 

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CD CDG KN PARM PREL UNGA
SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF UNGA FIRST COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS:
INCREASED U.S. ENGAGEMENT PAYS OFF

REF: USUN 1056

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 07 USUN NEW YORK 001070

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CD CDG KN PARM PREL UNGA
SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF UNGA FIRST COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS:
INCREASED U.S. ENGAGEMENT PAYS OFF

REF: USUN 1056


1. (U) Summary: During the October 5 - November 2 session of
the UNGA First Committee (Disarmament and International
Security),the U.S. policy of active engagement on
multilateral disarmament and nonproliferation issues paid
off. The United States sought to build on the vision
President Obama articulated in his April speech in Prague,
engage resolution sponsors with a view to finding as much
common ground as possible, and reduce the number of instances
in which we voted "no" in isolation. This approach was
largely successful, as indicated by the tally below of
actions taken on First Committee resolutions. The number of
"no" votes by the United States was reduced from 23 last year
to 10, and in no case did the United States vote "no" in
isolation. Many delegations applauded the United States for
its willingness to be flexible, and engage constructively.
They welcomed that fact that the United States was again
participating actively in multilateral disarmament forums.


2. Noteworthy among the 54 resolutions the First Committee
considered was Japan's resolution on complete elimination of
nuclear weapons, on which the United States went from a "no"
vote last year to co-sponsorship this year. ASEAN states
warmly welcomed the U.S. shift from "no" to an abstention on
their resolution on the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon Free
Zone Treaty. Satisfactory but hard-fought results were
reached on resolutions on the report of the Conference on
Disarmament (CD) and the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty
(FMCT). In both cases Pakistan sought, by watering down
these resolutions, to walk back from agreement reached on the
program of work (POW) for the 2009 session of the CD, which
called for FMCT negotiations in the CD. The resolution on a
conventional Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) was among the most
contentious, but in the end the United States agreed to
support it in return for UK agreement that that ATT
negotiations would be conducted by consensus.


3. Resolutions are listed by their Secretariat draft, or "L
number." Final action on resolutions is usually taken in the
UNGA plenary about a month after the First Committee
concludes. Where a recorded vote was taken, the votes are

listed in order as yes-no-abstain. In some cases an
explanation of vote (EOV) was made. Texts of EOVs will be
posted on the U.S. Mission Geneva web site. Most of the
resolutions (33) were adopted without a vote (i.e., by
consensus). Further analysis of the trends in this year's
First Committee is provided septel. End summary.

Resolutions
--------------

L.1 - Treaty banning the production of fissile material for
nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices (FMCT).
Sponsor: Canada. Adopted by consensus. For the first time
since 2005, Canada introduced a resolution supporting
negotiation of an FMCT in the CD. Pakistan, supported by
Iran, offered numerous and repetitive amendments to weaken
the precedent established by the 2009 CD Program of Work
(contained in document CD/1864). Over nearly two months of
open-ended and bilateral consultations, a draft text
acceptable to all was finalized, and the resolution (as
orally amended) was adopted on October 29. As adopted, the
resolution will support the resumption of FMCT negotiations
in the CD, but does not significantly prioritize FMCT
negotiations over substantive treatment of the CD's other
four core issues (nuclear disarmament, Prevention of an Arms
Race in Outer Space, and negative security assurances).

L.2 - Verification in all its aspects, including the role of
the United Nations in the field of verification. Sponsor:
Canada. Adopted by consensus. Canada introduced a
"placeholder" decision on verification, which puts the issue
on the agenda of the 2011 UNFC. It was adopted without
contention.

L.3 - Establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the
Middle East. Sponsor: Egypt. Operative paragraph 3: 166
(U.S.) - 0 - 3. Resolution as a whole: consensus. This
resolution has usually passed by consensus with little
controversy, as Israel has concluded not objecting to this
resolution was a way of demonstrating its good will on this
issue, even if it did not believe such a zone was a near-term
possibility. This year, however, the Israelis decided to
take tougher position in response to developments at the IAEA
General Conference (GC) in September. After long discussions
within the Israeli government in Jerusalem and with the
United States in Washington, Israel decided to call for a
vote on operative paragraph 3, which refers to the IAEA GC
resolution on Safeguards in the Middle East. Israel (along
with the Cote d'Ivoire and India) abstained on that
paragraph, then joined the consensus on the resolution as a

USUN NEW Y 00001070 002 OF 007


whole.

L.4 - The risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.
Sponsor: Egypt. Preambular paragraph 6: 163 - 4 (U.S.) - 6.
Resolution as a whole: 164 - 5 (U.S.) - 6. As in the past,
the U.S. opposed this resolution because it singled out
Israel as the sole source of the risk of proliferation in the
Middle East, while completely neglecting such more serious
concerns as Iran and Syria. The EU and others supported the
resolution but expressed strong regrets that it did not
mention Iran.

L.5 - Assistance to States for curbing the illicit traffic in
small arms and collecting them. Sponsor: Mali for ECOWAS.
Adopted by consensus.

L.6 - Follow-up to nuclear disarmament obligations agreed to
at the 1995 and 2000 Review Conferences of the Parties to the
NPT. Sponsor: Iran. Preambular paragraph 6: 109 - 49(U.S.)
- 10. Resolution as a whole: 105 - 56 (U.S.) - 12. This
resolution gets little attention from year to year and
attracts so much opposition because it is proposed by Iran.
The U.S. again voted "no" on the resolution as a whole and on
preambular paragraph 6, which calls for universal adherence
to the NPT.

L.7 -- Review of the implementation of the Declaration on the
Strengthening of International Security. Sponsor: Indonesia
for the NAM. Adopted by consensus. This year, Indonesia
presented a non-substantive decision to include this item on
the agenda of the sixty-sixth session of the UNGA.

L.8 - Implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean
as a Zone of Peace. Sponsor: Indonesia on behalf of the
NAM. 128-3(U.S.)-44. Indonesia introduced this traditional
and unchanged resolution. The P3 continued to vote no,
without explanation, supported by a large number of
abstentions.

L.9 - Convening of the fourth special session of the General
Assembly devoted to disarmament (SSOD IV). Sponsor:
Indonesia for the NAM. Adopted by consensus. As last year,
this was a brief non-substantive decision that put the item
on the agenda for the next year.

L.10 - Relationship between disarmament and development.
Sponsor: Indonesia on behalf of the NAM. Adopted by
consensus. Indonesia introduced this traditional and
unchanged resolution. The U.S. did not participate in action
on the resolution. The P-3 delivered separate but
complementary EOVs, with the USG noting briefly that it
disagreed with the resolution's central premise that there
was a generic connection between disarmament and development.

L.11 - United Nations regional centers for peace and
disarmament. Sponsor: Indonesia for the NAM. Adopted by
consensus. There were no substantive changes to this
long-standing resolution.

L.12 - Observance of environmental norms in the drafting and
implementation of agreements on disarmament and arms control.
Sponsor: Indonesia for the NAM. Adopted by consensus. The
United States has consistently opposed this resolution as an
unnecessary burden on the process of negotiating arms control
agreements. In recent years we have shifted from a "no" vote
to allowing consensus but not participating in action on the
resolution. This year we joined consensus but made an
explanation of vote on behalf of the P-3 pointing out that
France, the United States and the United Kingdom operate
under strict domestic environmental regulations, including
for implementation of arms control agreements. The U.S. said
that the P-3 saw no direct connection, as stated in the
resolution, between general environmental standards and
multilateral arms control.

L.13 - Promotion of multilateralism in the area of
disarmament and nonproliferation. Sponsor: Indonesia for
the NAM. 126-5(U.S.)-49. This resolution continued to tout
multilateralism as "the core principle" in negotiations on
disarmament and nonproliferation. The United States again
voted "no" and was joined by the UK, Israel, Palau, and
Micronesia.

L.14 - International day against nuclear tests. Sponsor:
Kazakhstan. Adopted by consensus. This first-year
resolution proposed by Kazakhstan began as "International day
for a world free of nuclear weapons" in honor of August 29,
1991, the date Kazakhstan's nuclear test range closed. The
resolution ran into stiff opposition right from the start.
The Japanese feared domestic fallout from a date in August
other than the anniversaries of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and
August 29 happened to be the anniversary of Russia's first

USUN NEW Y 00001070 003 OF 007


nuclear test under the former USSR. The EU was divided, with
few strong supporters in the West. The Kazakhs were
reluctant to make changes since this was a personal
initiative of President Nazarbayev. Shortly before voting,
Kazakhstan issued a revision that changed the title and focus
of the resolution to "International day against nuclear
tests." By the time of the vote the Kazakhs thought they
had consensus. However, after the Kazakh head of delegation
offered an oral revision to expand "nuclear tests" to include
"explosions," India suggested new wording for operative
paragraph 1. Egypt protested the Indian edit, with both
parties finally agreeing to add "as one of the means of
achieving the goal of a nuclear free world." The resolution
then passed by consensus. (Note: There was no French
reaction to the inclusion of "a goal of a nuclear free
world", despite consistent GOF neuralgia about the phrase
throughout the First Committee process. End note.)

L.15 - Convention on the prohibition of the development,
production, and stockpiling of bacteriological (biological)
and toxin weapons and on their destruction. Sponsor:
Hungary. Adopted by consensus. Hungary continues to
sponsor this resolution, and there were no substantive
changes from last year's version. It passed by consensus.

L.16 - Convention on cluster munitions. Sponsor: Ireland.
Adopted by consensus. This non-substantive resolution
welcomed the offer of Laos to host the first meeting of
states parties to the convention and asked the
Secretary-General to undertake preparations, as called for in
the Convention, to convene the conference following the
Convention's entry into force.

L.17 - Preventing the acquisition by terrorists of
radioactive materials and sources. Sponsor: France. France
introduced a "placeholder" decision which puts the issue on
the agenda of the 2011 UNFC. It was adopted without
contention.

L.18 - Reducing nuclear danger. Sponsor: India. 113 -
50(U.S.) - 15. This Indian-sponsored resolution continues
to cross a number of U.S. redlines. There were few changes
to this year's resolution, and we were among many voting
against it.

L.19 - Measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons
of mass destruction. Sponsor: India. Adopted by consensus.
No substantive changes from last year. We continued to join
consensus and co-sponsor this Indian resolution.

L.20 - Convention on the prohibition of the use of nuclear
weapons. Sponsor: India. 116 - 50 (U.S.) - 11. Another
Indian-sponsored resolution that we are unable to support.
There were few changes to this year's version and we were
among many voting against it.

L.21 - Role of science and technology in the context of
international security and disarmament. Sponsor: India.
Adopted by consensus. The Indians told us they keep this as
a placeholder decision that puts the subject on the UNGA
agenda, but that with the passage of time they are less
inclined to pursue it as a resolution.

L.22 - United Nations center for peace, disarmament and
development in Latin America and the Caribbean. Sponsor:
Peru on behalf of GRULAC. Adopted by consensus. There were
no substantive changes to this resolution.

L.23 - Treaty on the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon Free Zone
(Bangkok Treaty). Sponsor: Thailand on behalf of ASEAN.
172-0-5(U.S.). In accordance with its instructions, USDEL
opened a dialogue with the sponsors of this resolution in an
attempt to find common ground that might justify a change in
the U.S. vote on this resolution. The sponsors made clear
that they recognized that the United States and other P-5
states (except China) continued to have problems with the
Bangkok Treaty. However, they said that they would be highly
pleased if the United States could treat this resolution as a
separate issue from the Treaty itself and shift to an
abstention from its previous "no" note. USDEL proposed
changes to the resolution, mainly intended to correct the
impression that consultations regarding the Bangkok Treaty
were ongoing when in fact they were not. ASEAN accepted the
changes and the United States abstained. The Thai
representative repeatedly expressed her gratitude for the
U.S. vote.

L.24 - Conclusion of effective international arrangements to
assure non-nuclear-weapon states against the use or threat of
use of nuclear weapons. Sponsor: Pakistan. 119-0-58(U.S.).
The sponsor made no significant changes to this resolution,
about which the United States has had serious reservations

USUN NEW Y 00001070 004 OF 007


for many years. In accordance with its instructions to seek
to avoid unnecessarily voting "no" in isolation, the United
States shifted back to its approach of several years ago of
joining the large number of abstentions and making a strong
EOV. In its EOV, USDEL pointed out that the United States
continued to believe that the resolution, among other things,
did not accurately reflect the situation in the Conference on
Disarmament (CD) on nuclear security assurances (NSAs).
Nevertheless, the United States had supported the approval of
the CD's 2009 program of work (POW) in document CD/1864.
This document called for discussion in the CD of all aspects
of NSAs, including the possibility of an international
legally binding agreement. Since the United States remained
committed to engage fully in all aspects of the CD's POW, but
could not support the draft resolution as written, we decided
to abstain.

L.25 - Prevention of an arms race in outer space (PAROS).
Sponsor: Sri Lanka. 176-0-2(U.S.). In accordance with its
instructions to seek to avoid unnecessary isolation in a "no"
vote, USDEL resumed the U.S. practice of abstaining on this
resolution to encourage the sponsors to resist pressure to
add more objectionable features to it, such as endorsement of
a new outer space treaty.

L.26 - National legislation on the transfer of arms, military
equipment and dual-use goods and technology. Sponsor: The
Netherlands. Adopted by consensus. The United States
continued to support this resolution, which was substantively
unchanged.

L.27 - Regional confidence-building measures: activities of
the United Nations standing advisory committee on security
questions in Central Africa. Sponsor: Angola. Adopted by
consensus. This year, new language in the resolution
welcomed the adoption of a declaration calling on States
members of the Standing Advisory Committee to contribute to a
Special Trust Fund for the Committee.

L.28 - Regional disarmament. Sponsor: Pakistan. Adopted by
consensus. There were no substantive changes to the
resolution.

L.29 - Conventional arms control at the regional and
subregional levels. Sponsor: Pakistan. 173(U.S.)-1-2.
There were no substantive changes to the resolution from
previous years.

L.30 - Confidence-building measures in the regional and
subregional context. Sponsor: Pakistan. Adopted by
consensus. There were no substantive changes to the
resolution.

L.31 - Nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent
areas. Sponsor: Brazil. Operative paragraph 7: 165-2-6
(U.S.). Resolution as a whole: 168-3(U.S.)-5. The P-3
again raised issues about this long-standing resolution with
its authors, Brazil and New Zealand. The sponsors made no
significant changes in the text, and the P3 continued to
oppose this resolution because of the implication that it
would extend nuclear-weapon-free zones to the high seas,
thereby interfering with the freedom of navigation. The U.S.
again joined with the P-3 in a common EOV.

L.32 - United Nations regional center for peace and
disarmament in Africa. Sponsor: Nigeria. Adopted by
consensus. This resolution remained substantively the same.

L.33 - African nuclear-weapon-free zone treaty. Sponsor:
Nigeria. Adopted by consensus. This resolution remained the
same except for the addition of language welcoming the entry
into force of the Treaty of Pelindaba.

L.34 - Prohibition of the dumping of radioactive wastes.
Sponsor: Nigeria. Adopted by consensus. There were no
substantive changes to the resolution, which has been
submitted several times before.

L.35 - Convention on the prohibition of development,
production, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons and on
their destruction. Sponsor: Poland. Adopted by consensus.
This resolution was substantially the same as last year's,
with only technical updates.

L.36 - Renewed determination towards the total elimination of
nuclear weapons. Sponsor: Japan. 161(U.S.)-2-8. The
United States has voted against this resolution in recent
years, but has made clear that of all the major UNGA
resolutions on nuclear disarmament this one comes closest to
reflecting U.S. views. The United States opened a dialogue
with Japan on this resolution before the First Committee
session began with a view to seeking agreement on language

USUN NEW Y 00001070 005 OF 007


that would allow the United States to move away from its "no"
vote in recent years. Contacts continued during the session,
with discussion focusing primarily on how to reflect the
principle of irreversibility in further steps leading to
nuclear disarmament. Japan agreed to changes that permitted
the United States not only to support but to co-sponsor the
resolution. USDEL understands that this was front page news
in Japan. In a move unusual for the First Committee,
Japanese news media sought out the U.S. head of delegation on
the plenary floor for a few (courteous) questions as the
meeting in which this resolution was adopted adjourned.

L.37 - Convention on prohibitions or restrictions on the use
of certain conventional weapons which may be deemed to be
excessively injurious or to have indiscriminate effects.
Sponsor: Sweden. Adopted by consensus. This resolution was
substantially the same as previous versions but with
technical updates.

L.38 - The Arms Trade Treaty. Sponsor: The UK. 153(U.S.) -
1(Zimbabwe) - 19. The ATT resolution was among the most
contentious this year. After extensive high-level
consultations, the U.S. agreed to support the resolution (and
the negotiation of an ATT) in return for the UK's agreement
to add to the resolution the statement that the negotiations
would be conducted by consensus. In response to the
insistence by Germany and some others, the British then
agreed to add some further modifying language, while
retaining "consensus." The resolution passed overwhelmingly,
but the abstentions of some key countries (many but not all
Arab states, India, Pakistan, Russia, and China),which
argued that agreeing to a negotiation already was too rapid
movement, and may portend difficulties for the negotiations.

L.39 - Developments in the field of information and
telecommunications in the context of international security.
Sponsor: Russia. Adopted by consensus. The United States
continues to have reservations about this resolution,
believing that cyber security issues should be handled in
other forums than the First Committee. In the past, however,
the United States has been able on occasion to work with the
sponsor on resolution language and on participation in a UN
group of governmental experts (GGE) on this issue. This
resolution calls for another GGE, which the United States
believes is unnecessary and unlikely to be successful, but
the United States nevertheless has decided to participate in
it. In a meeting before this resolution was acted on, a U.S.
coordinator for cyber policy informed the Russian delegate
that the United States would allow this resolution to be
adopted by consensus. She asked that Russia support the U.S.
initiative to re-introduce a resolution on cyber security in
the Second Committee, which the United States believed was a
more appropriate forum for this subject. The Russian
representative welcomed the news about the First Committee
resolution and said that his delegation had recommended to
Moscow that Russia support the U.S. Second Committee
resolution.

L.40 - Transparency and confidence-building measures in outer
space activities. Sponsor: Russia. Adopted by consensus.
The United States has engaged with Russia on various aspects
of space policy, but with an ongoing space policy review we
were not in a position to support this resolution. At the
Russian representative's suggestion, the United States
announced that it would not participate in action on this
resolution (thus allowing it to be adopted by consensus). In
its EOV the United States noted its consultations with Russia
and the EU on space activities, criticized continued Chinese
stonewalling concerning their ASAT test, pointed out the
ongoing U.S. review, said that it looked forward to
discussing insights from its review at the UNGA the following
year, and that it looked forward to engaging in substantive
discussions on the prevention of an arms race in outer space
(PAROS) as part of the 2010 work program of the Conference on
Disarmament.

L.41 - Report of the Conference on Disarmament. Sponsor:
Austria. Adopted by consensus. Introduced by Austria with
co-sponsorship from the other P6 (CD Presidents in 2009),the
resolution calls for the early adoption of the CD's Program
of Work in 2010, with a focus on resuming negotiations on an
FMCT. As with the FMCT resolution, Pakistan, supported by
Iran and joined occasionally by India, offered numerous and
repetitive amendments to weaken the precedent established by
the 2009 CD Program of Work (contained in document CD/1864).
After nearly two months of open-ended and bilateral
consultations, a draft text acceptable to all was finalized,
and the resolution (L.41/Rev.1) was adopted on October 30.

L.42 - The illicit trade in small arms and light weapons
(SA/LW) in all its aspects. Sponsor: Japan. Operative
paragraph 4: 177(U.S.) - 0 - 1. Operative paragraph 15:

USUN NEW Y 00001070 006 OF 007


177(U.S.) - 0 - 1. Resolution as a whole: 179(U.S.) - 0 - 0.
After being the lone dissenter last year, the U.S. was able
to persuade the lead sponsors (South Africa, Japan, Colombia)
to accept two U.S. edits and convince the many co-sponsors to
go along with the changes. The U.S. voted in favor of the
resolution and co-sponsored it. Although the sponsors had
hoped for consensus, Iran called for a paragraph vote on
operative paragraphs 4 and 15. Mexico, which was unhappy
that the sponsors did not accept its own edits to the
resolution, provided a statement before the vote saying the
sponsors should have "respected the perspective of all
delegations." The sponsors were exceedingly pleased with the
new U.S. approach on SA/LW.

L.43 - Objective information on military matters. Sponsor:
Germany. Adopted by consensus. This resolution was
substantively the same as last year.

L.44 - Problems arising from the accumulation of conventional
ammunition stockpiles in surplus. Sponsor: Germany. Adopted
by consensus. This resolution only had minor updates from
last year.

L.45 - United Nations center for peace and disarmament in
Asia and the Pacific. Sponsor: Nepal. Adopted by
consensus. This resolution was substantially the same as
previous versions.

L.46 - Conference of states parties and signatories to
treaties by which nuclear-weapon-free zones have been
established. Sponsor: Chile. Amendment to preambular
paragraph 4: 4-103(U.S.)-22. Resolution as a whole:
159-0-6(U.S.). This resolution sought to organize the second
conference of states parties to nuclear-weapon-free zones
(NWFZs) with UN support. A provision calling for support
from the UN regular budget was deleted, and a one-day
conference in April 2010 with UN interpretation and
documentation support will be paid for with contributions
from states parties. Syria submitted an amendment to
preambular paragraph 4 that deleted language calling for a
NWFZ in the Middle East freely arrived at among states of the
region an in accordance with principles adopted by the UN
Disarmament Commission. It was soundly defeated. The United
States abstained on the resolution as a whole (joined by the
UK, Russian, Israel, France, and Syria) because the
resolution referred to agreements like the Central Asia
Nuclear Weapon Free Zone, which the United States opposes. A
joint US/UK/France EOV was delivered by the UK.

L.47 - Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).
Sponsor: Australia. 175(U.S.) - 1(DPRK) - 3(India,
Mauritius, Syria). Because of the change in U.S. policy on
the CTBT, the United States co-sponsored this resolution,
which it had voted against since 2001. In order to gain
widespread support, the Australian sponsors, after long and
difficult consultations with China, watered down
significantly any reference to the North Korean nuclear test.
In the end all P-5 states co-sponsored, reportedly a first.

L.48 - Nuclear Disarmament. Sponsor: Myanmar for the NAM.
112-43(U.S.)-21. The Myanmar/NAM nuclear disarmament
resolution went with little attention and a vote similar to
previous years'.

L.49 - Strengthening of security and cooperation in the
Mediterranean region. Sponsor: Algeria. Adopted by
consensus. This traditional resolution has remained
essentially unchanged since 1990.

L.50 - Transparency in Armaments (TIA). Sponsor: The
Netherlands. Operative paragraph 3: 147(U.S.)-0-24.
Operative paragraph 4: 147(U.S.)-0-24. Operative paragraph
5: 149(U.S.)-0 22. Operative paragraph 6(d):
147(U.S.)-0-23. Operative paragraph 6: 148(U.S.)-0-22.
Operative paragraph 8: 146(U.S.)-0-23. Resolution as a
whole: 150(U.S.)-0-22. The U.S. co-sponsored the
traditional TIA resolution, which discusses activities
connected to the UN Register on Conventional Arms. As in
previous years, the Arab states called for paragraph votes on
many of the operational paragraphs to make the point that the
register should include WMD as well as conventional weapons.

L.51 - Follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International
Court of Justice on the legality of the threat or use of
nuclear weapons. Sponsor: The NAM. 125-30(U.S.)-22. This
resolution continued to support an ICJ opinion that the
United States for years has opposed as inappropriate.

L.52 - Report of the Disarmament Commission. Sponsor:
Poland. Adopted by consensus. The United States announced
that it would not participate in action on this resolution.
After it was adopted, a representative of Poland (which

USUN NEW Y 00001070 007 OF 007


provides the chair for the current UNDC session) asked why
the United States had done so. According to him, Poland had
invested heavily in trying to improve the atmosphere of the
UNDC and it had had some success; the Polish delegation
seemed caught off guard. USDEL pointed out that the United
States has declined to participate in action on UNDC
resolutions for several years. As much as the atmosphere had
improved the chances of agreement in the UNDC's three-year
study cycle seemed as bleak as ever.

L.53 - Implementation of the convention on the prohibition of
the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of
antipersonnel mines and on their destruction. Sponsor:
Jordan, Norway, Switzerland. 158-0-18(U.S.). In accordance
with current policy that the United States will engage in
active landmine remediation activity but will remain aloof
from the Ottawa Convention, USDEL continued to abstain.

L.54 - Towards a nuclear-weapon free world: accelerating the
implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments. Sponsor:
South Africa for New Agenda Coalition (NAC). Operative
paragraph 4: 159-4(U.S.)-2. Resolution as a whole:
165-5(U.S.)-4. The U.S. consulted with the NAC co-sponsors
(Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa,
and Sweden) in an effort to seek changes that would permit
the U.S. to move from a "no" vote to an abstention or
positive vote. Our key concerns were the NPT
universalization paragraph, the need to "soften" the
reference to the NPT "practical steps" from the 2000 NPT
Review Conference, addition of a reference to FMCT
negotiations, and strengthening the need for compliance. We
provided the co-sponsors with language along those lines, but
they could not agree to any of the U.S. proposals, thus the
U.S. subsequently voted "no".
RICE