News

DISARMAMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY:

Final document of the 12th summit of the Non-Aligned Movement
Summit in Durban, South Africa,  2-3 September 1998


     The Heads of State or Government reiterated that with the end of the
       cold war, there is no justification for the maintenance of nuclear
       arsenals, or concepts of international security based on promoting
       and developing military alliances and policies of nuclear
       deterrence. They noted and welcomed the various international
       initiatives, which stress that with the end of the cold war the
       opportunity now exists for the international community to pursue
       nuclear disarmament as a matter of the highest priority. They also
       noted that the present situation whereby Nuclear Weapon States
       insist that nuclear weapons provide unique security benefits, and
       yet monopolise the right to own them, is highly discriminatory,
       unstable and cannot be sustained. These weapons continued to
       represent a threat to the survival of the mankind. The Heads of
       State or Government recalled their principled positions on nuclear
       disarmament and the related issues of nuclear non-proliferation
       and nuclear tests. They expressed their concern at the slow pace
       of progress towards nuclear disarmament, which constitutes their
       primary disarmament objective. They noted the complexities arising
       from nuclear tests in South Asia, which underlined the need to
       work even harder to achieve their disarmament objectives,
       including elimination of nuclear weapons. They considered
       positively the commitment by the parties concerned in the region
       to exercise restraint, which contributes to regional security, to
       discontinue nuclear tests and not to transfer nuclear
       weapons-related material, equipment and technology. They further
       stressed the significance of universal adherence to the CTBT,
       including by all Nuclear Weapon States, and commencement of
       negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament on fissile materials
       (decision CD/1547), which, inter-alia, should accelerate the
       process of nuclear disarmament. They also stressed their positions
       against unilateral, coercive or discriminatory measures which have
       been applied against Non-Aligned countries. They reiterated the
       need for bilateral dialogue to secure peaceful solutions on all
       outstanding issues and the promotion of confidence and security
       building measures and mutual trust. They recalled that the
       Cartagena Summit had called for the adoption of an action plan for
       the elimination of nuclear weapons within a time-bound framework.
       They once again called upon the international community to join
       them in negotiating and implementing universal, non-discriminatory
       disarmament measures and mutually agreed confidence-building
       measures. They called for an international conference, preferably
       in 1999, with the objective of arriving at an agreement, before
       the end of this millennium on a phased program for the complete
       elimination of nuclear weapons with a specified framework of time
       to eliminate all nuclear weapons, to prohibit their development,
       production, acquisition, testing, stockpiling, transfer, use and
       threat of use, and to provide for their destruction.
   102. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their call on the
       Conference on Disarmament to establish, as the highest priority,
       an ad hoc committee to start in 1998 negotiations on a phased
       programme for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons with a
       specified framework of time, including a Nuclear Weapons
       Convention. The Conference on Disarmament shall take into
       consideration all relevant views and proposals, regarding this
       issue that have been submitted to it. They also insisted on the
       need to conclude a universal and legally binding multilateral
       agreement committing all States to the complete elimination of
       nuclear weapons. In this context they regretted that some nuclear
       weapons states had adopted inflexible postures which prevented the
       Conference on Disarmament from commencing these negotiations. They
       underscored the flexibility, which on the other hand has been
       demonstrated by the members of the Non-Aligned Movement, members
       of the Conference on Disarmament, in accepting the proposal to
       establish an ad hoc committee under item 1of the Conference on
       Disarmament's agenda to negotiate a convention on the prohibition
       of the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other
       nuclear explosive devices. They emphasised that this flexibility
       should be reciprocated by others through their agreement on the
       establishment of an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament as
       well as during the course of the negotiations in the Conference on
       Disarmament on fissile materials (Decision CD/1547).
   103. In this connection, the Heads of State or Government reiterated
       that a number of Non-Aligned Movement countries had taken
       collective initiatives at the United Nations General Assembly
       sessions to underscore the need for urgent action in the field of
       nuclear disarmament, as mandated by the Cartagena Summit. They
       recognised all of the constructive and useful proposals put
       forward by members of the Non-Aligned Movement in the Conference
       on Disarmament on the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee on
       nuclear disarmament including the useful work done by Non-Aligned
       Movement members of the Conference on Disarmament in developing a
       Programme of Action for the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons within
       a time-bound framework. The Heads of State or Government took note
       of the Declaration issued on 9 June 1998 entitled - "Towards a
       World Free of Nuclear Weapons: Time for a New Agenda", supported
       and responded to by a number of States including by some members
       of the Non-Aligned Movement They recognised that this declaration
       as well as all other initiatives which have consistently been
       proposed by the Movement and its members are contributions to the
       goal of the complete elimination of nuclear weapons and called
       upon the Nuclear Weapon States to react positively to these
       initiatives.
   104. The Heads of State or Government expressed concern over the
       failure of the nuclear weapon States to demonstrate a genuine
       commitment with regard to complete nuclear disarmament, and to
       provide universal, unconditional, and legally binding negative
       security assurances to all non-nuclear weapon States, and urged
       the nuclear weapon States to immediately commence and conclude
       without delay negotiations on these assurances.
   105. The Heads of State or Government noted the establishment of an ad
       hoc Committee on effective international arrangements to assure
       non-nuclear weapon States against the use or the threat of use of
       nuclear weapons in the Conference on Disarmament to negotiate
       universal, unconditional and legally binding assurances to all
       non-nuclear weapon States. In this context, they expressed their
       conviction that efforts for the conclusion of a universal,
       unconditional and legally binding instrument on security
       assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States should be pursued as a
       matter of priority by the members of the Non-Aligned Movement.
   106. The Heads of State or Government commend the establishment in the
       Conference on Disarmament of an ad hoc committee, under agenda
       item 1, entitled "The cessation of the nuclear arms race and
       nuclear disarmament", to negotiate a convention on the prohibition
       of the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other
       nuclear explosive devices and believe that the proposed convention
       must constitute a nuclear disarmament measure and not only a
       non-proliferation measure, and must be an integral step leading to
       the total elimination of nuclear weapons. The treaty should also
       promote international cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear
       energy and should not hinder access to nuclear technology,
       equipment and material for peaceful purposes by developing
       countries.
   107. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their conviction of
       the validity of the unanimous conclusion of the Advisory Opinion
       of the International Court of Justice that "There exists an
       obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion
       negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects
       under strict and effective international control", and recognised
       that the unanimous conclusion contained in the International Court
       of Justices' Advisory Opinion has identified existing
       international law obligations. In this connection, they reiterated
       their call upon all States to immediately fulfil that obligation
       by commencing multilateral negotiations leading to an earl
       conclusion of a nuclear weapons convention prohibiting the
       development, production, testing, deployment, stockpiling,
       transfer, threat or use of threat of nuclear weapons and providing
       for their elimination.
   108. The Heads of State or Government noted with concern that undue
       restrictions on exports to developing countries of material,
       equipment and technology, for peaceful purposes persist. They
       emphasised that proliferation concerns are best addressed through
       multilaterally negotiated, universal, comprehensive and
       non-discriminatory agreements. Non-proliferation control
       arrangements should be transparent and open to participation by
       all States, and should ensure that they do not impose restrictions
       on access to material, equipment and technology for peaceful
       purposes required by developing countries for their continued
       development. In this regard they also expressed their strong
       rejection of attempts by any member State to use the International
       Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) technical cooperation programme as a
       tool for political purposes in violation of the IAEA's Statute.
   109. Consistent with the decisions taken by the 1995 Review and
       Extension Conference of Parties to the Treaty on the
       Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the Heads of State or
       Government of States party to the NPT called upon all States
       party, particularly the nuclear weapon States, to fulfil their
       commitments, particularly those related to Article VI of the
       Treaty. They also emphasised the need to ensure and facilitate the
       exercise of the inalienable right of all States to develop,
       produce and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without
       discrimination under IAEA safeguards. Undertakings to facilitate
       participation in the fullest possible exchange of equipment,
       material and scientific and technological information for the
       peaceful uses of nuclear energy should be fully implemented.
   110. The Heads of State or Government of States party to the NPT took
       note with regret at the outcome of the deliberations of the Second
       Preparatory Committee held in Geneva from 27 April to 8 May, 1998.
       They further regretted that the Committee could not achieve a
       substantive result due to the insistence of one delegation to
       support the nuclear policies of a non-party to the NPT. They
       called upon the Preparatory Committees up to and including the
       2000 Review Conference of the NPT to engage immediately, in good
       faith, in substantive work for the speedy and meaningful
       implementation of the obligations under the Treaty and the
       commitments in the 1995 Principles and Objectives document, and
       the resolution on Middle East. In this respect they further called
       upon the Preparatory Committee to make specific time available at
       its future sessions to deliberate on the practical steps for
       systematic and progressive efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons
       and for the 2000 NPT Review Conference to establish a subsidiary
       body to its Main Committee to deliberate on the practical steps
       for systematic and progressive efforts to eliminate nuclear
       weapons. The Heads of State or Government parties to the NPT,
       called for the establishment of a subsidiary body to its Main
       Committee II to consider and recommend proposals on the
       implementation of the resolution on the Middle East adopted by the
       1995 Review and Extension Conference of the NPT.
   111. The Heads of State or Government Parties to the Treaty on the
       Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons also called for the creation
       of an open-ended standing committee which would work
       intersessionally, to follow up recommendations concerning the
       implementation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
       Weapons which would be agreed to at the Treaty's 2000 Review
       Conference.
   112. The Heads of State or Government of State signatory to the
       Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty expressed their satisfaction
       that 139 States have signed the Treaty and 14 States have ratified
       it thus far. They further expressed their general satisfaction at
       the progress of establishing the international verification system
       thusfar. They agreed that if the objectives of the Treaty were to
       be fully realised, the continued commitment of all State
       signatories, especially the nuclear weapon States, to nuclear
       disarmament would be essential.
   113. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the inviolability of
       peaceful nuclear activities and that any attack or threat of
       attack against peaceful nuclear facilities - operational or under
       construction - poses a great danger to human beings and the
       environment, and constitutes a grave violation of international
       law, principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter and
       regulations of the International Atomic Energy Agency. They
       recognised the need for a comprehensive multilaterally negotiated
       instrument, prohibiting attacks, or threat of attacks on nuclear
       facilities devoted to peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
   114. The Heads of State or Government of the States party to the
       Chemical Weapons Convention welcomed the increasing number of
       ratifications of the Convention and invited all States who have
       still not ratified it to do so as soon as possible with the view
       to its universality. They also underlined the urgency of
       satisfactorily resolving the unresolved issues in the framework of
       the Organisation of the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)
       with a view to paving the ground for the effective, full and
       non-discriminatory implementation of the Convention. In this
       context, they reiterated their call on the developed countries to
       promote international cooperation through the transfer of
       technology, material and equipment for peaceful purposes in the
       chemical field and the removal of all and any discriminatory
       restrictions that are contrary to the letter and spirit of the
       Convention.
   115. The Heads of State or Government of the States party to the
       Chemical Weapons Convention, while stressing the importance of the
       full implementation of the Convention, and in this context, the
       provisions of Article X on Assistance, expressed their concern at
       the small number of responses received from the States Parties to
       the Voluntary Fund on Assistance established by the OPCW and
       called upon all States Parties to the Convention that had not yet
       acted in accordance with Article X, to reply to the OPCW and
       contribute to redress this situation.
   116. While asserting that the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention
       inherently precludes the use of biological weapons, the Heads of
       State or Government reiterated the decision by the BWC Review
       Conference that the use by the States parties, in any way and
       under any circumstances, of microbial or other biological agents
       or toxins, that is not consistent with prophylactic, protective or
       other peaceful purposes, is effectively a violation of Article I
       of the Convention. In this connection they noted that the Islamic
       Republic of Iran has formally presented a proposal to amend
       Article I of the Convention to include the prohibition of use of
       biological weapons and urged an early reply from the States
       parties to the inquiries by the depositories on this proposal.
       They noted the progress achieved so far negotiating a Protocol to
       strengthen the BWC and reaffirmed the decision of the Fourth
       Review Conference urging the conclusion of the negotiations by the
       Ad Hoc group as soon as possible before the commencement of the
       Fifth Review Conference and for it to submit its report, which
       shall be adopted by consensus, to the States parties, to be
       considered at a Special Conference. Therefore, artificial
       deadlines should be avoided. They also expressed their concern at
       any attempts to reduce the scope and importance of issues related
       to Article X of the Convention. Ensured access for peaceful
       purposes to the relevant materials, equipment and technology is
       essential to safeguard the economic interests of developing
       countries. Substantive progress in strengthening the application
       and full operationalisation of Article X is thus crucial for the
       conclusion of a universally acceptable and legally binding
       instrument designed to strengthen the Convention.
   117. The Heads of State or Government expressed particular concern
       over the illicit transfer and circulation of small arms and light
       weapons and their accumulation and proliferation in many
       countries, which constituted a serious threat to the population
       and to the national and regional security and were a factor
       contributing to the destabilisation of States. They urged States
       to take steps to deal effectively, through administrative and
       legislative means, with the increasing problem of illicit transfer
       of small arms and light weapons which exacerbate tensions leading
       to strife, conflict and terrorism, and impact negatively on the
       socio-economic development of affected countries. In this regard,
       they welcomed the adoption of guidelines in 1996 for international
       arm transfers in the context of General Assembly resolution 46/36H
       of 6 September 1991 by the United Nations Disarmament Commission.
       Moreover, they welcomed the initiative by His Excellency Alpha
       Oumar Konare, President of the Republic of Mali, on the
       establishment of a moratorium on the production, transfer and
       illicit traffic of light arms in West Africa, adopted by member
       States of ECOWAS within the framework of on-going discussions and
       referring to the creation of a mechanism to prevent, handle and
       rule on conflicts in the sub-region. They also welcomed the
       decision adopted by the 34th Summit of the Heads of State and
       Government of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) regarding
       the problem of small arms and light weapons in Africa.
   118. The Heads of State or Government recognised that there is also a
       significant imbalance in the production, possession and trade in
       conventional weapons between the industrialised and the
       Non-Aligned countries and they called for a significant reduction
       in the production, possession and trade of conventional weapons by
       the States with the largest arsenals with a view to enhancing
       international and regional peace and security
   119. The Heads of State or Government encouraged States, taking into
       account the legitimate requirement of States for self-defence and
       the specific characteristics of each region, to consider
       appropriate initiatives at international, regional and national
       levels to promote transparency in all types of armaments as an
       important element for building confidence and security. They also
       stressed that the concept of transparency should encompass both
       conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction, in
       particular, nuclear weapons.
   120. The Heads of State or Government called on States to become
       parties to the 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 (CCW) and
       the Protocols thereto, and expressed their satisfaction on the
       entry into force of its Protocol IV on Blinding Laser Weapons on
       30 July 1998 as well as the announcement by the UN
       Secretary-General that the Protocol II, as amended, on Mines,
       Booby-Traps and other Devices of the CCW would enter into force on
       3 December 1998.
   121. The Heads of State or Government called upon the international
       community to provide the necessary assistance to landmine
       clearance operations as well as to the rehabilitation of the
       victims and their social and economic reintegration in the
       landmine affected countries. They further called for international
       assistance to ensure full access of affected countries to material
       equipment, technology and financial resources for mine clearance.
       They also called for continued humanitarian assistance for victims
       of landmines.
   122. The Heads of State and Government deplored the use, in
       contravention of international humanitarian law, of anti-personnel
       mines in conflict situations aimed at terrorising civilians,
       denying them access to farmland, causing famine and forcing them
       to flee their homes eventually leading to de-population and
       preventing the return of civilians to their place of original
       residence.
   123. The Heads of State or Government expressed concern about the
       residue of the Second World War, particularly in the form of
       landmines which cause human and material damage and obstruct
       development plans in some Non-Aligned countries. They called on
       the States responsible for laying the mines outside their
       territories to assume responsibility for the landmines, to
       cooperate with the affected countries, to provide the necessary
       information, maps and technical assistance for their clearance, to
       contribute towards defrayal of the costs of clearance and provide
       compensation for any ensuing losses.
   124. The Heads of State or Government considered the establishment of
       nuclear-weapon free zones (NWFZ's) as a positive step towards
       attaining the objective of global nuclear disarmament. They urged
       States to conclude agreements with a view to creating
       nuclear-weapon-free zones in regions where they do not exist, in
       accordance with the provisions of the Final Document of the
       Special Session of the General Assembly Devoted to Disarmament
       (SSOD-I). In this context, they welcomed the establishment of
       nuclear-weapon-free zones established by the Treaties of
       Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok and Pelindaba. The Heads of State
       or Government considered the question of the establishment of
       nuclear-weapon free zones in other parts of the world and agreed
       that this should be on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at
       among the States of the region concerned and in conformity with
       the provisions of the Final Document of SSOD-I. They concurred
       that in the context of nuclear-weapon free zones, it is essential
       that nuclear weapon States should provide unconditional assurances
       against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons to all States
       of the zone.
   125. The Heads of State or Government welcomed and supported
       Mongolia's policy to institutionalise its single State nuclear
       weapon-free status.
   126. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their support for the
       establishment in the Middle East of a zone free of all weapons of
       mass destruction. To this end, they reaffirmed the need for the
       speedy establishment of a nuclear-weapon free zone in the Middle
       East in accordance with Security Council resolutions 487 (1981)
       and 687 (1991) and the relevant General Assembly resolutions
       adopted by consensus. They called upon all parties concerned to
       take urgent and practical steps towards the establishment of such
       a zone and, pending its establishment, they called on Israel, the
       only country in the region that has not joined the NPT nor
       declared its intention to do so, to renounce possession of nuclear
       weapons, to accede to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
       Nuclear Weapons (NPT) without delay, and to place promptly all its
       nuclear facilities under IAEA full-scope safeguards. They
       expressed great concern over the acquisition of nuclear capability
       by Israel which poses a serious and continuing threat to the
       security of neighbouring and other States and they condemned
       Israel for continuing to develop and stockpile nuclear arsenals.
       They are of the view that stability cannot be achieved in a region
       where massive imbalances in military capabilities are maintained
       particularly through the possession of nuclear weapons which allow
       one party to threaten its neighbours and the region. They further
       welcomed the initiative by H.E. Mohammed Hosni Mubarak, President
       of the Arab Republic of Egypt, on the establishment of a zone free
       from weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. They stressed
       that necessary steps should be taken in different international
       fora for the establishment of this zone. They also called for the
       total and complete prohibition of the transfer of all
       nuclear-related equipment, information, material and facilities,
       resources or devices and the extension of assistance in the
       nuclear related scientific or technological fields to Israel.
   127. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the initiative by H E.
       Mohammed Hosni Mubarak, President of the Arab Republic of Egypt,
       in June 1998, to achieve a world free from all weapons of mass
       destruction, in particular nuclear weapons and to convene as soon
       as possible an international conference to consider this issue.
   128. The Heads of State or Government expressed their concern over the
       Israeli-Turkish military alliance as well as the naval manoeuvres
       carried out in the eastern part of the Mediterranean and the
       dangers that such manoeuvres pose to the security of the region.
   129. The Heads of State or Government stated that in order to enhance
       international security and stability, all States parties to
       non-proliferation, arms limitations and disarmament treaties
       should comply with and implement all provisions of such treaties.
       They emphasised that questions of non-compliance by States Parties
       should be resolved in a manner consistent with such treaties. They
       further emphasised that any deviation from the role envisaged for
       the Security Council under the United Nations Charter or in
       certain circumstances under relevant provisions of multilateral
       treaties on non-proliferation, arms limitation and disarmament
       would undermine the provisions of these treaties and conventions,
       including the inherent mechanisms for securing redress of
       violations of their provisions. Such deviations would also call
       into question the value of painstaking multilateral negotiations
       on disarmament and arms control treaties in the Conference on
       Disarmament. They underlined that circumventing or undermining the
       provisisions of these treaties and conventions,
       including the inherent mechanisms for securing redress of
       violations of their provisions. Such deviations would also call
       into question the value of painstaking multilateral negotiations
       on disarmament and arms control treaties in the Conference on
       Disarmament. They underlined that circumventing or undermining the
       provisions of existing treaties will seriously prejudice the role
       of the Conference. In this context, they also underlined that they
       were opposed to the assumption of a role by the United Nations
       Security Council inconsistent with the United Nations Charter,
       also as this concerns non-proliferation.
   130. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that global and
       regional approaches to disarmament are complementary and could be
       pursued simultaneously. They urged States in various regions of
       the world to negotiate agreements to promote greater balance in
       conventional armaments and restraint in the production and
       acquisition of conventional arms and, where necessary, for their
       progressive and balanced reduction, with a view to enhancing
       international and regional peace and security. They stressed that
       the peaceful resolution of regional and inter-State disputes is
       essential for the creation of conditions which would enable States
       to divert their resources from armaments to economic growth and
       development. Regional disarmament initiatives, to be practical,
       needed to take into account the special characteristics of each
       region and enhance the security of every State of the region
       concerned. The question of the accumulation of conventional
       weapons beyond the legitimate requirements of the States for
       self-defence should also be addressed, taking into account the
       special characteristics of each region.
   131. The Heads of State or Government took note of the relevant
       paragraphs of the United Nation General Assembly resolutions
       52/12A & B on international peace, security and disarmament, and
       insisted on the need that its implementation respects fully the
       principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and
       non-intervention in the internal affairs of States.
   132. The Heads of State or Government continued to stress their hope
       that the decision to re-establish at the United Nations
       Secretariat, the Department on Disarmament, headed by an Under
       Secretary General from a Non-Aligned country should contribute to
       greater disarmament efforts towards achieving general and complete
       disarmament in conformity with priorities set out in SSOD I and
       relevant provisions of General Assembly resolution 52/220.
   133. The Heads of State or Government expressed once again their
       support for the convening of the Fourth Special Session of the
       United Nations General Assembly devoted to Disarmament. They
       welcomed the adoption by the General Assembly, by consensus, of
       the resolution on the Convening of the IV Special Session of the
       General Assembly Devoted to Disarmament. They took note of the
       deliberations on the matter held by the United Nations Disarmament
       Commission and directed the Coordinating Bureau to entrust the
       Non-Aligned Movement Working Group on Disarmament with the task of
       pursuing further the holding of the Fourth Special Session and the
       related coordination during the preparatory process. In this
       context, they reaffirmed the need to continue to press for further
       steps leading to its convening with the participation of all
       member States of the United Nations as well as the need for SSOD
       IV to review and assess the implementation of SSOD I.
   134. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the decision adopted by
       the General Assembly on maintaining and revitalising the three
       Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament in Nepal, Peru and
       Togo.
   135. The Heads of State or Government expressed their satisfaction
       with the work of the Non-Aligned Working Group on Disarmament
       under the coordination of Indonesia and encouraged delegations to
       continue their active work in this regard.