Question of Palestine home || Permalink || About UNISPAL || Search

English (pdf) ||Arabic||Chinese||Français||Русский||Español||



Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS

UNITED
NATIONS
A

        General Assembly
Distr.
GENERAL
A/C.1/48/SR.24
13 January 1994

ENGLISH
ORIGINAL: SPANISH

FIRST COMMITTEE
24th meeting
held on
Tuesday, 11 November 1993
at 10.30 a.m.
New York

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 24th MEETING

Chairman:
Mr. von WAGNER
(Germany)



CONTENTS

CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT RESOLUTIONS SUBMITTED UNDER ALL DISARMAMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AGENDA ITEMS (continued)


The meeting was called to order at 10.35 a.m.


CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT RESOLUTIONS SUBMITTED UNDER ALL DISARMAMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AGENDA ITEMS (continued) (A/C.1/48/L.1, L.2/Rev.1, L.12, L.14, L.18, L.20, L.29, L.32, L.42, L.43/Rev.1, L.48)

/...

Draft resolution A/C.1/48/L.48

5. Mr. YASSIN (Sudan), speaking on behalf of the Group of Arab States, introduced the draft resolution entitled "Israeli nuclear armament" under agenda item 74. Although the United Nations had adopted a number of resolutions on that question, the draft resolution took into account some recent changes in the international situation.

6. In the First Committee, the States politically close to Israel had said that the Non-Proliferation Treaty represented a legal and political guarantee of non-proliferation and peace. They had also said that the extension of the Treaty in 1995 could provide a basis for general disarmament. Israel's allies had asked for regional measures to prohibit the reduction of nuclear weapons and the sale of fissionable material in the Middle East.

7. The draft resolution referred to the positive aspects of the peace negotiations between the Palestine Liberation Organization and Israel. However, the building of confidence through those negotiations required additional steps. It was necessary to establish a nuclear-free-zone in the Middle East; to attain that goal Israel should renounce nuclear weapons and accede to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Moreover, like all the States of the region, it should submit its nuclear installations to IAEA safeguards. The Group of Arab States hoped that the draft resolution would be supported by the international community.

8. Mr. YATIV (Israel) said that his country could not accept draft resolution A/C.1/48/L.48 entitled "Israeli nuclear armament" in any of its versions and considered that it should not have been included in the First Committee's agenda. In 1993 more than ever that stale ritual cast doubt not only on the sincerity of the efforts of the United Nations but also on its stance with regard to the ongoing peace process. The purpose of that process was to find solutions to bilateral and regional problems and among the multilateral problems under consideration were those of regional security and arms control. Regional and extraregional parties, including representatives of the United Nations, were taking part in the multilateral talks.

9. The peace process deserved encouragement from all parties. Consequently, biased General Assembly resolutions would contribute nothing. At its thirty-sixth General Conference, the International Atomic Energy Agency had decided to discontinue further reference to a similar resolution on Israeli nuclear capabilities and threats. In Israel's opinion, the United Nations should follow the example of the General Conference of the IAEA.

10. Moreover, the draft resolution also ignored the advice of the Secretary-General in paragraph 7 of his report (A/48/399) of 25 October 1993 that the factors affecting security should be dealt with simultaneously. It also ignored the conclusion reached by the Secretary-General in paragraph 22 of that report that a nuclear-weapon-free zone could not be conceived of or implemented in a political vacuum, separate from the process of mutual reconciliation. Israel invited the Committee to heed that advice. Only in the peace talks were all those elements being taken up, and any attempt by the United Nations to separate the nuclear issue from the peace process could only be detrimental.

11. The operative paragraphs of the draft resolution formed part of the resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East. Although the latter resolution contained elements unacceptable to Israel, it had none the less joined the consensus over the years since it identified with the goal.

12. Israel hoped that the United Nations would cease to single it out for censure, explicit or implicit, for if the Organization supported the peace process it could not at the same time interfere by adopting resolutions on isolated issues; and it trusted that Member States would realize their responsibility and vote against the resolution under consideration. Their vote would demonstrate whether equity rather than convenience alone governed the First Committee's deliberations.

/...
The meeting rose at 12.10 p.m.


________________
This record is subject to correction. Corrections should be sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned within one week of the date of the publication to the Chief of the Official Records Editing Section, room DC2-794, 2 United Nations Plaza, and incorporated in a copy of the record.

Corrections will be issued after the end of the session, in a separate corrigendum for each Committee.


Follow UNISPAL RSS Twitter