1st Committee - Issue 1, 40th Session

40th Session Issues

Nuclear Free Zones

This is the way the world ends: not with a bang, but with a whimper. T.S. Elliott

Since the nuclear catastrophe of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, the international community has striven to reduce the dangers posed by devices that endanger humanity. One of the solutions called for is a Nuclear Weapons Free Zones (NWFZ).

DEFINITION

A nuclear weapons free zone differentiates from a nuclear free zone in that the latter implies that all nuclear devices, be they for peaceful uses (such as the generation of electrical power) or military uses (such as weapons of mass destruction), should be eliminated and banned; while the purpose of establishing a nuclear weapons free zone is the elimination and banning of nuclear weapons only. Those who support the call for a NWFZ see it as a way to achieve a zone of peace. The argument centers on the view that the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the risk of total destruction linked to them necessitates banning nuclear weapons altogether.

A NWFZ is understood as a geographical area in which the deployment, development, or import of any nuclear weapon is prohibited. United Nations' resolution 3472 of the Thirtieth General Assembly, ratified on 21 January 1976, adopted the following definition:

A nuclear weapons free zone, as a general rule, is deemed to be any zone, recognized as such by the General Assembly of the United Nations, which any group of States, in the free exercise of their sovereignty, has established by virtue of a treaty or convention where by;

a) The statute of total absence of nuclear weapons to which the zone shall be subject, including the procedure for the delimitation of the zone is defined:
b) An international system of verification and control is established to guarantee compliance with the obligations deriving from that statue. (See also Special Report of the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament CCD/476 of August 28, 1975.)

Transit of nuclear weapons by non-signatory nations poses a special problem. While compliance with transit restrictions is enforced easily on land, passage by air and sea is difficult to control and limit. A UN study concerned with this issue and the freedom of the seas summarizes:

In the present context reference may be made to the concept of zones of peace. In proposals put forward up to now for countries of the zone...the case of zone encompassing a part of the high seas raises difficult problems beyond those of naval and air presence in the narrow sense, notably the question of transit and the presence of nuclear-missile carrying submarines which, while not primarily related to the regional situation, may all the same be perceived as affecting it.

REGIONAL EXAMPLES AND UN INVOLVEMENT

Latin America

Following the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, the presidents of five Latin American nations (Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador and Mexico) called for the establishment of a multilateral agreement to contain the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Latin America. Their work culminated in the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which subsequently was adopted by the General Assembly in 1967. This treaty is the only effort concentrating on prohibiting the permanent land-based presence of weapons. The treaty allows for nuclear weapons to pass through the region aboard ships or planes. The Treaty of Tlatelolco has served as a model for international efforts to create zones free of nuclear weapons, nuclear testing, and disposal of nuclear waste. The Treaty of Tlatelolco remains the only treaty establishing a NWFZ in a densely populated area.

Signatory members of the treaty are: Bahamas, Barbados, Bolivia, Colombia, Costa Rica, The Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay and Venezuela.

Textual Summary of the Treaty:

In Article 1, the signatory States agree to restrict the use of nuclear materiel and facilities under their jurisdiction to peaceful purposes only, and to prohibit and prevent, within their territories, the following:

a) The testing, use, manufacture, production or acquisition of any nuclear weapons, either directly by the parties themselves or indirectly, on behalf of anyone else, or in any other way;

b) The receipt, storage, installation, deployment or possession of any nuclear weapon, directly or indirectly, by the parties themselves, by anyone on their behalf, or in any other way. They also agreed to refrain from encouraging, authorizing or engaging in, directly or indirectly, or in any way participating, the testing, use, manufacture, production, possession or control of any nuclear weapon.

Article 5 of the treaty defined a nuclear weapon as any device which is capable of releasing nuclear energy in an uncontrolled manner, and which has certain characteristics identifying its warlike purposes. An instrument that may beused for the transport or propulsion of such device is not included in this definition, if it is separable from the device and not an indivisible part thereof.

Article 17 reaffirmed the right of the contracting parties to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, to facilitate economic and social but not military development.

Article 18 highlighted the right of the contracting parties to carry out nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes, including explosions that involve devices similar to those used in nuclear weapons, or to collaborate with third parties for the same purpose, provided that those explosions are carried out inaccordance with the treaty and in particular with Articles 1 and 5.

Africa

The establishment of a NWFZ in Africa was sought following a French nuclear test in the African Sahara in 1960. A resolution calling on all states to refrain from conducting any nuclear tests in Africa, not to use the continent to test, store or transport nuclear weapons, and to respect the states of Africa as a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone, was adopted by the General Assembly on 23 November 1961. (res. 1652)

By 1964 the Organization of African Unity (OAU) adopted the Declaration on the Denuclearization of Africa. A number of countries called for action to ensure implementation of this declaration. However, the denuclearization of Africa has not been achieved as Africans have yet to establish the necessary procedures to define and implement a NWFZ in the continent. Members of the OAU have attacked several nations for their nuclear weapons policy regarding Africa. Kenya noted in 1985 that South Africa had developed nuclear capability. According to Angola, certain members states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Israel have attempted to undermine efforts to keep Africa a nuclear free zone. "Using as a pretext the 'vital interest of the west' and 'constructive engagement' with Pretoria," those countries helped to bring about a massive build-up of South Africa's military machinery, and assisted the "apartheid" state's acquisition of its present nuclear weapons capability.

In resolution 38/181, "Implementation of the Declaration on the Denuclearization of Africa," the Assembly strongly reiterated its call upon all States to consider and respect the continent of Africa and surrounding areas as a NWFZ. In addition, it reaffirmed the view that implementation of the Declaration would be a significant measure toward the prevention of the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the promotion of international peace and security.

Middle East

The Middle East is one of the most politically sensitive regions in the world. Ongoing military conflicts, violent political upheaval, religious differences, and superpower involvement in the area have created an environment conducive to large scale military confrontation. Fear of nuclear confrontation resulting from the ever present threat of escalation of tensions in the region has spurred United Nations' action.

In resolution 38/64, the United Nations called for the establishment of a NWFZ in the Middle East. The Assembly called upon all parties directly concerned to seriously consider taking practical and urgent steps required to establish a NWFZ in the Middle East. As a means of promoting the objectives, the United Nations invited the Middle Eastern nations to adhere to the Treaty of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Pending the establishment of the zone, all countries of the region that had not yet done so were urged to agree to place all their nuclear activities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguard and not to develop, produce, test, or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons, or permit the stationing of nuclear weaponsor nuclear explosive devices on their territories, or territories under their control. In 1984, the General Assembly (res. 39/54) reiterated that all countries of the region should agree to place all their nuclear activities under IAEA safeguards pending the establishment of a NWFZ.

To date, the United Nations have put forth fourteen resolutions calling for the establishment of a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. Its most recent resolution (43/65) reaffirmed the right of all States to acquire and develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes yet called upon member States to adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. In addition to reiterating goals established previously, the resolution called upon all States to work with the Secretary General to find the means to make a NWFZ the reality for the Middle East. The General Assembly decided to stay seized of that matter for the Forty-fourth Session.

South Pacific

In 1975, New Zealand introduced an initiative to the South Pacific Forum to establish a Nuclear Free Zone. The initiative was shelved when it did not receive support from subsequent regimes in New Zealand or Australia. However, by 1984 the leaders of the 13 member States of the South Pacific Forum endorsed an Australian proposal to establish a Nuclear Free Zone in the region.

The testing of nuclear explosives in French Polynesia the same year, and the subsequent use of an island as a nuclear waste disposal site, motivated the Forum. In 1985, eight of the thirteen voting members of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone (SPNFZ) signed the treaty of Rarotonga (Australia, Fiji, Cook Island, Kiribati, New Zealand, Niue, Tuvalu and Western Samoa). The substantive provisions of the Treaty establish obligations with respect to the following matters:

a) Renunciation of nuclear explosive devices;

b) Application of International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards;

c) Prevention of (illegal) dumping of radioactive waste and other radioactive materials;

d) Various related arrangements concerning controls, reports, exchange of information, and consultations;

e) Prevention of stationing of nuclear explosives devices;

f) Prevention of testing of nuclear explosive devices.

The Treaty area covers the Western Pacific from Australia and Papua New Guinea on the west, to the Equator on the north, to the 60th parallel on the south, and the 115th parallel on the east. It includes New Zealand, a number of small nation states, territories of France (French Polynesia and New Caledonia), United Kingdom (Pitcairn Island) and the U.S.A. (American Samoa and Jarvis Island).

The provisions relating to the prevention of nuclear explosive devices specifically provide that each of the Treaty parties remains free to decide for itself on visits, transit or navigation of foreign ships and aircraft in its territory, territorial waters or airspace. The phraseology was carefully selected as to not interfere with states' rights to transport nuclear armaments through the region and make ports of call.

All members of the South Pacific Forum are eligible to be signators to the Treaty. The annexes describe the boundaries of the treaty zone, the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards referred to in the content of the treaty, arrangements for the Consultation Committee and the Complaints Procedure.

The treaty also has three protocols which restrict nuclear activity within the SPNFZ by states possessing nuclear weapons. The content of the three protocols is as follows:

PROTOCOL 1

Stipulates that its members will not to manufacture, station or test any nuclear explosive devices within the boundaries of the SPNFZ. This protocol was open for signature by the U.S.A., the United Kingdom and France.

PROTOCOL 2

Strongly urges that its members not contrive to any act that would constitute a violation of the treaty, and not to threaten or coerce the usage of nuclear explosive devices against party members to the treaty.

PROTOCOL 3

Firmly requests that its members not test any nuclear explosive devices within the boundaries of the zone.

Protocols 2 and 3 are open to all five nuclear-weapons states for signature. Current members of the SPNFZ are: Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Salomon Island, Vanuatu, Tonga, Western Samoa, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Nauru, The Cook Island and Niue.

Notes

1. Annual Review of United Nations Affairs, 1981, p. 46.

2. Annual Review of United Nations Affairs, 1985, p. 160

SOURCES

Clements, Kevin P. "New Zealand's Antinuclear Stand", Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, March 1987, pp. 32-34.

Karem, Mahmoud; A Nuclear Weapon Free Zone in the Middle East, Problems and Prospects.

Alfonso Garcia Robles; The Latin America Nuclear Weapon Free Zone.

Spector, Leonard S., The New Nuclear Nations.

Van Ness, Peter & Stephenson, Carolyn M, "A Nuclear-Free South Pacific", The Nation, November 23, 1985., pp. 549 - 551.

Annual Review of United Nations Affairs 1977.

Annual Review of United Nations Affairs 1981.

Annual Review of United Nations Affairs 1983.

Annual Review of United Nations Affairs 1985.

Department of State Bulletin, Vol. 87, September 1985..