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.