|
Wellington,
December 8, 2004.
I
would like to thank the Parliamentary Network for Nuclear
Disarmament and the Government of New Zealand for the
privilege of joining you in Wellington and participating
in this important forum.
I
am from Chile, a country whose geographic similarities-and
I am referring to geography in its broadest sense, physical,
human, economic, etc.-with New Zealand are noteworthy.
Being here is like being at home. What is more, we Latin-Americans
admire New Zealand for its progressive foreign policy.
Few countries in the world have a firmer commitment
to the cause of non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament
than New Zealand.
I
am pleased to be participating in a parliamentary meeting.
Parliamentarians in a globalized world based on democratic
principles that express the will of their respective
national societies, have an ever-increasing influence
on the decisions of their governments. And I am not
just referring exclusively to parliamentary governments,
like New Zealand's, where the Government is part of
Parliament. In presidential systems as well, the influence
of Parliament is increasingly apparent, because in today's
world, foreign policy is by necessity State policy.
That
is why I wish to congratulate the Parliamentary Network
for Nuclear Disarmament for the magnificent work it
is doing in the field of non-proliferation and nuclear
disarmament. I would especially like to congratulate
my friend Alyn Ware who has been so efficient in coordinating
this event and has contributed to the organization of
this excellent forum.
The
subject I have been asked to address today is "Nuclear
Weapon Free Zones and the promotion of nuclear non-proliferation."
Nuclear-weapon-free
zones constitute an important contribution to the prohibition
of nuclear weapons and their proliferation.
In
essence, an NWFZ is a geographic area within which the
States that exercise sovereign territorial rights over
the area assume the commitment to prohibit or impede
the testing, use, fabrication, acquisition, installation,
or emplacement of nuclear weapons, while the nuclear
powers commit to respecting the denuclearized character
of the area.
The
first area in which the use of nuclear weapons was prohibited
was Antarctica; however the Antarctic Treaty of 1959
had a broader purpose. Strictly speaking, the first
NWFZ was created in 1967 by the Treaty of Tlatelolco
for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America.
By
establishing the first inhabited zone free of nuclear
weapons on the planet, the Treaty of Tlatelolco served
as and example and a source of inspiration for the creation
of other denuclearized regions. In 1985, the Treaty
of Rarotonga created a vast NWFZ in the South Pacific,
and in 1996 and 1997, the Treaties of Bangkok and Pelindaba
establish the military denuclearization of Southeast
Asia and Africa, respectively. Today, these four zones
include more than 100 States, that is to say, more than
half of the States that make up the international community.
Additionally, the creation of other NWFZs, like in Central
Asia-where all indications point to it being the next
NFWZ--, the Middle East, and the Korean Peninsula, is
all under consideration.
The
characteristics of these NWFZs have been built gradually
by the treaties that established them and by various
resolutions passed by the United Nations General Assembly,
especially Resolution 3472 (XXX). Based on these instruments,
the basic elements that characterize an NWFZ are:
•
NWFZs must be established
by international treaty;
•
The initiative for the
creation of an NWFZ is the responsibility of the states
that would make up part of the proposed Zone;
•
The NWFZs must be recognized
by a resolution passed by the United Nations General
Assembly;
•
The NWFZs establish
the complete prohibition of nuclear weapons in the Zone
of Application by the States Parties to the treaty;
•
States possessing nuclear
weapons must assume the commitment to respect the denuclearized
character of the NWFZs;
•
NWFZs must establish
a control and verification system for its nuclear facilities;
•
The geographic area
covered by the NWFZs must be clearly delimited.
One
essential element that characterizes these zones is
the necessary balance that must exist regarding the
obligations of the States Parties of the zones and those
assumed by the States that possess nuclear weapons.
In this regard, I should point out once again the pioneering
character of Additional Protocol II of the Treaty of
Tlatelolco, in which the recognized nuclear weapon States-China,
the United States of America, the Soviet Union (today
the Russian Federation), France, and the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland-committed "...not
to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against the
Contracting Parties of the Treaty."
All
of the other NWFZs have incorporated these fundamental
Protocols into their respective treaties, although unlike
the Treaty of Tlatelolco, they have not been ratified
by all of the nuclear powers. In the case of the Treaty
of Rarotonga , the legal texts include three
Additional Protocols.
The
first is for those States that de jure or
de facto have territories under their responsibility
within the treaty's zone of application. The Parties
to this protocol include, France, the United Kingdom,
and the United States of America, all three of which
have signed the Protocol, however it has only been ratified
by the first two. The second Protocol to the Treaty
of Rarotonga commits nuclear powers to respecting the
denuclearized character of the zone. It has been signed
by all five nuclear powers, all of which, except for
the United States, have ratified it. The third Protocol
commits the nuclear weapons States to abstaining from
conducting nuclear tests within the Treaty's area of
application and has been signed by all five of the nuclear
powers, however here again the United States has yet
to ratify it.
The
Treaty of Bangkok has one Additional
Protocol designed to ensure that the nuclear powers
respect its statute of denuclearization, however, to
date, no nuclear power has signed it.
The
Treaty of Pelindaba has three Additional
Protocols. The first aimed at the five nuclear powers;
the second prohibiting nuclear testing in the treaty's
zone of application, and the third referring to States
that de jure or de facto have territories
within their jurisdiction within the treaty's zone of
application. In modern Africa, which is almost completely
decolonized, this Protocol only applies to France and
Spain (Ceuta and Melilla). Spain, however, has yet to
sign it. The first two Protocols have been signed by
the five nuclear powers, although the United States
and Russia have yet to ratify both of them.
The
immediate objective of the NWFZs is the strengthening
of regional security and that of the Member States found
in those zones by prohibiting the use or threat to use
nuclear weapons within the area of application of each
treaty and the commitment by nuclear weapon States to
the zones through negative security guarantees.
The
final objective of NWFZs is the achievement of general
and complete disarmament. In this regard I should mention
that the Treaty of Tlatelolco in its Preamble states:
".that militarily denuclearized zones are not an end
in themselves but rather a means for achieving general
and complete disarmament at a later stage."
NWFZs
have made a significant contribution to the nuclear
non-proliferation process. The States that participate
in these treaties have not only committed to refraining
from developing, acquiring, or using nuclear arms, but
have also acquired the commitment to refrain from deploying
nuclear weapons belonging to another State within their
territory. Consequently, this prohibition included in
the treaties establishing the NWFZs is aiding the non-proliferation
process, by limiting the geographical area in which
nuclear weapon facilities or operations can exist.
Moreover,
it is important to note that the greatest guarantee
and assurance held by the Parties to NWFZs is the commitment
that nuclear-weapon States have assumed to not use or
threaten to use nuclear weapons against the States Parties
of the NWFZs. These commitments acquired by the nuclear
powers are unconditional and legally binding.
The
existence of the four NWFZs, all with similar interests
shared by their States Parties, requires that they coordinate
their efforts in order to adopt a common policy at the
United Nations, the various fora dedicated to disarmament,
the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the Preparatory
Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
Organization.
There
are many issues where this coordination may prove most
useful, especially as regards emerging issues that are
beginning to be discussed in different international
fora and organizations.
Ties
and cooperation between the NWFZs offer a unique opportunity
to play a role on the grand stage of world disarmament
with increased negotiating power. The enormous capital
offered by these States, their populations, and the
areas covered by these zones strengthens their presence
at multilateral disarmament negotiations and thus allows
them to fulfill more effectively their main raison
d'ętre , which is contributing to and hastening
the creation of a nuclear-threat-free world. That is
why OPANAL has been endeavoring to have convened an
International Conference of the States Parties and Signatories
of the NWFZs. The Government of Mexico has recently
offered to host the Conference of the States Parties
and Signatories to the Treaties Establishing Nuclear-Weapon-Free
Zones.
We
hope that immediately before the Conference on the Treaty
on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons which will
take place next year, the States parties and signatories
to the Treaties of Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok, and
Pelindaba –will meet in a special Conference for
the purpose of strengthening the nuclear-weapon-free-zone
regime and to contribute to the disarmament and nuclear
non-proliferation processes and in particular to analyze
ways of cooperating that can help to achieve
the universal goal of a nuclear-weapon-free world.
We believe that
this will be an excellent opportunity for the non-nuclear-weapon
States to express their points of view regarding nuclear
disarmament and non-proliferation. We agree with the
nuclear powers that the non-proliferation of nuclear
weapons is one of the international community's most
fundamental objectives, and that is precisely why the
NPT is the cornerstone of the non-proliferation regime.
But at the same time we also maintain that it is equally-if
not more-important to move toward general and complete
nuclear disarmament. Therefore, we are convinced that
the existence of nuclear weapons constitutes a threat
to the survival of humanity and that the only real guarantee
against their use or threat of use is their total elimination
as a way to achieve a nuclear-weapon-free world.
The draft Declaration
prepared by the States of Latin America and the Caribbean
has been presented to the other States of other NWFZs
expresses the need to move toward the priority objective
of nuclear disarmament and achieve the total elimination
and prohibition of nuclear weapons. The document also
states that reaching the objective of permanently eliminating
and prohibiting nuclear weapons requires firm political
will from all States particularly those States that
possess nuclear weapons.
I am not going
to refer in detail to the draft declaration –a
copy of which is available to you- because later in
this Seminar, Ambassador Angelica Arce and the Hon.
Matt Robson will address precisely this matter.
Nevertheless,
let me point out that this document calls upon the nuclear
powers that have not yet signed or ratified the pertinent
Additional Protocols to the treaties establishing nuclear-weapon-free
zones that they do so as soon as possible. Moreover,
it urges the nuclear powers that, having signed or ratified
some of the Additional Protocols to the treaty establishing
a NWFZ and have done so with reservations or unilateral
interpretations that affect the statute of denuclearization
of that zone to modify or withdraw such reservations
or unilateral interpretations.
One important
issue in this regard is the declaration made by some
nuclear powers to the effect that they could use nuclear
weapons in self-defense in the event of an armed attack,
based on their interpretation of Article 51 of the United
Nations Charter. We are of the opinion that such an
interpretation cannot be endorsed by current international
law because of a lack of proportionality. In effect,
the use of nuclear weapons as a means of self-defense
in response to an armed attack with conventional weapons
is not proportional to the end sought by the defensive
action recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the
United Nations.
The proposed
Conference of the States Parties and Signatories of
the Treaties establishing NWFZs will also be an excellent
opportunity for promoting other NWFZs to cooperate in
the advancement of ratification by all States that belong
to a nuclear-weapon-free zone as well as in the implementation
of relevant instruments as a contribution to strengthen
the NPT regime and achieve nuclear disarmament, including
through mechanisms such as joint meetings of the States
parties, signatories and observers of those treaties,
and cooperation agreements signed among them in a systematic
manner within the framework of the NPT Review Conference.
Ladies and gentlemen,
To conclude,
let me remind you that Ambassador Alfonso Garcia Robles,
the father of the Treaty of Tlatelolco, was wont to
say that NWFZs were not an end in themselves, but rather
a means for achieving general and complete nuclear disarmament.
Those inspired words were captured in the Preamble of
the Treaty of Tlatelolco and time has proven the wisdom
of them. But in the meantime, until an agreement is
reached to abolish nuclear weapons, NWFZs are still
the best way to continue the journey toward general
and complete disarmament.
So,
today, NWFZs, together with the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty and the Comprehensive-Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty,
constitute the fundamental instruments of the international
disarmament and non-proliferation regime. Those
instruments-the NPT, the CTBT, and Treaties like Tlatelolco
and Rarotonga-are examples of the international community's
greatest efforts to prohibit nuclear weapons and impede
their proliferation. They represent enormously important
yet still insufficient efforts. The goal we should all
set is the total abolition of nuclear weapons. Their
mere existence is a threat to all humanity, because
their use would bring catastrophic consequences for
all of us. For this reason we must press forward in
our efforts to reach the priority objective of nuclear
disarmament and the elimination and total prohibition
of nuclear weapons.
Thanks.
|
