UN Secretariat Item Scan - Barcode - Record Title Page 35 Date 07/06/2006 Time 11:35:56 AM
S-0905-0003-05-00001
Expanded Number S-0905-0003-05-00001
Title items-in-Disarmament - chronological files - general
Date Created 01/11/1979
Record Type Archival Item
Container S-0905-0003: Political matters - disarmament 1972-1981
Print Name of Person Submit Image Signature of Person Submit MJS/AKU/MS cc bf: RA/AR/MKP/CCF/AF cc: Mr. Akashi File: UNA Australia Ms. Lehmann xRef: Disarm.Week
13 October 1930
Dear Dr. Suter,
On behalf of the Secretary-General, I should like to thank you for your letter of 17 September 1980 concerning the national disarmament conference to be held by the United Nations Association of Australia on 25 October 1980.
The Secretary-General appreciated, your kindness in informing him of this commendable initiative. With regard to your request for a message, perhaps I could suggest that the message issued by the Secretary-General for UN Disarmament Week might be appropriate for this occasion. We will arrange for you to receive the text of this message, which is only released on the first day of Disarmament Week, 24 October, from the United Nations Information Centre in Sydney. The Secretary-General has asked me to convey to pou and to the United nations Association of Australia his best wishes for the success of your disarmament conference.
Yours sincerely,
Georg Mautner-Markhof Special Assistant to the Secretary-General
Dr. Keith D. Suter Vice-President United Nations Association of Australia GPO Box 9820 Sydney 2001 UNITED NATIONS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA 11 \Mk\5£iK^i£D/ /M Dear Dr. Waldheim, The United Nations Association is organising a national disarmament conference to take place on October 25th. The conference has . attracted wide support from all sections of the Australian community and we are confident that the conference will make a significant m contribution to increasing Australian's awareness bf the dangers p of the arms race and the need for positive alternatives. ' m A brochure giving more information is enclosed. It would be a great honour for the Association if you could write a short message of goodwill which would be read out at the beginning of the conference. This would remind the 200 or so participants and media representatives that this conference is but part of a vast international movement to- save humanity from the arms race. Thank you for your co-operation. "V,-U!ri; >- •telfc Yours sincerely, -•iWt.-7ij •Pf :-^5S.i Keith D. Suter (Dr.) Federal Disarmament Officer ^OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE j CONTROL no. o j/ti my and Delegate Non-Sponsoring Form Delegates: (1) Name Address Postcode (2) Name • Address Postcode Sponsorship Fees: $20 large organisations (2 delegates $10 small organisations (1 delegate) Non-Sponsoring organisations: $10 (1 delegate) Individual delegates — $5 Concessions — $2 Enclosed $ for sponsorship and'or delegate fees PLEASE RETURN TO: United Nations Association of Australia, N.S.W. Administrative Office, GPO Box 9820, SYDNEY 2000 Ph 290-3030 SPONSORING ORGANISATIONS to date Bathurst City Council Australian Conservation Foundation Printing & Kindred Industries Union Baulkham Hills Shire Australian Peace Committee Religious Society of Friends Blacktown Council Amalgamated Metal Workers & Si. Joan's International Alliance Municipality of Concord Shipwrights' Union Union of Australian Women Municipality of Ku-Ring-Gai Australian Glassworkers' Union Uniting Church Fellowship Council of the City of Lismore Association for Internationa! United Trades & Labor Council of S,A, Shire of Mittagong Co-operation & Disarmamem United Association of Women Port Stephens Shire Building Workers Industrial Union Waterside Workers' Federation of Warnngah Shire Council ot Australia (NSW) Australia. Sydney Branch Windouran Shire Council Electrical Trades Union — National Women's International League for Wingacarnbee Shire Electrical Trades Union of NSW Peace & Freedom City of Wollongong Federation of Australian University Women's International Zionist Hurstville Municipal Council Staff Associations Organisation of NSW IC' Municipality of Marrickville R'd. Miscellaneous Workers Union — NSV\ Assn. of Heads of Independent Shire of Homsby Young Women's Christian Association Girls' Schools of Australia N.S W. Teachers Federation Australian Bank Employees Union N.S W. Fire Brigade Employees Union N.S.W. Humanist Society Public Service .Association of N.S.W Australian Council of Churches (NSW) N.S.W. Chiidrens Week Committee Aust. Labor Party — N.S.W Australian Council of Trade Unions Labor Council of N.S W UNITED NATIONS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA NATIONAL CONFERENCE MEREWETHER LECTURE THEATRE SYDNEY UNIVERSITY (OFF CITY ROAD) SATURDAY 25th October 1980 — 9.00 am - 5.30 pm "Every gun that \s made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in a final sense, a THEFT from those who hunger and arc not tfri. "mm fho^r u'hn ,irc rold and are not ARE YOU CONCERNED? RESEARCH The world is spending $1,000,000 per minute on the arms race. Of 125 million children born in the world in 1977, 13 million died of disease and malnutrition before their first birthday. On a world scale annual expenditure on health is 544 per head as against $81 for military P'JS fii1 S expenditure. The Hiroshima bomb killed 140,000 people uiumw instantly. Today the stock pile of nuclear weapons is sufficient to kill every individual on earth several times over. Two fifths of the world's scientific research and development Recently the world stood only six minutes away Irom nuclear war after a computer malfunction is now devoted to military purposes put the U.S. nuclear forces on standby for attack. THE ARMS RACE OR THE HUMAN RACE GENERAL AND The Conference will also adopt a Plan ot Action COMPLETE to mobilise Australian opinion during the DISARMAMENT period leading up to the 1982 U.N. Special Session on Disarmament. General and complete disarmament under effective international control was the basic "The Arms Race and the Human Race" was the theme of the first international disarmament topic of a special N.G.O. Conference held by conference since 1932 held in New York in the United Nations in New York in June this 1978. year. The Final Document from this United Nations "The Arms Race or the Human Race", the Special Session of the General Assembly on national conference to be held in the Disarmament is the basis of an international Merewether Lecture Theatre, Sydney Univer- campaign to mobilise support lor disarmament. sity on Saturday, 25th October is our response It declared the week commencing 24th to the U.N. call to mobilise support for dis- October — the day of the foundation of the armament. The United Nations Association of United Nations as United Nations Disarma- Australia believes it has a special responsibility ment Week. to focus attention on peace, disarmament and development. The second U.N. Special Session of the General Assembly on Disarmament is to be The following topics will be discussed: held in 1982. Australia's Foreign Policy Non-Governmental Organisations throughout Australia and the New International the world are responding to ;he U.N call to Economic Order mobilise support for disarmament. Australia and the Arms Race Children and the Culture of War SHOW YOUR CONCERN HEALTH If an organisation: Become a sponsor and appoint delegates [f an individual: Become a delegate "The world now stands on the drink ol ihc final abyss. Lei us all ivsokv tn Like .ill possilA1 [ifIf practical steps k> ensure, th.il we du no!, through our own lolly, yo ovc't I hi; t'dqt.1." Farl Miiunihaiten (M.u. 197<->) Five million children, many of them weakened by malnutrition, die each year from diseases which immunisation could prevunt CONFIDENTIAL UNITED NATIONS WSKffl NATIONS UNIES Px? INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR jfM*. TO: The Secretary-OpuyggT^ DATE: 8 October 198^^ A: REFERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: Jan Martenson DE?M: Assistant SeSecretary-Generc a Centre for Disarmament PT: Advisory Board on Disarmament Studies Before the reception for the Advisory Board on 8 October, I should briefly apprise you of the main topics on which its attention is at present focussed. 1. Proposals for Disarmament Studies At the last two meetings, proposals for ten new studies were tabled, covering a wide range of subjects. None of these seem capable of receiving unanimous support. The trend now seems to be to submit all proposals to vo.u at the end of this session (one "Hair been withdrawn), possibly with an indication that several received more support than others. Since, as ascertained through legal advice, the Assembly could take direct action upon proposals for study transmitted to it by the Secretary-General with his endorsement, a_majority of members hope that you will see your way clear_tp giving ^juch endorsement to the three or four studies they expect to recommend. 2. Mandate of the Board A number of members are somewhat disillusioned with the Board's activities": it has^ not yet oeen able to agree on a comprehensive programme of disarmament studies; at each session, more proposals for studies are made, few of which have much chance of acceptance by the Assembly; there is a tendency to revert to the same subject repeatedly. Briefly, these members feel that time is wasted in what increasingly looks like a non-essential function. Some members have informally raised the question of the Board's mandate. One suggestion made is that the Board might have a more general advisory function in the area of disarmament. There is also a tendency on the part of several members tCL seek for the Board a supervisory function in regard to the Centre's activities in study and research. I respond to such suggestions by pointing_Qu.t that (a) the functions of the Board mav^ be reviewed at the 1982 special session on disarmament; (b) institutional arrangements are at present laeincr discussed in an ejg3ert~group wnich might also deal with the Board; so that (c) an^ attempt to change the mandate jipw (which the Board anyway cannot do uni lateral, ly)is inopportune^ - 2 - 3. United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research The Board has been acquainted with the steps taken and contemplated in this regard. Many members feel that the Advisory Council of the Institute should comprise five members of the Board, beside the Chairman, rather than three as proposed by UNITAR. Consultations to this effect with the Chairman of UNITAR's Board of Trustees, Mr. de Guiringaud, are taking place. Minister Agha Shahi is expected to propose to you the names of the five Advisory Board members to be appointed by you as the Advisory Council members. The Board is likely to recommend, in your report to the General Assembly on the Institute, to stress, inter alia, that it should work on the basis of the provisions of the Final Document of the Special Session devoted to disarmament. 4. A list of the members of the Board is annexed for your information. cc: Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko Under-Secretary-General for Political and Security Council Affairs September 1980 Members of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Studies - - - ...... E,E. Dr. Erich. Bielka-Karltreau, Former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Austria H.E. Amb. Abdulla Yaccoub Bishara, Permanent Representative of Kuwait to the United Rations H.E. Amb. Frank Edmund Boat en, Ambassador of Ghana to Denmark E.E. Amb. Constantin Ene, Permanent Representative of Romania to the United Rations Office at Geneva; Representative of Romania to the Committee on Disarmament E.E. Amb. Alfonso Garcia Robles, Permanent Representative of Mexico to the Committee on Disarmament Dr. John Garnett, Senior Lectiirer in Strategic Studies, Department of International Politics, University of Aberystvyth, Wales, United Kingdom E.E. Dr. Enrique Gaviria-Lievano , Deputy Permanent 'Representative of Colombia to the United Nations Office at Geneva H.S. Ignac Golob, Assistant Federal Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Yugoslavia H.E. Mr. A.C.S. Hameed, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Sri Professor John W. Holmes, Director of Research, Canadian Institute of Inter- national Affairs Professor Hussein Khallaf, Professor at the University of Cairo, Former - Minister and Ambassador of Egypt E.E. Amb. Lai Ya-li, Deputy Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the United Rations ----- H.E. Amb. Carlos Lechuga Hevia, Director of International Organizations, Ministry "of Foreign Affairs of Cuba. H.E. Amb. Akira Matsui, Adviser, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. Dr. Kasuka S. Miitukva, Deputy Permanent Representative of Zambia to the United .Nations ... H.E. Amb. Carlos Ortiz de Rozas, Ambassador of Argentina to the Court" of St. "James H.E. Amb. Radha Krishna Ramphul, Permanent Representative of Mauritius to the United Rations Professor Dr. Klaus Ritter, Director, Foundation of Science and Politics, Ebenhausen, Federal Republic of Germany H.E. Mr. Alejandro Rovira, Former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Uruguay H.S. Acb. George M. Seignious, H, Former Head of the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agsncy . . E.S. Mr. Agha Snahi, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Pakistan Mr. Vladimir Shustov, Deputy Permanent Representative of the USSS to the United Nations Mr. Pierre-Christian Taittinger, Senator and Foraer Minister of the Republic of France " . •' - • ' ' '- H.S. Amb.' Oscar Vaerao', Director General for Planning and Research, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Horvsy H.S. Dr. Milous 7ejvoda, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Czechoslovakia H.E. Mr. M.A. Yellodi, Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs of India . Mr. Piero Vinci, Ambassador of Italy, Rome « E.E. Amb. Eugeniusz ¥ysner, Director, Department of International Organizations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Poland H.E. Amb. Alejandro D. Yango, Permanent P.epresentative of the Philippines to the United Hations E.E. Amb. Alexander Yankov, Depirty Foreign Minister of Bulgaria and Permanent Representative of Bulgaria to the United Nations . V UNITED NATIONS ^g£$ NATIONS UN IE INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM ~^~~ MEMORANDUM INTERIELJR ' 1 October 198O TO: The Secretary Gener^aJ/( . A: REFERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: FROM: Jan Martenson| DE: Assistant Sec,r-e[cary, Centre for Disarmament SUBJECT: OBJET: Advisory Boara on Disarmament Studies 1. The Advisory Board on Disarmament Studies is now in session. I have invited its members to a _reLaep±jLoja in my office on Tt^sdajE-,—7-~October"ujerv^ $r?:r^i^w.- .from 6:15 to 7:3O. 2. Since it concerns a body appointed to advise you and includes some very senior persons, it would be highly appreciated if you could see your way clear to grace us briefly with your presence. 3. An up-to-date list of the composition of the Board is attached. rn K I ;/ Members of the Advisory _Board on Disarmp.ment Studies H.E. Dr. Erich Bielka-Karltreau, Former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Austria H.E. Amb. Abdulla Yaccoub Bishara, Permanent Representative of Kuwait to the United nations E.E. Amb. Frank Edmund Boaten, Ambassador of Ghana to Denmark H.E. Amb. Constantin Ene, Permanent Representative of Romania to the United Rations Office at Geneva; Representative of Romania to the Committee on Disarmament H.E. Amb. Alfonso Garcxa Robles, Permanent Representative of Mexico to the Committee on Disarmament Dr. John Garnett, Senior Lecturer in Strategic Studies, Department of latex-national Politics, University of Aberystvyth, Vales, United Kingdom H.E. Dr. Enrique Gaviria-Lievano, Deputy Permanent 'Representative of Colombia to the United Nations Office at Genevg. H.S. Ignac Golob, Assistant Federal Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Yugoslavia H.E. Mr. A.C.S. Eameed, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Sri Lanka Professor John W. Holmes, Director of Research, Canadian Institute of Inter- national Affairs Professor Hussein Khallaf, Professor at the University of Cairo, Former Minister and Ambassador of Egypt H-E. Amb. Lai Ya-li, Deputy Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the United nations H.E. Amb. Carlos Lechuga Hevia, Director of International Organizations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cuba. H.E. Amb. Akira Matsui, Adviser, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan Dr. Kasuka S. Mirtukva, Deputy Permanent Representative of Zambia to the United Eations " ' H.E. Amb. Carlos Ortiz de Rozas, Ambassador of Argentina to the Court"of St."James H.E. Amb. Radha Krishna Ramphul, Permanent Representative of Mauritius to the United nations Professor Dr. Klaus Ritter, Director, Foundation of Science and Politics, Ebenhausen, Federal Republic of Germany H.E. Mr. Alejandro Rovira, Former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Uruguay H.3. Arab. George M. Seignious, II, Foraer Head of the United States Arsis Control and Disarmament Agency E.S. Mr. Agba Shahi, Adviser on Foreign Affairs for Pakistan Mr. Vladimir Shustov, Deputy Permanent Representative of the USS2 to the United Rations Mr. Pierre-Christian Taittinger, Senator and Foraer Minister of the Republic of France "'.•'- • • E.S. Arab. Oscar Yaern^, Director General for Planning and Research, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Norway E.S. Dr. Milous Vejvoda, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Czechoslovakia H.S. Mr. M.A. Vellodi, Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs of India . Mr. Piero Yinci, Ambassador of Italy, Home * r H.S. Aab. Eugenitisz Vyzner, Director, Departaaent of International Organizations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Poland H-Z. Arab. Alejandro D. Yango, Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations E.S. Amb. Alexander Yankov, Deputy Foreign Minister of Bulgaria and Pemanent Representative of Bulgaria to the United Hations UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM*. MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: The Secretary-Genera ATE: 1 October 198( A: Mr. Mikhail D. Sytien^d THROUGH: Under-Secretary-General for, S/C DE: and Security Council Aff FROM: Jan Martenson DE: Assistant Secretary-General v Centre for Disarmament /\ SUBJECT: £ I Statements of the Soviet Un:fcQ.n_»nd the United States in the Plenary of the thirty-fifth session: comparison of the disarmament aspects 1. While manifesting considerable divergencies of opinion in the over-all assessments of international relations", the two major Powers indicated also some common ground on a number of questions of arms ilmitatiop and disarmament. They both emphasized tensions and* uncertainty in present-day international relations and seemed, therefore, to regard disarmament as an ever more difficult undertaking. They equally stressed the urgent importance of restrictions in armaments in view of the existing international situation. 2. The United States assured that its commitment to disarmament remained intact and recalled its position on major issues. The Soviet Union did the same, but it also drew attention to the escala- tion of armaments in a number of fields, expressing its opinion that the primary cause behind the deterioration of the international situation was a sharp turn and effort to tilt the strategic balance of forces by the West and the United States in particular. 3. The Soviet Union, stating.inter alia, that "the conditions which are developing require intensified efforts to preserve and deepen international detente and prevent war", proposed the inclusion in the agenda of the thirty-fifth session as an important and urgent matter of the item entitled "Urgent measures for, reducing the danger of jwar"/ In a draft resolution annexed to the explanatory memorandum, signed by Foreign Minister Gromyko, the Soviet Union put forward specific proposals amounting to a freeze of the expansion of existing military-political groupings]armed forces and conventional weapons, particularly those of the permanent members of the Security Council and their allies; steps concerning security guarantees to non-nuclear States as well as a one-year moratorium on any nuclear explosions. ~* 4. jEJeitfyer of the major Powers appeared to consider the delay in the ratification of the SALT II Treaty as an unsurmountable obstacle to negotiations in limitation and reduction of strategicarms and both urged preliminary discussions to begin promptly on medium-range nuclear weapon systems including, in the Soviet view, the US forward- based systems in Europe. The United States announced its intention to move forward towards ratification of SALT II after the Presidential election." -2- 5. In regard to a comprehensive test ban, both emphasized the speedy continuation of negotiations within the trilateral framework. The Soviet Union, however, as indicated above, also suggested an interim measure to be taken by all nuclear Powers by proposing a one-year moratorium of nuclear testing beginning from a date to be agreed upon between them. Suggestions on a moratorium were previously opposed by all nuclear-weapon States. 6. Likewise, some new elements were discernible in the Soviet position on security guarantees for non-nuclear States. The Soviet Union reiterated its stand on the adoption of a convention but expressed, in the same context, its readiness to consider other possible solutions to the issue, suggesting an identical solemn declaration by all nuclear weapon Powers to be reinforced, if so decided, by an authoritative decision of the Security Council. 7. Both manor Powp-rp II"^QT-I •'"^ +-T-»Q pr>gj+--i Yf a_gp«an+c nf t-.fr<=» recent" Review Conference of the NPT- The United States stressed the importance of the Treaty in the field of non-proliferation and of achieving comprehensive, full-scope international safeguard coverage. The Soviet Union draw particular attention to the importance of preventing, without any deviation, the transfer of nuclear equipment, material and technology intended for peaceful purposes from becoming a channel for spreading nuclear weapons. 8. In view of regional measures, the United States expressed its readiness to develop further the security aspect Of LJSCjj arid Willingness to consider. if the international situation permits and it there is t>alancecf progress in all areas in the Madrid Conference, a post-Madrid Conference on developing military significant confidence- building measures. The Soviet Union supported the broadening and deepening of confidence-building measures as well as measures towards lessening military tension on the European continent, with an emphasis on convening a conference on military detente and disarmament in Europe. 9. The .Soviet Union and the United States took stands close to each other on the efforts to bah radiological weapons. Tn~regard "to chemical weapons there was more distance between them, as the Soviet Union referred to plans by one of the negotiating powers to build new plants to produce chemical weapons and the United States, for its part, brought up reports that chemical weapons had been used in Afghanistan, Laos and Kampuchea. The United States supported the conduct of an impartial investigation into the matter under the auspices of the United Nations. Both major Powers spoke in favour of the continuations of the endeavours to achieve a prohibition against chemical weapons. ,Iiri;d«.^^,ii^.^fVNV*™"Jft^^'1«^ to^.JfefrBsiwfc-u* MEM, '' ' : , '~"'^ri;-i GMM suggested the SG to meet with Mr. Bielka on 9. October either for breakfast or lunch. SG's reply: "yes". Mr. Bielka can be reached through the Austrian mission. The letter says that GMM will contact Mr. Bielka personally Octavia bf: RA/AR/GI ¥ NOTE FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL Chairman of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Studies Following consultations, Mr. Agha Shahi (Pakistan)was nominated Chairman of the Advisory Board at its first meeting in November 1978. Though he did not attend the Board's sessions regularly, inquiries showed that there was no clear desire after one year for a change of Chairman. When Mr. Shahi was unable to be present, an Ad Hoc appointment of an acting chairman was made. At the fourth session of the Board in May 1980 - which Mr. Shahi did not attend - the Board appointed Ambassador E. Wyzner of Poland as Acting Chairman. At the end of that session, Ambassador Wyzner was designated as "Permanent Vice- chairman." The Centre for Disarmament advised us that informal consultations will be held at the Board's current session in order to determine the reaction to a proposal made by one member that Ambassador Wyzner be asked to succeed Mr. Shahi altogether. A. Knippenberg-Uther/ms 30 September 1980 GMI-l/ob 3 Lufton Place bf: RA/AR Lev; York, I>.Y. 10022 :ile: VIP B cc: MEM GLIM PENDING 2G, September 19BO Fur Deine freundlichcn £eilen von 1. September lYsGchte ich Dir bestens danker.. Ich freue raich, class Du cliescr Tage wieder nach Kew York koinnen wirst, urn an der bevorstohenden Tagung dc.3 Beircites fiir Abx'iistungsstudien teilsu- nci^iien. Ich stinmie in it Dir uberoir., class es keinen guten Eindruck ger^acht hatte, wenn cer osterreichieche Sits in dieseni Grerbium leer geblieben ware. Uas den j Vorsita ties BeiratGS betriff cr KO vurde Dotschaftor u'yzner am Ende cier Fruhjahrstagung suni ':Perrnanent Vice-Chairnian" bostellt. I's ist beabsichtigt, wahrend cier Herbstfcagung zu sondieren^ob die Anregung, Bet- acuaftcr V.-yzner orrueli die Position cles Vorsitsenden su libertragen, Unters tut sung findet. Da uu b-oabsichtigst bis 10. Qktober in Kew York EU bleiben, v;erderi wir sichcr Gile^enhcit habon uns \vicder-EUseiien und uns ciabei auch iiber dicse Frage su uiiterhalten. Wie 3u v.reisst, biti icii in aiosen Tag en beaonders stark in Anspruch genor^en, doch hoffe ich, dciss gegen Ende Deiines Aufenthaltes ein gemeinsames Fruhstuck Oder Hittagesson nog 1 ich sein vrird. Georg liautner-flarkhof wird sicn iiber die Hiss ion rnit Dir in Vcrbinaung setzen, um eir.en Terrain su vereinharen. Mit hor^lichen Grvissen, auch von Sissy, und Hanc- kusscn an Etta^ verbieibe ich herrn Bundesminister a.D Dr. Krich Biellp:a ii e v; Y err k c/o Austr. Mission S I AKU/MS ccij'SG; File: DPI \ /' xRef: Disarmament (aeneral) V- ' bf : AR/KKP/GMM/CCF/AF/MJS Mr, Ya sushi Akashi 25 September 1980 Under-Secretary-General fcr Public Information Rafeeuddin Ahmed Chef cie Cabinet International emblem-poster design competition on Bisarmament With reference to your memorandum of 16 September 1980, please proceed as proposed. UNITED NATIONS yjjgjf NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM ^^ MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: The Secretary-General DATE: 16 September 1980 A: Mr. Rafeeuddin Ahmed, Chef de Cabinet REFERENCE: THROUGH: Executive Office of the Secretary-General S/C DE: Yasushi Akashi, Under-Secretary-General -^^JH^^. FROM: for Public Information ' OE: SUBJECT: International emblem-poster design competition on OBJET: disarmament Pursuant to Resolution 3U/T5, 3^/83 and 3U/88 of 11 December 1979 (operative paragraphs attached), the Centre for Disarmament (PSCA) proposes that the Department of Public Information organize an international competition to select an appropriate emblem for the launching in the 1980s of the Second Disarmament Decade and to print posters containing the emblem for wide distribution. I wish to support this proposal. This measure will promote a better understanding by world opinion of the danger of the arms race as well as the need for disarmament and also ensure that world opinion exert a positive influence on the efforts of Governments to resolve disarmament issues. At its thirty-fifth regular session, the General Assembly will be requested to appropriate the necessary budget to finance the emblem and poster design competition which would provide: (a) funds for the printing of 100,000 copies of the winning poster (of which the emblem would be an integral part) in four/five colours and in several languages; (b) a prize of $2,500 for the best design for the emblem-poster as well as (c) other allied expenses for organizing the international competition and publicizing the emblem-poster. In view of the world-wide scope of the competition, it will be necessary — for practical reasons — to organize and conduct the competition on a country basis initially. This means that, in the first instance, the designs for an emblem-poster will be judged nationally and that the best emblem-poster design for each participating country will be sent to Headquarters to be judged internationally with designs received from other countries on the same basis. The final selection will be made at Headquarters by an international emblem-poster design competition selection committee with the prize to be awarded to the creator of the best emblem-poster design. The winning emblem-poster design will be reproduced by the United Nations and distributed widely through the DPI network of Information Centres and other available channels of distribution. - 2 - The time-table of the international competition, as agreed in principle by the Centre for Disarmament, is as follows: (a) announcement of the compe- tition through all governmental and information media to the fullest extent possible — January 1981; (b) the announcement of national entries in each participating Member State — 26 June 1981 (Charter Day); last day for pouching and mailing national entries to lew York for the international competition — 31 July 1981; announcement by the Secretary-General of the winner of the inter- national competition for the best emblem-poster design — 2U October 1981. Following the adoption of the relevant resolution by the General Assembly, the Secretary-General will be requested to send a note verbale on the interna- tional competition to the heads of Permanent Missions to the United Nations — in January 1981. This will be followed by a circular memorandum from the Department of Public Information to all Information Centres and U1DP offices to announce the launching of the international emblem-poster design competition. A press release will also be issued at Headquarters. If the Secretary-General approves of this proposal, I shall proceed with preparations for this event as well as arranging for its financial and adminis- trative requirements in consultation with the Centre for Disarmament. cc: Mr. Martenson Mr. Yeliseyev Mr. Masha Mr. Chao Mr. Martin Mr. Mazairac Mr. Stajduhar Mr. Nakachi - 18 - Consideration of the declaration of the 1980s as a disarmament decade Resolution 3V75 of 11 December 1979: The General Assembly, 1. Decides to declare the decade of the 1980s as the Second Dis- armament Decade; " .•? 2. Directs the Disarmament Commission, at its substantive session of 1980, to prepare elements of a draft resolution entitled "Declaration of the 1980s as the Second Disarmament Decade" and submit them to the General Assembly at its thirty-fifth session for consideration and adoption; 3. Determines that the draft resolution should embody, inter alia, an indication of targets during the Second Disarmament Decade for accomplishing the major objectives and goals of disarmament, as veil as vays and means of mobilizing vorld public opinion in this respect; 6. Decides to include in the provisional agenda of its thirty-fifth session an item entitled "Declaration of the 1980s as the Second Disarmament Decade'.' /No financial implications./ - 19 - Review of the implementation of the recommendations and decisions adopted by the General Assembly at its tenth special session Resolution 3^/83.of 11 December 1979: Disarmament Week The General Assembly, Gravely concerned over the continued arms race, Emphasizing the urgent need for and the importance of vide and continued mobilization of vorld public opinion in support of halting and reversing the arms race, especially the nuclear arms race in all its aspects, 3* Invites the relevant specialized agencies and the International Atomic Energy Agency to intensify activities, vithin their areas of competence, to disseminate information on the consequences of the arms race and reqpssts them to Inform the Secretary-General accordingly; 5. Invites international non-governmental organizations to take an active part in holding Disarmament Week and to inform the Secretary-General of the activities undertaken; Ato financial implications^./ - 20 - Declaration on International Co-operation for Disarmament^ Resolution 3^/88 of 11 December 1979: The General Assembly, II Urges all States, vith a viev to further improving the international climate required for the full implementation of the Final Document of the Tenth Special Session of the General Assembly and accelerating the progress of the appropriate disarmament negotiations, in particular: (e) To intensify steps, both through the United Nations system and individually, to promote a better understanding by vorld opinion of the danger of the arms race and the need for disarmament, and to ensure that vorld opinion exerts a positive influence on the efforts of Governments to resolve disarmament issues, utilizing to this end the educational systems, the mass media and all other appropriate institutions; • • • t * (g) To take vigorous measures, individually or collectively, to disseminate the ideals of peace, disarmament, co-operation and friendly relations betveen peoples; /_No financial implications^./ Sir ; As Mr. Corradini has just written to you again to send you an article of which he is the author, we have added one more sentence at the end. AKU/MS cc:( SG V -' bf : RA/AR/GMM"File: NPT (Disarmament) 17 Septeiuber I960 Dear Mr. Cooradini, I wish to thank you for your letter of 10 September 1980 concerning the second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Your reporting on the work of the Conference was most useful and has given me a valuable insight into the issues and the problems with which the Parties were faced at the Conference. The lack of significant progress and the failure to agree on a'substantive final declaration is a regrettable development, which I hope will be reversed in future negotiations. I should like to take this opportunity to express rny appreciation for your constructive work as Secretary- General of the second KPT Review Conference. I also wish to thank you for sending me the article on disarmament, which you recently published. With best wishes, Yours sincerely, Kurt Waldheim Kr. Alessandro Corradini Secretary-General of the second NPT Review Conference Geneva bf: #A/AR/GMM Note for the Secretary-General ** ^ -1 Second Review Conference of the Panayes to the Treaty on the Non-Prolif eration of Nuclle4r Weapons (NPT) — f^T*• • 'f/'/C Summary of telegramme and letter by Mr. Alessandro Corradini, Secretary-General of the Conference The Conference is generally considered unsuccessful. While the value of NPT was not called into question, the failure to adopt a final declaration brings into focus the broader question of the cessation of the nuclear arms race and disarmament in general - a question which is being debated in many other forums and still remains to be solved. Specifically, the main issues relating to implementation of NPT were: lack of significant progress on Article VI calling for negotiations in good faith to achieve nuclear disarmament ; criticism about nuclear co-operation with certain States not Parties to the Treatyi South Africa and Israel in particular; dissatisfaction of recipient countries with restrictive export policies affecting peaceful uses of nuclear energy; and question of imposing uniform export requirements (which all non-nuclear weapon States, whether Party to the NPT or not, have to accept, including safeguards) . The view of the Group of 77 clashed in some cases with the position of all three nuclear weapon States Party to the NPT and in other cases with positions of either the US or the USSR (in particular on negotiations on a comprehensive test ban and Salt II) . Despite the efforts by the Group of 77 to adjourn the Conference until 1981 (on the assumption that the political climate would be more favourable after the US presidential election) , the Conference decided to hold a third review conference in 1985. ***** A letter to Mr. Corradini is attached for your signature. A.Knippenberg-Uther/ms 17 September 1980 OFFICE DES NATIONS UNIES A GENEVE ffil UNITED NATIONS OFFICE AT Telegrammes: UNATIONS, GENEVE Palais des Nations Telex: 289696 CH -1211 GENEVE 10 Telephone: 346011 310211 REF. N°: (a rappelerdans la rtponse) 12 September I960 PERSONAL Dear Mr. Secretary-General, Your dedication to disarmament encourages me to send you the enclosed article — a small contribution on some very large and complex issues. Having had a long association with the United Nations, my main preoccupation was to stress the importance of the institutional and organizational aspects of disarmament. Allow me to take this opportunity to convey to you the expression of my highest regard and admiration. Yours sincerely, Alessandro Corradini His Excellency Mr. Kurt Waldheim Secretary-General United Nations New York N Y 10017 OFFICE DES NATIONS UNIES A GENEVE MwlVT/M UNITED NATIONS f- QPiM R tQfift- — f o L u L.I - i -j ssotr L $1 a Telegrammes : UNATIONS, GENEVE Palais des Nations Telex: 28 96 96 CH- 1211 GENEVE 10 Telephone: 346011 310211 REF. N°: (a rappeler dans la rfponse) 10 September 1980 CONFIDENTIAL Dear Mr. Secretary-General, With reference to my cables on the conclusion of the second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, I would like to complete my reporting with some observations on the nature of the problems with which the Parties were faced at the Conference. I believe it is correct to say that the problems which prevented the Conference from ending on a note of success were broader than the issue of non-proliferation itself, and these were the problems of disarmament. In other words, although the main objective of the Treaty is to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the commitment made by the Parties in Article VI has brought increasingly into focus the broader question of the cessation of the nuclear arms race and disarmament in general — a question which is being debated in many other forums and still remains to be solved. In 1975> these difficulties were overcome by a last minute personal effort of the President of the Conference (Mrs. Thorsson) who produced a draft Final Declaration which she then managed to have adopted by the Conference, largely as a recognition of her tireless endeavours. This procedure could not, however, be repeated in 1980, as Mr. Kittani clearly stated in his acceptance speech. The Non-Proliferation Treaty has also become an important vehicle for the promotion of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Thus, the Parties were also concerned with the implementation of the provisions of the Treaty dealing with such uses. The problems in this area proved, however, to be more manageable and the Conference came close to agreement on this part of the review of the Treaty. Nevertheless, this was not enough, and when the Group of 77 proposed an adjourn- ment until 1981 — an idea first put forth by Mrs. Thorsson in private consultations — the United States and other Western countries opposed such a move, presumably on the grounds that the disarmament problems (CTB, SALT II, etc.) might be as difficult to settle in 1981 as they were in 1980. This was not the view of many Parties, who held that after the United States presidential election the political climate would be more favourable. His Excellency Mr. Kurt Valdheim Se ere tary-General United Nations New York N Y 10017 Office des Nations Unies a Geneve =7-5*' United Nations Office at Geneva Page 2 Despite its outcome, the Conference served to "bring out, in very clear terms, the areas of agreement and disagreement and the fact that, although the validity of the Treaty was not called into question, its future is closely tied to progress towards the solution of the problems referred to above. I should also mention that the work of the Conference proceeded very smoothly at all stages, under the experienced and able leadership of Mr. Kittani. Further- more, there were not organizational problems at any time, thanks to the highly qualified staff of the Centre for Disarmament generously made available by Mr. Martenson, the staff provided by the IAEA and the excellent supporting services of the Palais des Nations. I wish to thank you again for having nominated me Secretary-General of the Conference, a nomination that was unanimously confirmed by the Parties. My firm commitment to the goal of non-proliferation enabled me to carry out my task to its conclusion. Please accept, Sir, my deep gratitude for the trust you placed in me. Yours sincerely, Alessandro Corradini T>CT H psr; .^ p^ /--.. *y\r' •_.„ -LJ [''-L^r~a3 ELf e ii kjT^^iij.-jj Lfl—«y I— w iv^*«w-cJiw/•_:• V rV^u M. 8 September 80 Department: P.Davinig/S,Kheradi/A.Ley: ...PSCA/DITCD Extension: J060 So : A-6&0 For use of Cable service only: Pnoniy JETAT_ -B PACSIMILIE TEXT (Typed in capitals and double spaced) ">SECRETARY-GEiq;EAL, SYTENKO AMD MARTEKTSON (DISARI-tU-'EMT) FROM COREA.DINI. FURTHER TO GVA 5402 OP 1 SEPTEMBER MORE DETAILED ACCOUNT 0? HIGHLIGHTS AND CONCLUSION OF SECOND HPT REYIEW COITFEREKCE FOLLOWS. . GIVEN AVOWED OBJECTIV3 OF PARTICIPANTS TO 'ACHIEVE A FINAL DECLARATION EMBODYING AGREED ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENTS SI1ICE 1975. MDr- ABOVE ALL, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE ACTION, COSFEHENCB WAS GEHERALLY CONSIDEBSD UNSUCCESSFUL, NEVERTHELESS IT _ PROVIDED MPT PARTIES V.1TH EXTENDED OPPORTUNITY TO BEYIEW TREATY P-ffLEMEI-TTATIOH AI-TO EXCHANGE OF VIEWS IN FORMAL AND IMFOH-lAL MEETINGS WAS MOST USEFUL AND OFTEN CONSTRUCTIVE. _MAIH ISSUES RELATING TO n^EPLEMENTATION '^ERE: (A)^LACK OF SIGNIFICAI^T PROGRESS ON ARTICLE VI CALLING FOR NEGOTIATIONS IN GOOD FAITH TO ACHIEVE HUCLSA3 DISARMA1-EXT; r~\ • - • -- - ^~ -- • - • - '"• ' (B) CRITICISM ABOUT NUCLEAR COOPERATION WITH CERTAIN STATES NOT PARTIES TO THE TREATY, '•- SOUTH AFRICA. AND ISRAEL IN PARTICULAR? (c) DISSATISFACTION OF RECIPIENT COUNTRIES WITH RESTRICTIVE EXPORT POLICIES AFFECTING PEACEFUL USES OF NUCLEAR ENERGY; AND (D) QUESTION OF IMPOSING TJNIFORM_ EXPORT REQUIREMENTS. INCLUDING I1FULL-SCOPS" SAFEGUARDS, I.E., THAT NOH-NUCLEAR-\'^APON STATES NOT PARTY TO THE TREATY ACCEPT TS3 SAKE SAFEGUARDS OBLIGATIONS AS THOSE ACCEPTED' 3Y NNWS PARTY TO THE TREIiTY. ! : ; ; ;••; ''& ^'""?r^^" rf ^ ^'^''"'7^'^ .^''%¥ /F ^:: ft ^rav :;\P;>/ ( -^"" ^ •-' ^ B u $ *a ^; ^ F P ti ®;> '4 "?•¥ 11 ^ : u : v- x'- -: < --/Uv' • ' '•• ; 'ff£ i\. \ bK ? '•§ ! v ^ nhi %fWMt '-?.- ^fl !.. |irj |' < , ,': f- ••••; .-'*;*. '^< .--' i -» \.t 's •••=•:: ~; •.:••••••.-.'•'.. ••'v.^ : • . v:\\N M n£ n u^ • [i ^ h ^ 1 :! :'--':.' --. -.'. •;!.:• -• '• ••J VI LJ£; V ;;/.;(•>.•;:- £ ^ :'A7;b:^ ^".iV K' J' .'.,: : ''.. •..-..'. : '...*.. '. ' .. J-'e>r use of Drafier: Uatc .: ; Dmlter'D Name bj : i : Sxlemio.T: ; Allotment Ns. : OHJiAr f flip ! • Hooin No*: ; For use of Cable service only: Class' D.m; L. Priority Address: TEXT (Typed in capitals ar.d double spaced* Serial — 2 — AMONG THESIS ISSUES, MAIN STUMBLING BLOCK VAS REVIEW OF ARTICLE VI. GROUP OF 77 HELD THAT FINAL DECLARA110J SliOITL-P INCLUDE RECOM'IEKDATIONS FOR (A) ESTABLISKKEHT A)F A WOfiJCENG GROUP IH ES ON DISARMAMENT (CD) EARLY IN 1981,. TO UlTDERTAjCE I^LTILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS ON qTB; (3) MORATORIUM-ON NUCLEAR V/EAPON TESTS PEI-TDING CONCLUSION OF A CTB; (c) COMMITMENT ON PART OF USSR AND UNITED STA'ISS TO RATIFf URGENTLY; SALT II AND, PE3SDIMG ITS RATIFICATION, TO ABIDE BY ITS PROVISIONS Arm TO S.TART IMffiDIATE IiSGOTI/iTIONS I^OR CONCLUSION OF SALT III; (c) ESTABLISHMENT 0? A CD WORKING GROUP ON NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT. • ON THESE ISSUES,VIE\'/S OF GHOUP OF 77 CLASHED IN SOHS CASES WITII POSITION OF ALL THREE NWS P/iPuTY TO NPT AITO IN JOTKEH CASES VriTH POSITIONS OF EITHER UNITED STATES OR SOVIET UNION. FOR INSTANCE, UMITED STATES AED UI1ITED IiINGDOi'l OPPOSED ESTABLISEt^ElTT OF CTB AND MORATORIUM. SOVIET UNION.'FOR ITS PART INSISTED THAT II'IPLS1-I2]','TATION OF SALT II PROVISIONS SHOULD BE S JBJECT TO ITS FORMAL RATIFICATION. REGARDING SALT ; NEGOTIATIONS, BOTH UNITED STAT33 AND SOVIET UITION HELD TI-IAT TI-12Y" COULD BEGIN ONLY AFTER RATIFICATION OF SALT II. AS A LAST MINUTE EFFORT TO'BRHL^K IMPASSE, UNITED STATES AGREED TO THE SETTING IP OF WORKING GROUP ON CTB BUT FINAL AGREEMENT V/AS : PREVENTED BECAUSE ITS PROPOSAL WAS NOT SEEN BY GROUP OF 77 AS iffiING SUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC ON WHEN WORKING GROUP WOULD BE SET UP ALT) OK ITS MANDATE-. /"• I Far-use! of Drcftur: uihu;i.cud ijy r. No.: Ryom N'o r For use .-of Cable service only : Number Class Allotment.: . Prioifty Address: EXT ood in capitals and double spaced) — 3 — REGARDING ARTICLE I DEFINING OBLIGATIONS OP 1-lWS, GROUP OP 77 i-IAIUTAIKED THAT iSPECIFIC REFERENCE SHOULD BE MADS TO NUCLEAR COLLABORATION WITH SOUTH AFRICA AND •ISRAEL AND TO THEIR NUCLEAR-VffiAPON CAPABILITY, WESTERN COUNTRIES, HOWEVER, WERE ; : . • - : ! ONLY WILLING TO SUBSCRIBE TO f. MORE GElffiRAL FCRI>IULA THAT WOULD COVER CERTAIN FORMS i " i COOEERATIOK VmiCH GOITLD CONTRIBUTE TO TILD DETCLOPMEKT OF A trjULSA TffflAPON CAPABILITY BY CSRTAIU STATES NOT PARTY TO THE TREATY. WITH PJEGPECT TO ISSUES PJ'JLATED TO PEACEFJL TJS23 OP 1TUCLEAR EI-IBRGY, DISCUSSION S DOffiK^TED BY QUESTION OF LIRKAGE BET.'/EEN ARTICLES III AI-TD IV OF THE TIUilTY, °HAT I5,;SETWEE1T ACCEPTANCE OF . SAFEGUARDS AJTO ACCESS TO 1-PJCL^R MATERIALS, EQUIE-JE1JT TECHNOLOGY. A LARGE MEASURE OP AGREEMENT V/AS TiE/iCIIED OK TiiSSS ISSUES AND IT 13 EXPECTED : THAT THEY WILL BE FJ^TSESR PU1?SUSD IN CONTEXT OF IAEA. COKMI'LTEE OK A3SUEAKCSS OF SUPPLY (CAS) Tr/HICH V/ILL ST/i.RT ITS WORK IN SEPT52'SSR 1930. WITH RESPECT TO ACCEPTANCE OF "FULL-SCOPS" SAFEGUARDS AS A CONDITION FOR EXPORT TO NGN -PARTIES, FJLL AGREEMENT WAS 'NOT KEACHE!E| AHD MTTER WILL BE PURSUED FURTHER IN CAS. THERE WAS AGREEMENT IN PRINCIPLE ON EXPANSION OF IAEA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ACTIVITIES, HiCLuDJK EBTABLISKMENT OFA SPECIAL FUND, BUT NO FINANCIAL COI-n-JITi-lEl-ITS VERE.H.1D3. TH3IU?. V^S GE15SRAL SUPPORT FOR EFFORTS DlfSCTED AT EARLY ESTABLISHMENT CF AN INTSILNATIONAL REGllffi FOR PLUTONIUM STORAGE A^D FOR SPENT FUEL MLWoAGEJffiirT iniDER IA&1 AUSPICES, / r 11 •z Of Oraflfir : >3tO DryHor'a xturtslon : AUotntt i ioom No. ; _ L CHIP . lifr.t- : L Priority • Address; TEXT (l(yped in capitals and doubio spaced) - 4.- THESE DEVELOPMENTS POINT TO JIT ENHANCED ROLE FOR IAEA. AS:A CONSEQUENCE OF ABSENCE OF A FIHAL DECLARATION THERE WAS'SO GENERAL EEAgFIKM/lTIOM OF SUPPORT FOR fMB MPT. HOVffiVER, HO DELEGATI01T CKALLS^GED VALIDIll ^ : p .. DP.KPT AND THEEE WAS READINESS TO REAFFIRM COMGffiEHTS DERIVIKG FROM '11IE PROVISIOKS OF'THE TREATY. THERE WESE, ^BEOVER. W_A.TTSS&'?S TO i-iosiFr THE Tfli-^TY. AS HAD ilAPPElffiD AT FIRST REVIEW COlTFpRENCE, VTItEl'T GROUP OF 77 HA13 PROPOSED ADDITIONAL' I • . PROTOCOLS TO THE TREATY. I : ' ; I III CONCLUSION, VALUE OF ftPT V/AS NOT CALLED IETO QTJSSTIOK, BUT FAILURE TO ADOPT FINAL DECLARATION, HAIKLY DUE TO DISSATISFACTION VITH II'IPLEI'IEUTATION OF ARTICLE VI, CLEARLY SHOVES THAT REAL PROGRESS ON DISARJ-IAJJEl^'C WILL BE OF CRITICAL ItlPOIiTAKCE TO T;HS;FJTURE OF THE NPT REGIME. f VOL. XXXV NO. 2 SPRING 1980 CANADIAN INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS Y Yj __-* JOHN W. HOLMES RUTH B. RUSSELL MIRIAM CAMPS FRANK SHEFRIN ALESSANDRO CORRADINI A.J. MILLER MARGARET DOXEY JON MC LIN ROBERT W. COX UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR 1 TO: The Secretary-Gener 16 September 1980 A: Mr. Mikhail D. Syte REFERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: Under-Secretary-General^ Litical/^/ and Security Council "7" FROM: Jan Mar ten son ' \ VijV^ \ DE: Assistant Secretary-General^\£,jy^(\Qtfl j&yi^lVt CentrPon-l-T-eo fofr\r r Disarmamenn-i ear-mamem-lt - ^.^ ^• 1^^ » ' SUBJECT: OBJET: American Production of Nuclear and Chemical Warfare Agents Nuclear 1. The New York Times of 16 September 198O reports that the United States is facing a "growing shortage" in nuclear- weapons material, notably plutonium and tritium, which are needed for the production of hydrogen bombs. Apparently, present programmes for the MX., Trident and Cruise missiles will require a total of about 9,50O new nuclear warheads for the fabrication of which present facilities are inadequate. 2. On the other hand, State Department and ACDA experts are not convinced that a shortage exists and it is contended that the necessary material might be obtained by scrapping older weapons. This, in turn, seems to be rejected by Pentagon officials. 3. This discussion comes at a time when an increasing number of States support the idea of a "cut-off" of the production of nuclear material for weapons purposes. It will no doubt have a bearing on discussions at this General Assembly and I shall continue to advise you of developments. Chemical 4. The same issue of the New York Times comments on the impending Senate vote on an appropriation to build a plant to make chemical warfare agents. A previous law prohibiting manufacture of new chemical warfare agents without the express declaration by the President that this is in the national interest does not seem to exclude the possibility of constructing such a factory. 5. The United States administration apparently resists this move, which would interfere with present negotiations between the United States and the USSR on a chemical weapons ban. The New York Times points out that the move in the Congress is part of a highly dangerous tendency to equate security with an increased diversity in the arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. It calls for a more rational approach in which international arms control would be applied in the interest of greater security, against an ever increasing and profitless arms race. UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR 15 September TO: The Secretary-Gen A: REFERENCE: Mr. Mikhail D. THROUGH: S/C DE: Under-Secretary-General and Security Council FROM: DE: Jan Martenson Assistant Secretary-General,. , Centre for Disarmament <^ , SUBJECT: OBJET: Nuclear Relations Between India and the United States 1. In my memorandum of 17 March 1980, I indicated that President Carter was likely to authorize the export to India of 38 tons of low-enriched uranium for use in the Tarapur power reactor, notwithstanding India's unwillingness to meet the number of requirements of the United States ' Non-Proliferation Act of 1978. The President has meanwhile indeed taken this decision and, as also expected, the competent Committees of the United States ' Congress, according to recent press reports, are now advising their respective Houses to override this decision. 2. The main objection seems to be that the 1978 Act requires recipients of nuclear fuel to submit all their nuclear activities to "full-scope safeguards" ot the IAEA. Tne initial agreement ot iabj Between India and the United States only provided for safeguards in respect of the Tarapur power station and ancillary facilities. . 3. There is much criticism among recipient States of this new United States requirement, which affects also"" other non-parties to the NFT. such as Argentina and Brazil. The requirement, which would oblige States with existing nuclear agreements with the United States to re-negotiate the conditions thereof was repeatedly cited at the recent NPT Review Conference in Geneva as an example of the "unreliability" of the United States as a nuclear supplier. Several suppliers of nuclear fuel, including Australia and Canada, impose the same requirement but a number of suppliers of nuclear equipment, notably the Federal Republic of Germany and Prance do not. The diversity of supply conditions on the international nuclear market has prompted the establishment in the framework of the IAEA of a "Committee on Assured Supplies" (CAS) which is one of the main results of the International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation (lNFCE)». —2 — 4. If the Congress sets aside the President's decision to supply India with the fuel it needs, this will have a negative impact on American relations with India. ^One. may be that India will seek further supplielies from States that do not require "full-scope safeguards" but will then, according to a recent New York Times report, also try to reject safeguards on the Tarapur reactor altogether^ However, since these safeguards are based on agreements to which the IAEA is also a party, it remains to *>e seen how this wi±J. ce possible. cc: Ms. I. Lehmann AKU/MS bf: RA/AR/MKP/CCF/GMM/AF/MJS File: GP cc: xRef: Disarmament - General 15 September 1980 Dear Mr. Raase, On behalf of the Secretary-General, I should like to acknowledge your letter of 9 September 1980, in which you inquired about addressing the united Nations General Assembly. While we are sympathetic to your request, I must inform you that in accordance with United Nations regulations, it is only possible for representatives of Member States and sanctioned organizations to address the Assembly. I have, however, forwarded a copy of your speech to officials in the Centre for Disarmament who, I know, will be interested to learn of your concern. Yours sincerely, Angela Knippenberg-Uther Second Officer Mr. Richard H. Haase 275 West 73rd Street Hew York, K.Y. 10023 275 West 73rd Street New York, N.Y. 10023 9 September 1980 The Honorable Kurt Waldheim Secretary-General United Nations New York, New York 10017 Mr. Secretary-General: I have not had the honor of meeting you, but I have read news- paper articles about you and about your diligent efforts to promote peace and cooperation in the world. Enclosed is an original letter of introduction from The Rever- end Ralph Peterson, and a copy of an introduction already sent to your office by Mr. John K. Lowe. I am the son of farmers, who were the children of farmers. I am interested in doing whatever I can to promote global disarmament and protect the Earth from radioactive contamination. My motives are altruis- tic and my methods are nonviolent and ethical. However, I must apologize for appearing so pretentious. I am writing to ask to be allowed the honor of addressing the United Nations General Assembly at, or as near the opening ses- sion, as would be possible. Enclosed is the text of the ad- dress I would deliver if granted the opportunity.' Regrettably, I can offer you no glorious argument why you should permit this, other than it is another sign that more people are requesting disarmament before there is an intentional or accidental nuclear war. Would you please reply favorably to my request? If, for what- ever reason you are unable to do so, I will appreciate your having considered my request. You may contact me by calling (212)874-1846, or by writing to me at the above address. Thank you very much. Respectfully yours, Richard H. Haase Enclosures (3) Text of the Address to the United Nations General Assembly Mr. President, Mr. Secretary-General, Honorable Ambassadors, Members of the General Assembly, and Fellow Citizens of the World, I am a simple man. Your allowing me to be here in your presence is a much appreciated honor. This opportunity to speak to you arose out of concern for about 4 billion citizens of the world, who like myself, have no official positions in any national governments. We have no great wealth or titles, but we are all human beings. We care for our families, our fellow citizens, and ourselves as best we can. We do not want to harm other citizens of the world, no matter whether they live on the other side of the street or on the other side of the Earth. Most of us believe that we are all brothers and sisters, no matter where we live, be it in Argentina, China, France, Iran, Israel, Libya, The United States, The Soviet Union, South Africa, Zimbabwe, or any other unique and beautiful country. As citizens of the world, we are deeply concerned that the safety of us all is being disregarded by leaders who create and control nuclear and other military weapons. Throughout history we have faithfully supported leaders of nations. We have taken part in arms races because leaders of nations have told us that strong military power benefits us by deterring war and producing peace. We believed our leaders and supported arms races before almost every war on Earth. Throughout history we have allowed leaders of nations to send us to wars against our brothers and sisters because they told us we would be fighting for noble causes. We fought, and we saw millions of our innocent sisters, brothers, mothers, fathers, and babies slaughtered by military organizations and machines. After the wars ended, we frequently found that instead of fighting for noble causes, we had fought for little more than base greed and false pride. Throughout history we citizens of the world have listened to leaders of nations faithfully believing that they offer moral,as well as, political leadership. But now, after seeing many wars, and after seeing tremendous amounts of precious human, natural, and capital resources wasted, it is increasingly difficult to retain our faith in military solutions to global, or local, problems. We believe that the resources now used to plan and produce military power should be used to plan and produce food, housing, employment, education opportunities, health care services, pollution control, energy development, and other worthwhile projects. We deplore terrorism, covert interference, and blatant military actions because they all are either barbaric, inhumane, or unjust, and they all violate the human rights of citizens of the world. We believe that nuclear weapons and the plans for their use are extremely deplorable. We are shocked and dismayed that otherwise responsible leaders of nations are continuing to threaten hundreds of millions of innocent people with extermination. We are alarmed that leaders of nations are continuing to threaten everything on Earth with destruction, or at the very best, radioactive contamination. Leaders of nations have the power to eliminate weapons which threaten our safety and well-being. We believe that they therefore have the duty and obligation to immediately abolish nuclear weapons and other military weapons, as well. Everywhere, citizens of the world are asking, "When are the leaders of nations going to grant the reasonable request for disarmament and peace?" We are all anxiously hoping that leaders bring about disarmament BEFORE an intentional or accidental nuclear holocaust takes place. We would all be appreciative if leaders of nations would respect the fact that the Earth is our home, not a battlefield. I can only reiterate the observation of Dwight D. Eisenhower, the late President of the United States, who was also a respected military leader. "Indeed, I think that people want peace so much that one of these days, governments had better get out of the way and let them have itl " I beg of you to do whatever is necessary to bring about complete global disarmament, or at the very least, nuclear disarmament, as soon as, humanly possible. I beg of you to resolve your differences ONLY by peaceable means. Your intelligence, your courage, your imagination, your cooperation, and your efforts to achieve complete global disarmament will be applauded and remembered with admiration by this, and all future generations of the world. Your work for disarmament and peace will be a demonstration of your concern for all the citizens of the world. May PEACE be with you all. Thank you. SAINT PETER'S CHURCH Ralph Edward Peterson,D.D./Pastor September 8, 1980 To Whom It May Concern: I have known Richard Haase since May 19V5 when he transferrred his membership to Saint Peter's Church. I have observed him as a good, upstanding citizen, greatly concerned for humanity both individually, and collectively. He has contributed greatly to the work of this parish and the community as a whole. I would highly recommend Richard as a conscientious, sincere and caring person, intelligent and aware of major issues facing our society. erely, Ralph Edward Peterson, D.D. A Congregation of the Lutheran Church 619 Lexington, New York, N.Y. 10022 in America 212/9352200 Caliicoon, N.Y. 12723 / 914-887-4000 July 30, 1980 t, ..-- ,,^-- - ,( t'• rt <-v>" -••-k" V ^~ --*••• ~ Honorable Kurt Waldheim Secretary-General of the United Nations United Nations Building New York, New York 10017 Subject; Richard H. Haase - Introduction Dear Secretary-General Waldheim: This letter is to introduce Mr. Richard H. Haase of 275 W. 73rd St., New York, New York 10023. I have personally known Mr. Haase for over 25 years, beginning when we rode on the same school bus and attended public school in nearby Pennsylvania. He comes from a family farm background. Both his parents and grand- parents were successful and respected hard-working local farmers. I have always looked up to "Rich" as a young man of outstanding character, and he is an innovative, successful business man. Mr. Haase's personal and business dealings with our banking institution have always been handled in a very satisfactory manner. I am pleased to commend to you Mr. Richard H. Haase as an honest and respected professional person who has a deep concern for his fellow man. Sincerely, J JKL:jp bcc: Richard H. Haase Offices at Caliicoon, N.Y. 12723 / Narrowsburg, N.Y. 12764 / Sparrow Bush, N.Y. 12780 / Wurisboro, N.Y. 12790 ZCZC DALiS3>4 HCL2984 . PB !'i02 RR NYK ' . . '. ';• • : . : -', • . ... .GENEVA (DISARM) 111423 . ". ' . .'' ;', QVA 484S THE SECrtETARY-GENERAL "FROM JA1PAL, .INFO SYTE^KO.AND - HARTEivSOK CEMTRE FOR DISARMftM£ST. .1.'COMMITTEE. 0?: DlaAR'.^.V(E';T H£LD ITS 9&TH ?LES^A?:Y KEETIMG' 0'-5 3. AUGUST, 1SEC. 2. CAlvADA WELCO; TRIPARTITE..REPORT A«D HOPED .THAT • N'EGQTIATIONS ON ft CTET COULD c,i coHCLUDED IK .TKE.SLAR-FUTURE-. STRESSED THE IKPORTA^CE OF VCRIFI CATION 3Y3TE;1 >:HOCH SHOULD COMMENCE EEFO'ItE.A CTLT'1'5 FINALIZED. SUPPORTED AUSTFALIAf; PROPOSAL'OM ' ApMI MI STRATI VE ARRAHGEMEKTS Oc^ SEISMIC DATA EXCHAKGE, A^D PROPOSAL OF WETHEJiLAKT-S TO S'ET UP A POLITICAL COMMITTEE: TO'SETTLE ANY PROBLEMS, ^^CHAIH^AN STATED THAI. lh VIEW OF CERTAIN DIFFICULTIES, THE CLOSING DATE QF 1980 SESSION v-'OULD B£ rOSTFO NE3.' 1HE COs-iriTTEE DECIDED THAT f-JEXT PLENARY MEETING I'JiiLD BE HELD'ON "9 AUGUST i??0 >',T li.CO A-.T:. COL 4S42-1 S^?TH S IS30 2 3 19SO 9 !9SO I'l.'OG 11 IS24 A-/ ,W^--v.,, AF/jb - cc: SG XL.V bf: CCF/AKU File: Cttee.Disarm. 8 August 1980 Dear Eikhi, In the absence of the Secretary-General, I should like to acknowledge your letter of 25 July 1980 concerning the work of the Committee on Disarmament. You may be assured that I shall not fail to inform the Secretary-General of the contents of your letter, and I know that he would wish me to thafak you for keeping him abreast of developments at the current session. With kind regards, Yours since1*""' Albert Rohan Director Mr. Rikhi Jaipal Secretary of the Committee on Disarmament Geneva OFFICE DGS NATIONS UH1ES A GENEVE UNITED NATIONS OFFICE AT GEi-.'EVA Tvieuramir.es: 'JJIATmS. GENF.VE Fsiais dss Nonius Islex : £2.212 OJ Z2.344 CH - i/:i GENEVE 1C Ts'ephone : 346CI1 ;34CCC 332COO 33!COO REF. No : 25 July 1980 ( 8 rappeler dans la rspoiise ) RECEIVED •!AUG 6'i PERSONAL AND COKFIDESTIAL Dear Mr. Secretary-General, 1. I shall try to summarise in this letter the work of the Committee on Disarmament at the current session on three items viz. nuclear test ban, nuclear disarmament and new weapons and systems of mass destruction. I might add that these three questions have been dealt with only in plenary meetings of the Committee, not because of their intrinsic importance and urgency, but rather because there was no consensus for remitting them to working groups for "negotiations" 2. The views exchanged at plenary meetings on a nuclear test ban were not different from those on earlier occasions. USA and UK favoured the continuation of the trilateral talks between them and USSR as the best practical method of proceeding in the matter. However, the Group of 21, supported by the Socialist Group including USSH, urged the setting up of a working group to negotiate a comprehensive ban on nuclear tests, with the participation of all nuclear weapon States. The positive,though somewhat guarded^reactions of China and France to this move led one to expect some results from a working group, but unhappily we are still far from it because of USA-UK opposition. The progress report of the trilateral talks due to be made on J>~L July is unlikely to hold out any hope of an agreed treaty in the immediate future. 3. The situation is just as unsatisfactory in regard to the item "Cessation of the arms race and nuclear disarmament". Here too the Group of 21, supported by the Socialist Group, is pressing strongly for a working group to commence negotiations or even consultations on whatever measure of disarmament is feasible. Although a number of suggestions have been made as to the first few measures to be taken up for negotiation, USA seems quite unready for a working group to embark on any kind of exercise on nuclear disarmament measures. His Excellency Dr. Kurt Waldheim Secretary-General of the United ITations United ITations Headquarters New York N.Y. 10017 •v- . O»ce des Nations Unies a Geneve '^-J^' United Natio.is Office at Geneva Page ..2.. 4. As regards "Hew types and systems of weapons of mass destruction", the Socialists have suggested the establishment of a group of experts to prepare a draft comprehensive agreement for banning new weapons in general and to draw up special agreements for prohibiting specific new weapons that can be identified. As these weapons are non-existent anyway, several members of the Group of 21 expressed a preference for the experts to limit themselves to keeping the CD informed of the potential and actual developments in the field of research into new weapons and systems. However, the idea of an expert group has found no support among the delegations of the USA and Western countries, who take the view that such a group would be able to produce little information of value or interest* The American attitude appears to be to wait until a weapon can be readily identified before banning it, since a general ban would be pointless. 5. The Group of 21 is thoroughly dissatisfied with the American opposition to working or expert groups on these three items. This Group has frequently quoted your statement of 29 February 1972 that technical and scientific aspects have been fully explored and all that is necessary is the political decision of the States concerned to reach agreement on a test ban. The Group of 21 is willing to consider a restricted mandate for a working group on nuclear disarmament but the uncompromising negative reaction of the USA to it is creating a serious problem. It will be extremely em- barrassing for G.21 to explain to the second special session on disarmament in 1982 why the CD failed to begin even preliminary negotiations on any aspect of nuclear disarmament, which after all had been accorded first priority in para. 45 of the Final Document of the first Special Session of 1979• 6. The American position evidently is that nuclear weapons questions by their very nature are much too coaplex for a multi- lateral negotiating forum and for the present therefore the bilateral SALT process is more likely to lead to meaningful measures of arms control and limitation. Even so it is a mistake to ignore the CD totally as if it has no responsibility at all in the matter. At any rate USSH has a different attitude towards the CD and it only shows up the USA in an unfavourable light. Besides, the presence of China and France in the CD is a good enough reason to involve it in negotiations on nuclear disarmament. 7. I hope that next year USA will see fit to recognise the CD's role, however limited it may be in the field of nuclear disarmament, and agree at least to exchange of information and views in a working group on some of the issues.involved in negotiations on the cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament. Such a limited mandate for the CD should enable it to engage itself in a small way in identifying the pre-requisites and issues connected with nuclear disarmament. Otherwise the CD's credibility would be seriously affected. I have spoken along these lines to the Ambassadors of •. • / • Office cJes Nations Unies a Geneve —r-?= United Nations Office al Geneva Page the USA and the "UK and while they appear to "be personally sympathetic to a restricted and realistic role for the CD, however policy is made in the capitals having regard to a variety of considerations including domestic, political, security, strategic and other factors. With warm regards, Yours sincerely, Rikhi Jaipal L1 a -IjtM) NOTE TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL Group of Experts on a Comprehensive Study on Nuclear Weapons The Group of Experts, of which Ambassador Thunborg of Sweden is the Chairman, started its work in January of this year. It has just concluded its study, which provides factual information on present nuclear arsenals, trends in the technological development of nuclear-weapon systems, the effects of their use and the implications for international security as well as for disarmament negotiations. The Study was based on open material; one of the difficulties was the non-participation of the nuclear-weapon States in the work of the 12-member Expert Group. The study will be submitted to the Assembly at its thirty-fifth session. Recently, a letter was received by Ambassador Thunborg commending the Secretariat for the valuable assistance to the Expert Group. A reply was sent by Mr. Ahmed in your absence. A. Knippenberg-Uther/ms 23 July 1980 File- Disarmament cc: Mr. Jonah Mr. Martensory Dear ;:r . K^C^KS^.. .or , Ir, the absence o3: the Secretary--Core rri en c:/-";" A;;i.v.l travel -abroad, I with to ackr:ov/lcd^e your 2ei_t^r of 3.4 July 13TO.r<-.--;-ir'iinn the work of the Croup of rxrcrt?:- or n. CoTAprch^nsive Stu;iy c'-: ?'ucleC'.r '-Voaccr.^. You ~iay t-c sure that I nhall Infer- tho : General u»:-on hifi returr to headquarters c£ t:~- completion of th^ Grout's vorx vac; very or you to ncnticr, it\ this cc;-;r!c::icn the cc-.;pctcnt scrvicrn rerOorcv. to tho Group by the Secretariat, in particular hy r-'r. Sohraio Fhcr?.di of the- C-._r.trr: for risarri^-.cnt, c-n'l I r.avt rccuestec, tr.^t your f^vcurablt- coi-.=ncr;cK arc ircluoc-u in Mr. Kh^raci'o j ersor,.-,£l file, or, the assurances cT -v t ccnsicicration. CLcE o^ Cabinet His Excellency !-:r. Anders I. ThnnborVI . " ' C. V.? , 1 - . - "• C i., ••! 1,^'* \,. Ij. Ycrl; TO THE UNITED NATION'S /JUL1419SO Excellency, On behalf of the group of Experts appointed by you to undertake a Comprehensive Study on Nuclear Weapons, and in my capacity as its Chairman, I wish to express my deep gratitude for the most competent services rendered to the Group by the Secretariat. In particular, I wish to commend the very outstanding and exemplary performance of Mr. Sohrab Kheradi (Centre for Disarmament) who has served as Secretary of the Group since January of this year. Despite the many pressures involved, Mr. Kheradi carried out his responsibilities with the highest degree of efficiency and dili- gence. The wide knowledge, keen intelligence and fine diplomatic skill which he brought to bear on his work, were of invaluable assistance to the Group in enabling it to successfully complete its difficult and delicate task. Accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration. Anders Thunborg Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Sweden to the United Nations His Excellency Dr. Kurt Waldheim Secretary-General of the United Nations cc. Mr. Jan Martenson United Nations Mr. James O.C. Jonah Mr. Sohrab Kheradi NEW YORK Address: Telephone: Cable Address: Telex: 825 Third Avenue, New York, N. Y. 'iOI22 (212) 751-5500 SVENSK New York 22 41 SO File: Disarmament cc : G cc : Mr. Jonah Mr. f'artenscn July 19&0 Dear Mr. j».vfcaEE3clor , In the- absence of the 3c:creto.ry-<7erer<~l en official travel abroad t I wish to acknowledge yo-jr letter of .1.4 -July I?r O.rccjsruintf the work of the Crc.iu. of Fx^-crts en a Conpi-chensive Study en ruclear 'ceor:cns. Yoa r;jay be sure that I shall in fern vhc Secretary- Cc;r»C'!rn.}. *..ij.. on his jrc-tiurL tc '".C'ticr^v.iOirt.CJrs 01 tr.c succcfii>tui ccrvr-lotion cf the Croup's uori: . It vas very thoughtful of you to meuticn ir. this ccr.nrxicn the cc.-^otcnt Kcrvicfvs rcnccre.-.; to the Grcu^: by the Secretariat F in particular by Kr. Sohrab ?'heradi of the: Centre fcr Di^er(ra';'.Gnt , cma I havo rs'Cjucsted that ycur favourable cor.;r-'C-.riU5 a.ro included in Kr. Khcr^ci's j. ersor:;;e! file. et 5; f ^lr. /iv.bas the i:SKur?ir.c*" s? of ny hi^hi/sfc consideration. i:cf ae Cabinet ilis l::-:cclloncy Fr . f,~i Jo-re I, Th\;nboru cf Sv' iV:\7 York UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: The Secretary-General ;E: 30 April 1980 A: Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko REFERENCE: THROUGH: Under-Secretary-General S/C DE: Political and Security FROM: Jan Mar ten son \ DE: Assistant S^ecretary-General^_A(Ajy. Centre for Disarmament f \ Group of Experts on a Comp^eheprsive Study on Nuclear Weapons 1. The Group of Experts on a Comprehensive Study on Nuclear Weapons, which was established in 1979 (pursuant to General Assembly resolution 33/91 D), held its fourth session at the United Nations Headquarters from 21 to 25 April 198O. At its previous session, held from 23 January to 1 February, the Group decided that the revised versions of the available Chapters would be submitted by their respective authors to the Chairman, Ambassador Thunborg (Sweden), who assumed the responsibility of providing a unified composite text to the Group, for its consideration at its April session. 2. Consequently, at its most recent session, the Group carefully examined the Chairman's drafts of Chapters 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 as well as the draft of Chapter 4 revised by its original author. On the basis of the comments presented, the Chairman has been requested to y:.-* incorporate the necessary modifications and to circulate among the members the revised drafts of the Chapters, as well as drafts of the Introduction and Conclusion to the Study, before the Group's next session to be held from 7 to 12 July 198O, at which time the Group expects to finalize the Study and transmit it to the Secretary-General. UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM 1NTERIEUR 13 Februar^ TO: The Secretary-General DATE: A: Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko REFERENCE: ™cRO£f:H: Under-Secretary-General ... . Political and Security/doujicil Affairs FROM: ,Mr, B. Sanders DE: Officer-in-Charge Centre for Disarmament SUBJECT: OBJET: Graap—of Experts on a Comprehensive Study on Nuclear Weapons 1. The Group, which was established in 1979 (pursuant to Assembly resolution 33/91 D), held its third session at the United Nations Headquarters from 23 January to 1 February. The way the study is progressing is encouraging, in spite of the difficulties involved and the fact that none of the nuclear Powers are represented in the Group. 2. While, at its first session, the Group of Experts adopted an outline of the study and at the second session considered preliminary drafts of the available chapters, for the first time, at its latest session, it undertook a detailed examination of all six chapters which are to be included in the study. 3. The Group of Experts has decided that the revised versions of the six chapters will be submitted by their respective authors to the Chairman, Ambassador Thunborg (Sweden), who will assume the responsibility of prpviding a unified composite text to the Group, for its consideration, at the next session to be held from 21 to 25 April 198O. 4. The Group has decided to hold an additional session from 7 to 11 July 198O but to curtail, by one week, its April session, originally scheduled from 21 April to 2 May 198O. 5. It is hoped that the study will be completed and issued before the convening of the NPT Review Conference to be held in Geneva in August 198O. AKU/MS ccrfsG 'cc: Mr. Sytenko V_X Mr. Martenson bf: RA/AR/MKP/GMM/AF/MJS File: Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons/Disarm. 23 July 1980 Dear Mr. C ha i r n\an, I wish to refer to ray letter of 23 June 1980 concerning the Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Mori-Proliferation of Fuclear Weapons to be held at Geneva from 11 August to 5 September 1980. The attached list contains the composition of the delegation to represent the United Nations at the Conference. I also wish to advise you that Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko, Under-Secretary-General for Political and Security Council Affairs, will deliver a statement on wy behalf to the participants in the Conference. Accept, Mr. Chairman, the assurances of ray highest consideration. Kurt Waloheim Mr. G.C. .W Chairman Third Session of the Preparatory Committee for the Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the ?'on~Froliferation of Nuclear Weapons Geneva Note to the Secretar^yJ-G^neral ^f The^Second Review Conference of the Paries to the Treaty on the Non- A. Knippenberg-Uther/ms 23 July 198(V}f*^, ^>*,/l *_J*% '•<£ A\? > '4 Composition of the delegation to represent the United Nations at the Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons to be held at Geneva from 11 August to 5 September 1980 Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko, Under-Secretary-General for Political and Security Council Affairs; Mr. Jan Martenson, Assistant Secretary-General, Centre for Disarmament Mr. Pal Csillag, Director and Chief of the Committee and Conference Services Section, Centre for Disarmament Ms. Amada Segarra, Chief, Treaties and Resolutions Section, Centre for Disarmament; and Ms. Ingrid Lehmann, Political Affairs Officer in Charge of Liaison with Non-Governmental Organizations, Centre for Disarmament. file: Non-Proliferation of bf: Nuclear Weapons cc: SG cc: Mr. Csillag 23 June I960 ' ;..'.. Centre for Disarmament Dear. Mr.' Chairman,;;. ' - . - ~" . . • II wish, to acknowledge receipt of your letter of 20 May ISBO, inviting me to the Second Review Conference of the. Parties to the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation cf l-;uclear Weapons to be held at Geneva from 11 August to 5 September. I have noted the draft rules of procedure of the Conference and will advise you in due course cf the composition of the delegation to represent the United ^a-t-i.ons at the Second Review Conference, Accept, Mr. Chairman,- the assurances of niy highest consideration. Kurt ivaldheim Cliairiuan Third Session of the Preparatory Comnittee tor tnc: Rtivisv Conference ox the Pcirtj.es tc the treaty on the I-ion-Proliferation cf I-'uclesx Weapons Geneva ;;---. Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons :".?.. :.-'.- Geneva, 1980 . •.-:':- i r1." f PO 1JV*1 (l-l) ; 20 Ms3ri j MAY 2 9 1930' I ACT; ON TO: Dear Mr. Secretary-General, I have the honour to refer to the Final Report of rthe :-;'- ..,:,.:''. Preparatorsr Committee for the second Review Conference iofpthe •;;-:.;/ - Parties to the Treaty on the Hon-Proliferation of KuciearrWeapons and, in particular, to paragraph 1J, by which the Consiittes-...^^-.'^^.^-;'" decided that the Review Conference should be held in Geneva" frbra" '/ 13. August to 5 September 1930. I TG: In accordance with paragraph 51 of the Preparatory wonmivcee-s Final Resort, I have the honour to invite you to the Conference. . The Review Conference will open at the Palais des Rations on 11 August 1^30 at 3.CO p.m. I should like to draw your attention to Rule kh (j) of the draft rules of procedure of the Conference, which are contained in Annex III to the Final Report, pursuant to which the Secretary- General of the United Nations or his representatives-shall be entitled to attend meetings of the Plenary and of the Main Committees ana to receive the Conference documents* They shall also be entitled to submit material, both orally and in writing. Accept, Sir, the assurances of ray highest consideration. C. G. Haina Mr. Kurt Waldheira Chairman Seer et-ir y~General Third session of the Preparatory Cosaittee United Nations for the Review Conference of the Parties Kew York 5 Y 10017 to the Treaty on the Eon-Proliferation of Joiclear Weaocns 1i OFFICIAL CO~?L£r>ON'DE.\'CE fI_ cw<*\.: S-G. }I i :- j I AKU/KS bf :AR/MKP/GKH/CCF/7iF/KJS ;i File: Cttee on Disarmament L July 19LO My clear colleague, I wish to thank you for your letter of 9 July informing rne of developments at the surrmer session of the Conrrvittee on Disarmament. I was pleased to learn that the current session has remained relatively free of tension and I appreciate your efforts to solve the controversy of the participation of some non-rrvom.ber States in the work of the Conirnittee. The respite gained in. this issue has certainly enabled the CoiT^.ittee to turn its attention to other matters and concentrate on the substantive issues on its agenda. With war IT, regards, Yours sincerely, Kurt Wildheim l-'r. Rikhi Jaipal Secretary of the. Coramittee on Disartri Geneva Summary of letter dated 9 July 1980 of Mr. Rikhi Jaipa,! The Committee on Disarmament's summer session opened on 12 June and has conducted its work in an atmosphere relatively free of tension. The controversy that dominated the last session, which was created by requests for participation of some non^member States (in particular, Vietnam and two different authorities in Kampuchea) was temporarily shelved, but is likely to surface again next year. At the urging of the USSR and Mr. Jaipal, Vietnam agreed not to press now for a decision on its request, and the two Kampuchean requests thus failed to be considered in the absence of consensus on which of the two authorities might speak for Kampuchea, This enabled the Committee to approve other requests for participation (Austria, Denmark, Spain, Switzerland) , The Committee is presently dealing with questions of: nuclear test ban, nuclear disarmament and new weapons of mass destruction. In addition, the four working groups established at its last session (.on chemical weapons, radiological weapons, security assurances to non-nuclear States, and a comprehensive disarmament programme) have started their work, Note for the Secretary-General Attached is a reply to Mr. Jaipal for your signature. A. Knippenberg-Uther/ms 18 July 1980 OFFICE DES NATIONS UNiES A GENEVE UNITED NATIONS OFFICE :-*-Wi JSS RECEiVLWl' Telegrsmrres : UUATIONS. &EKEVE Pa'ais d-:s K'sii'.r.s Tble>: : 22.212 Ou 22.344 CH - 1911 '^.iJULieiQSQ Telephone : 346011 334COO 3320CO 331000 REF. No : (a rappeler dans la repanse) 9 July 1930 Dear Kr. Secretary-General, 1. The summer session of the Committee en Disarmament (CD) opened • ;s*S on the 12th June with Czechoslovakia in the chair. It decided very quickly that its four working groups (on chemical weapons,radiological weapons, security assurances to non-nuclear States, and a comprehensive S8 disarmament programme) should begin their tasks at once, while the Committee itself dealt with the other questions i.e. nuclear test ban, nuclear disarmament and new weapons of mass destruction. 2. The political controversies that had plagued the spring session were generally absent, although occasionally they made brief appearances, The socialist group, which provided the chairman for June, stressed the need for keeping out political issues and devoting more vigorous efforts to disarmament negotiations, and the other groups too were of the same mind. Thus the atmosphere of the current session is relatively free of tension. J. It was necessary, however, as a matter of first priority, t:co resolve the dilemma of the last session created by the requests fo.^~ -r participation from two different authorities in Kampuchea, about which I had written to you on the 1st Kay 1930. You will recall that the Kampuchea:! requests had got linked to Vietnam's request, which in turn became linked to the requests from Austria, Denmark and Spain. As a result, none of them could be approved and that had cast a dark shadow over the Committee's future. 4- The answer to this problem of course lay in de-linkir.g the various requests. Farly during the current session I met the Ambassador of Vietnam and later I saw the Ambassador of the USSR twice. I urged upon both the wisdom, in their own enlightened interests and without prejudice to their positions,, of de-linking Vietnam's request from the others. One way of bringing it about would be for Vietnam itself not to press now for a decision on its request. In that event the two Kampuchean requests would fail to be considered in the absence of consensus en which of the two authorities might speak for Kampuchea. His Excellency Dr. Kurt Vfeldheim Secretary-General of the United Nations United Nations Headquarters !Tew York IT.Y. 10017 Office des Nations Unies a Geneve United Nations Office at Geneva Page 2 5« i an glad to say that my advice was eventually found to be acceptable to Vietnam, which had also been urged in the sane direction by the USSR. A letter was then received from Vietnam re-affirming its rights but offering to wait for a decision on its request until later. This enabled the Committee to approve the requests of Austria, Denmark and Spain, and subsequently of Switzerland. Fulsome tributes were paid by the Socialist Group to Vietnam for its statesmanlike gesture, and I too sent a personal letter of appreciation. 6. However, the postponement of the consideration of Vietnam's request will not make its acceptance any easier, because China still wants the request of Democratic Kampuchea considered at the sarr.e time as Vietnam's. V,re may therefore have to deal with that problem next year, if there is no material change in the situation meanwhile in Kampuchea. 7- In my next letter I shall try to provide you with a brief account of the interesting discussions taking place now in the four working groups. Vith warm regards, Yours sincerely, Rikhi Jaipal I Summary of letter from Mr. Jaipal to tme \Becretary-General dated 11 July Mr. Jaipal outlines the discussions in the four working groups of the Committee on Disarmament. He calls them stimulating, but wonders if the results will be commensurate with the labours. Security assurances for non-nuclear States The five nuclear-weapon States have each given assurances, but the working group is nowhere near an agreed international instrument embodying a common formula. The Chinese formulation ("non-first use of nuclear weapons at no time and in no circumstances") was widely welcomed. USSR declaration is aimed at securing the non-deployment of nuclear weapons in non-nuclear countries. UK and USA have reserved their freedom to use nuclear weapons in self-defence, and France is prepared to negotiate binding commitments of non-use of nuclear weapons only with countries belong to nuclear free zones. France's position has been criticized as being too restrictive. Chemical Weapons Due to its restricted mandate ("to identify ... the issues to be dealt with in the negotiation of a prohibitory Convention"), the working group has been listing the issues to be considered. If agreement on these issues can be reached, substantive negotiations might begin next year. Pressure is mounting for culmination of bilateral US-USSR negotiations, which have progressed so far as to have reached a common understanding on definitions of terms and the extent of prohibition. Radiological Weapons A draft Treaty has been submitted by the USA and USSR, which enjoys the support of Western and Eastern European countries. Problem about this initiative is that it deals with a non- existent weapon whose military value is doubtful. Objections have therefore been voiced (by some members of Group of 21) to priority being given to this "phantom weapon" and the exclusion of nuclear weapons from its scope. There exists therefore little prospect of this draft Treaty being finalized this year. - 2 - Comprehensive Programme of Disarmament The outline for this Programme (which is to be submitted to the second Special Session in 1982) has been drawn up, but there have emerged strong differences of opinion over targets and time frames, priorities, linkages, etc. The Programme, therefore, is likely to be no more than a framework for negotiations rather than a legally binding treaty. Note to the Secretary^General You will recall that you have just replied to a previous letter by Mr. Jaipal. Since he announces that a letter will be following to inform you of the discussions in the Committee of Disarmament itself, if you agree^we will wait until that letter has been received before preparing an answer. A.Knippenberg-Uther/ms 25 July 1980 QA^ 2,C 7 OFFICE DES NATIONS UNIES A GENEVE ^ UNITED NATIONS OFMMfi^AT GENEVA TSISgrammes: UNATIONS, GENEVE PALAIS DES NATIONS RECEIVED Tiilex: 22212 Od 22344 CH-1211 GENEVE 10 Telephone: 346011 310211 S13SO REF. No: {4 rappeler dans la rSponse) 11 July 1930 PERSONAL A1ID COIT?IDSTTIAL Dear LIr. Secretary-General, In this letter 1 should like to acquaint you with the main issues that have been under discussion in the four working groups of the Committee or. Disarmament (CD). Security Assurances for non-nuclear States. - The five different assurances a^viinst nuclear threat or att^c^" contained in the declarations separately made by the five r-ucl ear- weapon States have been subjected to close scrutiny and Questioning by several non-nuclear members of the Cor.inittee. The Chinese declaration of "non-first use of nuclear weapons at no tine and in no circumstances'4has been widely welcomed as the next best assurance to a commitment of non-use of nuclear weapons. However, the Soviet delegation questioned whether China's assurance would hold in a situation in which China itself faced a possible nuclear threat fro™, a non-nuclear country on which the nuclear weapons of a nuclear weapon State were deployed. The Chinese reply was to re-affirm its assurance of non-first use. Evidently, the Soviet Union was seeking to justify its own declaration of non-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear States which is apparently aimed at securing the non-deployment of nuclear weapons in non-nuclear countries. The declarations of the UK and USA are somewhat similar i.e. not to use nuclear -weapons against any party to the HPT or other such legally binding international commitment, unless such a State were to attack them or their allies in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon State. This is designed to reserve their freedom to use nuclear weapons for purposes of self-defence, and is presumably addressed to non-nuclear countries that are in association cr alliance with other nuclear weapon States. The French declaration stems from its special position in regard to the 1TPT and IIATO. Prance is prepared to negotiate effective and binding commitments of non-use of nuclear weapons only with those countries that are participants in nuclear free zones. This limitaticr has provoked the criticism that the French declaration is restrictive of the five assurances. Office ties Nations Unies a Geneve United Nations Office at Geneva Page 2 There has "been a good deal of direct questioning of the five nuclear weapon States about their security assurances both in regard to the circumstances of their use cf nuclear weapons as yell as those in which they would not use them. ITc-t all the questions received satisfactory answers. Nor have the five powers given any indication cf modifying the terns of their assurances. Views among non-nuclear countries in the Group of 21 have varied widely from these who see real security only in commitments of non-use of nuclear weapons to those who say - why give up empty options for empty assurances against r threats. The working group is nowhere near an agreed international instrument embodying a common formula for non-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear countries. In the circumstances while the present efforts may be continued, there is a likelihood of the Group recommending that the Security Council should take formal note of the five undertakings by the nuclear weapon States as contributions to international peace and security. Chemical V/eanons — The "forking Group on Chemical Weapons has a somewhat restricted mandate viz. "to identify, through substantive examination, the issues to be dealt with in the negotiation of a prohibitory Convention". Evidently this restriction was necessary, because USA and USSR are already negotiating the details of a Convention seeking to ban chemical weapons. For the present therefore this working group has been confining its work to listing the issues to be considered in the negotiation of a ban, such as definitions, toxicity criteria, permitted activities, scope of prohibition, confidence-building measures, verification measures, complaints procedures, etc. Among the interesting reactions of delegations are the following: that the ban should be comprehensive in its scope and provide also for non-use of chemical weapons and generally strengthen the Geneva Protocol of 1925; that biochemical agents ana other "grey a should be covered; that protective and defensive measures shoul L ^ clarified lest they become loopholes; that the scope of verific T ~v-, should not be intrusive or hinder peaceful activities; and that there should be appropriate international machinery for investigating allegations, recommending penalties, payment of compensation, etc If this Group succeeds in reaching agreement on the issues to be negotiated, one may expect substantive negotiations to commence next year so that hopefully the Convention may be ready in 1902. r-eanwhile USA and USSR have submitted a progress report on the current state of their bilateral negotiations. They ceem to have reached a common understanding r.n definitions cf terms and the extent of prohibition, barring certain specific exceptions such as the extent to which irritants, toxins ana precursors r,,*. OHjCe des Nations Unies a Geneve ^•p^-fr' United Nations Office al Geneva Page....J |j.- should be covered, There are three tread categories of canned agents - super to::ic lethal, toxic lethal and other harmful agents. Important issues relating to international verification measures however remain unresolved, including1 the functions of a Consultative Committee, scope of on-site investigations and some technical questions. It is not possible at present to say when the bilateral negotiations will yield a draft' Convention, as the unresolved issues are extremely complex. Hovrever, pressure for a very early culmination of efforts is increasing. The Group on this subject has the advantage of working with reference to a draft Treaty proposed by the USA and USSR. The discussions have been most interesting, and suggestions and counter- proposals have been prolific. However, I propose to limit myself to bringing to your attention only those comments that are adverse to the draft Treaty as well as comments that are otherwise of some significance. The main problem about this initiative is that it deals with a non-existent weapon and indeed one whose fabrication is fraught with enormous practical difficulties and whose military use is of doubtful value. Although the draft Treaty enjoys the support of Vestern and Eastern European countries in general, several members of the Group of 21 have voiced doubts about the priority and attention being given to this phantom weapon of negligible arms control value. Another source of objection stems from the very definition of this weapon in such a manner as to exclude nuclear weapons from its scope. This exclusion has been interpreted by some delegations as implicit legitirnisation of nuclear weapons. Some have referred to the possibility of extending IAFA type safeguards to all radioactive waste in the nuclear reactors of all States. This has been objected to on the ground that it would introduce full- scope safeguards which are new opposed by countries that have not signed the HPT. Some have suggested that the Treaty should prohibit attack^on nuclear reactors, as they might lead to widespread dissemination of radioactivity. Attempts to bring within the scope of prohibition neutron bombs and particle beam weapons have not been successful. In the light of these basic conceptual differences, I see little prospect of this draft Treaty being finalised this year. In any case, | it is facing a rough passage and it is hazardous to speculate on its future. Office des Nations Unies a Geneve United Nations Office at Geneva Page 4.. Comprehensive Programme cf Disarmament — The 'forking Group on this subject is charged with the task of elaborating a comprehensive programme for submission tc the second Special Session in 1982. Its first stap has bsen to prepare an outline of the programme, including objectives, principles, priorities, measures, etc. Iiscussion in this Group is continuing and there are already strong differences of opinion over ar 3 ana time frames as well as priorities, stages or steps, linkages, o. It is too scon to predict its outcome but it has only some 9 working months to accomplish its formidable task. Pressure on the USA and USSR tc present up-dated versions of their Treaties of 1962 is no-anting1 once again but they seer, just as impervious to it as in the past, I have no doubt that ultimately sc:.ie compromise will be worked cut to evolve a programme in time for the second Special Session but it will be subject to the usual reservations. The "programme" is likely to be no more than a framework for negotiations rather than s. legally binding treaty. Two interesting ideas thrown cut in one of the many papers submitted to the Group are a fresh look at the machinery for settlement of disputes and a Convention en non-use of science and technology for military purposes. I am sorry this letter has become unavoidably long. However, I hope it gives you an insight into the thinking and talking that goes on in the working groups. It is certainly stimulating but I wcr.c-.sr if the results will be commensurate with the labours. In my next letter I shall write about the discussions in the Committee itself on a nuclear test ban and nuclear disarmament, concerning both of which there has so far been no agreement to remit them to working groups for the kind of discussion that is now taking place in regard to the other issues. Warn regards, Yours sincerely, Eikhi Jaipal Iiis Excellency Dr. Kurt Waldheim S e cre tary-General of the United ITations Unitc-d ITations Headquarters Hew York N.Y. 1001?^ MJS/PG cc; SG b/f: RA/MKP 7 July 1280 Dear Mr. Fernando, On behalf end in the absence of the Secretary-"General, I wish to acknowledge your letter of 23 I-iay 1980 concerning your resignation as Chairman of the ^-d_Jrioc Committee on the Indian Ocean and of the Ad Hoc Committee on the World Disarmament Conference. I know that the Secretary-General would wish me to express his gratitude to you for your great dedication in guiding the work of these two disarmament bodies, as well as for the important contribution you made to the United Nations in other areas. You niay be assured that your offer to be of assistance in the continuing work of the Indian Ocean Committee is very much appreciated. We shall certainly let you know if an opportunity arises to make use of your valuable expertise in this or some other appropriate field. With kind regards, Yours sincerely, Rafeeuddin Ahmed Chef de Cabinet Mr. B. J. Fernando Attorney-at-Law 110 Rosemead Place Colombo 7 Sri Lanka *-7 - % J.'PERNANDO X|\ / no. ROSMEAD PLACE. ATTORNEY-AT-LAW ^ \ \/ COLOMBO 7. TELE- 94051 \ 0\ His Excellency Dr Kurt Waldheim, ^ ^) •/t-/J'W> Secretary-General_ « 4 , — f „,—.,w«»*sT=T,A Unite-----"d Nations' , f) Excellency, I wish to hereby tender my resignation as Chairman of UN Ad Hoc Committee on Indian Ocean, Chairman of UN Ad Hoc Committee on World Disarmament Conference and as a Vice-Chairman of Committee of the Whole. My resignations are necessary as with effect from 25th March 1980 I have resigned as the Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to U.N, Though I had no wish to cause any detriment to the work in the above Committees, circumstances beyond my control made ny resignation necessary. However, I am very much concerned about the work in the Indian Ocean Committee which is of vital importance to peace. During the last two years we have made considerable progress to bring the peace initiatives within the U.N. framework and its resolution 2832. I wish to inform you that if in any way I could assist the work of this Committee even as an expert for which provision was made by the General Assembly last year, I would be very glad to do so as the objectives are very close to my heart. I have now resumed my practice as a lawyer in Sri Lanka. However, I wish I could have continued to be in New York for another year and half because of the education of my children. I am enclosing a brief sketch of my bio-data in jdie event of your Excellency considering Utilisation of my services in some appropriate capacity. Any communi- cation could be forwaj; With affectionate regards, Yours sincerely, B. J. FERNANDO B.J. Fernando, 110, Rosinead Place, Colo"ibo~7i> Sri Lanka ( Ceylon ) Born 14th September 1934. Primary Education at Anancla College, Colombo. University of C&ylon (Sri Lanka) and University of London. After becoming a Barrister-at~Law fx"oin Middle-Temple, Inns of Court, London, practised as an Attorney~at~Law in Sri Lanka from 1953 to 1977. Chairman of the Junior Bar Committee of Bar Association of Sri Lanka» Member of the Executive Committee and thereafter from 1st January 1977 a member of the Working Committee wh±h governs the United National Party which formed the Government of Sri Lanka in 1977. Was a member of Sri Lanka delegation to U.N. at 32nd session (1977). From February 1978 to March 1980 Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to U.N. During 1978 and 1979 was Chairman of Co-ordinating Bureau of Non-Aligned Nations,Presided as Chairman of Ambassadors and Senior Officials Meetings of Non-Aligned Countries at Havana (May 1978), Belgrade (July 1978), Maputo (January i979)5 Colombo (June 1979) and at the Non-Aligned Summit in August 1979. Leader of the Sri Lanka delegation to Law of The Sea Conference 1978, 1979 and 1980, Chairman of U,W. Ad Hoc Committee on Indian Ocean during February 1978 to March 1980. Chairman of UCN. Ad Hoc Committee on World Disarmament Conference between March 1979 and March 1980. Elected Vice Chairnaii in January 1980 of Coamiittee of the Whole for the preparation of special session of U.l-T. General Assembly on World Economy.Prom April 19^0 resumed practise as an Attorney-at-Law in Sri Lanka. Sports - Tennis and Golf Married and has four children. / rt file: iron-Proliferation of AKU/ob 1,'uclear Weapons bf: rU cc; Mr. Csillag cc: EC Centre for Disarnonerit I-L vjLQn to viCKncv/lfe'.icjs rocoi.pt 01 ycur letter of 20 :iay i^c-O, inviting me to the Se-ccn-i Review CDiifortirica of the Parties to the '.Treaty or, the l-:oii- rroliferatlou of l;uclear V -car-one to bo held at Gcia^rva fron II i\ur;ust to S Gs>pfce.~ber. I have noted tho draft rules of prcoec?.vre cf tiits Ccnfcrcnco and will ofiviGi. vou in due coarse of t^so composition cf the colec;c?ticn to r^prcsont the Ur-itca Kalons at the Hecond Kevicv; Conference, Accept, llr. Chairman, tho asourancf-c r. hiylicet consideration* ;'r. C-.C. K^inn Chairn,an 'ihircv St.3G.ior- cf the ?rop^rc.tcry Ccc^-'itlc for ir.ho P.cviov: Corifcr^^ce of the Partic-3 tc t-is.- treaty en t;-;i, :iori-Prolirf:ration c- RECEIVED UNITED NATIONS NATIONS U INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR ,,JUM 9 The Secretary-General TO: .3 June 198O A: Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko Under-Secretary-General for ERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: and Security Council Aff FROM: Jan Martenson DE: Assistant Secretary-General Centre for Disarmament SUBJECT: OB JET: United Nations RepresentateiciL-at the Second NPT Review Conference £T 1. You have received the attached invitation to the second Conference to review the implementation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. I attach for your approval the draft of a letter of acknowledgement. 2. The Conference will be of considerable political interest. The level of representation is expected to be high. I consider that it would be appropriate if the United Nations were to express the importance it attaches to the Treaty, by representation at the highest level. I would therefore respectfully suggest that you might consider attending the opening session and delivering a message to the Plenary. 3. A draft of a message will be submitted to you in the near future. 4. As you know, the Secretariat is making an important contribution to the Conference, by submitting four major background papers. In accordance with the request made by the General Assembly at its thirty-third session, the substantive conference Secretariat is largely made up of staff from the United Nations, which also provides conference services. Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Geneva, 1980 IN RECORDS CONTROL (l-l) 20 MAY 2 91980 ACTION TO: Dear Mr. Secretary-General, I have the honour to refer to the Final Report o Preparatory Committee for the second Review Conferenc Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuc and, in particular, to paragraph 13, by which the C '^ ING" FOR WARD" decided that the Review Conference should be held in from / 11 August to 5 September 1980. DAY MONTH YR. TO: In accordance with paragraph 31 of the Preparatory Uomrarttee* s Final Report, I have the honour to invite you to the Conference. The Review Conference will open at the Palais des Nations on 11 August 1980 at 3.00 p.m. I should like to draw your attention to Rule kk (3) of the draft rules of procedure of the Conference, which are contained in Annex III to the Final Report, pursuant to which the Secretary- General of the United Nations or his representatives shall be entitled to attend meetings of the Plenary and of the Main Committees and to receive the Conference documents. They shall also be entitled to submit material, both orally and in writing. Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration. C. G. Maina Mr. Kurt Waldheim Chairman Secretary-General Third session of the Preparatory Committee United Nations for the Review Conference of the Parties New York N Y 10017 to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL NO. m 1) TO ciikj(M 2074 ft cc: SG _/ b/f: RA/Apy v;.-p/G.vM/AF/MJS File : GP '"r;" XRef : Disar—ent 5 June 19i:- Dear Mr, Hasira, •• ," .. \ On behalf of the Secretary-Geaeral I would like to thank you for your letter of 19 May 19SO and the kind words you addressed to him. Regarding the forthcoming special issue of your journal devoted for disarmament, the enclosed text of the statement made by the Secretary-General on the occasion of disarmament .week last year r?.ight be of interest to you. As.requested, I am also sending a photograph signed by'the Secretary-General, As .you may know, the Secretary-General will personally address the conference on "The Arras Race and the Human Race1', which will be held at United Nations Headquarters this month. His speech, however, cannot be released prior to the opening of the Conference. Uith my best wishes.for success.in your work I remain Yours sincerely. Angela Knippenberg-Uthe] Second Officer l-lr. S.P. Jain Nasirn International Cultural Forum 2G53, Roshanpura Uai Sneak New Delhi - G I RECE!VEp Founded ; 1349 hone;265319 MAY '6 o 1980 TERNATIONAL CULTURAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIAL & CULTURAL ORGANISATION ( Registered under the Indian Societies Act. ) OFFICIAL ORGAN Int. H. Qrts. : Chairman : 26S3, ROSHANPURA. N A I S A R A K • ShriS.P. JainNasim DELHI-4 (India) 19th May 80. My Dear Dr. Waldheim, I am glad to inform you that one of our delegate Mr.C .K.Xochokoshy, I. A.3 .Chairman, Siectricity Board Kerala, and his wife is coming to attend the NGO's conference.'at your U.H.headquarters from our organisations side, at the three days conference of "The Arms Race & the Human Race". I am sure under your able guidance the conference will be of great success, and some Role of HGO's in halting the Arms Race will come out. During the conference week,I am "bringing out a sper.ial issue of my Journal ^ove v;^ich will "be based on the theme of "The Arms Race & Human Race". I will be greatful if you plese favour me with your kind message to the world on this subject for publication in our Journal together with one of"your signed photo for inserting with the message . ~ " Needless to tell you that from our first dayof start in 19^9.we are working with "the Motto of Love Brotherhood'& Service ,and are fully surmorting the UN'Charter in India., and are working for it in various fields. Looking to hear from you.with personal regards; and respectful greetings for the fine work you are doing for W-rid Peace. Yo s sincerly; <• A ^^'^ Dr. Kurt Waiaheim, Chairman. Secretary General of Newyork. \ it Press Section ^dQvf"**?"11 ©h * United Nations, New York DC/1276 29 Hay 1980 SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT ON COMPREHENSIVE NUCLEAR TEST BAN RELEASED (Based on information received from United Nations Information. Service, Geneva) A report containing a number of conclusions on the question of a comprehensive nuclear test ban, transmitted by the Secretary-General to the General Assembly, was released at United Nations Headquarters today. Prepared in the Secretariat with the help of four consultant experts, the report, (document A/35/257) states that 3 comprehensive ban on nuclear tests could serve as an important measure of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, both vertical and horizontal. Further, a comprehensive test ban would have a major arms limitation impact in that it would ma^e it difficult, if not impossible, for nuclear-weapon States parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) to develop new designs of nuclear weapons and would also place constraints on the modification of existing weapons cos igns. Among other things, the report states that no other question in the fiala of disarmament has been the subject of so much international concern and negotiation as that of stopping nuclear-weapon tests and that its achievement would be an event of great international importance. It states that a comprehensive test ban is regarded as the first and most urgent step towards a cessation or the nuclear-arms race, in particular as regards its q ual itat ive aspects. The report reiterates the view cf the parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (MPT) that a comprehensive test ban would reinforce the Treaty by demonstrating the awareness cf the major nuclear Powers of the legal obligation uncer the Treaty "to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation cf the nuclear-arms race at an early date". The report also notes that in order to achieve its purpose, the. comprehensive test ban must be such as to endure. By decision 34/422 of 11 December 1979, the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General to prepare the study on the question a comprehensive- nuclear test ban recommended by the Advisory Board on Disarmament Studies and the Secretary-General himself. The study was to be completed in time for •~ - (more) For information media - not an official record UNITED NATIONS Distr. GEN ERAL GENERAL A/CN.10/INFA ASSEMBLY 16 May 1980 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH DISARMAMENT COMMISSION LIST OF DELEGATIONS H.E. Mr. Mohammed Bedjaoui Algeria Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Permanent Representative to the United Nations Mr. Mohanmed-Tahar Bouzarbia Counsellor, Permanent Mission Mr. Ramdane Lamamra Head of the Department of Political Affairs and of Relations with the United Nations Ministry of Foreign Affairs Mr. Mohamed Medkour Adviser, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Mr. Boualem Lahouel Adviser Ministry of Foreign Affairs Mr. Mohamed Merzelkad Adviser Ministry of National Defence Mr. Hassan Hellal Adviser Ministry of Defense Argentina H.E. Dr. Enrique Jorge Ros Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Permanent Representative to the United Nations Sr. Gustavo E. Figueroa Minister Plenipotentiary Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations Sr. Jose" Maria Otegui First Secretary, Permanent Mission Austria H.E. Mr. Thomas KLestil Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Permanent Representative to the United Nations Mr. Ernst Sucharipa First Secretary, Permanent Mission Mr. Thomas Scheidl Military Adviser. Permanent Mission UNITED NATIONS Distr. GENERAL S/13919 1 Hay 1980 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH LETTER DATED 29 APRIL I960 FROM THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE UNITED NATIONS ADDRESSED TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL On behalf of the Unified Command established pursuant to Security Council resolution 8U of 7 July 1950, I have the honour to sulniit a report of the United Nations Command concerning the maintenance of the Armistice Agreement of 1953 during the period 18 December 1978 through 15 December 1979- I request that this letter, together with the enclosed report of the United Nations Command, be circulated as a document of the Security Council. (Signed) Donald F. HcHEKRY 80-10805 ^yilllli^JsJ^^ ^ U/jY Ghyur:-.0" C 0 Vj-Ki'i^Li] i AL '^.\r"L:.iS i-1 ;'-' CO^J1 i ^ci;Oii.—3 >Jl Li--I tyv? eS GPEKiD ITS ' Z'C£S13£ THIS. AFTH.FJNOOH A-D ELECTED -A'EASSA-C? L. PFillFFE? ("EDEKAL REPUBLIC OF GERMAe'Y.; ./•$ CH^I^i^Alv." ^ITcNDI :^ ... DEBATE U'ITK; A VI 5.V TQ FO^nULwTI :.G rr.LLI:'H ^A-::V TO'vJ;-.GO- A.;'." e r:'- :.oo~5 ..•' ' '" £ V E £ wen COPVu^" '***? * Y8 it FILE NO. ACTtOH TO NNNN 2C2C MQP1222 MCP0295 SS CABUK *NEWYORK (UNNY) 08 2123Z ETATPRIORITE THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD PHILIP NOEL--BAKER HOUSE OF LORDS WESTMINSTER LONDON (GREAT BRITAIN) MCP0295-04 ON BEHALF AND IN THE ABSENCE OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL I WISH TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR LETTER OF 25 MARCH REGARDING THHE CONVENTION ON THE WORLD DISARMAMENT CAMPAIGN, WHOM YOU HAVE KINDLY INVITED TO ATTEND THE CONVEN- TIONv WILL REPRESENT THE UNITED NATIONS AND DELIVER A MESSAGE MAY I TAKE IS OPPORTUNITY TO SEND YOU MY BEST WISHES FOR THE UCCESS OF THE CONFERENCE, WITH KIND REGARDS* RAFEEUDIUN AHMED CHEF DE CABINET -04082330 bf : AP/GMM cc: Lhbmann File : Messages refuse* xRef : Disarmament April 19>:0 A.KriipEenbercy/ns 3i!02 E 5036 . EOSG THE BIGHT liONCUSlSBLf; I.OHD PHILIP HOEL-EAKER IIOJSE OF LORDS WEST.NIKS5'ER LONDON (OREAT BRITAIN) N BEHALF AKD III THE A3SEMCE OF THE SECPES'ARY-GENERAL, WISH rO THANK YOU FOR YOUR LETTER OF 25 M&P.CH REGARDING THE lWETsTIOT ON THE WORLD DISARMAMENT CJvKFAIGN. MS, LEHMAN17, V7HOH YCU IIAVS KIKDLY I1WITED TO ATTEND THE CONVENTION , WILL REPRESENT THE UNITED KATIONS A>^ID DELIVZR A MESSAGE I. . J1AY I T^.KE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SEND YOU MY BEST WISHES FOR TEE SUCCESS 0? THE COfTEIlEKCE. WITH KIND REGARDS, PAFSEUDDIN AHMED CHEF DL CABINET E. Ah:-ed, Chef do Cabinet \ CCn--TC3-1 APR-219BO 1 iL: --..•m„ - ACTION TO;, | - .- • -, , „-,' \ \'.--.-{,./-.r/,-:^.. f fbrtfc- '?;•_ CN ..../.... / His Excellency Doctor Kurt Waldheim £>AY MONTH YR. r-f • Secretary-General TO: , , -.•.•.-..•.. United Nations NEW YORK ^, C-'' New York United States 25th March 1380 My dear Secretary-General, I must ±irst thank you warmly for sending me a copy of your forthcoming book 'Building the Future Order1. I have had an opportunity to send a few words for the dust-cover and hope that the "book will have an enormous success and that it will sell by the million all over the world. • I am now writing to ask if you could be good enough to send us ; a message for a 'Convention' on disarmament and development which our World- Disarmament Campaign is holding. We are expecting to have three thousand delegates from supporting organisations. Delegates pay one pound registration fee, receive basic documents of which I enclose three, and some of them will have the right to speak in the Convention which will last from 10.30 am. to 5.30 pm. with an interval for lunch. We have among the speakers; the Cardinal Hume, Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop of Birmingham representing the Archbishop of Canterbury; Jack Jones, until recently the Chairman of the International Committee of the Trade Union Congress; John Ferguson, the Chairman of our United. Nations Association; -..-^l.. i^.^i.. *^ Chairmen:— Vice-Chairmen:— Lord Philip Noel-Baker Mgr. Bruce Kent Lord Fenner Brockway Ron Huzzard Hon. Secretary Hon. Treasurer Eric Messer. Lord Bruce of Donington NATIONAL CONVENTION - 12th APRIL 1980 Dear Friend, There is now a growing realisation that been arranged to take place:— the peace of the world is becoming in- on Saturday 12th April 1980 creasingly endangered by an arms race in from 10am to 5 pm. both nuclear and conventional weapons. at: Central Hall, Victoria Street, West- It is recognised also that only by the minster, London S.W.I. actions of the Governments of the world You are invited to send delegates to it, in furthering the objectives and policies as per the Application Form below. set out at the conclusion of the United Lord Gerald Gardiner, Q.C. will pre- Nations Special Session on Disarmament side. Speakers of national repute will be 23 May to 1 July 1978, to which they invited. Distinguished visitors will come themselves subscribed, can the escalation from abroad. Announcements concerning of the arms race be halted and reversed. this will be made later. Failure to accomplish this would result Ample opportunity will be provided for in the destruction of civilisation in a discussion by delegates, to whose atten- nuclear holocaust. tion we commend the enclosed documents The aim of the World Disarmament concerning the Campaign, together with Campaign is thus to arouse all peoples in an appeal for sponsorship. support of policies for disarmament through- Please complete the Application Form out the World in order to save mankind. and return it as soon as you can. We have In the words of the UN Declaration a race against time — for it is now World "At the earliest appropriate time, a world Disarmament or World Death. disarmament conference should be con- Yours in good hope, vened with universal participation and Philip Noel-Baker with adequate preparation." Fenner Brockway The time to begin to prepare is NOW \ Donald Bruce A NATIONAL CONVENTION has Eric Messer. APPLICATION FOR DELEGATES' CREDENTIALS (Delegation up to a maximum Qf 3. Delegates' Names and addresses. £1. Fee per Delegate —25p for students) (BLOCK LETTERS PLEASE) To: Eric Messer, Hon. Sec. WDC, 21 Rydons Lane, Old Coulsdon, Surrey, CR3 ISU. Enclosed, please find £ Name of Organisation Individuals welcome. Please give Name and Address (Block letters) and enclose £1 for ticket. World Disarmament Campaign in association with the United Nations Association Joint Chairmen: Lord Philip Noel-Baker Lord Brockway "Someday the demand for disarmament by hundreds of millions will, I hope, become so universal and so insistent that no man, no nation, can withstand it. " President Dvvight D. Eisenhower SPEECH by Admiral of the Fleet Earl Mountbatten was an outstandingly successful Commander-in-Chief both by sea and land in the Second World War, and perhaps the highest authority in the world on all questions of armaments and warfare. AKU/MS cc: SG (^ bf: AR/JPB/MKP/GMM/AF/MJS' File : Disarmament 4 April 1980 Dear Mr. Jaipal, On behalf asvd .iB the absence of the Secretary- General on official business overseas, I wish to acknowledge your letter of 31 March 1980 by which you gave him your assessment of the recent work'of the Committee on Disarmament. You may be sure that I shall bring your letter to the Secretary-GenEa&l1s attention upon his return to New York and I know that he would wish me to convey to you his sincere appreciation for sending him this most interesting information. With kind regards, Yours sincerely, Rafeeuddin Ahmed Chef de Cabinet Mr. Rikhi Jaipal Secretary of the Committee on Disarmament Geneva 1 i£a-a^Lji^JsSasisiuss^^^^^''^ffiiasssassasssi ;• '• -•'•--•^"''-'i •**&•;* S45Ss ' OFFICE DES NATIONS UNIES A GENEVE UNITED NATIONS OFFICE AT GENEVA Telegrammes: UNATIONS, GENEVE Palais des Nations TSlex : 22.212 on 22.344 CH - 1211 GENEVE 10 Telephone : 3(6011 334000 332000 331000 REF. No : (a rappeler dans la reponse) 31 Earch 1980 PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL Dear fir. Secretary-General, Since my last letter to you of 20 February, the Committee on Disarmament has had its ups and downs. We all thought ve would have approved our programme of work and established four working groups by the end of February, but that was not to be. They were left over for the next month when these two issues were settled as late as the llth and lyth March. Again, we thought that we would approve the chairmen for the four working groups as well as the six requests for participation from some non-member States by the end pf March, but that too has eluded us and will have to wait for April. 2. While on the surface these matters seem procedural in nature, the discussions became highly politicised and occasionally were confrontational. This is a reflection of the prevailing international climate. A number of political issues were introduced into the plenary meetings and there were spirited responses and counter charges on such questions as Afghanistan, Nato's perception of military weakness vis-a-vis the Warsaw Pact's forces in the European theatre, the decline of detente and its causes, and the reported use of chemical weapons in Afghanistan, Laos and Kampuchea. J>. Even so, there is a strong undercurrent of determination not to allow the negotiating process to be derailed but to concentrate on substantive issues and make steady though slow progress. I am fairly confident therefore of the immediate future when we should be able to remove the present roadblocks and reach consensus. But there will have t-o be some sacrifices. The request for participation from Democratic Kampuchea is inevitably linked to a similar request from Vietnam and both may have to be rejected in order that four other requests from Austria, Denmark, Finland and Spain may be approved. Again, two groups have made firm bids for the chairmanship of the working groups on- chemical weapons viz. Western Europe and Group of 21. One of them will have to yield of course. His Excellency Dr. Kurt Waldheim Secretary-General of the United Nations United ITations Headquarters New York N.Y. 1001?' Office des Nations Unies a Geneve United Nations Offic Page 4. Some interesting ideas have materialised from quite unexpected quarters. While UK and USA regard the trilateral negotiations on a nuclear test ban as the best way to proceed, USSR will have no objection to the CD establishing a working group to undertake parallel negotiations, if all nuclear-weapon States participate in them. The reactions of China and France are not devoid of either interest or meaning. Prance said it had no objection to a working group and its joining it would depend on its terms of reference. China's response was that if the majority favoured a working group, it would go along. Canada reflected the views of the majority in saying that since the overall strategic relationship between the USA and USSR was one of rough parity, agreement to stop testing should be feasible, provided verification measures could be settled. 5- Vith the monthly rotation of the chairman from .countries belonging to different groups and with controversial questions spilling over from one month to another, I am pleasantly surprised to find that my mannerresponsibilitie. s have been evolving and increasing in an interesting Yours sincerely, Rikhi Jaipal —.--' . CC L-*--'--f -('••• AKUHS cc:/SGy cc/ Mr. Martenson bf : RA/APyjPB/r-'KP/Gr.lT-VAF/MJS File : Coiriu. on Dis . 24 I-iarch 1580 Dear Hr. In acccraance v,Yith General Assembly decision 34/422 of 11 Decstnber 1979, I have the honour to transmit to you the report en a Cctriyirehensivo Nuclear Test Ban. which was prepared in the Secretariat with the assistance of four consultant experts . /iccept ,- Mr. JVnbassadcr , the assurances of ?vi.y highest consideration, Kurt Vvaldheiv-1 His Excellency J-'r. Yu Poi-Vieii ArrtbG^sador and Per2:;anent KepreEcn of tho People's Republic of China to the United Nations. Office at Geneva Cnairr.aa Ccinraittee on Disarmament. AKUMS File: Disarmament bf/ AR/JPB/MKP/GMM/AF/MJS Mr. Pal Csillag 24 Karch 19CO Of ficer~in.-cha.rge Centre for Disarmament Mr. E.S. Ready Officer-in-charge Dept. of Political and Security Council Affairs Rafeeuddin Ahmed Chef de Cabinet Report on a Comprehensive Test Ban With reference to Mr. Martenson's memorandum of 19 March, and the changes discussed with you, please issue the report as proposed. The letter of the Secretary-General transmitting the report to the Chairman of the Committee on Disarmament is attached. bf: RA/AR/GMM NOTE TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL By decision 34/422, the General Assembly requested you to prepare the study on a comprehensive nuclear test ban (CTB), which had been recommended by the Advisory Board on Disarmament Studies, The Assembly's decision envisaged that the study be carried out "in the Secretariat, with the help of four consultant experts" and is to be submitted to the Committee on Disarmament in the spring of 1980. The Centre for Disarmament submitted the report last week. In consultation with Messrs. Martenson and Jaipal, it was decided to delete the letter of transmittal by the experts as well as the reference (.in the foreword) to the experts' "unanimous approval" of the report, since the Centre did suggest several changes in the text. The Centre for Disarmament considers the study to be "generally of high quality". It is also pointed out, however, that more emphasis might have been put on: the positive effects of a short-term CTB; the complexities facing the nuclear powers in concluding a treaty; and the desirability of the adherence of all nuclear powers to a CTB. Since this report is submitted by you, the foreword therefore contains a disclaimer: "... I am aware that the subject of a comprehensive test ban has a variety of interrelated aspects on which there are many different views". (P.2) The Centre for Disarmament, in consultation with Mr. Jaipal, recommends your approval of the study and we would support that recommendation. A letter of transmittal to the Chairman of the Committee on Disarmament is attached for your signature. A. Knippenberg-Uther/ms 24 March 1980 UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: The Secretary-General DATE: 19 March A: REFERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: Jan Martenson FROM: DE: Officer-in-Charg Department of Security Co SUBJECT: i OB JET: Expert Report on^T Comprehensive Test Ban 1. By decision 34/422, the General Assembly requested you to prepare the study on the question of a comprehensive nuclear test ban which had been recommended by the Advisory Board whose recommendation you endorsed in document A/34/588, in which it was envisaged that the study could be carried out in the Secretariat, with the help of four consultant experts. 2. Accordingly, you appointed Mr. A. Corradini, formerly of the Centre for Disarmament; Dr. W. Epstein, formerly of the Centre for Disarmament and UNITAR and now a professor in Canada; Mr. J. Goldblat of SIPRI and Mr. K.P. Jain, Ministry of External Relations, New Delhi. They have prepared the report with the help of the Secretariat. 3. The report, which has been adopted unanimously by the experts, is generally of high quality. It has been scrutinized by myself and my senior collaborators within the Centre in the light of the fact that it is to be a report of the Secretary-General. In several respects we have considered it necessary to make changes in the presentation and we have obtained the concurrence of the experts thereto. Nevertheless, I should point out that there are still some passages in which, had the report been prepared exclusively by the Secretariat, we would probably have used a somewhat more differentiated emphasis in the presentation. In particular this is the case with respect to: a. the discussion on the duration of the Comprehensive Test Ban (CTB). The experts have pointed out the disadvantages of a CTB of short duration but have not pointed out that, even so, such a treaty might have certain positive effects; b. the report tends, to some extent, to ignore the complex- ities facing the negotiating nuclear powers in concluding a treaty; and c. the report could have laid more stress on the desirability of the adherence of all the nuclear powers to a CTB. - 2 - As a whole the document is acceptable. 4. I wish to draw attention specifically to the inclusion by the experts of salient parts of your statement of 1972 to the CCD. This is contained in Appendix A and referred to in paragraph 14. 5. I should point out that in one respect we have not obtained the expert's agreement: paragraph 28 made explicit references to the explosion by the Soviet Union, on 3O October 1961, of a nuclear device of 50 megatons yield, "the largest ever undertaken". We consider this inappropriate as it disturbs the balance of the presentation, but at least two of the experts were unwilling to delete this. Nevertheless, I suggest deletion and inclusion of footnote 3 which would merely refer to the General Assembly resolution in which mention of this particular test is made. 6. I have prepared a letter (attached) transmitting the report to the Chairman of the Committee on Disarmament; you will recall that the Assembly requested that the report should be completed in time to be so transmitted, in the spring of 198O. cc: Mr. Kashirin A £} RFCESVED UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: The Secretary-Gener DATE: 12 March 198O A: REFERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: FROM: Jan Martenson DE: Officer-in-Char Department of ical and Security SUBJECT: Council Affa OBJET: Nuclear Relations - France and Iraq 1. Recent reports on French nuclear supplies to Iraq may, among other things, have a bearing on the study on Israeli nuclear armament, to which I refer in a separate memorandum. 2. According to these reports, France is planning to supply Iraq with enriched uranium for a nuclear research reactoP: you. may recall that components of that reactor under construction in France were damaged by fire last year, reportedly as a result of sabotage. 3. The reactor will use nuclear material which could be diverted relatively easily for the manufacture of an explosive device. France is hard at work to develop various nuclear processes that are inherently proliferation resistant. It has been recently reported to have developed nuclear fuel so intermixed with other material as to make it hard to convert into explosives. Because of its shape and colour the manufactured fuel is called "caramel". 4. Iraq appears to object to receiving this kind of fuel; it is a party to the NPT, and as such has an agreement with the IAEA under which all its nuclear activities are subject to international safeguards. cc: Mr. Kashirin r E D, UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: The Secretary-Gen 12 March 198O A: REFERENCE: CONFIDENTIAL THROUGH: S/C DE: Jan Martenson FROM: DE: Officer-in-Charge Department of Polijtiic^l and Security Council Affairs SUBJECT: OBJET: Study on the Israeli Nuclear Armament 1. By resolution 34/89 the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General with the assistance of qualified experts to prepare a st:uay on Israeli nuclear armament. For this study, on which a progress report is to be made to the 35th General Assembly, and a report to the 36th, the Assembly has given the authorization to engage a team of five persons. 2. In consultation with yourself, it was decided to ask five States, selected on a geographic/political basis and taking into account their potential contribution to this specialized study, to nominate participants. 3. Our continuing efforts to this effect have had poor results. Responses from States that have voted against and that had abstained have all been negative and a number of States that had voted in favour have either not replied or given negative responses. So far,only the USSR has expressed a willingness to participate. Iraq^itself seems nesxtant. We have asked it to informally approach the governments that have so far not replied to our inquiries. 4. Under the circumstances it will not be practicable to have the first meeting of the group in April, as planned. We are, however, renewing efforts to obtain the cooperation of the necessary numbers of governments and I trust that we shall be able to arrange a meeting in July. CC: Mr. Kashirin UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: The Secretary-General DATE: 12 March 198O A: REFERENCE: CONFIDENTIAL THROUGH; S/C DE: Jan Martenson FROM: DE: Department of itical and Security Council Affairs•-- —f SUBJECT: OBJET: Swiss Nuclear Sales to Argentina 1. The New York Times of 11 March 198O reported that the United States administration is objecting to Switzerland's plans to sell Argentina nuclear equipment,Today's issue confirms that tne relevant sales contract will be signed on 14 March. ^~"~ 2. This concerns an installation for the manufacture of_heavy water, which is one of the items in regard tcT which the nuclear suppliers, in their consultations ("The London Suppliers Club") had agreed to use particular prudence. Switzerland has not gone along with certain restrictions proposed there, nor has it agreed, along with France and the Federal Republic of Germany, to make nuclear exports only to states parties to the NPT or otherwise accepting "full-scope safeguards". Argentina has submitted to safeguards only facilities supplied from abroad. 3. The heavy water is presumably meant for use with natural uranium power reactors.~bf which Argentina has one in operation and several planned. Such facilities produce large amounts of plutonium. 4. We are aware that at the moment negotiations are proceeding between the IAEA and Argentina for a full- scope safeguards agreement pursuant to the Treaty of Tlatlolco, which Argentina previously announced it was planning to ratify. Apparently, those negotiations have raised some problems and the American authorities may be concerned that the Swiss supply might further complicate them. cc: Mr. Kashirin ... a-pre-. »•--, iss Sale x v .,-' gentina am -. •:"" Nev York' -Times v By RICHARD BUST l- -' Sj»d*I to Tic New Yorit Times1 WASHrNGTON, March 10— The Car- i Pakistan with several components for a >;' ter. Administration is trying to block a plant to produce bomb-grade uranium. ."' r; proposal by Switzerland to sell Argentina After the Pakistani program was de- '.."sensitive nuclear equipment for its tected.is late 1978, the 'Administratioa !^, power-plant development, Government tried to persuade the Swiss to agree to a •''?' officials said today. tighter export policy, but officials said- .;••• -The'officials said the deal would signifi- i the effort has produced few results-1-.;^. v cantl*»*»nHTy7 OrfVtort^*enhance* Argentina'h riroriHna rcs /*"ar>c»i—itcapacityv- ftno .' - . " ^ . ...'-• ; ; A main concern- about Argentina's ac- . - x/-produce nuclear weapons. • ... -j quisition of a heavy-water plant is. that . J-.- Argentina, the officials-said, is negoti-i American leverage on the country's pro- i ~.f v; 'ating with Swiss companies to buy a plant gram would be greatly diminished. Ar-- * T.^'.S for producing heavy water, a nuclear iso- gentina, officials said, has its. own supply "••g&iT-tope that could be used in the countryjs ; of natural uranium and, with a heavy- £'. .-T new generation of atomic power plants:-." water plant, the country would be able to ^.y»7.-\ -. Heavy water is used in some reactors resist pressure from Washington 'and Sr^r.ta slew-down-neutrons, maMng them elsewhere to forgo nuclear arms. •••:, j;-^)^- more efficient in producing nuclear fis- ~ *.-??>;. sionv However, the Carter Administration ; *;'": ?i' is^ concerned: that Argentina;;Uke- India :.V- HV several years ago, could also use heavy -./ Carter Allows Sales to Europe- ; ,.-;- i;'; waterto produce bomb-grade plutonium^ v . SpecUI to ThaNr* York Times ."'• ' ' t -•;• .-. Argentina-has declined to sign the 1868 PARIS, March 10 —President Carter '~; .•',-'.'». treaty to prevent the spread of nuclear has granted Western European'countries •- '•.:'.-.-'' weapons, and Administration experts permission to continue buying American- -'•.-^..r -have long viewed it. as a potential nu- made enriched uranium fuel for their nu- -i^i'"' ds^-wsap?113power^ ' -. ' .. --;. .. .'"• clear-power reactors even though they Wt-'.-^-.Officials said that .in several recent ex- have not complied with a key require- -v^j.;,^changes, the Administration had pressed ment of a law intended, to prevent the -•;\^";'"' the Swiss Government to get Argentina's- spread of nuclear arms. "••_.." - r^--= agreement to tight "restrictions on how • .x-:-/' the plant and other sensitive nuclear fa- ' If the President had not acted, he would, =.-?•='•« cilities could-be used.. But the Swiss are" have been required under the legislation ":: C'-; 'said to'have maintained that looser safe- to declare a nuclear-materials embargo :;--,;...•• guards on nuclear exports were all that effective today. The dispensation*, he . "I..-''. was required by a 1978 agreement among granted is for a year. . . '' " ..--./..major-, supplier • countries, including The Nuclear Nonproliferation Act of ;j;f'•.'..-; Switzerland.. -'' •.•....:*-;• 1978 forbids countries buying,-American : reactor fuel to reprocess it without •'^r .'->;' Several American' technical experts that the safeguards mentional by- American permission into plutonium, ~Z~i:'. Switzerland would not keep- Argentina which can be used for both producing from misusing the heavy water plant. electric power and making nuclear weap- are worried about a ««• But .the-President can temporarily: ..i-;/-'possible attempt by Argentina to acquire ;em while negotiations for such %.?'. nuclear arms,, they are almost aa con- an agreement are under way. •- ,. - - ""=;•.. ceraed by what was described as Switzef- Western European officials dealing- y land's lax attitude-on controlling the ex-,with nuclear affairs say they hope to use %r,-X>.i P01*- °* sensitive technology.. Several 'the year's grace period to narrow their, I'---'?-:!' aides said that two years ago the lack of differences with the Carter Administra- r;i''-V<- .Government constraints on nuclear ex- tion over the-"plutonium economy" they ?•'%•?•' ports allowed Swiss companies to provide are developing, - . •: Department of Public Information nr$ kB^'S^s"*** hjcsvy York ? • 0 V ^^ V v * %^ B D % SG/SM/2879 DC/1226 10 March 1980 SECRETARY-GENERAL'S MESSAGE OF 3 MARCH TO REVIEW CONFERENCE OF PARTIES TO BIOLOGICAL WEAPOi'JS COMVEHTION (The following, delayed in transmission, was received from the United Nations Information Service, Geneva.) It gives me great pleasure to extend my greetings and best wishes to all delegations participating in the Review Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Sto ckpil ing of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction. This important conference is being held at the beginning of the Second Disarmament Decade which should mark a new stage in the long and difficult road towards disarmament. The fact that the world is faced at present with international tensions and an accelerated of the arms race is all the more reason for us to use every opportunity to invigorate the disarmament process. The Biological Weapons Convention occupies a special place in the field of disarmament. In providing for an undertaking by States Parties to prohibit and prevent the development, production, stockpiling, a cquisition or retention of a whole category of weapons of mass destruction, the Convention represents the first disarmament effort in recent years by the United Nations by which one of the dangerous avenues of the arms race has been closed. The significance of the Convention comes into sharper focus when one considers that the unceasing progress in science and technology often leads to the development and production of newer and more dangerous weapons. The arresting of this ominous trend at least in one area is an achievement that resulted from long but persevering efforts of the whole international community. It proves the importance of similar efforts in other areas of disarmament. Another positive aspect of the Convention is the prevision in its Article IX that States Parties should continue negotiations in good faith with a veiw to reaching early agreement on effective measures for the prohibition of the. development, production and s t cokpiling of chemical weapons and on their destruction. Numerous decisions of the General Assembly have unequivocally accorded high priority to the prohibition of all chemical weapons. Negotiations to this end, therefore, need to proceeed without delay. (more) For information media - not an official record - 2 - Press Release SG/SM/2879 DC/1226 10 March 1980 I trust that your participation in the uork cf this Conference will assure that the purposed of the Preamble and the provisions of the Convention, including these concerning negotiations on chemical weapons, are being realized and that the relevant new scientific and technological developments are fully, taken into account. Over 100 States have ratified or signed the Convention, including many militarily significant countries. A thorough and forward-looking examination ot the functioning of the Convention will no doubt contribute to its broader acceptance, and ultimately to its universal application. Your Conference has an important mandate and I wish you every success in its fulfilment. AKU/MS ' <- •eas**1" bf: RA/JPB/MKP/GMM/AF/MJS File: Disarmament Mr. Pal Csillag 3 March 1980 Officer-in-chagge Centre for Disarmament Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko Under-Secretary-General for Political and Security Council Affairs Albert Rohan Director Executive Office of the Secretary-General Composition of the Study Group on Confidence-building Measures With reference to Mr. Martenson's memorandum of 26 February 1980, please proceed as proposed with the necessary arrangements for the establishment of the study group on Confidence-building Measures. bf; RA/AR/GMM NOTE TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL Developments concerning the Study Group on Confidence-building Measures The group was initially intended to have 10 members; this number was subsequently enlarged to 12 to ensure better geo- graphical composition. None of the nuclear powers was represented. The sponsor is the Federal Republic of Germany. In late January, the USSR expressed its interest to join all study groups currently being formed. This raised the question of the participation of all the nuclear powers, which were contacted in order to ascertain their reaction. The US and the UK indicated a wish to participate in the study groups. The FRG was kept informed of these developments and while tentative approval was initially given, difficulties subsequently arose and feelings were ruffled, as the FRG felt that "their" study group was being taken over. After intensive negotiations, those difficulties have now been solved and the composition of the group has been established. Membership was enlarged to 14: Austria, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Ecuador, Japan, Finland, FRG, Ghana, Peru, Romania, Thailand, USSR, USA and Zaire. The Centre suggests your approval of the composition of the study group. A. Knippenberg-Uther/ms 28 February 1980 -2 A UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES 4&» <1 ""^ /i/ • M •- ft i a $ INTEROFFICE MEMORANDU NDUM INTERIEUR / J TO: The Secretary-Gene D x//26 February 198O A: Mr. Mikhail Sytenko REFERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: Under-Secretary-General Department of Political curity ^Council Affairs FROM: DE: Jan Martenson Assistant Secretary-General Centre for Disarmament Composition of the Study Group on Confidence-building Measures Further to my memo of 15 January 1980, I wish to inform you of developments concerning the composition of the above-mentioned group. As you will recall, originally the proposed composition of the group was as follows: Austria, Burma, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Ecuador, Finland, Ghana, Germany, Federal Republic of, Hungary, Phillipines, Romania and Peru. This was an expansion from ten countries to 12 to ensure a better geographical/political composition of the group. Subsequently, in a note addressed to you on 23 January 198O, the First Deputy Permanent Representative of the USSR, Ambassador Kharlamov expressed the interest of his Government to participate in four of the study groups established under resolutions adopted by the 34th session of the General Assembly, including the study on confidence-building measures. In view of this development, I thought it appropriate, and in this I followed past practice, to contact informally representatives of the other four nuclear Powers - China, France, the United Kingdom and the United States - to inform them about the expression of interest by the USSR to participate in the CBM study group. I also informed Ambassador Baron von Wechmar, the proponent of the study. The reaction of the United States conveyed to me informally was that if the Soviet Union became a member of the group, the US would also wish to participate, A similar wish was later signified by a representative of the United Kingdom. I kept your office informed of these developments. In my consultations, I have stressed that under the pertinent General Assembly resolutions, the Secretary-General has the final responsibility regarding the composition of study groups; that in fulfilling this task, the Secretary-General endeavours to set up balanced groups, in the composition of which account is taken of an appropriate political/geographical representation, the interest of Member States for participation, the level of expertise they can contribute to the study, and the need to keep the number of Member -2- States that can participate in these groups reasonably close to that envisaged in the General Assembly resolution for each particular study group. In the case of the CBM study group, the membership envisaged in the resolution's financial implication was 1O. This number has already been expanded, as mentioned above, to 12. It would seem doubtful that financial arrangements could be made for a group composed of more than 14 countries. Under the circumstances, and with a view to accommodating the desire for participation of the USSR and the United States, I would propose that we proceed on the basis of a 14-member group composed as follows: Austria, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Ecuador, Japan (instead of Burma which declined the invitation), Finland, Ghana, Germany, Federal Republic of, Romania, Thailand (instead of the Philippines which declined the invitation), Peru, the USSR, the United States and Zaire. I would be grateful if you could endorse the membership proposed above so that we may proceed with the necessary arrangements for the establishment of the group, whose first session is to take place in Geneva on 8-11 April 198O. f $^ UNITED NATIONr\S NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDU MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: The Secretary-General 726 February 198O A: Mr. Mikhail Sytenfc REFERENCE: THROUGH: Under-Secretary-General Department of Political am 1 Affairs FROM: Jan Martenson ^ \ DE: Assistant Secretary-General/^ Centre for Disarmament SUBJECT: Review Conference on the BioTogicaioXoqi l Weapons Convention '-"•" •--_!—T—-1I------J -- - .««_«^«_ _ T n-r-IM-JM-lir- MMM—• —^^MMl !_•_!_ H^—M^—WHM—«•- 1. The first Review Conference of the States Parties to the 1971 Copyention banning bacteriological {biological) and toxin weapons" opens in Geneva on 3 March 1980 for a period of three weeks. To date, there nave seen some Ufa ratifications and 34 signatories to the Convention. It is expected that about 5O to 6O States Parties will attend the Conference, including the Depositary Governments of the Convention - Soviet Union, United Kingdom and United States. France and China are neither parties nor signatories. 2. The main function of the Conference is to review the past five yearsr experience in terms of States' compliance with the obligations deriving trom the provisions of the Convention.Up to the present, there has £>een no complaint lodged with the Security Council of any breach of the Convention's provisions. 3. In the context of the review to be made by the Conference, two important issues are likely to command its attention: (1) the question or new scientiFic and technical developments relevant to the Convention which the Conference must take into account in conducting its review, and (2) the question of extending the biological weapons ban to chemical weapons. 4. As regards the first question, discussion will centre around a scientific paper prepared by the Depositary Governments at the request of the Preparatory Committee for the Review Conference, which has been circulated to all States Parties for comments. Non-aligned delegations in the Preparatory Committee attached special importance to the study and sought, without success, to widen its scope to include developments in science and technology relevant to a chemical weapons ban. As to the second question, the review is likely to focus on the progress of efforts to reach agreement on chemical weapons, both at the bilateral negotiations undertaken by the Soviet Union and the United States, as well as at the CD which has for a number of years considered this question on a priority basis. 5. As you agreed, I shall be attending the opening of the Conference as your representative and deliver your message to the Conference, a draft of which has been submitted for your consideration and approval. RECEIVED UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES FEB 2 1 19 if\ / itj CABLE ADDRESS -ADRESSE TELEGRA PHIQUE' UNAT1ON5 NEWYORK A REFERENCE: 26/February 1980 Dear Sir, I wish to convey to you my thanks and appreciation for having nominated me for the post of Secretary-General of the Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. In discharging my responsibilities, I will always "be mindful of the trust that you have placed in me and of your unrelenting efforts in support of disarmament and world peace, which will inspire me to serve at the Conference with a maximum commitment to the achievement of positive results. Yours sincerely, Alessandro Corradini His Excellency Mr. Kurt Waldheim Secretary-General United Nations New York UNITED NATIONS MATJONS UNIES RAFEEUDDIN AHMED £j_ A^vw£- SUMMARY OF WORKING PAPER TRANSMITTED-' BY THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF FINLAND TO THE UNITED NATIONS This working paper, which was submitted to the Foreign Ministers of all European States and Canada and the United States, deplores the recent aggravation of tension in the international situation and calls for new initiatives in the field of disarmament and arms reduction. Finland puts forth the proposal - first mentioned in the General Assembly's general debate in October 1979 - of a European disarmament programme.,,. ™~"~ ~~"~**"™~ While existing measures (reference is made to the Final Act of the Helsinki Conference) and on-going negotiations should be borne in mind, Finland suggests the following points for discussion on the proposed programme: definition of terms; information on on-going negotiations; co-ordination of negotiations and proposals; joint or unilateral declarations regarding the objectives of participating Governments; obligations undertaken by States on the proposals under consideration; indirect effects on participating and non-participating States? global adaption of the European disarmament programme. Finland considers the framework in which the CSCE negotiations were held to be appropriate. Finland is asking the views and proposals on this initiative of all Governments to whom the working paper was submitted. AKU/EF 11 February 1980 ,(, " r _ ..™r.f '..IT/lfMt.nnllTrt*. Conf ider; t iel :2. 1.1 980 Traductio! PAPIST? DE TRAVAIL Y 1. Le Gouvernernent finlandais est persuade que, malgre une aggravation recente de la situation Internationale, il reste dans 1'interet de tous les Etats concernes de poursuivre et d'intensifier les efforts pour la limitation des armaments en Europe. Avec 1'evolution continue de la technologie militaire, c'est egalement la course aux armements tant con- ventionnels que nucleaires qui progresse sans relache. Au fond, 1'Europe se voit entrainee vers une situation para- doxale: les armes toujours plus puissantes constituent une entrave de plus en plus efficace a leur emploi militaire, tandis que les consequences politiques d'une course incessante aux armements tendent, en mime temps, a saper les bases de la detente. Celle-ci est reconnue, neanmoins a long terme, comme la gage la plus importante de la securite de tous les Etats europeens. Cette situation est propre a exposer 1'Europe a de nouveaux risques et a comprornettre les possibilites de maitriser les crises sur ce continent. 2. Toutefois, le Gouvernement finlandais estirne que la situation actuelle comporte egalement des signes positifs. Les negociations a Vienne sur la reduction mutuelle des forces se poursuivent jouant un role important dans les efforts en vue de limiter les forces et les armements en Europe centrale. De rnene, les Gouvernements interesses, estime le Gouvernement finlandais, seraient prets, en principe, a engager les negociations sur la limitation des armements nucleaires stationnes en Europe et diriges centre 1'Europe. D'importantes initiatives et propositions cnt ete avancees portant sur le desarmernent en Europe ou dans certaines de ses regions. Bien que chacune de celles- ci coinporte sa logique, ses fondemerits et sa valeur, - 2 - la plupart de ces initiatives et propositions n'ont pas fait, jusqu'a present, sur le plan international, 1'objet d'un examen suffisamment approfondi pour avoir conduit a une negociation. En outre, les rapports mutuels entre les negotiations en cours et les propositions recemment avancees, leurs convergences, leurs superpositions et differences eventuelles, ainsi que les con- clusions a tirer de 1'ajustement de ces differences ou de leurs convergences n'ont pas ete etudies non plus, jusqu'a present, sur une base suf f isamraent multilaterale. De merne, il n'a pas ete encore precede a 1'examen des effets qu'aura, eventuellement, 1'aboutissement ou, par centre, le non-aboutissement des negociations en cours sur la securite des Stats non participants qui, d'autre part, n'ont pas ete suffisamment informes de-ces questions, jusqu'a present. 3. La Conference sur la securite et la cooperation en Europe et ses Suites representent une contribution importante a la stabilisation de la situation en Europe et a 1'encouragement de la detente. Les mesures de confiance adoptees dans 1'Acte final de la CSCE concourent a completer de fa^on nouvelle les efforts dans le domaine du desarmement. L'Acte final confirme aussi 1'interet que portent les Etats participants aux efforts visant a reduire 1'affrontement militaire et a promouvoir le desarment. Le Gouvernement finlandais considere qu'il faudrait garder a 1'esprit, au moment de proceder a 1'examen de la situation actuelle du desarmement en Europe, aussi bien les mesures de confiance deja adoptees que celles qui seront envisagees, ainsi que les obligations generales de 1'Acte final. Le developpement continu des mesures de confiance devraient etre etroitement lie a la preparation de la deuxieme reunion faisant suite a la CSCE qui se tiendra a Madrid en novembre 1980. 4. De ce fait, le Gouvernement finlandais estime que de nouvelles approches et une nouvelle dynamique seront necessaires pour encourager le desarmement et la limitation des armements en Europe. Le Gouvernement finlandais a presente devant 1'Assemblee - 3 - generale de 1'ONU, le 19 octobre 1979, 1'idee d'une elaboration eventuelle d' un "programme de desarmernent pour 1'Europe". Le Gouvernement finlandais considere que, a partir des prccessus et propositions existants et envisages portant sur le desarmenent en Europe et dans certaines de ses regions, ainsi que par voie de consultations appropriees, il serait possible d'etablir un tel programme. 5. Les Etats interesses, tenant compte des negociations en cours, devraient definir le cadre des negociations sur le desarmement et la limitation des armements, ainsi que les principes regissant ces negociations. II parait evident au Gouvernement finlandais que les principes generalement reconnus dans le domaine du desarmement, c'est-a-dire la souverainete des Etats, le respect du droit de chaque Etat participant a la securite, le maintien de 1'equilibre militaire et un controle international approprie, devraient aussi etre appliques a 1'elaboration d'un programme de desarmement pour 1'Europe. Le Gouvernement finlandais souligne que 1'elaboration d'un programme de desarmement pour 1'Europe ne doit pas entraver les negociations en cours, ni toucher aux questions faisant 1'objet de ces negociations. 6. Les consultations sur un programme de desarmement pour 1'Europe pourraient eventuellement porter sur les questions suivarites: - Definition et la delimitation des termes avances au cours des negociations et dans les propositions. - Information sur les negociations en cours et les propositions presentees. - Coordination des negociations et des propositions et les rapports mutuels de leur mise en oeuvre. - Declarations conjointes ou unilaterales concernant les objectifs proposes par les Etats participant aux negotiations en cours. - bngagements qui porteraient eventuellement sur les questions faisant 1'objet des negociations, les regions geographiques, le niveau d'ambition, 1'effet des mesures unilaterales ou multilaterales, prises dans le cadre de ces negociations, notamment sur les Etats europeens non participants. - Effets indirects des negociations et des propositions, d'une part, sur les Etats participants, d'autre part, sur les Etats non participants, mais soumis auxdits effets. - Adaptation du desarmement europeen au cadre global du des- armement. 7. Le Gouvernement finlandais estime que tous les Etats responsables de la securite en Europe devraient participer aux consultations sur un programme de desarmement pour I1Europe ainsi qu'aux autres rencontres multilaterales qui se tiendront eventuellement a cet effet. Apres 1'aboutissement des consultations, les resultats obtenus poUrraient etre re- cueillis, a 1'avis du Gouvernement finlandais, dans un document adopte par consensus qui constituerait, avec ses annexes, "le programme de desarmement pour 1'Europe" vise par le Gouvernement finlandais. 8. Le Gouvernement finlandais estime que le processus de la CSCE auquel participent les Gouvernements des Etats responsables de la securite en Europe pourrait former un cadre approprie a ces consultations, a condition que soit obtenu un consensus sur cette question entre les Gouvernements interesses; d'autre part, le Gouvernement finlandais sera dispose a envisager tout autre forurn sur lequel sera atteint un accord suffisant. 9. Les representants de la Finlande remettront le present papier de travail aux ministeres des Affaires etrangeres de tous les Etats europeens ainsi qu'a ceux du Canada et des Etats-Unis d'Amerique. La Finlande serait reconnaissante aux pays - 5 - interesses de lui faire connaitre les propositions et les reflexions que leur inspire le present papier de travail. Le Gouvernement finlandais exprime le souhait ques ses representants aient 1'occasion de consulter, a un stade ulterieur et dans un contexte approprie, avec les representants des pays concernes sur leurs positions a 1'egard de la creation d'un programme de disarmament pour 1'Europe et de toutes les autres questions relatives a ce sujet. Le Gouvernement finlandais, en suivant soigneusement 1'etude de cette proposition par les Gouvernements interesses, examinera des possibilites de donner suite a son initiative. UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR \ TO: The Secretary-Genera anuary 198O A: Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko, Under- THROUGH: S/C DE: Secretary-General for Politica Security Council Affairs FROM: Jan Martenson \ RECEIVED DE: Assistant Secretary-Genera^XT Centre for Disarmament f\ OBJET^T: Review Conference of the BW Convention 1. The Review Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxic Weapons and their Destruction will be held from 3 to 21 March 1980 at Geneva. 2. It is proposed that I, as Head of the Centre for Disarmament, following previous policies, represent you at the Conference. 3. It is also proposed that you address a message to the Review Conference to be read by your representative. The text of the draft message is attached. \Kf NOTE TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL The Review Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxic Weapons and Their Destruction will be held from 3 to 21 March 1980 in Geneva. A message on this occasion was drafted by the Centre for Disarmament. It is herewith submitted, with minor stylistic changes, for your approval. The message will be delivered by Mr. Martenson on your behalf. A. Knippenberg-Uther/ms 25 February 1980 MESSAGE OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL TO THE REVIEW CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES TO THE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION It gives me great pleasure to extend my greetings and best wishes to all delegations participating in the Review Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxic Weapons and Their Destruction. This important conference is being held at the beginning of the Second Disarmament Decade which should mark a new stage in the long and difficult road towards disarmament. The fact that the world is faced at present with international tensions and an acceleration of the arms race is all the more reason for us to use every opportunity to invigorate the disarmament process. The Biological Weapons Convention occupies a special place in the field of disarmament. In providing for an undertaking by States Parties to prohibit and prevent the development, production, stockpiling, acquisition or retention of a whole category of weapons of mass destruction, the Convention represents the first disarmament effort in recent years by the United Nations by which one of the dangerous avenues of the arras race has been closed. The significance of the Convention comes into sharper focus when one considers that the unceasing progress in science and technology often leads to the development and production of newer and more dangerous weapons. The arresting of this ominous trend at least in one area is an achievement that resulted from long but persevering efforts of the whole international community. It proves the importance of similar efforts in other areas of disarmament. Another positive aspect of the Convention is the provision in its Article IX that States Parties should continue negotiations in good faith with a view to reaching early agreement on effective measures for the prohibition of the development, production and stockpiling of chemical weapons and on their destruction. Numerous decisions of the General Assembly have unequivocally accorded high priority to the prohibition of all chemical weapons. Negotiations to this end, therefore, need to proceed without delay. I trust that your participation in the work of this Conference will assure that the purposes of the Preamble and the provisions of the Convention, including those concerning negotiations on chemical weapons, are being realized and that the relevant new scientific and technological developments are fully taken into account. Over one hundred States have ratified or signed the Convention, including many militarily significant countries. A thorough and forward-looking examination of the functioning of the Convention will no doubt contribute to its broader acceptance, and ultimately to its universal application. Your Conference has an important mandate and I wish you every success in its fulfilment. HD/AF/AKU/g'B/iyis - cc :/ SG / cc I Mr .Debatin cc :Mr . Csillag , Of f icer-in-charge bf : RA/AR/JPB/MKP/GMM/MJS Centre for Disarmament F±le. Disarnament 29 January 19SG Dear Kr, Ambassador, The Preparatory Committee for the Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the lion- Proliferation of Mucek&sr Weapons decided,- at its last session, to invite me to nominate a Provisional Secretary-General of the Review Conference, which is to be held in August 1930. I wish to inform you that I have decided, in consultation with the members of the Preparatory Committeef to nominate to that position Mr. Alessandro Corradini, tny representative to the first and second sessions of the Preparatory Committee. The. nominee is to be confirmed by the Review Conference itself in accordance with its rules of procedure. Accept, l-*x« Ambassador, the assurances of my highest consideration. Kurt Wsldheiin His Excellency .Mr. Gerhard Herder ChaEEEsan of the Preparatory Conunlttee Permanent Representative of the German Democratic Republic to the United Faticns Office at Geneva Geneva Press Release ALESSANDRO CORRADINI NOMINATED FOR SECRETARY-GENERAL OF SECOND REVIEW CONFERENCE OF PARTIES TO TREATY ON NON- PROLIFERATION OF' NUCLEAR WEAPONS The Secretary-General of the United Nations today informed the Chairman of the second session of the Preparatory Committee for the Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of his decision to nominate Mr. Alessandro Corradini of Italy for the post of Secretary-General of the Second Review Conference. This nomination is to be confirmed by the' Review Conference itself. "-' -• - - -: - - - {• The Secretary-General's nomination was made in accordance with a decision of the second session of the Preparatory Committee (NPT/CONF.II/PCII/12-of 27 August 1979)inviting the Secretary-General to make such a nomination in consultation with the members of the Preparatory Committee. The Second Review Conference for the Non-Proliferation Treaty is scheduled to be held from 11 August to 5 September 1980, in accordance with the Final Document of the First Review Conference. Mr. Corradini served from 1956 to 1979 in the UN Secretariat and devoted his entire career to disarmament. From January 1977 to 31 December 1979 he was Director and Deputy to the Assistant Secretary-General of the UN Centre for Disarmament. He served as Deputy Secretary-General at the First Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. NATIONS NATIOWS UNIES RAFEEUDDIN AHMED Ji NOTE FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL The Preparatory Committee for the Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non- Prolif eration of Nuclear Weapons decided, at its last session, to invite you to nominate, in consultation with the members of the Preparatory Committee, the Secretary-General of the Review ^Conference. Consultations have determined that Mr. Alessandro Corradini was the strongest candidate. The Centre for Disarmament backs this choice. A letter informing the Chairman of the Preparatory Committee of the nomination of Mr. Corradini is attached for your signature. Also, in accordance with past practice, a press release announcing Mr. Corradini 's nomination is attached for your approval. A. Knippenberg-Uther/ms 5 February 1980 UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: The Secretary-General DATE: 25 January 198O A: REFERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: FROM: HelStiut Debatin DE: Under-Secretary-General for Administration, Finance and Management SUBJECT: Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty OBJET; on the Non-Prolireration of Nuclear Weapons - Nomination of Mr. Alessandro Corradini as Secretary-General of the Conference 1. The Preparatory Committee of the Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons has invited you to nominate an official to act on behalf of the Committee as Provisional Secretary-General of the Review Conference, the nominee to be confirmed by the Review Conference itself under its Rules of Procedure. 2. Mr. J. Martenson, Assistant Secretary-General, Centre for Disarmament, has proposed the candidature of Mr. Alessandro Corradini as Provisional Secretary-General of the Review Conference. I understand that you agree with that nomination. 3. In order to formalize your nomination of Mr. Corradini as the Provisional Secretary-General of the Review Conference, the Chairman of the Preparatory Committee, Ambassador Gerhard Herder, Permanent Representative of the German Democratic Republic to the United Nations Office at Geneva, should be notified of the nomination. This procedure is consistent with that adopted in the nomination of Ambassador Pastinen as Secretary-General of the First Review Conference. 4. A draft text of the letter of notification of that nomination is attached for your consideration. %1 ** ——- _- bf: NOTE FOR THE FILE I informed Mr. Csillag by telephone that it would not be possible for the Secretary-General to attend the Second NPT Review Conference. He asked me not to send an official memo with a negative answer, as this would leave open a possibility, however slight, that the Secretary-General might attend. The request for a message from the Secretary-General to the Second NPT Conference was duly noted by Mr. Csillag. A. Knippenberg-Uther/ms 6 February 1980 UNITED MATiONS NAT!OM/|igJ!ES RAFEEUDDIN AHMED UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: The Secretary-General ^ 29 January 198O A: Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko REFERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: Under-Secretary-General for and Security Council Aff FROM: Jan Martenson DE: Assistant Secretary-General Centre for Disarmament SUBJECT: OBJET: MPT Review Conference 1. The Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons will take place in Geneva from 11 Aucrust until 5 September. There is every indication that tnis conference WIJL! E>e o± considerable political significance and will provide a forum for discussion of important issues of disarmament and of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. 2. You will recall that you addressed the opening meeting of the First HPT Review Conference in May 197_5'>The United Nations delegation was composed of the Under-Secretary-General, PSCA, Dr. BjSrnerstedt, then head of the Disarmament Affairs Division, and two professional officers of that Division. 3. It would seem opportune if, this time again, the United Nations were represented at a high level. I suggest that you might wish to consider addressing the opening session. It would, in my view, be appropriate if the delegation of the United Nations^ included the Under-Secretary-General. PSCA. myself and the two ^senior officials of the Centre for Disarmament involved in the *substance of the Review Conference, Mr. P. Csillag, Chief, Committee and Conference Services Section and Ms. A. Segarra, Chief, Treaties and Resolutions Section. 4. The Centre for Disarmament will provide a draft of your statement in due time. 5. As you will recall, you have been requested by the General Assembly to render the necessary assistance and to provide such services as may be required for the conference. Accordingly, the main_part of the conference Secretariat will be constituted by staff members of the Centre for Disarmament. The IAEA will again make several professional officers available. For your information, the composition of the Secretariat, as it is now known, is listed hereafter. COMPOSITION OF THE SECRETARIAT OP THE SECOND NPT REVIEW CONFERENCE Secretary-General of the Conference A. Corradini Secretary of the Plenary Deputy Secretary-General B. Sanders Secretary of Committee I and of the General Committee Assistant Secretary/Drafting P. Davinic Officer in the Plenary; Document Supervision Assistant Secretary/Drafting A. Levin Officer in Committee I Assistant Secretary/Drafting B. Konstantinov Officer in the General Committee Secretary of Committee II R. Rainer (IAEA) Assistant Secretary/Drafting Officer in Committee II Secretary of the Credentials Committee S. Kheradi and the Drafting Committee Drafting Officer P. Joenniemi NGO Liaison Officer L. Waldheim-Natural Information Officer - - - (DPI) UNITED NATIONS INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: The Secretary-General DATE: 11 January 198O Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko Under-Secretary-General and Security Council FROM: J. Martenson DE: Assistant Secretary-General Centre for Disarmament The United Nations Disarmamer t Yearbook, volume 31 1978 I take pleasure in providing you with a copy of the 1978 United Nations Disarmament Yearbook. r , UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM 1NTER1EUR tyri °' The Secretary-General 1O January 198O ~~* ,/ "FERENCE: THROUGH-M*- Mikhail D. Sytenko -^^^jf ' s/c DE-. under-Secretary-General ^CS Political and Security"Council Affairs FROM: DE: J. Martenson Assistant Secretary-General f p V\\W\ SUBJECTCentre for Disarmament United Nations Institute sarmament Research in UNITAR 1. You will recall that following a French initiative and recommendations made by the Advisory Board on Disarmament Studies, the General Assembly has requested the Secretary-General to hold consultations with UNITAR regarding the establishment of a United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research within the framework of that body. 2. I have accordingly, after having discussed the matter with Mr. Mikhail D. Sytenko, on two occasions consulted with Dr. Davidson Nicol, the Executive Director of UNITAR, on steps to give effect to the Assembly's mandate. I have also had informal consultations with the French delegation. 3. The Board of Trustees of UNITAR is expected to discuss the matter at its next meeting, on 19 - 2O February, including the recommendations made by the Advisory Board on various aspects of the Institute, as endorsed by the Assembly (Document A/34/589, attached). The Centre has been asked, and will be prepared to attend the deliberations and give any necessary c lar i f ications . 4. The Advisory Board is scheduled to meet from 28 April to 9 May. In the light of any decision the Board of Trustees of UNITAR may have taken by then, you might wish to ask the Advisory Board to consider various aspects relating to the matter. cc: Dr. Davidson Nicol, UNITAR UNITED NATIONS Distr. E ERAL GENERAL 1 1-Toveiiiber 19T9 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH Thirty-fourth session Agenda iten U2 (j) REVIEW OF THE Il'PLEMENTATIO:1 OF THE RECOI.-jIIEEDATIOFIS A!TD DECISIONS ADOPTED BY THE GENERAL .ASSEMBLY AT ITS TEHTH SPECIAL SESSIOrT Frop:ramme of research and studies on disarmament Report of the Secretary-General 1. At its thirty-third session, the General Assembly adopted resolution 33/71 K of lU December 19783 entitled "Prop-ramme of research and studies on disarmament". In paragraph 1 of that resolution, the Secretary-General was requested to report to the Assembly at its thirty-fourth session on possible ways of establi shins5 operating and financing an international institute for disarmament research5 under the auspices of the United ITations. In paragraph 2 of the resolution, the Secretary-General was further requested to seek in this regard, inter alia,, the advice of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Studies , established in implementation of paragraph 12U of the Final Document of the Tenth Special Session of the General Assembly (resolution S-10/2)9 in view of the competence to be assigned to that body in respect of a. programme of studies on disarmament. 2. Accordingly, at its two sessions in 1979 , "tns Advisory Board on Disarmament Studies I/ discussed this matter. The Board first had a thorough exchange of views on the general aspects of the establishment and operation of an international institute for disarmament research and on various requirements which such an institute would have to meet. In its current discussions the Board considered a s-oecific proposal that an international institute for disarmament research should be set up within the framework of the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UEITAR) , to take the form of a new section of imiTAR, with its own scientific council, located at UFITAR's premises in Geneva and funded from a special item in the UNITAR budget, Findful of its limited mandate to advise on the modalities of the establishment 3 operation and financing of an international _!/ For the composition of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Studies- see the annex to document A/3U/588. 79-28278