PEOPLE FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT

27 October 2009
   
General Assembly
GA/DIS/3399
Department of Public Information * News and Media Division * New York

    Sixty-fourth General Assembly

    First Committee

    19th Meeting (PM)

    Gravely Concerned at Danger of Possible Nuclear Weapons Use, First
Committee Draft



    Resolution Calls on States to Prevent Proliferation, Promote
Nuclear Disarmament

    Seeking to Remove Nuclear Weapons from High Alert, Review Nuclear Doctrines,

    Halt Threat of Renewed Arms Race, Committee Sends 13 Texts to
General Assembly

    Removing nuclear weapons from a state of high-alert, halting the
threat of a renewed nuclear arms race and cementing commitments and
efforts to do both reflected the positive progress in the field of
disarmament, according to one of 13 draft texts approved today by the
Disarmament Committee, as it began taking action on the more than 50
draft resolutions and decisions before it.

    By a recorded vote of 113 in favour to 50 against, with 15
abstentions, the Committee approved a draft resolution seized with a
review of all nuclear doctrines and immediate and urgent steps to
reduce the risks of unintentional and accidental use of nuclear
weapons, including through de-alerting and de-targeting of nuclear
weapons.  (For details, see Annex VI.)

    By its terms, the draft resolution would have the General Assembly
call upon Member States to take the necessary measures to prevent the
proliferation of nuclear weapons in all its aspects and to promote
nuclear disarmament, with the objective of eliminating nuclear
weapons.

    Reiterating its grave concern at the danger to humanity posed by
the possibility that nuclear weapons could be used, the Assembly would
call upon all States to comply fully with all commitments made
regarding nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation and not to
act in any way that might compromise either cause or that might lead
to a new nuclear arms race, according to the draft resolution,
entitled "Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world:  accelerating the
implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments".

    The Committee recommended that draft resolution to the Assembly by
a vote of 165 in favour to 5 against (Democratic People's Republic of
Korea, France, India, Israel, United States), with 4 abstentions
(Bhutan, Federated States of Micronesia, Pakistan, United Kingdom).
(See Annex XIV.)

    Prior to approving that draft, a separate vote was taken on
operative paragraph 4, which would have the Assembly reiterate its
call upon all States parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT) to spare no effort to achieve the Treaty's universality, and in
that regard, urge India, Israel and Pakistan to accede to the Treaty
as non-nuclear-weapon States promptly and without conditions.

    The Committee voted to retain that provision by 159 in favour to 4
against ( India, Israel, Pakistan, United States), with 2 abstentions
( Bhutan, France) (Annex XIII).

    The process of nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation
went hand in hand, according to a draft resolution, entitled "Nuclear
disarmament" (document A/C.1/64/L.48).  By its terms, the Assembly
would reaffirm there was a genuine need for a systematic and
progressive process of nuclear disarmament, and it would urge the
nuclear-weapon States to stop immediately the qualitative improvement,
development, production and stockpiling of nuclear warheads and their
delivery systems.  It would also urge those States, as an interim
measure, to de-alert and deactivate immediately their nuclear weapons
and to take other concrete measures to reduce further the operational
status of their nuclear-weapon systems.

    The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 112 in favour to 43
against, with 21 abstentions.  (See Annex XII.)

    Another traditional draft text, on the risk of nuclear
proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/64/L.4), was approved
by a vote of 164 in favour to 5 against (Israel, Marshall Islands,
Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, United States), with 6
abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Canada, Côte d'Ivoire, Ethiopia,
India).  Among its key provisions, the Assembly would reaffirm the
importance of Israel's accession to the NPT and placement of all its
nuclear facilities under comprehensive International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) safeguards.  (See Annex III.)

    A separate vote was held on preambular paragraph 6, which would
have the Assembly call on those remaining States not parties to the
NPT to accede to it and to accept IAEA safeguards on all their nuclear
activities.

    That paragraph was retained by a vote of 163 in favour to 4
against (India, Israel, Palau, United States), with 6 abstentions
(Bhutan, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic People's Republic of Korea,
Ethiopia, Mauritius, Pakistan) (Annex II).

    The Committee also approved, by a vote of 168 in favour to 3
against (France, United Kingdom, United States), with 5 abstentions
(India, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Pakistan,
Palau), a draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern
hemisphere and adjacent areas (document A/C.1/64/L.31).  (See Annex
XI.)

    Prior to the text's passage, a separate vote was taken on
operative paragraph 7, which calls upon all States to consider all
relevant [nuclear-weapon-free zone] proposals, including those
reflected in its resolutions on the establishment of
nuclear-weapon-free zones in the Middle East and South Asia.

    The paragraph was retained by a vote of 165 in favour to 2 against
(India, Pakistan), with 6 abstentions (Bhutan, France, Israel, Palau,
United Kingdom, United States) (Annex X).

    Acting without a vote, the Committee approved a draft resolution
on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of
the Middle East, and on the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty.

    The Committee also approved, without a vote, a draft decision on
preventing the acquisition by terrorists of radioactive materials and
sources, and on the prohibition of the dumping of radioactive wastes.

    The following additional resolutions were approved by recorded
votes:  follow-up to nuclear disarmament obligations agreed to at the
1995 and 2000 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons; Convention on the Prohibition of
the Use of Nuclear Weapons; Treaty on the South-East Asia
Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone (Bangkok Treaty); and the conclusion of
effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon
States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.

    General statements on Cluster I or introductions of draft texts
were made by the representatives of Cuba, Nigeria, Pakistan, Brazil,
Egypt, Syria, Sweden (on behalf of the European Union) and New
Zealand.

    Explanations of vote were made by the representatives of Sweden
(on behalf of the European Union), Democratic People's Republic of
Korea, Nigeria (on behalf of the African Group), Israel, Iran, Norway,
Spain, France, Russian Federation, India, United Kingdom, Pakistan,
Venezuela, Canada, Israel, Brazil and the United States.

    Representatives of Cuba and Israel spoke on procedural matters.

    The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. Wednesday, 28 October, to
continue to take action on all disarmament and security-related draft
resolutions.

    Background

    The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met
this afternoon to take action on all draft resolutions and decisions
submitted under the disarmament and international security agenda
items, beginning with its first cluster on nuclear weapons-related
draft texts.

    General Statements on Cluster 1/Introduction of Drafts

    CAMILO GARCIA LOPEZ-TRIGO ( Cuba) said he supported and agreed to
the procedures; however, he asked about the availability of the
informal paper, as his delegation had not received the document.  He
requested that it be given to his delegation in a timely fashion.

    The CHAIR said that the informal paper had been distributed on
Friday and posted online on Monday.

    LAWRENCE OBISAKIN (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the African
Group, introduced the draft resolution on the African
Nuclear-Weapon-Free-Zone Treaty (Pelindaba Treaty) (document
A/C.1/64/L.33).  The draft had been approved by consensus before, with
no substantive amendments, and he hoped it would enjoy consensus once
more.

    He also introduced a draft text on prohibition of the dumping of
radioactive wastes (document A/C.1/64/L.34), and likewise hoped the
Committee would approve it by consensus.

    ZAMIR AKRAM ( Pakistan) introduced a draft resolution on the
conclusion of effective international arrangements to assure
non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear
weapons (document A/C.1/64/L.24).  He said that the demand for
negative security assurances crystallized in 1968, but the response of
the nuclear-weapon States had not been adequate.  At the first special
session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament, it had been
agreed that it was necessary to conclude binding agreements, but,
unfortunately, the declaration by four of the five nuclear-weapon
States was insufficient.

    He said that there were several justifications for negative
security assurances, including the fact that the principle of non-use
of, or threat of use of, force was enshrined in the Charter.  Present
statements not to use nuclear weapons were mere political declarations
if not backed by a binding document.  Even nuclear-weapon-free zones
did not have ironclad guarantees.  Only one nuclear-weapon State had
given an ironclad guarantee.

    Negative security assurances were unfinished business, which had
to be completed, he said.  New security doctrines envisaging the use
of nuclear weapons in response to chemical or biological attacks were
not tenable.  The Non-Aligned Movement had expressed concern about new
types and possible deployment of nuclear weapons.  The expansion of
nuclear alliances had also increased the scope of use of nuclear
weapons.  Those situations were inconsistent with negative security
assurance pledges and weakened the concept, lending great urgency to
the task of concluding those assurances.

    He said that the co-sponsors of the draft resolution sought to
underline that sense of urgency and to see it backed up by concrete
action.  The resolution had been technically updated.  They appealed
to all States, especially nuclear-weapon States, to work towards a
common approach and formula on that matter.  They believed that the
conclusion of effective arrangements would constitute a
confidence-building measure and contribute to reducing nuclear danger.
The co-sponsors urged the draft's approval by the widest possible
majority.

    LUIZ FILIPE DE MACEDO SOARES (Brazil), speaking on behalf of the
New Agenda Coalition (Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand,
South Africa, Sweden), introduced a draft resolution, entitled
"Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world:  accelerating the implementation
of nuclear disarmament commitments (document A/C.1/64/L.54).

    He explained that the Coalition was a group of like-minded nations
engaged in the nuclear disarmament agenda.  Their goal was the
complete elimination of nuclear weapons.  The resolution concentrated
on nuclear disarmament.  Building upon the increasing interest
expressed in disarmament by global leaders, the group engaged
constructively in consultation with Member States, with a view to
getting wide acceptance in the Committee this year.  They hoped that
all delegations would be able to support the draft text and, as such,
contribute and give concrete expression to achieving a world free of
nuclear weapons.

    KHALED ABDELRAHMANSHAMAA (Egypt), making a general statement on
"L.3", on establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle
East, said that the international consensus on the resolution adopted
annually was a manifestation of the importance given to the nuclear
disarmament and non-proliferation regime in the Middle East region and
globally.  In view of the current positive atmosphere, Egypt was
determined to move forward on nuclear challenges in the region,
particularly emanating from unsafeguarded nuclear activity there.  The
draft had been technically updated to include factual references to
resolutions adopted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
regarding Agency safeguards in the region.  Egypt looked forward to
continued and consensual adoption of the resolution, as well as
collective action towards its implementation.

    Mr. GARCIA LOPEZ-TRIGO ( Cuba ) said that his delegation had
co-sponsored several draft resolutions, including L.18, L.20, L.24,
L.31, L.48, and L.40.  It was unfortunate that those texts were
adopted every year, but not implemented.

    ABDULLAH HALLAK (Syria), speaking on the draft resolution on the
risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document
A/C.1/64/L.4), said that, at a time when nuclear weapons were being
developed and stockpiles were being increased, when nuclear Powers had
failed to fulfil the progress they had made at the Review Conferences
of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1995 and 2000, there
were pressures on States to acquire the means to secure their
sovereignty under international laws and conventions.  A blind eye
could not be cast on Israel, which possessed nuclear weapons.  Israel
continued an aggressive arms programme on an assortment of weapons.

    Hence, he said, the Middle East region remained the most exposed
to those threats.  Syria had been among the first States to have
called for the region to become free of weapons of mass destruction,
under international supervision.  Yet, Israel had still not subjected
its nuclear programme to IAEA safeguards.

    MAGNUS HELLGREN ( Sweden), on behalf of the European Union, said,
regarding a draft resolution on African Nuclear-Weapon-Free-Zone
Treaty (document A/C.1/64/L.33), nuclear-weapon-free zones enhanced
global peace and promoted stability and confidence.  He welcomed into
force the Pelindaba Treaty, and congratulated all African States on
that achievement.

    RAYLENE LIUFALANI ( New Zealand) said, regarding the draft
resolution on nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent
areas (document A/C.1/64/L.31), a technical glitch reflecting a
sponsors' list was incomplete, and it should include a complete list
of co-sponsors.

    Action on Drafts

    The representative of Sweden, speaking on behalf of the European
Union, on the draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in
the Middle East (document A/C.1/64/L.4), said the Union intended to
vote in favour of the text, but that did not imply its support of the
preambular reference to IAEA resolution GC(53)/RES/17.  The draft
before the Committee did not mention the serious proliferation risks
related to Iran's nuclear programmes.  The Union urged Iran to comply
fully with United Nations Security Council resolutions.  A solution to
the Iranian nuclear issue would contribute to global non-proliferation
efforts and to realizing the objective of a Middle East free of
weapons of mass destruction, including their means of delivery.
Practical steps, including Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
(CTBT) ratification and the start of negotiations on a fissile
material cut-off treaty, would be important confidence-building
measures in the regional context.

    The representative of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
wanted to clarify its position on the draft resolution on a
nuclear-weapon-free world, accelerating the implementation of nuclear
disarmament commitments, L.54.  He was in favour of the main thrust of
the text, however, the NPT was discriminatory in content and unfair in
implementation.  The nuclear-weapon States were preaching the NPT, but
denying developing countries' right to developing nuclear-energy
programmes.  The NPT was applied unfairly.  The Democratic People's
Republic of Korea signed onto the Treaty in 1985, with a hope of
peaceful nuclear-energy development.  But his country's expectations
had not been met.  It was inconceivable to re-enter the NPT until its
concerns were completely dispelled.  A number of countries called for
a legally binding treaty to eliminate nuclear weapons.  He would, for
those reasons, vote against the draft.

    The representative of Nigeria, on behalf of the African Group,
said he believed there would be another revision to the draft
resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and
Disarmament in Africa (document A/C.1/64/L.32/Rev.1).

    The Secretariat said that the amendments arrived too late.

    The representative of Israel said that the current situation on
nuclear proliferation in the Middle East begged the question of
whether the draft text on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the
Middle East, L.4, was realistic.

    Proliferation existed in the Middle East, with four of five
non-compliance cases overall taking place there, none involving
Israel, he said.  That was an alarming situation.  The region also
suffered from States sending weapons of mass destruction to it.

    He said that Iran's ongoing clandestine activities totally
disregarded IAEA and Security Council resolutions, and Syria's lack of
cooperation with IAEA investigations were some examples.  The draft
text did not include enough information, and it singled out the State
of Israel and overlooked the poor track record of other States in the
region.  Adopting such a resolution would not curb proliferation in
the Middle East. and he urged other States not to support it.  In
addition, the draft included references to a divisive IAEA resolution.
The fact that some States continued to support the Committee
resolution was regrettable.

    The representative of Iran, speaking on L.3, on the establishment
of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East, said
that, as a result of Iran's initiative, the General Assembly had
recognized the need for a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.
The activities of the Zionist regime were the major obstacle in
achieving that goal.  The actions of certain nuclear-weapon States had
actively hindered any progress in that respect.  The contradictory
approach by certain European Union members had also sent the wrong
message to the Zionist regime, even though those States were parties
to the NPT.  The inaction imposed on the Security Council, with the
support of the European Union members, had allowed the Zionist regime
to explicitly acknowledge the unlawful possession of nuclear weapons.

    The representative of Norway, speaking on L.4, on the risk of
nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, said that, while he would
support the text, his country shared the European Union's concerns
about it.  Norway was in favour of the establishment of
nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.

    Nigeria's representative stressed that the amendment he proposed
had been presented to the Secretariat at 5:30 p.m.  The sponsors
wanted the amendment in print, and not presented orally.

    The Committee took up a draft resolution, on the establishment of
a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East (document
A/C.1/64/L.3), which would have the General Assembly urge all parties
directly concerned to seriously consider taking the practical and
urgent steps required for the implementation of proposal to establish
such a zone and invite concerned countries to adhere to the Treaty on
the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

    Under the draft, the Assembly would call upon all countries of the
region that had not done so, pending the establishment of the zone, to
agree to place all their nuclear activities under IAEA safeguards.
Furthermore, the draft would have the Assembly invite all countries of
the region, pending the establishment of such a zone, not to develop,
produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or permit the
stationing of such weapons or nuclear devices on their territories, or
territories under their control.

    The Assembly would also invite the nuclear-weapon States and all
other States to assist in establishing the zone and to refrain from
any action that ran counter to both the letter and the spirit of the
present resolution.  The Assembly would also invite all parties to
consider the appropriate means that might contribute to the goal of
general and complete disarmament and the establishment of a zone free
of weapons of mass destruction in that region.

    A separate vote was held for operative paragraph 3, which takes
note of resolution GC(53)/RES/16, adopted on 17 September by the
General Conference of the IAEA, concerning the application of Agency
safeguards in the Middle East.

    The Committee voted to retain that provision by 166 in favour to
none against, with 3 abstentions ( Côte d'Ivoire, India, Israel). (For
details of the vote, please see Annex I.)

    Next, the draft resolution was approved in its entirety without a vote.

    The Committee then took action on the draft resolution on the risk
of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/64/L.4),
which would have the Assembly reaffirm the importance of Israel's
accession to the NPT and placement of all its nuclear facilities under
IAEA safeguards.  It would call upon Israel to accede to the Treaty
without further delay and not develop, produce, test or otherwise
acquire nuclear weapons, and to renounce possession of nuclear
weapons, and place all its unsafeguarded nuclear facilities under
full-scope IAEA safeguards as an important confidence-building measure
among all States of the region and as a step towards enhancing peace
and security.

    A separate vote was held for preambular paragraph 6, which would
have the Assembly called on those remaining States not parties to the
NPT to accede to it and to accept IAEA safeguards on all their nuclear
activities.

    That paragraph was retained by a vote of 163 in favour to 4
against (India, Israel, Palau, United States), with 6 abstentions
(Bhutan, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic People's Republic of Korea,
Ethiopia, Mauritius, Pakistan) (Annex II).

    The draft resolution as a whole was approved by a vote of 164 in
favour to 5 against (Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau,
United States), with 6 abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Canada, Côte
d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, India) (Annex III).

    The Committee then took up a draft resolution, on follow-up to
nuclear disarmament obligations agreed to at the 1995 and 2000 Review
Conferences of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons (document A/C.1/64/L.6).

    By its terms, the Assembly, gravely concerned over the failure of
the 2005 NPT Review Conference to reach any substantive agreement on
the follow-up to nuclear disarmament obligations, call for practical
steps to be taken by all nuclear-weapon States that would lead to
nuclear disarmament in a way that promotes international stability and
based on the principle of undiminished security for all.  The draft
would also have the Assembly urge States party to the Treaty to follow
up on the implementation of the nuclear disarmament obligations under
the Treaty agreed to at the 1995 and 2000 Review Conferences.

    A separate vote was taken on preambular paragraph 6, by which the
Assembly would reaffirm the resolution on the Middle East adopted on
11 May 1995 by the 1995 NPT Review and Extension Conference, in which
the Conference reaffirmed the importance of the early realization of
universal adherence to the Treaty and placement of nuclear facilities
under full-scope IAEA safeguards.

    The paragraph was approved by a vote of 109 in favour to 48
against, with 10 abstentions (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, India, Peru, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Samoa, Serbia,
Timor-Leste) (Annex IV).

    The draft resolution as a whole was approved by a vote of 105 in
favour to 56 against, with 12 abstentions (Annex V).

    The Committee then took up a draft decision, on preventing the
acquisition by terrorists of radioactive materials and sources
(document A/C.1/64/L.17), which would have the Assembly decide to
include an item of the same title in the provisional agenda for its
sixty-fifth session.

    The draft decision was approved without a vote.

    The Committee then took up a draft resolution, on reducing nuclear
danger (document A/C.1/64/L.18), which would have the Assembly call
for a review of nuclear doctrines and, in that context, immediate and
urgent steps to reduce the risks of unintentional and accidental use
of nuclear weapons, including through de-alerting and de-targeting of
nuclear weapons.

    Also by the draft, the Assembly would call on Member States to
take the necessary measures to prevent the proliferation of nuclear
weapons in all its aspects and to promote nuclear disarmament, with
the objective of eliminating nuclear weapons.

    The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 113 in favour to 50
against, with 15 abstentions (Annex VI).

    The Committee then took up a draft resolution, on Convention on
the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons (document
A/C.1/64/L.20), approving it by a vote of 116 in favour to 50 against,
with 11 abstentions (Annex VII).

    The draft resolution would have the General Assembly, convinced
that the use of nuclear weapons poses the most serious threat to the
survival of mankind and stressing that an international convention on
the prohibition of the use of nuclear weapons would be an important
step in a phased programme towards the complete elimination of nuclear
weapons within a specified time frame, reiterate its request to the
Conference on Disarmament to commence negotiations to reach an
agreement on such a convention.

    The Committee then had before it a draft resolution on the Treaty
on the South-East Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone (Bangkok Treaty)
(document A/C.1/64/L.23), by which the Assembly would encourage States
parties to resume direct consultations with the five nuclear-weapon
States to resolve comprehensively existing outstanding issues on
provisions of the Treaty and the Protocol thereto.  The Assembly would
also encourage nuclear-weapon States and States parties to work
constructively, with a view to ensuring the early accession of the
nuclear-weapon States to the Treaty's Protocol.

    The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 172 in favour to 0
against, with 5 abstentions (France, Israel, Marshall Islands,
Federated States of Micronesia, United States) (Annex VIII).

    The Committee then voted on a draft resolution on the conclusion
of effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon
States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons (document
A/C.1/64/L.24), approving it by a vote of 119 in favour to none
against, with 58 abstentions (Annex IX).

    That draft would have the Assembly appeal to all States,
especially nuclear-weapon States, to work actively towards an early
agreement on a common approach and a common formula that could be
included in an international legally binding instrument.  The Assembly
would recommend that further intensive efforts be devoted to the
search for such a common approach or common formula and that the
various alternative approaches, including those considered by the
Conference on Disarmament, be explored further in order to overcome
difficulties.

    The Assembly would also recommend that the Conference on
Disarmament actively continue intensive negotiations with a view to
reaching early agreement and concluding effective international
agreements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or
threat of use of nuclear weapons.

    The Committee took action on a draft resolution on
Nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas (document
A/C.1/64/L.31), which would have the Assembly welcome the continued
contribution that the Antarctic Treaty and the Treaties of Tlatelolco,
Rarotonga, Bangkok and Pelindaba are making towards freeing the
southern hemisphere and adjacent areas covered by those treaties from
nuclear weapons.  It would further note with satisfaction that all
nuclear-weapon-free zones in the southern hemisphere and adjacent
areas were now in force.

    By further terms of the draft text, the Assembly would call upon
all concerned States to continue to work together in order to
facilitate adherence to the protocols to nuclear-weapon-free-zone
treaties by all relevant States that have not yet adhered to them and
also urge all relevant States to cooperate in resolving outstanding
issues with a view to the full implementation of the Central Asian
Nuclear-Weapon-Free-Zone Treaty, which entered into force on 21 March
2009.

    A separate vote was taken on operative paragraph 7, which calls
upon all States to consider all relevant [nuclear-weapon-free zone]
proposals, including those reflected in its resolutions on the
establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones in the Middle East and
South Asia.

    Operative paragraph 7 was approved by a vote of 165 in favour to 2
against (India, Pakistan), with 6 abstentions (Bhutan, France, Israel,
Palau, United Kingdom, United States) (Annex X).

    The draft resolution as a whole was approved by a vote of 168 in
favour to 3 against (France, United Kingdom, United States), with 5
abstentions (India, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia,
Pakistan, Palau) (Annex XI).

    Following the vote, the representative of Israel said he would
have abstained from the vote and wanted that reflected in the record.

    Acting without a vote, the Committee approved a draft resolution
on African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (document A/C.1/64/L.33),
which would have the Assembly note with satisfaction the entry into
force of that treaty on 15 July 2009 and wouldcall upon African States
that have not yet done so to sign and ratify it as soon as possible.
It would further call upon the States contemplated in Protocol III to
the Treaty that have not yet done so to take all necessary measures to
ensure its speedy application to territories for which they are, de
jure or de facto, internationally responsible and that lie within the
limits of the geographical zone established in the Treaty.

    It would also call upon the African States parties to the Treaty
on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons that have not yet done so
to conclude comprehensive safeguards agreements with the International
Atomic Energy Agency pursuant to the Treaty, and to conclude
additional protocols to their safeguards agreements on the basis of
the Model Protocol approved by the Board of Governors of the Agency on
15 May 1997.

    Also by consensus, the Committee approved a draft resolution on
prohibition of the dumping of radioactive wastes (document
A/C.1/64/L.34), which would have the Assembly express grave concern
regarding any use of nuclear wastes that would constitute radiological
warfare and have grave implications for the national security of all
States.  It would call upon all States to take appropriate measures
with a view to preventing any dumping of nuclear or radioactive wastes
that would infringe upon the sovereignty of States.

    The Assembly would request the Conference on Disarmament, in the
negotiations for a convention on the prohibition of radiological
weapons, to take into account radioactive wastes as part of the scope
of such a convention, and to intensify efforts towards an early
conclusion of that convention.

    By a recorded vote of 112 in favour to 43 against, with 21
abstentions, the Committee approved a draft resolution on nuclear
disarmament (document A/C.1/64/L.48) (Annex XII).

    By its terms, the Assembly would reaffirm that nuclear disarmament
and nuclear non-proliferation are substantively interrelated and
mutually reinforcing, that the two processes must go hand in hand and
that there is a genuine need for a systematic and progressive process
of nuclear disarmament.  It would welcome and encourage the efforts to
establish new nuclear-weapon-free zones in different parts of the
world on the basis of agreements or arrangements freely arrived at
among the States of the regions concerned, which is an effective
measure for limiting the further spread of nuclear weapons
geographically and contributes to the cause of nuclear disarmament.

    The Assembly would urge the nuclear-weapon States to stop
immediately the qualitative improvement, development, production and
stockpiling of nuclear warheads and their delivery systems and also
urge them, as an interim measure, to de-alert and deactivate
immediately their nuclear weapons and to take other concrete measures
to reduce further the operational status of their nuclear-weapon
systems, while stressing that reductions in deployments and in
operational status cannot substitute for irreversible cuts in, and the
total elimination of, nuclear weapons

    It would also call upon the nuclear-weapon States, pending the
achievement of the total elimination of nuclear weapons, to agree on
an internationally and legally binding instrument on a joint
undertaking not to be the first to use nuclear weapons, and call upon
all States to conclude an internationally and legally binding
instrument on security assurances of non-use and non-threat of use of
nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States.

    The text would, in addition, have the Assembly callfor the
immediate commencement of negotiations in the Conference on
Disarmament on a non-discriminatory, multilateral and internationally
and effectively verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile
material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices on the
basis of the report of the Special Coordinator and the mandate
contained therein.

    The Committee then took up the draft resolution, entitled Towards
a nuclear-weapon-free world:  accelerating the implementation of
nuclear disarmament commitments (document A/C.a/64/L.54), which would
have the Assembly call upon all States to comply fully with all such
commitments and not to act in any way that may compromise either cause
or that may lead to a new nuclear arms race.  The text would also have
the Assembly urge the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to rescind
its announced withdrawal from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to re-establish cooperation with the IAEA and
to rejoin the Six-Party Talks, with a view to achieving the
denuclearization of the Korean peninsula in a peaceful manner.

    The Assembly would, by the draft, call upon all parties to the NPT
to spare no effort to ensure a successful outcome of the 2010 Review
Conference, and stress that this outcome should build upon the
positive results reached at two previous review conferences and
advance the goal of a nuclear-weapon-free world.

    A separate vote on operative paragraph 4 resulted in retaining the
paragraph, by a vote of 159 in favour to 4 against (India, Israel,
Pakistan, United States), with 2 abstentions (Bhutan, France) (Annex
XIII).

    By that provision, the Assembly would reiterate its call upon all
States parties to the NPT to spare no effort to achieve the Treaty's
universality, and in that regard, urge India, Israel and Pakistan to
accede to the Treaty as non-nuclear-weapon States promptly and without
conditions.

    The draft resolution was approved as a whole by a vote of 165 in
favour to 5 against (Democratic People's Republic of Korea, France,
India, Israel, United States), with 4 abstentions (Bhutan, Federated
States of Micronesia, Pakistan, United Kingdom) (Annex XIV).

    Regarding L.33, on the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free-Zone Treaty,
Spain's representative said the treaty's entry into force was a major
step for all African countries.  Spain had always supported the treaty
and related activities.  However, having carefully studied the
invitation to join Protocol 3 of the Treaty, the Spanish Government
had decided not to sign.  Underlining two issues, he said that the
Pelindaba Treaty did not contain any safeguards in terms of nuclear
disarmament or non-proliferation that Spain had not already adopted.
In addition, Spain had been denuclearized.  As for L. 33, Spain had
opted not to break consensus on the resolution, but it did not
consider itself bound by the consensus as far as operative paragraph 4
was concerned and appealed to the sponsors to find a more balanced
wording acceptable to all parties.

    The representative of France said his delegation had abstained in
the vote on L.23, on the draft on the Treaty on the South-East Asia
Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone (Bangkok Treaty) (document A/C.1/64/L.23).  A
regional approach was needed for disarmament and non-proliferation to
allow for progress in the area of security.  He supported the
establishment of such zones and had given security guarantees to more
than 100 countries.  In terms of those zones, France had regularly
stated, within the NPT review process framework, that it was prepared
to continue on that path.  Indeed, the draft reflected positive
developments, compared with the resolution adopted in 2007.  France
was ready to participate in an open dialogue on those issues.

    Speaking on behalf of his country and the United Kingdom on the
draft resolution on the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty, L.33,
he aligned the group with the statement delivered by the European
Union.  He recalled that the protocols annexed to the Pelindaba Treaty
stipulated that nuclear-weapon States committed themselves not to use
or threaten to use nuclear weapons against any African State party to
the Treaty.  He underlined that France and the United Kingdom had
already complied with Treaty obligations by signing and ratifying all
the relevant Protocols attached to the Treaty.

    The representative of the Russian Federation said that his
delegation had been able to support L.23 based on its fundamental
support for nuclear-weapon-free zones created under agreements reached
freely by the countries concerned.  It welcomed the decision on a
nuclear-weapon-free-zone in South-East Asia.  It was ready to continue
consultations with other nuclear-weapon States in accordance with
operative paragraph 2 of the draft resolution.

    He said that the Russian Federation also supported L.31, based on
its fundamental support for nuclear-weapon-free zones created under
agreements reached freely by the countries concerned.  It welcomed the
entry into force of the Central Asia and Pelindaba
nuclear-weapon-free-zone treaties.  It believed, however, that the
adoption of those treaties should not mean the expansion of the areas
covered by nuclear-weapon-free zones beyond legally established
borders.

    The Russian Federation had also been able to support L.54 this
year, he said.

    The representative of India said that his country abstained in the
vote on L.4 as a whole and had voted against preambular paragraph 6
because the focus should be limited to the region the draft intended
to address.  India's position on the NPT was well known.  The call to
States outside the Treaty to accede to it and to accede to IAEA
protocols was contrary to, and at variance with, relevant principles.

    India had also voted against operative paragraph 7 of L.31 and had
abstained in the vote on the draft resolution as a whole.

    Regarding L.33, he said that India respected the sovereign choice
of non-nuclear-weapon States to establish nuclear-weapon-free zones.
That principle was consistent with the first special session of the
General Assembly devoted to disarmament, and India shared and
supported the aspirations of the States.  It had conveyed unambiguous
respect for the Treaty.

    Turning to L.54, he said that India remained committed to the goal
of the complete elimination of nuclear weapons.  It shared the view
that disarmament and non-proliferation were mutually reinforcing and
that there should be a credible time-bound target for the total
elimination of nuclear weapons. It had voted against the draft
resolution, however, because India could not agree to accede to the
NPT as a non-nuclear-weapon State.  In fact, there was no question of
India joining the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon State.

    The representative of the United Kingdom, speaking on L.23,
welcomed the draft resolution's support for the establishment of
nuclear-weapon-free zones and its encouragement of the five
nuclear-weapon States and the States parties of the Bangkok Treaty to
resume consultations on the outstanding issues.  His country attached
importance to the development of internationally recognized
nuclear-weapon-free zones.  Those could make an important contribution
to regional and global security, provided they were established as set
out in the 1999 United Nations Disarmament Commission guidelines.  It
was the United Kingdom's long-standing policy to support the principle
of the South-East Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone, and it regretted that
the ASEAN States parties had not conducted consultations in accordance
with the Disarmament Commission's guidelines before signing the
Treaty.  The United Kingdom was still awaiting a formal response to
the non-paper issued by France, the United States and the United
Kingdom to the ASEAN States on 4 September 2002.  His country
continued to stand ready to resume consultations with the concerned
States parties to nuclear-weapon-free-zone treaties to reach a
mutually satisfactory outcome regarding outstanding issues.

    Turning to L.31, and speaking on behalf of his country, France and
the United States, he emphasized the importance those countries
attached to the development of internationally recognized
nuclear-weapon-free zones, which could make an important contribution
to regional and global security, provided they were established as set
out in the Disarmament Commission guidelines.  The three countries
appreciated the willingness of the sponsors of the draft resolution to
engage in constructive discussions of their concerns and welcomed the
changes to the text compared to resolution 63/65.

    He said that they still believed, however, that the text was
contradictory to propose simultaneously the establishment of a
nuclear-weapon-free zone that would be composed largely of the high
seas and yet say that it would be fully consistent with applicable
principles and rules of international law relating to the freedom of
the high seas and the right of passage through maritime space,
including those of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea.  The three countries continued to question whether the real goal
of the draft text was, in fact, the establishment of a
nuclear-weapon-free zone covering the high seas.  They did not believe
that that ambiguity had been sufficiently clarified.  For that reason,
they had voted against the draft resolution again this year.

    Turning to L.48, the representative of Pakistan said that his
country shared the goal of nuclear disarmament.  However, Pakistan was
convinced that the references to the NPT were unwarranted and, as
such, had abstained.

    On L.31, Pakistan had always supported the creation of
nuclear-weapon-free zones in accordance with agreement reached freely
by the countries concerned, he said.  The call for its creation in
South Asia failed to acknowledge the reality on the ground.  The
nuclear explosions in the region had disrupted the strategic balance,
and with those explosions, the objective of the establishment of such
a zone had been defeated.  Pakistan appreciated the effort of the
sponsors in revising the draft resolution, but the call to accede to
the NPT had caused it to vote against operative paragraph 6 and to
abstain from the resolution as a whole.

    On L.54, he said that Pakistan could not accept the NPT-related
references in the text, owing to its known position on that subject.

    The representative of Venezuela said the delegation had joined
consensus on the draft decision on preventing the acquisition by
terrorists of radioactive materials and sources (document
A/C.1/64/L.17), and supported the text.  She trusted that when the
next resolution on the subject was adopted it would include, among
other things, the notion that preventing terrorist and non-State
actors from acquiring weapons of mass destruction would be the
elimination of those weapons.

    The representative of Canada explained his delegation's vote on
L.4, on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.  He had
abstained in the vote on the draft as a whole because the text
unfairly singled out Israel.  If the draft's goal was to stem
proliferation, then it should require that all States adhered to and
complied fully with their obligations.  He regretted that Iran failed
to comply with Security Council resolutions and he was concerned about
recent revelations about undeclared facilities in Syria.  He
encouraged Syria to cooperate.

    The representative of Israel said that establishing the Middle
East as a weapon-of-mass-destruction-free zone was a vision to which
Israel aspired.  However, grave cases of non-compliance had not been
included in the draft on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free
zone in the region of the Middle East, L.3.  The international
community should not overlook that four of five non-compliance cases
were located in the Middle East.  Threats directed against Israel were
exacerbated by certain States.  Essential progress must be made
through mutual recognition before such a zone could be attained.  The
creation of such a zone should emanate within the region.  Matching
political will must be demonstrated.  Dialogue, taking into account
viewpoints of all States, must take place.  That had not happened at
the recent IAEA conference and its resulting resolutions.  Israel had
not abandoned a vision where negotiations were possible over a
nuclear-weapon-free zone, but only when all States took part in
discussions could its realization be possible.

    The representative of Brazil said his delegation voted in favour
of the draft on reducing nuclear danger, L.18, because he was
convinced that the review of nuclear doctrines was crucial to reduce
risks of unintentional and accidental use of nuclear weapons.  Brazil
believed that reducing nuclear danger could not substitute for
multilateral efforts.  The mere existence of those weapons constituted
a grave global risk.  He would have preferred the thrust of the draft
to have been the complete elimination of nuclear weapons.

    The representative of the United States provided explanations of
vote on three drafts.  His country had voted against the draft on the
risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, L.4, which was
unable to find a balance.  Nor did it mention the failure of a country
in the region to comply with the IAEA.  However, he reiterated the
United States long-standing belief in the importance of the NPT.

    On the draft on the conclusion of effective international
arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or
threat of use of nuclear weapons, L.24, he said the text did not
accurately reflect the work of the Conference on Disarmament.  The
United States supported CD/1864, but could not support the draft as it
was written.

    Regarding the draft "Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world:
accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments",
L.54, the United States had engaged in intense consultations with the
sponsors, but the two sides had been unable to reach agreement on the
text.  He looked forward to continuing discussions on the subject.

    ANNEX I

    Vote on Middle East Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone

    The draft resolution, on establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free
zone in the region of the Middle East (document A/C.1/64/L.3), was
approved by a recorded vote of 166 in favour to none against, with 3
abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola,
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium,
Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana,
Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia,
Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia,
Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo,
Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El
Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany,
Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras,
Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica,
Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic
Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali,
Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro,
Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New
Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama,
Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal,
Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian
Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San
Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia,
Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland,
Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago,
Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates,
United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay,
Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  None.

    Abstain:  Côte d'Ivoire, India, Israel.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia,
Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Marshall Islands,
Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Palau, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon
Islands, Tonga, Uganda.

    ANNEX II

    Vote on Risk of Nuclear Proliferation in Middle East, Preambular Paragraph 6

    Preambular paragraph 6 of the draft resolution, on the risk of
nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/64/L.4), was
approved by a recorded vote of 163 in favour to 4 against, with 6
abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola,
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium,
Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil,
Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia,
Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia,
Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo,
Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El
Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France,
Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana,
Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland,
Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's
Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya,
Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia,
Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia,
Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands,
New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Papua
New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar,
Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation,
Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi
Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South
Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden,
Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey,
Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom,
United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela,
Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  India, Israel, Palau, United States.

    Abstain:  Bhutan, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic People's Republic of
Korea, Ethiopia, Mauritius, Pakistan.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Marshall Islands,
Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon
Islands, Tonga, Uganda.

    ANNEX III

    Vote on Risk of Nuclear Proliferation in Middle East

    The draft resolution as a whole, on the risk of nuclear
proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/64/L.4), was approved
by a recorded vote of 164 in favour to 5 against, with 6 abstentions,
as follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola,
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas,
Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin,
Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei
Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Chile, China,
Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador,
Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France,
Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana,
Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland,
Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan,
Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia,
Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi,
Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico,
Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia,
Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway,
Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland,
Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania,
Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa,
San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka,
Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan,
Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste,
Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu,
Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of
Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen,
Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States
of), Palau, United States.

    Abstain:  Australia, Cameroon, Canada, Côte d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, India.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Eritrea, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Nauru, Panama, Saint
Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra
Leone, Tonga, Uganda.

    ANNEX IV

    Vote on Follow-up to Nuclear Disarmament Obligations from NPT
Review Conferences, Preambular Paragraph 6

    Preambular paragraph 6 of the draft resolution, on follow-up to
nuclear disarmament obligations agreed at the 1995 and 2000 Review
Conferences of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons (document A/C.1/64/L.6), was approved by a recorded
vote of 109 in favour to 48 against, with 10 abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina,
Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin,
Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso,
Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte
d'Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica,
Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia,
Fiji, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras,
Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait,
Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho,
Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives,
Mali, Mauritania, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar,
Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Papua
New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint
Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Somalia, South Africa, Sri
Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan,
Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, United
Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan,
Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria,
Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel,
Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Micronesia
(Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway,
Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova,
Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, The former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom,
United States.

    Abstain:  Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, India,
Peru, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Samoa, Serbia, Timor-Leste.

    Absent:  Afghanistan, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad,
China, Comoros, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Equatorial
Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Marshall Islands,
Mauritius, Nauru, Palau, Panama, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao
Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Tonga,
Tuvalu, Uganda.

    ANNEX V

    Vote on Follow-up to Nuclear Disarmament Obligations from NPT
Review Conferences

    The draft resolution, on the follow-up to nuclear disarmament
obligations agreed at the 1995 and 2000 Review Conferences of the
Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
(document A/C.1/64/L.6), was approved by a recorded vote of 105 in
favour to 56 against, with 12 abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina,
Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin,
Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso,
Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Cuba,
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El
Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea,
Guyana, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya,
Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon,
Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali,
Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar,
Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Papua New Guinea,
Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia,
Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South
Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan,
Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia,
Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania,
Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia
and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary,
Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Micronesia (Federated States of),
Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Palau,
Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania,
Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Vanuatu.

    Abstain:  Armenia, Azerbaijan, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Haiti,
Honduras, India, Peru, Rwanda, Samoa, Tonga.

    Absent:  Afghanistan, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad,
Comoros, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati,
Marshall Islands, Nauru, Panama, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao
Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Tuvalu, Uganda.

    ANNEX VI

    Vote on Reducing Nuclear Danger

    The draft resolution, on reducing nuclear danger (document
A/C.1/64/L.18), was approved by a recorded vote of 113 in favour to 50
against, with 15 abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda,
Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan,
Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi,
Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire,
Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of
the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El
Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana, Grenada,
Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran,
Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic
Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi,
Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia,
Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger,
Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru,
Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa,
Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South
Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Thailand,
Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan,
Tuvalu, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay,
Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia
and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary,
Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Malta, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco,
Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal,
Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.

    Abstain:  Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, China, Japan,
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Marshall Islands, Republic of Korea, Russian
Federation, Serbia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Nauru, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Uganda.

    ANNEX VII

    Vote on Nuclear Weapons Convention

    The draft resolution Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of
Nuclear Weapons (document A/C.1/64/L.20) was approved by a recorded
vote of 116 in favour to 50 against, with 11 abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda,
Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin,
Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso,
Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa
Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea,
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican
Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana,
Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia,
Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic
Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi,
Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia,
Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger,
Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru,
Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa,
Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South
Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan,
Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia,
Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of
Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia,
Zimbabwe.

    Against:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia
and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary,
Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Malta, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco,
Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal,
Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.

    Abstain:  Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Japan, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Marshall Islands, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation,
Serbia, Uzbekistan.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Nauru,
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles,
Sierra Leone, Uganda.

    ANNEX VIII

    Vote on South-East Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free-Zone Treaty

    The draft resolution, on Treaty on the South-East Asia
Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone (Bangkok Treaty) (document A/C.1/64/L.23),
was approved by a recorded vote of 172 in favour to none against, with
5 abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola,
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium,
Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana,
Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia,
Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte
d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's
Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark,
Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,
Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Georgia,
Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti,
Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland,
Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan,
Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia,
Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi,
Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico,
Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia,
Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway,
Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines,
Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova,
Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint
Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri
Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria,
Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey,
Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom,
United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela,
Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  None.

    Abstain:  France, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated
States of), United States.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Nauru, Palau, Saint Vincent
and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone,
Uganda.

    ANNEX IX

    Vote on Negative Security Assurances

    The draft resolution, on conclusion of effective international
arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or
threat of use of nuclear weapons (document A/C.1/64/L.24), was
approved by a recorded vote of 119 in favour to none against, with 58
abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize,
Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina
Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo,
Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of
Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican
Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana,
Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia,
Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait,
Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho,
Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali,
Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar,
Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama,
Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint
Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore,
Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland,
Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago,
Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, United Arab Emirates, United Republic
of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen,
Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  None.

    Abstain:  Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia,
Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia,
Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Finland,
France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel,
Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Marshall
Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea,
Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia,
Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey,
Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Nauru, Palau, Saint Vincent
and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone,
Uganda.

    ANNEX X

    Vote on Nuclear-Weapon-Free Southern Hemisphere, Operative Paragraph 7

    Operative paragraph 7 of the draft resolution, on
nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas (document
A/C.1/64/L.31), was approved by a recorded vote of 165 in favour to 2
against, with 6 abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola,
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium,
Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil,
Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia,
Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte
d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's
Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark,
Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,
Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Georgia,
Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti,
Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy,
Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia,
Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta,
Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco,
Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand,
Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea,
Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of
Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint
Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia,
Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa,
Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland,
Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia,
Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United
Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet
Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  India, Pakistan.

    Abstain:  Bhutan, France, Israel, Palau, United Kingdom, United States.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lao People's Democratic
Republic, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco,
Nauru, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe,
Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Uganda.

    ANNEX XI

    Vote on Nuclear-Weapon-Free Southern Hemisphere

    The draft resolution, on nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere
and adjacent areas (document A/C.1/64/L.31), was approved by a
recorded vote of 168 in favour to 3 against, with 5 abstentions, as
follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola,
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium,
Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana,
Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia,
Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte
d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's
Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark,
Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,
Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Georgia,
Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti,
Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy,
Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao
People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia,
Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi,
Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico,
Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman,
Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland,
Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania,
Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa,
San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka,
Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan,
Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste,
Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan,
Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania,
Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia,
Zimbabwe.

    Against:  France, United Kingdom, United States.

    Abstain:  India, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States
of), Pakistan, Palau.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Israel, Kiribati, Monaco, Nauru, Saint
Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra
Leone, Uganda.

    ANNEX XII

    Vote on Nuclear Disarmament

    The draft resolution, on nuclear disarmament (document
A/C.1/64/L.48), was approved by a recorded vote of 112 in favour to 43
against, with 21 abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda,
Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin,
Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso,
Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa
Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea,
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican
Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana,
Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran,
Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic
Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi,
Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco,
Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger,
Nigeria, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines,
Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi
Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa,
Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste,
Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Tuvalu, United Arab
Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela,
Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Belgium, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary,
Iceland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg,
Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands,
Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United
States.

    Abstain:  Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, India, Ireland,
Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius,
Pakistan, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation,
Serbia, Sweden, Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Uzbekistan.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Nauru,
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles,
Sierra Leone, Turkmenistan, Uganda.

    ANNEX XIII

    Vote on Nuclear-Weapon-Free World, Operative Paragraph 4

    Operative paragraph 4 of the draft resolution, entitled "Towards a
nuclear-weapon-free world:  accelerating the implementation of nuclear
disarmament commitments" (document A/C.1/64/L.54), was approved by a
recorded vote of 159 in favour to 4 against, with 2 abstentions, as
follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola,
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium,
Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei
Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon,
Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire,
Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador,
Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, Georgia,
Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti,
Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy,
Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia,
Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta,
Mauritania, Mexico, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique,
Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger,
Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru,
Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of
Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis,
Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia,
Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri
Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria,
Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu,
Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of
Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen,
Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  India, Israel, Pakistan, United States.

    Abstain:  Bhutan, France.

    Absent:  Botswana, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad,
Comoros, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Equatorial Guinea,
Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Lao People's Democratic
Republic, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Micronesia (Federated States
of), Monaco, Nauru, Palau, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome
and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Tonga,
Turkmenistan, Uganda.

    ANNEX XIV

    Vote on Nuclear-Weapon-Free World

    The draft resolution, entitled "Towards a nuclear-weapon-free
world:  accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament
commitments" (document A/C.1/64/L.54), was approved by a recorded vote
of 165 in favour to 5 against, with 4 abstentions, as follows:

    In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola,
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium,
Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil,
Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia,
Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte
d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic
of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic,
Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia,
Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada,
Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland,
Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan,
Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic
Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali,
Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco,
Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand,
Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea,
Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of
Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint
Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia,
Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands,
Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland,
Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago,
Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United
Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet
Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

    Against:  Democratic People's Republic of Korea, France, India,
Israel, United States.

    Abstain:  Bhutan, Micronesia (Federated States of), Pakistan,
United Kingdom.

    Absent:  Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,
Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Monaco,
Nauru, Palau, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe,
Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Turkmenistan, Uganda.

    * *** *