Рейтинг
Порталус

Status of the Initiative to Create a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in Central and Eastern Europe

Дата публикации: 29 апреля 2014
Автор(ы): Aleksandr Sychou, Ambassador, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Belarus to the United Nations
Публикатор: Научная библиотека Порталус
Рубрика: МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЕ ПРАВО
Источник: (c) "БЕЛАРУСЬ В МИРЕ" No.004 12-01-97
Номер публикации: №1398771821


Aleksandr Sychou, Ambassador, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Belarus to the United Nations, (c)


The issue of nuclear-weapon-free zones has special prominence in the United Nations' activities aimed at maintaining international peace and security. The question of establishing nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZ) in various regions of the world has taken deep roots in agendas of major international forums. It has been in the focus of attention of the United Nations General Assembly and the Commission on Disarmament.

 

Three decades ago the UN General Assembly adopted resolutions encouraging the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones, later followed by the elaboration of the concept of nuclear-weapon-free zones at disarmament negotiations conducted within the framework of the United Nations and other international forums. Such zones were seen as those able to make a substantial contribution to attaining a common goal to prevent horizontal proliferation of nuclear weapons and, at the same time, ensure that the regions, in which countries undertook to create such zones, would be totally free of those weapons. In a broader context, it was believed that nuclear- weapon-free zones could contribute to the achievement of comprehensive and complete disarmament, particularly nuclear disarmament, under an effective international control.

 

The idea of creating a nuclear-weapon-free zone was put forward as a result of emerging threat to regional security. A vivid example in this regard was the creation of the nuclear-weapon-free zone in Latin America after the Caribbean crisis in 1962. Negotiations between Latin American countries resulted in the signing of the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America-the Treaty of Tlatelolco-on February 14, 1967.

 

After the opening for signature of the Treaty of Tlatelolco in 1967, the General Assembly began to pay more attention to initiatives on nuclear- weapon-free zones. Africa was declared a nuclear-weapon-free zone, further suggestions were put forward on the creation of such zones in the Middle East, South Asia and the South Pacific. It is noteworthy that until recently the leadership in promoting this issue almost entirely belonged to the Third World countries, which, in practical terms, were hostages to the nuclear confrontation between two superpowers. The efforts by the developing countries-the signing of the Antarctic Treaty, the Treaty of Tlatelolco and the accession of nuclear powers to the corresponding Protocols, the signing of the Treaty of Rarotonga, the Treaty of Pelindaba and the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty-have led to a gradual transformation of the whole Southern Hemisphere into a zone free of nuclear weapons. The important contribution of these treaties in consolidating nuclear non-proliferation regime, strengthening peace and security in respective regions and globally, is universally acknowledged. The transformation of the Southern Hemisphere into a nuclear-wea-pon-free zone creates an important new impulse for the broadening of such zones and involvement of the other regions in this process. This is particularly important for those parts of the world, where tensions persist, and those which have many times posed threats to international peace.

 

At the same time, in the Northern Hemisphere, particularly in Europe, which had already been a battleground for the two world wars, no practical steps in this direction were made, although many countries did put forward a number of initiatives on the creation of a nuclear-weapon-free zone on the European continent in the aftermath of the Second World War. Serious concerns over the fate of the continent, which appeared to be a centre for stockpiling huge nuclear arsenals, were underpinning these initiatives. This was accentuated by lack of any firm legal and political commitments on non-use of nuclear weapons.

 

In 1956, the Soviet Union proposed that stationing nuclear weapons in Europe be banned. In 1957, Poland suggested that a nuclear-weapon-free zone should be created. Subsequently reviewed in 1958 and 1962, the Polish proposal-the so-called "Rapatski's plan"-envisaged prohibition of the production and stockpiling of nuclear arsenals on the territory of Poland, the former German Democratic Republic (GDR) and the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). A number of proposals regarding the Balkans were advanced by Romania, first in 1957 and on several occasions later, as well as by the Soviet Union in 1959, being the Soviet proposal extended to the Adriatic region. In 1964, Poland put forward an initiative-the so-called "Polish plan of 1964"-on the freeze of nuclear weapons in Central Europe. According to this plan, parties that had armed forces stationed in the area of freeze, that is, on the territory of Poland, the former Czechoslovakia, GDR, and FRG, would undertake neither to produce nuclear weapons in this region, nor to import or transfer them to other states. In 1963, the Soviet Union advanced an initiative to create a zone free of nuclear missiles in the Mediterranean region.

 

In 1959, Ireland put forward proposals on general approach to the issue of creating nuclear-weapon-free zones, which suggested, in particular, an "area approach" to non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. In 1961, Sweden also suggested that the United Nations Secretary General request the opinions of the UN member states regarding conditions under which non-nuclear countries would be willing to participate in initiatives on the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones. The Swedish proposal was adopted in UN General Assembly resolution 1664 (XVI). Sixty-two UN member states presented their views on the Swedish initiative. Later, in 1963, and from 1971 to 1973, Finland advanced several proposals on setting up a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Nordic countries. How- ever, none of these proposals materialised in specific negotiations on the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zone.

 

The changes that the European continent has since then undergone created favourable conditions which, in principle, allow Europe to follow the example of other regions and get involved in the process of setting up a nuclear-weapon-free zone on its territory aimed at ensuring total nuclear security in this strategically important region. In these circumstances the issue of creating a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe emerged once again on international agenda.

 

In 1990, at the 45th session of the UN General Assembly the delegation of the Republic of Belarus proposed to create in Europe a "nuclear-weapon- free belt" from the Baltic to the Black Sea. The proposal was based on non-nuclear provisions of the Declaration on State Sovereignty of Belarus with due account of similar provisions of the Declaration of Independence of Ukraine, and on the endeavour by the Baltic states to free themselves of the Soviet heritage, including that in nuclear-related matters. It was also taken into consideration that such potential members of the "belt" as Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania and Bulgaria were non-nuclear-weapon states. Thus, as far back as in 1990 Belarus undertook to offer the elements for the future European security system.

 

This effort was determined by major qualitative changes in the sphere of international security and disarmament during the 1990s. The new political situation facilitated disentanglement of some key international security issues. Considerably was improved the environment for international commitments on non- proliferation and disarmament.

 

With slight modifications, the Belarus's initiative on the creation of a "nuclear-weapon-free belt" was reiterated in the following years. After the accession of the Baltic states to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as non- nuclear-weapon states (in September 1991 by Lithuania, and in January 1992 by Latvia and Estonia) and with due account of the proposals to create a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Northern Europe, the "belt" was suggested to be extended to include Scandinavian countries. Yet, a major obstacle to this idea was political reorientation of the potential members of the "belt": their intent to be integrated into NATO resulted in the loss of interest in the idea on their part, and even led to attempts to block its realisation.

 

Halting the gradual progress of Central and Eastern Europe towards zone free of nuclear weapons, debates on NATO expansion prompted a re-evaluation of the idea of nuclear-weapon-free zones in the centre of Europe. That is why at the May 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the Parties to the NPT Belarus proposed to renew efforts aimed at establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central and Eastern Europe. The Belarusian delegation to the Conference, at the concluding session supported by Ukraine, made serious efforts to get this proposal included in the final document. However, potential participants of the proposed zone did not respond to it with due constructiveness.

 

The "Study on NATO Expansion," published in September 1995, ascertained that there appears no necessity "to change or modify any aspect of NATO's nuclear posture," and, at the same time, stated that NATO reserves "the right to modify its nuclear posture as circumstances warrant." This implies that the possibility of stationing nuclear weapons at new sites in Europe is not limited in any way.

 

At present, both the countries striving to join the Alliance and the NATO member states take the Alliance expansion for granted. All of them stress the universal character of all obligations of the new NATO members as well as inadmissibility of restrictions on their future rights, including the right to ensure their security by all means in the possession of the Alliance. We believe that the principled unwillingness to modify the spirit and the letter of the Washington Treaty is hardly a weighty argument in the discussion on the future of the Alliance, especially considering the fact that the Treaty was worked out under quite a different geopolitical situation.

 

A solid pan-European security architecture can only be constructed through a progressive movement toward enhanced security of all the countries of the region, without any exception. Unfortunately, the irreconcilability of the position of the countries concerned with the expansion of NATO is, to a certain extent, reinforced by a new growing distrust among the former rivals. The establishing of the nuclear-weapon-free space would, undoubtedly, improve all-European climate and contribute to further rapprochement of the positions of the sides.

 

Among the factors reinforcing these hopes are the entry into force of the Chemical Weapons Convention, fulfilment of the INF Treaty, the progress achieved in the implementation of START-I, unilateral measures adopted by the USSR (later Russia) and the United States regarding their tactical nuclear weapons, the indefinite extension of the NPT in 1995, the opening for signature of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in September 1996. After the withdrawal of the last ICBMs from the territory of Belarus in November 1996 and the preceding withdrawal of all nuclear missiles from the territory of Kazakhstan and Ukraine, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe de-facto became nuclear-weapon-free states. All this increases favourable preconditions for the realisation of the idea of a nuclear- weapon-free region in the centre of Europe. Our common responsibility before the future generations of Europeans and the international community on the whole does not allow us to miss this historic opportunity.

 

As a follow-up to the previous Belarusian proposals, and based on analysis of the emerging dynamics in the approaches to all-European security, A. Lukashenko, the President of the Republic of Belarus, launched an initiative on creating, through multilateral efforts, a nuclear-weapon-free space in Central and Eastern Europe. Multilateral efforts are essential since it is only through such efforts substantial results could be achieved. This initiative has already been reflected in official documents of the 51st Session of the UN General Assembly: a personal letter of the president of Belarus to the United Nations Secretary General was issued in document A/51/708.

 

The goals of establishing a nuclear-weapon-free space in General and Eastern Europe could be defined as follows:

Ыto contribute to the process of disarmament, in particular to the elimination of weapons of mass destruction;

Ыto exclude the possibility of renewal of nuclear confrontation in Europe;

Ыto introduce a unifying security element for Central and East European countries with different approaches to all-European security structure;

Ыto reinforce transatlantic element of the European security through mutual commitments by the United States and Russia on the nuclear-weapon-free space;

Ы to consolidate existing non-nuclear commitments of countries of the region;

Ыto strengthen regional security and stability; in particular, to contribute to the search for solutions to the problem of the expansion of NATO on conditions acceptable to all countries of the region;

Ыto prevent the possibility of geographical proliferation of weapons of mass destruction;

Ыto strengthen confidence between the states that are parties to the nuclear-weapon-free space accord;

Ыto promote co-operation in developing technologies for a peaceful use of nuclear energy.

As seen from the above, the idea of nuclear-weapon-free space could contribute to the strengthening of foundations of all-European security, and, at the same time, to take into account interests of both Russia and the United States.

 

The term "space", we believe, adds flexibility to the Belarusian proposal, allowing potential participants and all interested states to be engaged into discussion on legal and political basis required for the realisation of the idea without being constrained by stereotypes related to the previous nuclear-weapon-free zones.

 

There can be several versions of institutionalising the nuclear- weapon-free space in Europe. The most rational and forward-looking one would be the synergy of legal and political commitments by the participants while substantiating the meaning of such a space with new elements of security.

 

Nuclear-weapon-free space, along with non-nuclear obligations, could also imply obligations of the participating states not to take any steps related to the conventional weapons or any military activities that could provoke retaliatory measures by nuclear-weapon states.

 

The proposal to establish a nuclear-weapon-free space in Europe requires that the interests of all European states and security structures be taken into account. It recognises the right of states to choose one security system or another. It is not aimed against any process; it strives to facilitate the search for mutually acceptable decisions.

 

The Belarusian initiative can become a practical implementation of the ideas of the 1996 Stockholm Declaration of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, which underlined usefulness of the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones in the OSCE region. This proposal is in accord with the spirit and the letter of the decisions adopted by the 1995 NPT Review and Extension Conference. One of these decisions says that creation of new nuclear-weapon-free zones by the 2000 NPT Review Conference will be a welcome development.

 

Thus, the creation of the nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central and Eastern Europe could reaffirm the intention of European states to move towards the final goal of attaining general and complete nuclear disarmament under an effective international control.

Опубликовано на Порталусе 29 апреля 2014 года

Новинки на Порталусе:

Сегодня в трендах top-5


Ваше мнение?



Искали что-то другое? Поиск по Порталусу:


О Порталусе Рейтинг Каталог Авторам Реклама