On December 5 the First Committee approved the draft resolution by a recorded vote of 92 to 10 (U.S.S.R., U.S.), with 16 abstentions (France, U.K.). In an explanation of vote the U.S. Representative welcomed the interest shown in the SALT talks and reaffirmed the U.S. desire to achieve as early as possible a SALT II agreement limiting quantitative and qualitative aspects of strategic arms. However, he objected strongly to the first two operative paragraphs which, he said, seriously misrepresented the facts.

The General Assembly adopted the resolution on December 12 by a recorded vote of 102 to 10 (U.S.S.R., U.S.), with 12 abstentions (France, U.K.). The P.R.C. did not participate in either the Committee or the plenary vote.

Strengthening UN Secretariat

On December 4 Austria introduced a draft resolution, ultimately sponsored by 12 states, noting that the number of meetings serviced and the documentation prepared by the Disarmament Affairs Division of the UN Secretariat had doubled in the last 4 years, and requesting the Secretary General to take appropriate steps to strengthen the Division, including the addition of staff necessary for effectively carrying out its increased responsibilities. The First Committee approved the resolution on December 5 by a recorded vote of 104 (U.S.S.R.) to 0, with 12 abstentions (France, U. K., U.S.), and the Assembly adopted it on December 12 by a recorded vote of 115 (U.S.S.R.) to 0, with 13 abstentions (France, U.K., U.S.). The P.R.C. did not participate in either vote.

The United States abstained because it believed that the Secretary General's budget estimates for 1976-77 provided adequately for the Disarmament Affairs Division and that requirements arising from new responsibilities given the Division could and should be met by reallocating available resources.

Review of the Seabed Arms Control Treaty

The Seabed Arms Control Treaty, which entered into force in May 1972, provides for a conference to review the operation of the treaty 5 years after its effective date. On December 4 Denmark introduced a draft resolution, sponsored by seven states, designed to permit initiation of preparations by the UN Secretariat for such a review conference in 1977. The First Committee approved the resolution on December 5 by a vote of 112 (U.S.) to 0, with 5 abstentions, and the Assembly adopted it on December 12 by a recorded vote of 126 (U.S.S.R., U.K., U.S.) to 0, with 2 abstentions (Cuba, France). The .R.C. did not participate.

Disarmament Decade

A resolution adopted by the General Assembly in 1969 declared the 1970's a "Disarmament Decade," and a resolution in 1974 invited member states to report on measures and policies they had adopted to achieve the purposes and objectives of the 1969 resolution.

Pursuant to the 1974 resolution, the Secretary General submitted to the 30th Assembly a report containing the replies of 28 states. The U.S. reply described its participation in bilateral, regional, and multilateral fora, specifically mentioning the important agreements achieved with the Soviet Union in the SALT negotiations, the negotiations on mutual and balanced force reductions in Central Europe, the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the agreements negotiated in the CCD, and its active part in the NPT Review Conference.

On November 28 Nigeria introduced a draft resolution sponsored by 13 states that, inter alia, (1) deplored the wastage of resources on armament expenditures; (2) called upon member states to promote disarmament negotiations and to ensure that the resources freed thereby are used to promote economic and social development, particularly in developing countries; and (3) invited the CCD to review the implementation of the purposes and objectives of the Disarmament Decade and in this light to reappraise its tasks and duties in order to accelerate its efforts to negotiate truly effective disarmament and arms limitation agreements.

With only minor discussion, the resolution was approved in the First Committee on December 5 and adopted by the General Assembly on December 11, both without vote.

Environmental Modification

The 29th General Assembly had requested the CCD to proceed as soon as possible to achieve agreement on the text of a convention to prohibit action to influence the environment and climate for military and other hostile purposes. The CCD's report to the 30th Assembly included a summary of its discussions on this topic and the identical draft conventions submitted by the United States and the U.S.S.R. (See p. 39 .)

On October 30 the U.S. Representative explained in the First Committee the basic provisions of the draft convention, reiterating that:

". . . while environmental warfare is not at present practical on a militarily significant scale, understanding and technology in the field are advancing. For that reason, the United States

believes action should be taken now to adopt effec-
tive restraints--before techniques are perfected
and their potential threat materializes."

A number of countries commented on various aspects of the draft convention, but there was general agreement on the importance and need for such a convention.

On December 2 Finland introduced a draft resolution, ultimately sponsored by 17 states, which noted with satisfaction that the United States and the Soviet Union had submitted identical drafts of a convention on this subject and requested the CCD to continue negotiations with a view to reaching early agreement, if possible during 1976, on the text of such a convention. Without vote, the draft resolution was approved by the First Committee on December 5 and adopted by the Assembly on December 11.

Mass Destruction Weapons

In a September 23 letter to the Secretary General, Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko proposed a new agenda item entitled "Prohibition of the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and of new systems of such weapons." The letter affirmed that the danger of using scientific and technological achievements to create new types of weapons of mass destruction was becoming increasingly real, and therefore proposed concluding an international agreement banning the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and of new systems of such weapons. The suggested text of such an agreement was enclosed. The General Assembly decided on September 29 to include the item on its agenda and allocated it to the First Committee.

On October 30 the U.S.S.R. introduced a draft resolution on the subject that in its operative paragraphs (1) considered it necessary to take effective steps, by concluding an appropriate international treaty, for the prohibition of the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and of new systems of such weapons; (2) noted the draft agreement submitted by the U.S.S.R., which was annexed to the resolution; and (3) requested the CCD to work out the text of such an agreement and to report to the 31st General Assembly on the results achieved. The Soviet Representative recommended that the definition of the weapons systems to be banned should be worked out by negotiations among the parties concerned. On December 1 the U.S.S.R. submitted a revised draft resolution, cosponsored by 17 other states, which added a provision for qualified government experts to assist the CCD in working out the text of an agreement.

On December 5 the U.S. Representative said that the United States shared the concern of others over the dangers posed by the possible development of new weapons of mass destruction and was willing to consider any practical steps toward the prevention of such dangers. He said that the United States could have supported a resolution calling for examination of the issue by the CCD, but it believed that

. before making a commitment to seek restraints of new weapons of mass destruction it is essential to obtain a clear understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, we could not associate ourselves at this time with the assertion . . . that it is necessary to conclude an international treaty on new weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons. could we agree with a request. . . that the CCD proceed as soon as possible to work out the text of such an agreement."

For these reasons the United States abstained.

Nor

The resolution was approved by the First Committee on December 5 by a recorded vote of 99 (U.S.S.R.) to 1 (Albania), with 15 abstentions (France, U. K., U.S.), and adopted by the Assembly on December 11 by a recorded vote of 112 (U.S.S.R.) to 1 (Albania), with 15 abstentions (France, U.K., U.S.). The P.R.C. did not participate in either vote.

Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones

The possibility of creating nuclear-weapon-free zones in various regions of the world in support of nonproliferation objectives received a considerable amount of attention in the disarmament debate. The Assembly adopted nine resolutions on this subject under seven different agenda items.

Ambassador Martin observed on October 30 that, depending on the specific arrangements, nuclear-weaponfree zones could contribute to regional and global security and effectively complement the NPT. He noted, however, that "while nuclear-weapon-free zone projects can be given an initial impetus by General Assembly resolutions, there is no substitute for the development of concrete zone arrangements by the states concerned." He cited the Treaty of Tlatelolcd as an example of a zone arrangement whose success was due primarily to the "persevering efforts of its founders."

11/Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America, done at Tlatelolco (Mexico City), Feb. 14, 1967; entered into force, Apr. 22, 1968.

Protocols I and II of the Treaty of Tlatelolco

The Treaty of Tlatelolco established a nuclearweapon-free zone in Latin America. Countries adhering to additional Protocol I of the Treaty undertake to apply denuclearization to territories within the treaty area for which they are internationally responsible, de facto or de jure. Of the four countries concerned, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands have adhered to Protocol I and the United States and France have not. On November 24 Mexico introduced a draft resolution, sponsored by 21 Latin American and Caribbean states, that specifically urged France and the United States to adhere to Protocol I as soon as possible and requested the Secretary General to inform the General Assembly at its 32nd session of any measures adopted by those states.

The First Committee approved the resolution on November 28 by a vote of 91 to 0, with 17 abstentions (U.S.), and the Assembly adopted it on December 11 by a recorded vote of 113 (P.R.C., U.K.) to 0, with 16 abstentions (France, U.S.S.R., U.S.). In explaining the U.S. abstention Ambassador Martin reiterated in the First Committee the long-standing U.S. position that the United States does not wish to have the treaty's denuclearization provisions apply to the U.S. Virgin Islands or Puerto Rico because the former are a part of U.S. territory and the latter has a special integral relationship with the United States. He continued:

"On the other hand, we believe, first, that the Guantanamo base could be included if the Government of Cuba were to sign and ratify the Treaty of Tlatelolco; and second, that the treaty would apply to the Canal Zone upon return of jurisdiction over the zone to Panama under the new treaty now being negotiated."

Additional Protocol II of the Treaty of Tlatelolco commits nuclear-weapon states to respect the Latin American nuclear-weapon-free zone and not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against parties to the treaty. France, China, the United States, and the United Kingdom have ratified Protocol II. On November 24. Mexico introduced a draft resolution, sponsored by 21 Latin American and Caribbean states, that urged the U.S.S.R. to sign and ratify the Protocol. The First Committee approved the resolution on November 28 by a vote of 95 (U.S.) to 0, with 14 abstentions, and the Assembly adopted it on December 11 by a recorded vote of 115 (P.R.C., France, U.K., U.S.) to 0, with 12 abstentions (U.S.S.R.).