development processes particularly in the case of aggressions, pressures or coercion.* Resolution of the Fifth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries: Indian Ocean Peace Zone Proposal, August 19, 19761 The Fifth Conference of Heads of State or Government of NonAligned Countries meeting in Colombo from 16th August 1976 to 19th August, 1976, 2 Recalling that the proposal to establish a Zone of Peace in the Indian Ocean, initiated at the Third Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries in Lusaka and further developed at the Fourth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries in Algiers and by the Conference of Foreign Ministers of Non-Aligned Countries in Lima,3 invokes and upholds the cardinal principles of Non-Alignment including true independence and peaceful co-existence and is fully consistent with the Charter of the United Nations, Reaffirming United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2832 (XXVI) declaring the Indian Ocean for all time a Zone of Peace,* as well as Resolutions 2992 (XXVII), 3080 (XXVIII), 3259 (XXIX) and 3468 (XXX),8 7 Recalling UNGA Resolution 2832 (XXVI) which inter alia calls upon the littoral and hinterland states of the Indian Ocean, the permanent members of the Security Council and other major maritime users of the Indian Ocean to promote the objectives of establishing a system of universal collective security without military alliances and to strengthen international security through regional and international co-operation, Noting that the implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace is intended to preserve unaffected that right to free and unimpeded use of the zone by the vessels of all nations. in conformity with international law subject only to certain limitations on the use of the zone by warships and military aircraft for any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity and *A/10217. 1 NAC/CONF.5/S/RES.11. Also issued as General Assembly document A/31/197, Sept. 8, 1976, pp. 124–125. 2 Documents on Disarmament 1973, p. 631. independence of any littoral or hinterland State of the Indian Ocean is a contravention of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, Convinced that the escalation and expansion of great Power military and naval presence in the Indian Ocean and its natural extension in the form of bases, military installations and logistical supply facilities and the disposition of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction, constitute a real threat not only to the peace, freedom, security and territorial integrity of the littoral and hinterland States but also to world peace in general, Deeply concerned that with the historic victory of the liberation struggle in Indo-China, South Asia could replace South East Asia as the Centre of great Power confrontation in Asia and that, consequently, tension and conflicts in the Indian Ocean could be intensified through an increased struggle for naval supremacy between the great Powers, 1. Notes that agreement in principle has emerged among the littoral and hinterland States of the Indian Ocean and among Non-Aligned Countries on the convening of a Conference on the Indian Ocean in terms of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3259 (XXIX) and Resolution 3468 (XXX), with a view to implementing the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace, 2. Regrets that despite repeated invitations, certain great Powers as well as certain major maritime Powers have not co-operated with the littoral and hinterland States and the Ad Hoc Committee in order to realize the objectives of the Declaration, 3. Strongly condemns the establishment, maintenance and expansion of foreign military bases, such as Diego Garcia, and the escalation of great Power rivalry in the Indian Ocean to the detriment of the political and economic well-being of the littoral and hinterland States, and calls for the dismantling of all such military bases, 4. Urges the littoral and hinterland states of the Indian Ocean to make sure that their facilities are not used by warships and military aircraft, especially those of the great Powers, for purposes incompatible with the sovereignty and the territorial integrity of the States of the zone or for purposes which might endanger the peace and security of the region, 5. Calls on the great Powers to desist from any activity that would obstruct the implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace; to halt the senseless escalation of their military rivalry to remove their military and naval bases, facilities and installations from the Indian Ocean and its natural extension and to cease deploying nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in the area; 6. Decides to pursue concerted action in co-operation with the Ad Hoc Committee and the littoral and hinterland States at the Thirty-first Session of the United Nations General Assembly for the implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace and specifically, as a first step, the convening of a Conference on the Indian Ocean. Resolution of the Fifth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries: Disarmament, August 19, 19761 Heads of state or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, Having considered the problems of disarmament and in particular the adverse effects of the continuing and intensifying arms race to international peace and security and economic development, Convinced that non-aligned countries should reinforce their activities in promoting the urgent solution of disarmament problems, Determined to reinforce their activity towards strengthening the role and influence of the United Nations in the negotiations and in reaching the solution of disarmament issues, Convinced that the elaboration of a comprehensive programme of agreed measures is an essential prerequisite for the opening of a process of genuine disarmament, in particular nuclear disarmament, and accomplishment of general and complete disarmament under international control, Recalling that the non-aligned countries at their First Summit Conference had proposed the convening of a special session of the General Assembly of the United Nations on a World Disarmament Conference, 2 1. Call for urgent banning of the use, production and stockpiling of nuclear weapons and pending the achievement of this goal, request the nuclear powers to undertake: (a) not to use or threaten with the use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states, (b) cessation of all nuclear weapon tests, (c) measures for gradual withdrawal of nuclear weapons from the territories of non-nuclear weapon States, (d) support the creation of nuclear free zones and zones of peace and cooperation and that nuclear powers undertake to respect such zones; 2. Demand the immediate prohibition of the production and stockpiling of chemical weapons and of all other weapons of mass destruction, as well as the production and stockpiling of new weapons of mass destruction; 3. Request the discontinuation of the arms race, banning of the use of napalm and other incendiary weapons as well as means of warfare which are inflicting great suffering upon the civilian population; 4. Call for immediate initiation of negotiations for gradual dismantling of foreign military bases and withdrawal of military forces 1NAC/CONF.5/S/Res. 12. Also issued as General Assembly Document A/31/ 197. Sept. 8, 1976, pp. 126–127. 2 Documents on Disarmament, 1961, p. 381. from foreign territories, particularly from those countries in which they are stationed against their will; 5. Call on the United Nations to convene a special session of the General Assembly with the aim to review the problem of disarmament and to promote the elaboration of a programme of priorities and measures in this field; 6. Report their call for an early agreement on the convening of the World Disarmament Conference in order to promote the solving of basic issues of general and complete disarmament under strict international control. Statement by the Mexican Representative (García Robles) to the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament: Environmental Modification [Extract], August 26, 19761 It has thus been demonstrated beyond all doubt that CCD, with the assistance of its Working Group, is procedurally equipped to do an efficient job in the field of disarmament negotiations; but at the same time, unfortunately, proof has been given once again of the lack of political will on the part of the so-called super-Powers-sometimes one, sometimes the other, or both together-to accept commitments. which mean genuine disarmament measures, this is clear from the sterility of the Committee's proceedings in 1976 as reflected in the draft report prepared by the Secretariat. Indeed, the facts set out in this report must inescapably lead any objective reader to the following two conclusions. (1) As to the "draft Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques" which, for reasons that are difficult to understand, monopolized most of the Committee's attention, the improvements made in the text have almost all been of a merely cosmetic nature and have left intact the provisions of article I-those which, for some delegations including that of Mexico, present insuperable difficulties in their present form; (2) The Committee has totally ignored the General Assembly's express request that it should give "the highest priority" to the conclusion of a comprehensive agreement banning nuclear weapon tests (resolution 3466 (XXX) of 11 December 1975) 2 and has complied only superficially with the request to treat "as a matter of high priority" the conclusion of an early agreement on the elimination of "all chemical weapons" (resolution 3465 (XXX), also of 11 December 1975).a 1CCD/PV.724, pp. 6-9. * Documents on Disarmament, 1975, pp. 769–773. 3 Ibid., pp. 767-769. 253-754 O 78 - 38 I shall now put forward a few considerations and comments which will serve to explain and justify the above conclusions. With regard to the first conclusion I would emphasize that, although we consider that the new text of article V prepared by the Working Group-particularly the addition which provides for the convening of an advisory committee of experts for the purposes indicated therein-represents an appreciable step forward, that can in no way allow us to forget the very serious dangers involved in the provisions of article I of the identical drafts submitted by the Soviet Union and the United States of America in August 1975.5 In order to assess those dangers correctly, it should be remembered that the text of article I of the Soviet Union's original draft, reproduced in the annex to resolution 3264 (XXIX) of 9 December 1974, read as follows: Each of the Parties to this Convention undertakes not to develop meteorological, geophysical or any other scientific or technological means of influencing the environment, including the weather and climate, for military and other purposes incompatible with the maintenance of international security, human well-being and health, and, furthermore, never under any circumstances to resort to such means of influencing the environment and climate or to carry out preparations for their use." Compared with this text, which is fully comprehensive in its prohibitions and categorical and unequivocal in its ideas, the text of article I which the super-Powers are now proposing to us is, by any reckoning, inadequate and ambiguous; so much is evident from the first paragraph, which reads as follows: Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to another State Party. In order to make clear what we have called the "very serious dangers" of the foregoing provisions, we need only re-word them in a positive form which is equivalent from the legal point of view; the text would then read: Each State Party to this Convention shall be entitled to use environmental modification techniques for military or other hostile purposes as the means of destruction, damage or injury to another State Party, provided that such techniques do not have widespread, long-lasting or severe effects. The risks that would entail, not only from the legal but also from the practical point of view, can be appreciated even more if we take into account the explanations of the scope of the expression "environmental modification techniques" which are given in article II, to the effect that this expression would cover inter alia the deliberate manipulation of natural processes to cause earthquakes, tsunamis, cyclones of various types and tornadic storms, or changes in the state of the ozone layer or ionosphere or in ocean currents. 4 See post, pp. 577-588. 6 Documents on Disarmament, 1975, pp. 385-388. Ibid., 1974, pp. 517-521. The res. is printed ibid., pp. 814-816. |