 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
STATEMENT BY MR. HU XIAODI, AMBASSADOR FOR DISARMAMENT AFFAIRS, AT THE PLENARY OF THE CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT
Permanent Mission of the PRC to the UN Office at Geneva
GENEVA, 14 SEPTEMBER 2000
Mr. President,
At the outset, let me congratulate you on your assumption as the last President
of this year¡¯s session of the Conference on Disarmament (CD), guiding the work
of, inter alias, preparing the annual work report of CD and the draft resolution
to be submitted to the UN General Assembly.Your predecessor Ambassador Amorim
has made valuable efforts for bridging the differences among the parties and
breaking the impasse of CD, which deserve our high appreciation.I would also
like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to CD Secretary-General, Mr.
Vladimir Petrovsky, and Deputy Secretary-General, Mr. Abdelkader Bensmail.
Mr. President, I would like to speak today on the negative impacts of the
national missile defense system (NMD) and the relationship between NMD and the
prevention of an arms race in outer space.
I.The dire consequences of NMD
In recent years, there has been a negative development in the form of tremendous
efforts to develop and deploy NMD, with a view to seeking unilateral military
and strategic superiority.Subsequently, the Treaty on the Limitation of
Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM Treaty) is in danger of collapse.The
international community is seriously concerned about this negative development,
as it will result in a series of grave consequences.
On 18 July 2000, Presidents of the People's Republic of China and the Russian
Federation issued a joint statement on missile defense (The Russian and Chinese
delegations have jointly required the Secretary-General of CD to distribute the
joint statement as an official CD document. Its serial number is CD/1622).
The two leaders pointed out in the statement that the ABM Treaty remains the
cornerstone of global strategic stability and international security and
constitutes the basis for a framework of the key international agreements
designed to reduce and limit offensive strategic weapons and to prevent the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.To undermine the ABM Treaty will
trigger off another round of arms race and subsequently reverse the positive
trend that has emerged in world politics after the end of the Cold War.The
country that presses for amending this fundamental treaty in the field of arms
control and disarmament will have to bear the full responsibility for
undermining international stability and security, and for all the consequences
that may arise therefrom.
The two leaders also stressed in the statement that the plan to establish NMD
prohibited by the ABM Treaty is a cause of profound concern.It is aimed, in
essence, at seeking unilateral superiority in the military and security
arena.Implementation of the plan would have the gravest adverse consequences for
the security not only of China, Russia and other States, but also for that of
the United States itself and for the global strategic stability.The
international community should, therefore, continue to give serious attention to
the perilous development and take necessary measures to halt it.
Mr. President, what will be the grave consequences of the development and
deployment of NMD?
First, it will undermine global strategic balance and stability and threaten
international peace and security.The ABM Treaty is the corner stone of global
strategic balance and stability. It clearly limits the deployment of missile
defense systems aimed at protecting the whole territory of its State parties.
NMD, however, is exactly such a system that violates the ABM Treaty.Once NMD is
deployed, the ABM Treaty will be dead in essence.To seek missile defense
capability protecting the whole territory is tantamount to seeking unilateral
absolute security so as to gain absolute freedom in using or threatening to use
force in international relations.As a result, the blackmail of nuclear war will
likely loom again and the international situation become turbulent and unstable.
Secondly, NMD will seriously obstruct arms control and disarmament process and
may lead to a new arms race.NMD plan is, in fact, a unilateral nuclear force
expansion program.The Russian Federation has stated in explicit terms that if
the U.S. violates or pulls out of the ABM Treaty, it will be forced to withdraw
from a series of agreements and treaties in the field of arms control and
disarmament.Therefore, if NMD is deployed, the achievements made by the U.S. and
Russia over the years in their bilateral nuclear disarmament will be gone at
once. It will also be detrimental to multilateral arms control and disarmament
process.Other countries will not sit by idly and allow their security
jeopardized.So may arise various offensive-defensive and ground- or space-based
measures and counter-measures, which will likely result in an arms race.
Thirdly, NMD will disrupt international efforts of
non-proliferation.Non-nuclear-weapon States regard nuclear disarmament by
nuclear-weapon States as the prime prerequisite for them to honour their
commitment to stay non-nuclear. As NMD will reverse the process of nuclear
disarmament, it will inevitably shake non-proliferation to its foundation. NMD
will also sow mistrust and discord among many countries, which will in turn
affect adversely their cooperation on non-proliferation. Furthermore, as missile
defense program proceeds, there will be proliferation of sophisticated missile
defense systems to other countries and regions.This will be de facto
proliferation of advanced missile technology, since the technologies for
missiles and missile defense are inter-related and mutually convertible.
In this regard, Mr. President, it is an absolutely urgent task for the
international community to take effective measures to halt such a negative
development.This is certainly not a groundless fear, nor an alarmist talk, but
rather a truly realistic issue.
It is true that there are international treaties concluded in the past on the
prevention of the deployment of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in outer
space.However, it is irrefutable that the existing international legal mechanism
only prohibits the deployment of WMD in outer space, but has nothing to do with
preventing the deployment or use in outer space of non-WMD weapon systems and
their components, such as laser, particle beam, x-ray and kinetic weapons.It is
also a matter of fact that these are the very weapons envisaged for outer space
by many programs and projects ranging from ¡°Star War¡± to NMD.Therefore, the
existing international legal instruments need to be augmented and improved --
not only continue to ensure that WMD never be introduced into outer space, what
is more important and urgent is, they must prevent the weaponization of outer
space by any other weaponry.We are convinced that, like China, the majority
countries in the world want to take effective measures now to prevent the
weaponization of outer space, rather than wait for the future to curb weapons in
outer space, let alone engaging in another ¡°space weapon non-proliferation¡±.
We believe, therefore, that it is of absolute necessity now to negotiate new
international legal instruments to prevent the weaponization of and an arms race
in outer space.This position has enjoyed extensive support from the
international community, which has been adequately proven by the fact that the
resolution on ¡°the Prevention of Arms Race in Outer Space¡± was again adopted
by an overwhelming majority at the 54th Session of the UN General Assembly.
II. The relationship between NMD and an arms race in outer space
Mr. President, it is claimed that NMD systems are not outer space weapons and
will not lead to an arms race in outer space.It is further asserted that time is
not ripe for negotiations on outer space and that to call for such negotiations
is putting the cart before the horse.Then, what is the true relationship between
NMD and the weaponization of and an arms race in outer space?
Whether they are so-called ¡°limited¡±or ¡°more advanced¡±, NMD systems
undoubtedly include space weapon systems.Some of these sophisticated non-WMD
weapon systems will be space-based, providing target information and guidance
for ground-based weapon systems, while others will be deployed in outer space or
on ground, intercepting and destroying targets in space or attacking from space
the targets within the atmosphere.Thus, outer space will be part of the
battlefield.
It is obvious, therefore, that once the ABM Treaty is discarded and the door for
NMD opened, advanced weapon systems will be brought into outer space, leading to
its weaponization.Many documents, including important Party Platform, point to
such a prospect.Other countries cannot but make necessary responses, as their
important security interests will be adversely affected.As a result, it is very
likely that an arms race in outer space will follow.
We have heard the claim that the only intention is to develop a limited NMD,
which has nothing to do with outer space.If that is the case, then why is there
the obstinate opposition to the negotiations on a treaty preventing
weaponization of outer space?
III. The relationship between FMCT and the prevention of an arms race in outer
space
There is an accusation that negotiations on FMCT are blocked because they are
held ¡°hostage¡± to negotiations on PAROS.Therefore, FMCT and PAROS must be
de-linked.
Mr. President, the Chinese delegation is of the view that, as the only
multilateral negotiating forum on disarmament, CD ought to give priority to the
most urgent and important issue in the international arena at present.Based on
the analysis above, we are fully convinced that the prevention of the
weaponization of and an arms race in outer space is exactly such an issue.
Given that position, we never say no to the negotiations on FMCT, which is the
top priority item of some other delegations.What we are asking for only is that
when we negotiate FMCT, the negotiations on a treaty preventing the
weaponization of and an arms race in outer space should start as well.This is
fully in line with the spirit of relevant UNGA resolutions.It is also the best
way to break the impasse of CD by taking care of the concerns of all sides in a
comprehensive and balanced manner.This is far from holding FMCT ¡°hostage¡±.On
the contrary, no matter how pleasant it sounds, the so-called ¡°opposition to
linkage¡± means in fact that only the negotiation on one¡¯s own priority item is
allowed, at the expense of the primary concerns and priority items of others.Is
that fair and reasonable?
It must be pointed out that CD items are all related with security and that
different aspects of security are inherently inseparable.Inevitably, these CD
items are inter-related with each other.As a result of a series of negative
developments, including the setback of CTBT and in particular the NMD plan, the
nature and purpose of FMCT negotiations have been put under serious
doubt.Therefore, the issues of outer space and FMCT cannot but be closely
linked.
Mr. President, it can never help break the impasse in CD if a country insists on
negotiating its own priority only and does not allow negotiations on the
priority items of others.We sincerely hope that each delegation will face
reality, take into account the concerns of others while attending its own, and
no longer block the PAROS negotiations.
Before I conclude, I would like to point out that the recent announcement by the
US President not to deploy NMD for the time being does not mean at all that NMD
plan has been given up.Rather, it is only a deferral of decision to deploy NMD
when its technology is not ripe yet and it is facing strong opposition from the
international community.The US President has instructed the continued
development and testing of NMD.The international community should be clear about
this fact.It remains, therefore, an urgent task for CD and the international
community in general to negotiate legal instruments preventing the weaponization
of and an arms race in outer space and to safeguard the ABM Treaty from being
scrapped or weakened.We hope that CD will be able to start the PAROS
negotiations at the earliest possible time.
Thank you, Mr. President.
This
material is produced independently for NTI by the James Martin
Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of
International Studies and does not necessarily reflect the
opinions of and has not been independently verified by NTI or
its directors, officers, employees, agents. Copyright © 2007 by
MIIS.
