DYB2011-Part-II-web

Disarmament resolutions and decisions listed by chapter
also intended to abstain in the vote on paragraph 16, which called for the immediate
commencement of negotiations for an FMCT, in line with its clear position on the FMCT.
After the vote, four States that had voted against the draft took the floor:
• The United Kingdom, also speaking on behalf of France, clarified that they
had abstained in the vote on paragraph 16, which called for the immediate
commencement of negotiations in the CD for an FMCT, but reiterated that they
supported the objective of that paragraph. As was their standard practice, they
abstained on the paragraph because they voted against the draft resolution as
a whole. They also commended the language in paragraph 4, which referred to
efforts between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the nuclearweapon
States to agree on signing the Protocol to the Treaty on the South-East
Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone. The United Kingdom, France and the United
States were encouraged in making early progress on that.
• Netherlands said that it was fully committed to the full implementation of the
action plan of the 2010 NPT Review Conference, which contained actions on
the three NPT pillars: disarmament, non-proliferation and the peaceful use of
nuclear energy. For the Netherlands, non-proliferation and disarmament were
equally important and mutually reinforcing. It was therefore important to work
towards the full implementation of all elements of the 2010 NPT action plan.
• Ukraine stressed that it was in favour of a nuclear-free world, but had voted
against the draft resolution as a whole because some of its provisions were not
entirely balanced.
• Germany pointed out that it voted in favour of retaining paragraph 14, with a
view to achieving a balanced implementation of all three pillars of the NPT.
Two States that had abstained in the vote as a whole took the floor:
• Japan stated that it shared the goal of the total elimination of nuclear weapons.
However, it attached the highest priority to concerted actions by the international
community, including nuclear-weapon States, in order to steadily implement
concrete measures towards nuclear disarmament. It stated that there remained
a great difference between Japan’s standpoint and the approach of the draft
resolution.
• India said that it attached the highest priority to nuclear disarmament and shared
the main objective of the draft resolution, which was the complete elimination
of nuclear weapons within a specified period of time. However, it had been
constrained to abstain on the draft resolution because of certain references to the
NPT, on which India’s position was well known. Nevertheless, its vote should
not be seen as opposition to other provisions of the draft resolution.
283