SMALL ARMS

  1.  The Committee requested information on the UN General Assembly's resolution on small arms adopted on 15 December 1999 (54/54 V).

  2.  The central element of the resolution was the decision to convene a UN Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects in June/July 2001. The resolution also decided to establish a Preparatory Committee, which would hold no less than three sessions and would make recommendations to the Conference on all relevant matters.

  3.  The first Preparatory Committee meeting (PrepCom) took place at UN Headquarters in New York on 28 Feburary to 3 March. The official report has not yet issued. This will be provided to the Committee as soon as it is received. The meeting:

—  elected Ambassador Carlos Dos Santos, the Permanent Representative of Mozambique to the United Nations, as chairman of the Preparatory Committee;

—  elected a Preparatory Committee Bureau of 25 Vice-Chairmen, comprising 5 from each of the regional groups, as follows:

—  Western Europe and others: Portugal, France, Norway, US, Canada.
—  Eastern Europe: Belarus, Latvia, Poland, Azerbaijan, Ukraine.
—  Asia: Japan, China, Iran, Indonesia, Philippines.
—  Latin America/Caribbean: Brazil, Guyana, Peru, Costa Rica, Jamaica.
—  Africa: Gabon, Senegal, Kenya, Egypt, (to be confirmed).

—  decided to hold the second PrepCom on 8-19 January 2001 in New York, and the third PrepCom on 19-30 March 2001 in a venue to be decided (the candidates are New York, Nairobi and Geneva);

—  decided to refer the question of dates and venue of the Conference to the 55th General Assembly, as the first PrepCom had not been able to reach consensus on this point and therefore fulfil the mandate given to it by the 54th General Assembly (the candidates for the venue are New York and Geneva; the EU supports the latter);

—  exchanged views on the modalities for NGO participation in subsequent PrepComs and in the Conference itself, and asked the Chairman to conduct further consultations on this point intersessionally;

—  requested the Chairman to conduct broad-based intersessional consultations on an informal, open-ended and transparent basis with representatives of governments and intergovernmental organisations, with the option of also hearing the views of civil society;

—  held an initial exchange of views on the scope, objectives, agenda and rules of procedure of the Conference (the EU's and hence UK's views on these issues are set out in the documents listed below).

  4.  The Committee asked about the Government's attitude to the resolution (and hence to the Conference). The UK voted for the resolution (but was one of 14 states to abstain on preambular paragraph 8, referring to the right of self-determination of all peoples, on the grounds that this was inappropriate to the subject matter of the resolution). The Government regards the Conference as a key milestone in international efforts to tackle the scourge of small arms proliferation. The Conference offers the opportunity to build on existing regional initiatives by agreeing concerted global action to reduce levels of illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. The UK therefore intends to work hard for a successful Conference.

  5.  The main channel for such work will be the EU. Member States tend to see eye-to-eye on small arms proliferation and to express their views collectively through the Presidency. The Government's attitude towards the Conference is therefore described in detail by the following EU documents:

—  EU common reply to UNGA resolutions 53/77 E;

—  the EU Presidency statement in the first meeting of the Preparatory Committee;

—  the EU's food for thought paper, entitled "Elements for consideration in the substantive preparation for the 2001 Conference", circulated during the first meeting of the Preparatory Committee.

  6.  The Committee asked about the attitudes of other members of the Security Council to the resolution. It is too early to form a clear picture of the views of other Security Council members on the Conference. The first PrepCom focussed on procedural issues; in addition, not all members of the Security Council spoke in the general debate, although the US, China and Russia did. All speakers, including those three states, expressed their desire for a successful Conference but more detailed debate is likely to reveal differences on the scope, agenda and preferred outcome of the Conference.

  7.  In addition, Resolution 54/54 V endorsed the Secretary General's report on small arms (A/54/258) (Annex D) and called upon all Member States to implement the relevant recommendations in section IV of the report. The UK was represented on the Group of Governmental Experts who assisted the Secretary General in preparing the report by Sir Michael Weston, the UK's former Permanent Representative to the Conference on Disarmament. The UK is already in compliance with the majority of the recommendations for actions by states in Section IV of the Report and will continue to give full consideration to the rest in developing and implementing its policy on small arms.

ANTI-PERSONNEL LANDMINES

  8.  The Committee asked about the Government's efforts to encourage other countries to sign and ratify the Ottawa Convention. The United Kingdom was one of the first States to sign the Ottawa Convention, and was one of the first forty to ratify it, thus being instrumental in bringing it into force. We have played a leading role in providing funding for mine action projects, increasing our annual funding for such activity from £5 million in 1997 to £10 million in 2000. We have now destroyed all of our anti-personnel mine stocks, ahead of schedule, except for the small quantity retained in accordance with the Convention for demining training purposes.

  9.  The UK conducted an extensive lobbying exercise in 1998 to encourage all non-signatories to sign the Ottawa Convention. Since then, we have continued to take all appropriate opportunites to raise this issue with non-signatories.

  10.  While the Government would prefer all to join the UK in the total ban, we would welcome global participation in a ban on transfers as a key first step on this path. The Government is actively pressing for negotiation of such an agreement in all appropriate fora, including the Conference on Disarmament and the UN Weaponry Convention review process.

  11.  The Committee asked in particular about the position of the United States. The US has not signed the Ottawa Convention, arguing that it continues to need anti-personnel mines for security reasons, in particular for the defence of the Republic of Korea. However, the US is no longer producing or exporting anti-personnel mines and has said that it is committed to identifying alternatives to anti-personnel mines which would, if successful, enable it to sign the Ottawa Convention by 2006. The US is aware of our wish to see it and other non-signatories sign the Convention as soon as possible.