'Security Of One Country Must Not Pose Threat To Others'

JAYANTHA Dhanapala, 61, Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs at the United Nations, was appointed to the prestigious post by the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in 1998. Since then, he has been working to bring consensus among the UN member states for global disarmament and on Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Dhanapala, former Sri Lankan additional foreign secretary, has held several positions with bodies concerned with disarmament. He was the President of the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the Treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. He was also ambassador and permanent representative of Sri Lanka to the UN in Geneva.

Dhanapala, who was recently in the Nepalese capital in connection with the 12th Regional Disarmament Meeting in the Asia Pacific Region, spoke exclusively to K. P. Sharma of the Sunday Despatch on the achievements of the three-day meeting and on global disarmament. Excerpts:

What are the achievements of the "Kathmandu Process"?

"Kathmandu Process" began twelve years ago when the regional center for peace and disarmament was established in Kathmandu under a UN General Assembly resolution. Its purpose is to create greater understanding in the region and to develop agenda for regional disarmament leading towards global disarmament.

During the 12 years we have been able to bring parties in disputes to the conference table where in an atmosphere of friendly discussions over controversial issues have been discussed and explored. It is not possible of course, in meetings like this to have overnight solutions. But we have to create a climate of trust and confidence. This is what the "Kathmandu Process" has done.

Do you think that the UN has been able to properly address the issue of arms control? What are its strategies for global disarmament?

Nuclear weapons is the number one priority of global disarmament because of the awful destructive capacity of these weapons. We have been able to have a treaty for the non-proliferation of the nuclear weapons and this treaty is the most widely subscribed treaty in the disarmament arena. A total of 187 countries have signed this treaty and this is a very important step against the spread of nuclear weapons. Only four countries (India, Pakistan, Israel and Cuba) remain outside this treaty. This has helped to ensure that we have kept the number of nuclear weapon states under some kind of control. Now what we must do is to try to address those countries which have nuclear weapons and bring down sharply the number of weapons they have until we can achieve complete elimination of those weapons. This is our objective. We have to be patient, steady and determined in our pursue to this goal.

What is the reason that only 26 nuclear power countries have ratified the CTBT, whereas the ratification of 44 countries is needed to bring CTBT into force?

The negotiation of the CTBT in 1996 was, in fact, the fulfillment of a long felt dream on the part of many countries beginning in 1954.. And when the CTBT was achieved there were some controversial aspects which prevented some countries from signing it.

Only 155 countries have so far signed the CTBT and only 26 of the nuclear power countries have ratified it. Even the US has failed to ratify the treaty. France and England, however, have done the both - signed and ratified. Thus, we have a long way to go. Last year in Vienna, we, along with the UN Secretary General, requested the member states to help enforce both NPT and CTBT and we hope that in due course countries will come under the treaties. It is more important for the countries in the Asia Pacific region to sign and ratify these treaties. It has not only a non-nuclear proliferation value but also has a disarmament value because this will establish a break against the development of new generation nuclear weapons.

What may be the reason behind India and Pakistan not signing the CTBT?

In the case of Pakistan, they voted for the resolution supporting the CTBT and they joined in the resolutions of the CTBT. In case of India, there was, from the beginning, an opposition principle regarding the CTBT. However, after May 1998 test, both India and Pakistan have stated openly that they will sign the treaty in due course.

We understand both the countries are engaged, right now, in internal dialogues in order to establish a national consensus which will enable them to sign the treaty. And I am confident that when that national consensus is achieved these countries will find it possible to sign the treaty.

How much obstruction has the nuclear tests done by India and Pakistan last year done to the non-proliferation process in South Asia?

Neither India nor Pakistan have signed the NPT. So they didn't violate any international legal treaty as a result of the May '98 test. But there is no pain in saying that these tests have reverberated around the world and they have caused worldwide precautions. Because it means that two more countries have crossed the nuclear threshold. And that is a set back by any reckoning to the progress towards nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation.   

How do you view the Kathmandu regional office's effectiveness in addressing the issue of the Asian countries signing the CTBT?

In the meetings we discussed the issues that come within the preview of strategic stability in nuclear non-proliferation. Nuclear disarmament is one in which we can give wide dissemination to the importance of the signature procedure. This matter was discussed in the two and a half day meeting and we hope that as a consequence of our discussion more and more countries will realise the value of signing the CTBT and bring it into force as early as possible.

What will be the main agenda in the forthcoming Review Conference of the NPT-2000 to be held in New York after two months?

The review conference of the NPT has to be held once in five years and this will be the first review conference after the treaty was extended indefinitely in 1995. At the review conference the state parties will review how treaty has performed in the last five years. The accountability of each state will be evaluated in terms of the different articles of the treaty as well as the package of decisions. Then it will also look forward towards the future regarding the targets that have to be established for the treaty to be a viable one for it to be effective in the goals that was set out in the original treaty which was signed in 1968.

What is the UN doing to stop the spread of arms?

There are two categories of arms - weapons of mass destruction and conventional arms. On weapons of mass destruction, we have a Biological Weapons Convention of 1972 which bans biological weapons and we are now negotiating a protocol which we hope will give some verification provision for that. We have also concluded a Chemical Weapons Convention which is now administered by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons established in The Hague and that is also a very important step towards banning chemical weapons.

Nuclear weapons remain the only weapons of mass destruction that we have to ban. And it is my hope that we will be able to progress towards a total ban on these weapons in near future.

Regarding conventional weapons we must know that under article 51 of the UN charter every country has the right to self defence. So a country can't be denied the possibility of acquiring arms for its national security and sovereignty.

But they must be proportionate to their needs. It must be for the security of  a country and that should not pose threat to other countries. We have the need, therefore, for transparency and confidence building.

Small arms is another area which is causing widespread killing particularly in the internal wars that are taking place in many parts of the world. And we have had many reports on that issue about the danger of this problem and an urgent need for the solution.

The first step that we have agreed on is to have a major conference in 2001 on the illicit trafficking of small arms and we hope that it will help a lot in arms control and disarmament. We are now engaged in widespread advocacy, we have been maintaining relations with institutes and academic institutions and other works through regional sectors like the Kathmandu sector regarding solutions against arms. And again, we have been trying to translate global norms into regional situations and for that regional sectors will be playing a vital role.

Nepal To Support US Proposal At CITES Meeting

-By Krishna Shrestha

FOUR tiger, 70 leopard, 221 blackbuck skins and 18,000 leopard nails were confiscated on January 12 by the Indian authorities following a raid at Khaga, in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. It was one of the largest seizures of goods related to wild animals in recent times. The raw skins and bones were brought mainly from Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh as well as from Bihar and West Bengal states of India.

According to TRAFFIC India, "After tanning the skins and processing the bones and nails, they are packed in plastic and jute bags and were sent to Delhi. In Delhi, contacts were made with international traders in Bangladesh, Nepal and other countries."

Meanwhile, Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation states, in Nepal too, over 75 kg of tiger bones were seized, and 21 persons involved in the trade of tiger bone and 39 persons involved in rhino poaching or rhino-horn trade were arrested during the period of July 1996 to mid-November 1999. Likewise, five persons were arrested with common leopard skin and one skull in the same period. 

However, in many cases, Nepal has been turned to trading point of illegal wildlife trade. It has been turned into a transit point for trading of tiger bones and shatoosh, wool of Chiru or Tibetan antelope, recognised as one of the threatened species and protected by law. It is estimated that as many as 20,000 of the animals are killed annually to produce shawls.

During the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) Standing Committee Meeting held in Rome in 1996, China had said that it was loosing 2,000 to 4,000 Chiru annually to poaching.

In last one and half years, more than 50 rhinoceros have been died/killed in Nepal. Though officials claim that most of them had died due to natural causes, many suspect they were being killed by poachers. It may be recalled here that several years back the numbers of rhinoceros had declined from 1,000 to about 50, mainly due to heavy poaching.

Illegal wildlife trade has been the second largest illegal trade after narcotics in terms of value in Nepal. Five years back, it was estimated that global trade included at least 40,000 primates, ivory from at least 90,000 African elephants, one million orchids, four million live birds, 10 million reptile skins, 15 million furs and over 350 million tropical fish.

The CITES says the international trade in wildlife is a big business, estimated to be worth billions of dollars annually and to involve more than 350 million plants and animals every year. Along with the loss of habitat and increased local exploitation of wildlife resources, unregulated international trade can pose a major threat to the survival of threatened and endangered species.

Considering the growing threat of extinction of  the wild flora and fauna, the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) was formed in 1973. Its headquarters is in Washington. The international agreement came into force in 1975. To date, 146 countries, including Nepal, have signed the treaty, which has made it one of the world's largest conservation agreements in existence.

The 11th CITES meeting is going to be held in Kenya from April 10 to 20, 2000. But, there is a big question, is Nepal, one of the signatories of the convention that has played crucial role in conserving biodiversity by allocating more than 18 per cent of the total land of the country as protected area, is prepared to take part in the meeting actively? At least, the present situation does not suggest so. It is also not clear who is going to take part in the meeting nor there are any concrete agendas from the Nepalese side.

The Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation is the management authority for CITES in Nepal. But, till last week, the Department has not received any invitation from the CITES secretariat. It is the ministry which has received the invitation. However, according a reliable source, the department has been corresponding with the CITES.

Similarly, Nepal has not submitted any proposal for discussion in CITES secretariat.

In an interaction programme on Nepal's preparation for CITES meeting being organised by Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists, an NGO of working journalists involved in the field of biodiversity conservation and sustainable development, with support from WWF Nepal program, Secretary in the Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation Ravi Bahadur Bista said, "We are not a big player in CITES." He further said the CITES has been turned into traders group rather than conservators group.

He categorically said, "There is proposition from Nepalese side." However, he made it clear that in the past Nepal had signed only in up-listing not down-listing, and the same thing will happen in the coming meeting too.

The deadline for submitting proposal has already been crossed. A total of 62 proposals have been submitted at CITES secretariat for discussion on coming meeting. Some of the proposals are directly related to Nepal.

"Nepal is going to support three proposals being presented by America," said Dr. Tirtha Man Maskey, Director General of Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC).

The proposals include transfer of all Moschus species (musk deers) currently in appendix II to appendix I, transfer of all Manis species (pangolin) currently in appendix II to appendix I, and supporting the United States for opposing the down-listing of whale species as proposed by Norway and Japan.

Dr. Maskey, speaking at an interaction programme, also made clear that Nepal has achieved some progress towards CITES implementation in Nepal following the 10th meeting of CITES held in Harare, Zimbabwe in 1997.

According to him, tiger action plan has been approved. National legislation for CITES implementation in Nepal (draft) is under revision in the process of approval. A working group has been formed for drafting amendments in National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act. The CITES unit under the DNPWC has been created and preparation of separate CITES identification manuals for flora and fauna are also underway. Two high-level and one local-level transboundary meeting between Nepal and India have been held. Investigative report on CITES Compliance in Nepal has been published with support from British Embassy. Anti-poaching units have been strengthened with support from World Wildlife Fund and ITNC. Trophies have been destroyed. Initiating study on status of common leopard and bear in Nepal among others.

However, Ukesh Bhuju, Conservation Program Director, Asia/Pacific Program, WWF Nepal Program, feels that Nepal has been taking right stance in CITES meeting since the very beginning. Nepal has definitely made some progress. CITES unit, formed within the department, is an example of Nepal's commitment towards CITES implementation. According to him, there are other things too, and Nepal should strongly present its progress in the forthcoming meeting.

Bhuju suggests that CITES legislation should be presented in House of Representative before CITES meeting. He also suggests that a museum be opened from the trophies stored trophies.

"But we should be careful while taking stance in CITES. It should not hamper our income source. We should be able to distinguish between satoosh and pashmina," says Director Bhuju. It may be recalled here that Nepal had joined CITES by signing it on 18 June 1975.