New York: Amid an evolving and challenging international security landscape, speakers in the Security Council underscored the continued relevance of its Committee tasked with monitoring and supporting efforts to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to non-State actors.
According to EMM, delegates welcomed the Committee’s efforts in training, capacity-building, and assistance to Member States, but called for an end to the political deadlock hampering the Committee’s work, including the adoption of its programme of work and the appointment of experts to vacant posts. Some divergence of views emerged regarding export controls and the peaceful use of technology and nuclear materials.
On 28 April 2004, the Council unanimously adopted resolution 1540 (2004) under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, affirming that the proliferation of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and their means of delivery constitutes a threat to international peace and security. The resolution obliges States, inter alia, to refrain from supporting non-State actors in developing, acquiring, manufacturing, possessing, transporting, transferring, or using such weapons and their means of delivery.
In the ensuing debate, many delegates emphasized the enduring importance and relevance of the Committee’s work, especially as international non-proliferation architecture is under threat. France’s representative stressed that the risks of proliferation have never been higher due to the global strategic context being weakened by the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine, where chemical agents were allegedly used as weapons of war, violating the Chemical Weapons Convention. The crises in Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea are worsening, challenging international law and the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The representative of Panama, Council President for August, expressed concern about the risk that non-State actors with sufficient financial resources could access materials and knowledge to develop weapons of mass destruction. He quoted Mohamed El-Baradei, Nobel Peace Prize laureate and former IAEA Director General, highlighting that technological sophistication of extremist groups should no longer be considered a sinister fairy tale. However, he emphasized that concerns about proliferation should not be manipulated for geopolitical purposes and that legal norms must be applied consistently.
Algeria’s delegate emphasized that the threat of weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of non-State actors remains as real today as it was two decades ago, intensified by rapid technological advancement, including artificial intelligence (AI). He underscored the need to balance legitimate peaceful uses of technology and materials for development with the imperative to prevent misuse by non-State actors.
Delegates including those from Sierra Leone and the Republic of Korea highlighted the importance of technical assistance, citing difficulties faced by some Member States in obtaining technical expertise and implementation capabilities. The Republic of Korea called on the Committee to organize capacity-building activities, noting its financial contributions to Committee activities in the Asia-Pacific region and beyond.
China’s representative called for the international community to fulfill responsibilities towards establishing a non-discriminatory non-proliferation and export control order. He advocated for lifting restrictions for peaceful use on developing countries and fostering international cooperation.
Somalia’s representative welcomed enhanced cooperation between the Committee and international organizations, which is indispensable for facilitating expertise sharing and technical assistance. Guyana’s delegate welcomed Panama’s plan to host a training course for 1540 points-of-contact in Latin America and the Caribbean by the end of the year.
Pakistan’s representative underscored the need for multilateral export control regimes to maintain credibility and avoid being seen as exclusive clubs. He proposed establishing an open-ended working group under UN auspices to ensure equitable access to technologies and address denial cases that hinder development.
Greece and other delegations emphasized the need for the Committee and Group of Experts to function properly, with the United Kingdom expressing concern over unwarranted objections preventing the Group of Experts from attending outreach events. Denmark and Slovenia lamented the Committee’s inability to adopt its programme of work for 2025.
The Russian Federation’s delegate emphasized that delays in Committee work aid those who seek to undermine international non-proliferation. He cautioned against imposing additional functions on the Committee that are outside its mandate.
The United States delegate stressed that Committee successes are overshadowed by obstructionism, particularly by the Russian Federation and China, hindering the Committee’s ability to fulfill its mandate. He called for an end to such obstructionism, while China’s representative rejected the claims.