UN Secretariat Item Scan - Barcode - Record Title PageDateTime

S-0905-0004-01-00001

4107/06/200611:35:56 AM

Expanded Number S-0905-0004-01 -00001

Title |tems-in-Disarmament - chronological files - general

Date Created 09/01/1981

Record Type Archival Item

Container S-0905-0004: Political matters - disarmament 1972-1981

Print Name of Person Submit Image Signature of Person Submit

'r^ :" "O/r?-:^ - - c A L S r s i F3;-;05?.0 • .... •

:;~; HYK .

G~.;<SVE ( D I G A R ? ' ) H 1513

'.5VA 0? !22 S E C R E T A R Y G E N E R A L FROM J A I P A L . l T v F O S Y T 5 K K O , « A R T E M 5 0 - N

,1!- CSrtTR?: F O R D I S A a K A M E N T . ' . - . . . '

1 , T:£ W O R K T ^ G G R O U P ON G P D . H S L ^ - I T S - I 9 T H I^STIKG ON 13APH' U K D E R

T1S O H A I R I I A U S H I P OF A M B A S S A D O R G A R C I A R03LES C f l E X I G O )

2, IKS V . ' O R ; - I I > i G G R O U P C O N T I N U E D THE FR£LI ; - i ! r«A.TY E X A M I N A T I O W OF T H' :

;j'! ;APT£n CCi^CEMII-iG P R I M C T P L E S B' tGUN AT 'THE LAST MEET IN'7.. IH THIS

COr i .^CTlCr t T H E G R O U P H A D BEFORE I T w O R K I N G D O C U t l E i - J T S S U B M I T T E D

"^ h ^ X l O O CCD/CPD/yp . (3 ) C H I K A (CD/CPSAJP.iO V E N E Z U E L A ( C D / C P D / V P SO)

AW. C H E C H O S L O V A K I A CCD/OPD/WP.-?) eEYO;;D T H A T Tf!H G R O U P DISCUSSED\ •

THE PE;^AL O U ^ S T I Q H OF W H A T SHOULD as . C O N S I D E R E D A " P R I N C I P L E *•

51JT NO D E F I N I T E C O w C L U S I O . ' ? ^AC f t E A C K E f i -

*» S T A T E M E N T S V-'Ea? : -ADZ SY C H I N A , V E f R Z U ' i L A , iJS r ITALY, F R A K C E ,

' ' : « ~ E C : ; 0 2 L O ' / A X I A , L'SSR, " G N C O L I A » ! ~ D H , CU5A A N D I N D I A

COL 021^^ 1 l?T!i 15APP 2 S ff 13 10 3 •

= 0^! 14 IcQ

-i}A 14 1C 10

V'AF/os cc: SG

File:XRef:b/f : RA/AR/MKP/GMM/AKU/MJS

10 April 1931

Dear Mr. Hudson,

On behalf and in the absence of the Secretary-General

on official business overseas I should like to acknowledge

your letter of 2 March 1981 concerning your proposals for

a Ivations/People/Sudget Triad decision-leaking process.

You may be sure that 1 shall not fail to bring your

letter to the Secretary-General's attention upon his

return and I know that he would wish me to thank you for

your thougnfulness in sending your suggestions to him.

With regard to your request to discuss the matter

directly with the Secretary-General, I am sorry to tell

you that in view of his very heavy schedule, it is not

possible to arrange a meeting in the near future.

With best regards,

Yours sincerely,

Albert RohanDirector

;lr. Richard HudsonIxocutive DirectorCenter for Uar/Peace Studies21oL 13th StreetI-; \; York, K.Y. 10003

Summary of the proposals for a Nations

People Budget (NPB) Triad System

To redress "voting inequities" in the General

Assembly, Mr. Hudson proposes amendments to Articles

18 and 13 of the Charter. Article 18 would be

revised to require that the States making up a two-

thirds majority also meet the criteria that their

combined populations be at least two-thirds of the

total populations of all those voting and that their

contributions to the regular budget represent at

least two-thirds of the total contributions of those

voting. Article 13 would be revised to provide the

General Assembly with the power to enact binding

decisions. The intent is to ensure that binding

decisions of the Assembly reflect strong and broadly

balanced world opinion representing as they would the

majority of the world's population, as well as the

opinions of those countries with sufficient political

/economic/military means to implement them. (The

Security Council would still retain its prerogative

to employ military forces).

An immediate observation on this proposal is that

if the US, the FRG and one other state of the Western

group voted against a binding resolution, it would be

defeated since their combined contributions to the budget

would exceed one-third; or if China and India both voted

against this would also lead to defeat since their

combined populations exceed one-third of the world's

population.

A.Fouracre/jb19.3.81

ROUTING SLIP " FICHE DE TRANSMISSION

- f?; f- LOlJq

i™i c. /f 4 U TA/£ z-tyAik forRoom No. — VNo de bureau

FOR ACTION

FOR APPROVAL

FOR SIGNATURE

FOR COMMENTS

MAY WE DISCUSS?

YOUR ATTENTION

AS DISCUSSED

AS REQUESTED

NOTE AND RETURN

FOR INFORMATION

Extension- Poste Va\e// /3 /

V /A

POUR SUITE A/50NNER /

POUR APPR^BAT(ONf '

POUR SIGNATURE

POUR OBSERVATIONS

POURRIONS-NOUS EN PARLER ?

VOTRE ATTENTION

COMME CONVENUSUITE A VOTRE DEMANDS

NOTER ET RETOURNER

POUR INFORMATION

COM.6 12-78)

ccftTCR ron uifin/pcncc STUDIES 218 c ISTII ST mr mr 10005 maw 475 osso

BOARD OF SPONSORSS. O. AdeboElisabeth Mann BorgeseElise BouldingKenneth E. BouldingLord CaradonStuart ChaseNorman CousinsLuther H. EvansRobert Wallace GilmoreAlva MyrdalGunnar MyrdalPhilip Noel-BakerArvid PardoCharles S. RhyneMaj. Gen. Indar Jit Rikhye (Ret.;Yoshikazu SakamotoLouis B. SohnC. Maxwell Stanley

R E C E I V E D

MAR I 2 1981

March 2, 1981

Secretary-General Kurt WaldheimUnited NationsNew York, NY 10017

Dear Mr. Secretary-General:

I was surprised to find myself in your office on a fewminutes' notice as guest photographer last week with Profes-sor John Logue. I enjoyed our discussion, and I thank youvery much for your autographed book. Prof. Logue and I havebeen close colleagues on the Law of the Sea for many years,and I associate myself with all that he said. I intend toinclude your book, in fact, books, in a list of peace bookspeople should read in an early issue of Pisarmament Times,along with an excellent book review of James Avery Joyce'snew book by Robert Muller.

I found myself filled with nostalgia on being in theSecretary-General's office again. I was there many timesduring U Thant's tenure. Mainly we talked about Vietnam,and I was able to give him some information I was receivingfrom Hanoi and the Viet Cong, but we also discussed the Mid-dle East and disarmament. I also recall vividly some smallinformal luncheons U Thant gave, with guests including RalphBunche, Brian Urquhart, Roger Baldwin, Norman Cousins, JimmyWechsler, Arthur Lall, and others.

It was a coincidence that I landed in your office lastweek, as I would have been writing you this week anyway toask for an appointment to discuss the Nations/People/BudgetTriad decision-making process for the United Nations system.I enclose the last issue of Global Report, which sets forththis proposal, and also the next-to-last issue, which includessome pertinent analysis.

...12

Applied Research Toward a World of Peace With JusticePublisher of Global Report Executive Director: Richard Hudson

Page two

In recent weeks and months, at various stages in itspresentation, I have discussed the NPB Triad decision-mak-ing proposal with a rather wide spectrum of concerned people.On your staff, I have talked about it with Brian Urquhart.Jay Long., and Victor Lessiovski, and Robert Muller is look-ing at it. The Centre for Disarmament has received copies.Among others with whom I am discussing the NPB Triad areAmbassador Ovinnikov of the USSR, Cyrus Vance, Senator AlanCranston, and Robert Rosenstock of the USA, Ambassador Gon-zalez Galvez of Mexico, Ambassador Elaraby of Egypt, Ambas-sador Kamil of Indonesia, and Ambassador Koroma of SierraLeone. Copies of the proposal have gone out under personalcover letters to all 47 members of the Special Committeeon the United Nations Charter and the Strengthening of theRole of the Organization, as well as the rest of the MemberStates. Copies have also been sent to all members of theGroup of Government Experts to Study the Institutional Ar-rangements relating to the Process of Disarmament. Also Iplan to send copies to members of the Experts Group on Dis-armament and International Security, your Experts AdvisoryGroup on Disarmament under Agha Shahi, the Committee onDisarmament, and Olof Palme's International Commission onDisarmament and Security.

In sum, I hope you will conclude that this is a seriouseffort, and I believe it would be extremely helpful if Icould have a discussion with you quite soon on the NPB Triadproposal.

Richard HudsonExecutive Director

RH:mzenclosures

cc : G AKU/atK file: Disarm.

xRef : Chemical Weapons bf :

I-!r. Jan ttartenson 3 April 1931Assistant Secretary-GeneralCentre for Disarmament

f-r. Hiiihail D. SytenkoUrldsr-Secretari

;--Gcrieral forPolitical and Security Council Affairs

Hafeeuddin ?Jmed, Chef de CabinetExecutive Office of the Secretary-General

Group of Experts to Investigate Reports on theJj.leged Use of Chemical Weapons

With reference to your memorandum to the Se-cretary-

General of 31 March 1901 on the above-mentioned, subject/

pleace proceed as proposed.

NOTE FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

Mr. Martenson is reporting to you'on thp czomposition

of the Group of Experts to investigate report's on the

alleged use of chemical weapons. You will recall that

this subject aroused great controversy at the last

Assembly.

The socialist countries have indicated their unwilling-

ness to participate and efforts were therefore made to

secure the participation of experts from non-aligned and

neutral states.

Peru, Egypt and Kenya have agreed to participate.

Final replies are still awaited from Cyprus and the

Philippines.

France, as the depository power of the 1925 Geneva

Protocol, has agreed to provide a consultant, Professor

Marcovich, of the Institut Pasteur, who is also highly

regarded amongst socialist states for his mediation efforts

in S.E. Asia.

Since it is hoped to convene the first session at

the end of this month, Mr. Martenson suggests the

appointment of the 3 experts already nominated and the

consultant. We would agree with this recommendation and

request your approval.

AKU/3 April 1981

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

T0. The Secretary-G^rJergllA:

Mr. Mikhail D. SytzenkoUnder-Secretary-Qeneral

THROUGH: _ _ . . . n , „ _/ . .s/c DE: Political and Security

FROM:DE:

N A T I O N S U N I E S

MEMORANDUM 1NTERIEURr >

DATE: 31 March 1981

REFERENCE:

Jan MartensonAssistant Secretary-GeneralCentre for Disarmament

Group of Experts to Investigate Reports on theAlleged Use of Chemical Weapons

1. In my memorandum of 19 January 1981, I reported to you on stepsthat the Centre was taking in setting up the expert group to assistthe Secretary-General to carry out an investigation in connexion withreports on the alleged use of chemical weapons, pursuant to resolution35/144 C.

2. As noted then, our initial approach was directed towards thecomposition of a group representing different viewpoints. Veryextensive and comprehensive consultations were undertaken in thisregard. Those consultations have indicated that no Socialist Statewould be willing to participate in the exerci.se and, Jience,in theinterest of impartiality and balance, we have concentrated our sjub-sequent efforts on securing the participation ot experts trpm thenon-aLlgned and neutral states^in the first instance,from among thosewho abstained..Peru, which abstained, and Egypt and Kenya, both ofwhich voted in favour, have now cpmmunicatecii their interest in pro-viding experts for the^group and have already supplied the names oftheir respective experts. Currently, we are continuing our effortsto complete the composition of the group which, according to thefinancial implications, should consist of five members. In thisconnexion, it should be noted that while we are still awaiting finalreplies, inter alia, from Cyprus and the Philippines, the availableoptions, on the basis of consultations already carried out, are nowconsiderably limited. It should also be stressed that the specificqualifications required of the experts further restricts the selectionprocess.

3. The financial implications of the resolution also provide for aconsultant"!"To obtain tne services of this person, we initially nexcidiscussions with certain neutral countries possessing the requisiteexpertise. The response in each case was that the countries in questionwere not in a position to provide such a consultant, .tye have finallysucceeded in getting France, as the Depositary Power to make available£Ke~servlC6g Ot Professor Hubert Marcov^ch of the Institut Pasteur.Director 6± Research in Biology at the National Scientific ResearchCentre of France. Professor Marcovich is, reputedly, jiighly regardedalso among Socialist States for his involvement in various mediationefforts in Southeast Asia.

Geneva Protocol of 1925.

_2 _

4. In a related action on this question, I have designated theSecretary of the expert group, Mr. Sohrab Kheradi, to attend theEighth Pugwash Workshop on Chemical Warfare to be held in Geneva from2 to 4 April 1981. Besides attending the Workshop, Mr. Kheradi willattempt to obtain any available information regarding the alleged useof chemical weapons from the relevant international organizations andother sources, as stipulated in resolution 35/144 and will alsoestablish appropriate contacts with experts in the field.

5. It is my j.ntention to convene the first session of the expertgroup at United Nations Headquarters on 2O April 1981 for a periodof one week. Although the possibility exists that all five membersof the group may not have been appointed by then, it should be noted,however, that with the participation of Egypt, Kenya and Peru thegroup will have two States from Africa and one from Latin Americaand since the consultant is a French national, a Western Europeancountry would also be involved in the work of the group.

6. Replies to the note verbale,requesting Governments to provideany relevant information on the subject, have been received, to-date,from the following: Canada, Cuba, Denmark, Federal Republic ofGermany, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, New Zealand, St. Vincentand the Grenadines, the United Kingdom and the United States.

7. With your approval, I shall arrange for the appointment of,_theexperts to tne group. ~ ~~~~~~~ =*"

C-v ^ _ . N- (.;_ :\.j p

7

NOTE FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

; ,

y Lf' i.'Mr. Martenson is reporting to you'on th£ composition

of the Group of Experts to investigate repori/s on the

alleged use of chemical weapons. You will recall that

this subject aroused great controversy at the last

Assembly.

The socialist countries have indicated their unwilling-

ness to participate and efforts were therefore made to

secure the participation of experts from non-aligned and

neutral states.

Peru, Egypt and Kenya have agreed to participate.

Final replies are still awaited from Cyprus and the

Philippines.

France, as the depository power of the 1925 Geneva

Protocol, has agreed to provide a consultant, Professor

Marcovich, of the Institut Pasteur, who is also highly

regarded amongst socialist states for his mediation efforts

in S.E. Asia.

Since it is hoped to convene the first session at

the end of this month, Mr. Martenson suggests the

appointment of the 3 experts already nominated and the

consultant. We would agree with this recommendation and

request your approval.

AKU/3 April 1981

TO:A:

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM^i^

N A T I O N S U N I E S

MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR

The Secretary-General//W ,

Mr. Mikhail D. SytenkoUnder-Secretary-General f.0 REFERENCE:

S/CRO£EGH: Political and Security podncil

-.„_,.. Jan Martensonr re W IYi. . -DE: Assistant Secretary-General

Centre for Disarmament

OBJET:CT: Group of Experts to Investig

31 March 1981

Reports on theAlleged Use of Chemical Weapons

1. In my memorandum of 19 January 1981, I reported to you on stepsthat the Centre was taking in setting up the expert group to assistthe Secretary-General to carry out an investigation in connexion withreports on the alleged use of chemical weapons, pursuant to resolution35/144 C.

2. As noted then, our initial approayh was directed towards thecomposition of a group representing different viewpoints. Veryextensive and comprehensive consultations were undertaken in thisregard. Those consultations have indicated that no Socialist Statewould be willing to participate in the exerci_se .and, Jienc_e, in theinterest of impartiality and balance, we have concentrated our s_ub-sequent efforts on securing the participation of experts From tire non-ajjLgned and neutral Stjaces, Tn the first instance, from among thosewho abstained. JPeru . which abstained, and Egyptand Kenya, both ofwhich voted in favour, Jiave now communicatecT^tneir interest in pro-viding experts for the "group and have already supplied thenamesoftheir respective experts. Currently, we are continuing our et fortsto complete the composition of the group which, according to thefinancial implications, should consist of five members. In thisconnexion, it should be noted that while we are still awaiting final_

inter alia, from Cyprus and the Philippines, the availableoptions, on the basis of consultations already carried out, are nowconsiderably limited. It should also be stressed that the specificqualifications required of the experts further restricts the selectionprocess.

3 . The financial implications of the resolution also provide for aconsultant^ To ot>tairi~~the services of this person^ we initially "Held"cJiscUs~s"Tons with certain neutral countries possessing the requisiteexpertise. The response in each case was that the countries in questionwere not in a position to provide such a consultant. *We have finallysucceeded in getting France, as the Depositary Powery to make availablethe sHTVices o~f Protessor Hubert Marcovich of the Institut Pasjteur"Director of Research in "Biology at the National Scientific ResearchCentre of France. Professor Marcovich is, reputedly, _highly regardedalso among Socialist States for his involvement in various mediationefforts in Southeast Asia.

*/ Geneva Protocol of 1925.

-2-

4. In a related action on this question, I have designated theSecretary of the expert group, Mr. Sohrab Kheradi, to attend theEighth Pugwash Workshop on Chemical Warfare to be held in Geneva from2 to 4 April 1981. Besides attending the Workshop, Mr. Kheradi willattempt to obtain any available information regarding the alleged useof chemical weapons from the relevant international organizations andother sources, as stipulated in resolution 35/144 and will alsoestablish appropriate contacts with experts in the field.

5. It is my j.ntention to convene the first session of the expertgroup at United Nations Headquarters on 2O April 1981 for a periodof one week. Although the possibility exists that all five membersof the group may not have been appointed by then, it should be noted,however, that with the participation of Egypt, Kenya and Peru thegroup will have two States from Africa and one from Latin Americaand since the consultant is a French national, a Western Europeancountry would also be involved in the work of the group.

6. Replies to the note verbale,requesting Governments to provideany relevant information on the subject, have been received, to-date,from the following: Canada, Cuba, Denmark, Federal Republic ofGermany, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, New Zealand, St. Vincentand the Grenadines, the United Kingdom and the United States.

7. With your approval, I shall arrange for the appointment of_theexperts to the group. ' ' ="

TO:A:

10

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

INTEROFFICE MEMORAND

The Secretary-Gener

FROM:DE:

SUBJECT:

N A T I O N S U >

MEMORANDUM INTERIEUif~\

DATE: 9 March

REFERENCE:Mr. Mikhail D. SytenkoUnder-Secretary-General

and Security Council

Jan MartensonAssistant Secretary-General \ V\Centre for Disarmament x'" \

Follow-up on New Report on Nuclear Explosion Over theSouth Atlantic

1. In my memorandum of 19 February 1981 I advised you ofa second interpretation of the 15 December 198O incidentover the South Atlantic whereby United States DefenceDepartment analysts believed that it had not been of nuclearorigin. I also stated that I would inform you of anyfurther developments.

2. In response to our seeking of further information, theUnited States Government has advised the following:

"Infrared sensors on a U.S. satellite overthe South Atlantic recorded a signal on December fr,,but: tnere is agreement among all agencies of theUnited States government that it was not caused by anuclear explosion. " ""

The December 15 signal was recorded by aninfrared or heat detector rather than the light flashdetector or bhangmeter which recorded the September 22,1979 signal. A bhangmeter was in good position onDecember 15 but was not triggered as it most likelywould have been had a nuclear explosion occurred.Nevertheless, a search was made for other data such asnuclear debris which could have confirmed the occurenceof an explosion and no corroborative data was obtained.Subsequent analysis by air force contractors familiarwith these infrared signals indicate that theDecember 15 event was probably the result of a largemeteor entering the atmosphere."

f

TO:A:

THROUGH:S/C DE:

FROM:DE:

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

The Secretary General

Mr. E. ReddyOfficer-in-ChargeDepartment of Political

P. CsillagOfficer-in-ChargeCentre for Disarmament

SUBJECT:OBJET:

N A T I O N S U N I E ^ t

MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR' i

DATE:

REFERENCE:

february 1981

ecurity Council Affairs

-[/

f^Non-Proliferation; Ratification ofMNPT by Egypt

1. Further to the memorandum of 12 February 1981 on theabove subject, when it was reported that Egypt had ratified,on 7 February 1981,the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation ofNuclear Weapons, it is now learned that Egypt intends todeposit an instrument of ratification with the Government ofthe United Kingdom on 26 February 1981.

2. Statements attributed to high Egyptian Officials seem toimply that the decision to adhere to the Treaty was motivatedby the desire to make easier the acquisition of the necessarynuclear facilities from the supplying countries.

3. According to the Egyptian Foreign Minister, Egypt, in1975, initiated an agreement with the United States for theimport of three nuclear stations, but it was not implementedbecause Egypt had not ratified the Treaty. Egypt now intendsto re-open talks with the United States for the supply ofnuclear stations. In addition, on 12 February, Egypt signedan agreement with France on nuclear cooperation for peacefulpurposes under which France would help Egypt build nuclearreactors for electrical energy.

4. Egypt's action will undoubtedly strengthen the non-proliferation regime of the NPT. The regional implications,however, will remain to be further clarified in view of thefact that Israel has so far not adhered to the Treaty.

5. Comments also seem to indicate that Egypt's adherenceto the Treaty might serve as an incentive to Israel to reconsi-der its position on the Treaty. According to Egypt's ForeignMinister, Egypt has played a role in persuading Israel to joinin the unanimous support of the proposal to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, adopted by the GeneralAssembly at its thirty-fifth session.

'-" • Mr. j. MartensonAKU/atk File: Disarm.Gen.

xRef: Invits.regretted

bf: AR/MKP/CCF/GMM/AF/MJS

19 February 1981

Dear David,

Thank you for your letter of 10 February 1981,by which you forwarded the invitation to the Secretary-General for the World Assembly of Religious Workersfor General and iTuclear Disarmament. I would begrateful if you would transmit the enclosed cspjytfcoMr. Sato, a copy of which is attached for your information,

The request to send a representative from outsideJapan to the World Assembly has been discussed withother senior colleagues. On the basis of these consul-tations I should like to ask you to represent theUnited nations on that occasion. As you will see fromthe enclosed letter, I have infcsmied &r. Sato accordingly.

With kind regards,Yours sincerely,

Rafeeuddin AimedChef de Cabinet

tlr. David J. ExleyDirectorUnited Nations Information CentreShin Aoyana Building tfishikan1-1, Miriam i-Aoyaina 1-ChciueMinato-kgTokyo 107

t ~~

U N I T E D N A T I O N S m m ® N A T I O N S U N I E ST^v^j^^yff-*? ^^

SHIN AOYAMA BUILDING NISHIKAN UNITED NATIONS INFORMATION CENTRE *»«i?;«!ZpSffLuiT@iti^ TI22ND FLOOR KrWdJt;i/Sf|22ft1-1, MINAMI-AOYAMA 1-CHOME raMS'*^.rt-*e-i-» AMINATO-KU, TOKYO 107 I H I ^ a E i a W i W T r ^ ^ - "

10 February 1981

Dear Rafee:

At the request of Ven. Gyotsu N. Sato, I am forwardingthe enclosed invitation to the Secretary-General to address a WorldAssembly of Religious Workers for General and Nuclear Disarmament to beheld in Tokyo from 21 to 25 April 1981.

Mr. Sato asked me to convey to you the Organizing Committee'srequest that if the Secretary-General himself is unable to attend, he senda representative from outside Japan.

In this connection, you will wish to know that those alreadyinvited include Messrs. M.A. Vellodi, Chairman of the Disarmament Commission,and Jan Martenson, ASG, Centre for Disarmament, and Mrs. Sally Swing Shelley,Chief, NGO Section, DPI, all of whom I am informed are unable to attendbecause of prior commitments. Mr. Martenson may have additional informationconcerning the invitation.

You will find together with Mr. Sato's letter to theSecretary-General a listing of the Board of Convenors of the World Assemblyof Religious Workers for General and Nuclear Disarmament. Mr. Sato isa leading figure in Gensuikyo (the Japan Council Against A and H Bombs),which is affiliated with the Japan Communist Party, and some of the OrganizingCommittee members are Gensuikyo supporters. At the same time, the Committeeas a whole includes representatives of a broad range of religious faithsand creeds in Japan. The call for the World Assembly of Religious Workerscame from the Patriarch of the Japan Buddha Sangha, the Most Ven. NichidatsuFujii.

I should be grateful if you could advise me in due courseof the decision which is taken on this invitation.

With kind personal regards,

SincVrely yours,

IkJX'-David J. Exley

Mr. Rafeeuddin Ahmed DirectorChef de CabinetExecutive Office of the Secretary-GeneralUnited Nations

cc: Mr. Jan Martenson, New York

TELEPHONE: (03) 475-1611, 1612, 1613, 1614 • CABLE ADDRESS: TOKOMN1PRESS TOKYO • TELEX: J28334

/•-

cc : Mr. J. MartensonAKU/atk cc : SG File: Disarm.

xRef: Invit.regretted

19 February 1981

Dear Mr. Sato,

On behalf of the Secretary-General, 1 wish toacknowledge your letter of 30 January 19 £1 concerningthe World Assembly of Religious Workers for Generaland Nuclear Disarmament to be held in Tokyo frcra21 to 25 April 1S81.

You ttiay be sure that the Secretary-General verymuch appreciated the kind invitation you extended tohim to attend the World Assembly. Unfortunately, inview of long-standing previous cornrnitirtents for thetiio.e in question he will be prevented fron being withyou. I an pleased to inform you, however, that he hasaskfed the Director of the United nations InformationCentre in Tokyo, Mr. David J. Exley, to represent himon that occasion.

Hay Ir on behalf of the Secretary-General, extendto you best wishes for a successful World Assembly.

Yours sincerely,

Eafe-ouddin AhmedChef de Cabinet

The Veil. Gyotsu 1-7. SatoWorld Assembly of ReligiousWorkers for General andNuclear Disarmament

8-7 Shinsen-choSnibuya-kuT o k y o

3|OD3R

In-charge international affairs: Telephone: (03 )461-9363Ven. Gyotsu N. Sato, (jable code : JBSANGHA TOKYO8-7 Shinsen-cho, Shibuya-ku, Tokyo, |sb. : JBS/1641/UN150, JAPAN. Date •. 30 January 1981

To : His Excellency, Dr. Kurt Waldheim,Secretary General,United Nations, New York.

Your Excellency,

The purpose of this letter is to coordially invite youto the World Assembly of Religious Workers for General and Nuclear Disarma-ment, April,1981. It will be held in Tokyo just one year prior to the con-vocation of the S.S.D.-II,1982. Perhaps, this attempt of ours may be thefirst of its kind in the field of disarmament on Non Governmental basisat a time when the Preparatory Committee of the S.S.D.-II is now going tostart working on the business required for the successful achievement ofthe same. At this moment, we also know that the Committee on Disarmamenthas just embarked on the drafting of the full text of the ComprehensiveProgramme of Disarmament well in time with the S.S.D.-II,1982.

We in the field must get ready to pressurize the governmental negotiatorsso that they may comply with the world public opinion which never desirethat mankind should perish in the possible nuclear war.

I am enclosing herewith the Call to Chhose Life and the List of theexpected delegates and guests which may show the true nature of the Assembly.

I request you sincerely that you may generously share a few days withus and encourage all those who will converge at the Assembly from all cornersof the world, and that you may give a push to the whole of the human effortsto save themselves from the catastrophe, first of all converting themselvesin the way of thinking, the delegitimatization of armaments and their use,in particular, nuclear armaments.

The U.N. Declaration on the Second Disarmament Decade is emphaticallystressing the need of N.G.O. contribution to the effectuation of theAgreements and also promissing us to help holding of Seminars and Fora topromote the raising of world public opinion in different strata and differentregions. Perhaps, this may be one of thsoe efforts referred to in the Decla-ration , and thus, the forerunner. Your encouragement is indeed desired byall of us who are organizing this Assembly.

I wish you to hear from you a very positive response, and obliged.We shall be pleased to bear all the neccessary expences for your trip andaccommodation while in Japan. We shall be pleased to have you here amongstus from the 21st of April till the 25th of April.

Yours sincer,

(Veh-i Gyotsu N. Sato)

In-charge ofThe International Affairs.

iL-Ht: (01x0:) AM 31231X0;") tanjtUtUltLiItlil IF(01\

iriTouiuuiHi*? uur>i\ii;iH\§ JAN? i^KTTr v A H tl 31 $ A li jtt A Jtt i£X C (11! A1UU / «f>N til )

8- ^ S ! i i . \ sK . \ - c i i o , s i i i H N Y A - K r . T ^ K Y O i r . o J A K A XCAiiiECOu1 : j i i S A t i c ' i A . >.vo

1 E L . IGKi'O (03; 461 - V. - .Vi

In-chcrge inlernat I onol a f f a i r s :

Ven. Gro.s. N. Sa.o. A CALL TO CHOOSE LIFE _.'J!LJBS/1641/UN

AN INVITATION L.....!^ A9.81.

TOTHE WORLD ASSEMBLY OF RELIGIOUS WORKERS FOR

GENERAL AND NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT

[I]

The simultaneous rise of world public opinion brought forth the subsequentconvocation of the Special Session of General Assembly of the United Nations Devotedto Disarmament (S.S.D.-I) in the year 1978. The S.S.D.-I offered us , people ofthe world, a strong hope for the future of humanity. We thought,then, that we couldsee a new century to dawn in the immage of a REALM without war and wothout arms,sought for ages together,perhaps by all religions

However, the danger of nuclear war has risen to an unprecedented degreeof immencity and imminence due to the rapid rise, though in continuation, of thepersistent arms race, particularly in the field of nuclear arms. It came as theresult of sofistication of war-technology devoted to the ALTER of DEATH and DE-STRUCTION. But we can no longer sacrifice any more lives to this unholy platform.

Looking at the result of arms race to-day, the mere "Absence of war"appears to be not enough for our purposes - for the humanity to survive. It pro-vides states with the hardest rationale to the on-going spiral-rise of this unholyrace in pursuite of "Security". Thus they feel vhcy need "Strategic superiorityfor deterrence" and/or "Ballance of powers'. And, indeed towards this end, thearms-race has been motivated through centuries without break.

The ultimate stage will eventurally arrive to see the total homicide, theinstantaneous move of the ESCALATOR, already in its readiness of sliding, from aconventional local war onto a theatre-wide and thon over-all nuclear war.

Men and women had peeped into the man-made- 'INFERNO, on the very Gth and9th of August,1945. It was the teller of the fate prepared for the whole of humanity,should the situation to-day fail to take an immediate stop and then a quick andcomplete 180° reversal for the better and then the best. Indeed, the question ofnuclear weapons has now become a problem that lie not among peoples but between

[II]

The correct information and knowledge on the damages and after-effects ofatomic-bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki should new be disceminated throughout theworld more than ever. It is not, in fact, very widely and correctly known to thenew generation as well as to the policy-makers of th'o existing states. This allowedthe legitimacy of the existence of nuclear weapons, and thereby of their use, tostay. The promulgation of the very legitimacy of nuclear weapons had given riseto the concepts of NUCLEAR DETERRENCE and than'the NUCLEAR ALLIANCE and thus theNUCLEAR CONFRONTATION!

The Japanese religious workers have been jointly upto1 this task :;ince theconvocation of an International Symposium of NGOr., in 1077, to study the problemsmentioned above, just one year prior to the S.S.D.-I. Wo still consider this task

should be shared by - us all, more than' ever.

[Ill]

As religious workers, we may state that our basic attitude towards peaceand disarmament should be fully converted and be lasting forever. We are happy tosee this process has already been started. The official approach to DisarmamentEducation at G.O. level (UNESCO) has just begun covering all the fields of educationincluding mass-media. We believe that it is the high time for us all to review theage old philosophical principles which hitherto have provided states with the conceptof another legitimacy, i.e. the legitimacy of using force as the solution to inter-state conflicts. These principles should be replaced by a set of new principlesin order to give a solid basis and steadfast pillars for a "Soviety of Life inPeace", and therein the "Right to Live" not only for individuals but also for nations.

iiPerhaps, this World Assembly of Religious Workers may become the first of its kind ito undertake the full assessment to such religious principles based upon our respectivefaith and creed.

IIV]

We are happy again to see the Second S.S.D. shall be convened in the year1982. The task of this S.S.D.-II is mainly to bring all the possible and effectivemeasures of disarmament under an over-all time-frame called as the COMPREHENSIVEPROGRAMME OF DISARMAMENT (C.P.D.).

We believe that we need to offer a basic network of cooperation. In orderto bring back world public awareness to be powerful enough and to be translated intothe behaviours of all negotiators of every states, now readying themselves for thistask, we are called to exchange views. To this end, we call upon all the conscienc-ious and friendly religious workers throughout the world to converge at the venueof the World Assembly of Religious Workers in Tokyo, April, 1981. It will againbe jsut one year prior to the convocation of the S.S.D.-II, and at the beginingof the United Nations Second Disarmament Decade.

Let us discuss the problems mentioned above and contribute our sharejointly for the new means of new time to deliver the whole of humanity from thegrip of the possible homicide.

[V]

We sincerely hope that you may support this call and positively respondto this invitation to the World Assembly of Religious Workers for General andNuclear Disarmament, 22 - 24 April, 1981, in Tokyo 1

Yours sincerely,

Ayako Se^ya')^Chairperson SpecialCommittee on NuclearIssues NationalChristian Councilof Japan

(Rev . Cbiyomatsu Sasaki)Secretary GeneralJapan Council ofReligionists for Peace

for the Board of Convenor:_ •> _

Jfc"(The Mqjtfl-VeriT'shojun Kibu)Director GeneralJapan Centre forAsian Buddhist Conferencefor Peace

GENERAL 1'l.ANOF

THE WORLD ASSEMBLY OF J K U C 1 O U S WOKKFIKSFOR

GENERAL AND NUCLKAI ' 111 S AJ<MAMKNT

1. Title of the Assembly:

The World Assembly of Religious W o r k e r s for General and NuclearDisarmament (WAKW/GND)

2. Dates:

22 - 24 April 1981

3. Venue:

Tokyo

4. Themes of Discussion:

a) For the survival of humanity and for th( j prevention of nuclearwar ; For the discemination of correct knowledge and informationon the Damages and Af te r - e f f ec t s of Atomic Bombing and othernuclear-test explosions.

b) Review and assessment of the religious principles on and forpeace and disarmament.

c) What can we, religious workers , do leading to the convocationof the S . S . D . - I I , 1982, and in the Second United Nations Dis-armament Decade?

5. The Sponsoring Body and the Board of Convenors:

&) The Sponsoring Body:

Japanese Organiz ing Committee for the WARW/GMD

b) The Board of Convenors:

The Board of Convenors includes the most respected and responsiblepersonalities among religious, communities active in the f ield ofpeace and disarmament in Japan, and nomina ted by the supportingNGOs.

The List of the members of the Board of Convenors is attached tothis General Plan of the WAFW/GND.

The co-chairpersons of the Board are as follov>s:

Mrs. Ayako Sekiya, (Chair-person Japan NCC/SCN)The Most Ven . Shojun Mibu , (Director Genera l , ABCP/JC)Rt. Rev. Chiyomatsu Sasaki, (Secretary Genera l , JCRP)

6. The Secretariat:

The Secretariat is attached to the Jsoard of Convenors and through whichto the Japanese Organizing Committee

a) Secretary General:

There is no Secretary General but t-he work of the Secretariat shallbe conducted by the coordinated body of the Joint Secretaries incharge of different tasks.

b) Joint Secretaries :

In-charge of International A f f a i r s :

Ven. Gyotsu N. Sato (Japan Buddha Sanyha)

In-charge of Finance and other General A f f a i r s :

Ven. Shoju Matsui (ABCP/JC)

In-charge of Internal Organization:

Ven. Kosho Ohmi (Rissho Peace Fellowship)

In-charge of Public Relations:

Prof . Koichi Ohshima(NCC/SCN)

7. Requests for the participants and part icipat ing organizations andGroups:

a) No financial contribution is compulsory for any participants andparticipating organizations and groups from abroad, but theirvoluntary contribution is welcome.

b) For the needfu l , their airl ift and assistance of accommodationshall be made at their requests to the Secretariat.

c) Arrival of the participants, delegates, obsdirvers and the guestsmay be on the 19th of April, 1981, if the invitees are desirousof participating in the preliminary activities proceeding theWAKW/GND. In this connection please see the additional inform-ations to be forwarded by the Japan Bucklha Sangha, one of thesupporting NGOs.

TUB LIST OF MKMBF.RSOF

THE BOARD OF CONVENORS

The list of members of the Board of Convenors is to present beforeyou the nature of the Organizing Committee to be established in Japanfor preparatory aj}d organizing work for the V J u r l d Assembly of ReligiousWorkers for General and Nuclear Disamuuno.Tit formed at the init iative callof the Most Ven. Nichidatsu F u j i i , Patr iarch of the Japan Buddha Sanyha.

The composition of the Committee is to unite broadest-possiblereligious workers in this country active in the field of peace anddisarmament rising above the dif ferences of roliyious fai ths and creeds.

They are responsible to extend invitations to you/your organization/your group seeking for your positive support and also active participation.

I. Representing Buddhist Communities:

The Most Ven. Yushun Arnino,Member, Board of Elders, Sensoji Monas te ry , Sho-kannon-shu (Tokyo)

The Most Ven. Nichidatsu Fuj i i ,Patriarch, Japan Buddha Sangha, (Tokyo)

The Most Ven. Shunniyo Fuke,Patr iarch, Ten.dai-shu, Mii-dcra, ( O h t s u )

The Most Ven. Ryosen Hiratsuka,Zen Master , Soto-shu,Dy. Director General , Japan National Centre for the Asian BuddhistConference for Peace (Tokyo)

The Most Ven. Yush in liosoi,President, Association of the Major Mona.c;teries o£ Nichiren Shu,Deputy Director General, Japan National Centre "fbr the A . B . C . P . (Kyoto)

The Most Ven. Shojun Mibu ,Chief Abbot of Zenkoji Be tsu in ,Director General , A . B . C . P . / J . C .Director Genera l , Japan Council of teligionis; ts for Peace (Tokyo)

The Most Ven. Kaisho Mitani ,Pres ident , Rissho Peace Associa t ion , Nichi ren- . shu , (Odawara )

The Most Ven. Ryokei Ohnishi ,Patr iarch, Kita i iosso-shu, Kiyomiz.u Monastery ,President , Japan Council of Religionists for Peace (Kyoto)

II. Christian Connumities :

Rev. Kazumitsu Aihara ,Secretary, General Hiroshima Y . M . C . A . ( H i r o s h i m a )

Rev. Junichi Asano,Vice President , Japan Council of l- ' j_>li"<jio;i i : ; t_: ; for 1 'crace, (Tokyo)

Prof. Toyohiko Hor i ,(Under consideration)Professor Emeri tus , Tokyo Univers i ty . (Tokyo)

Rev. Teruji Hirayama,Deputy-chairman, Asian Christian Peace Conference (Tokyo)

Prof. Yoshiaki lizaka.Professor, Gakushuin University (Tokyo)

Mr.Susumu Ishitani,Sec. G. Japan Branch Fellowship of Reconcilliation (Tokyo)

Mr. Soichi Morita,President, Catholic Council for Justice and Peace (Tokyo)

Prof. Koichi Ohshima,Member, Special Committee on Nuclear Issues. National ChristianCouncil of Japan

Mrs. Ayako Sekiya,Chair-person, Special Committee on Nuclear Issues.National Christian Council of Japan

Rev. Paul Masahiko Sekiya,Director, Japan branch Fellowship of Reconcilliation (Tokyo)

Mrs. Kimi Shinozawa,President, Christian Women Temperance Union , Japan Branch, (Tokyo)

M.Sr . Nobuo Soma,Bishop in-charge, Catholic Council for Jur-.tice and Peace, (Tokyo)

Rev. Yoshiaki Toeda, (Under consideration)Member, Christian Peace Conference (Sendai)

Rev. Mikio Takagi ,President, Japan Christian Peace Association (Tokyo)

Mr. Akio Watanabe,Member, Peace and Social Committee, Japan Yearly Meeting of theReligious Society of Friends (Tokyo)

Mr. Hiroshi Yoshinaga,Chief , Section for Public Relations, Y . M . C . A . (Tokyo)

I I I . Other Religious Communities:

Rev. Mitsumaro Miyauchi,Representative, Tenrikyo Fellowship for Nuclear Disarmament (Tokyo)

Rev. Munehiro OkudaSecretary General, J in ru i 'Aizen-ka i , Ohmoto-kyo (Ayabe)

Rev. Chiyomatsu Sasaki,President , Maruyama-kyo Peace Fellowship,Secretary General , Japan Council of- Religionists for Peace (Tokyo)

Alfabet ic order)

THE LIST OF OVERSEAS DELEGATES, OBSERVERS AND GUESTS

INVITED TO PARTICIPATE

IN

THE WORLD ASSEMBLY OF RELIGIOUS WORKERS FOR GENERAL AND

NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT

A REGIONAL DIFFERENTIATION '•ii

International Organization Sub-Committee forThe Organizing Committee

001/006 6

007/014 8

015/038 24

U.N. & i

Special

REGION/

015/018016/021022/023024025/026027/029030/032033/034035036/037038

039/105 68

106/160 55

Specialists invited to speak in the COMMISSIONS

REGION/I - Pacific Ocean Rim, Basin and Hinterlands

Pacific Coast North America (U.S.A.)HawaiiNative Americans (M.A.I)Polinesian (Tahiti)Melanensians (Fiji, Vanuatu)Micronesians (Palau,Marshal and Mariana)PhilippinesAustraliaNew ZeqlandPacific Coast Central AmericaPacific Coast South America

REGION/II - Asian Continent and Indian Ocean Rim, BasinAnd Hinterlands

039/061 Indian Sub-continent062/078 East Asia079/094 South East Asia095/097 Indaln Ocean Basin Counctires

098/ioo Indian:.-.Ocean"Rim Countries101/105 Arabs in the Middle East

REGION/HI - European Continent and Atlantic Ocean Rim,Basin and Hinterlands

106/122 NATO Allies in Europe123/127 NATO Franks in Europe128/131 Non-Alligned Europe132/139 WATO Europe

140/148 Northern America along Atlantic Ocean(East Coast)

149/151 Central America Atlantic Coast(Caribian sea)152/153 Southern America Atlantic Coast154/160 Atlantic Coast Africa

Total : 160

1 -

UNITED NATIONS & UNESCO

001

002

003

004

005

006

United Nations Disarmament Commission (UNDO

Mr. M.A. Vellodi Chairman of the U.N.D.C.

United Nations Centre for Disarmament (Cfor D)

Mr. Jan Martenson

United Nations D.P.I

Ms. Ingrid Lehman

Committee on Disarmament

Mr. Rikhi Jaipal

Director of the Centre for DisarmamentAssistant Secretary General,U.N.

Centre for DisarmamentN.G.O. Section

Secretary ,Representative of the Secretary GeneralUnited Nations in the C.D.

First Committee of the U.N.G.A.

Mr. Alfonso Garcia Robles Head of Mission for Mexico

UNESCO Programme Specialist Division on Human Rights and Peace

Mr. Stephen Marks Specialist UNESCO

SPECIALISTS

. COMMISSION,.!

007 General Nino Pasti NATO Dy. Commander008 General Sydney R.Katz Defence Information Centre U.S.A Army009 General Michael Milstein General of U.S.S.R. Army010 General Georgis Koumanakos General of Greek Army

COMMISSION II

011 Robert Harris012 Dr. Jozef Rotblad

COMMISSION III

013 Robert Aldridge014 Owen Wilkes

UNESCO NGO Standing CommitteePugwash Conference

Pacific Life CommunitySIPRI on ASW

REGION/I-PACIFIC OCEAN RIM, BASIN AND HINTERLANDS

PACIFIC COAST NORTH AMERICA

015 Rev. John P. Brown016 Rev. George Riges

017 Sister M. Devola

018 Sister Sheley Douglass

Northern California Ecumenical Council [C]Inter-Religious Conference to ReverseThe Arms Race [C]Inter-Religious Conference to ReverseThe Arms Race [C]Pacific Life Community (Washington) [C]

HAWAII

019 Rev. Jamese V. Albertini,

020 Stewart Meacham021 Sister Sandy Galazin

021 Miss Mabel DeCsmbra

PACIFIC COAST CANADA .

Catholic Action of Hawaii, Peace Edu- [C]cation ProjectAmerican Friends Service Committee [C]Mary Knoll Sister's HouseNuclear Free Pacific ConferenceResourse Centre,Polinesian. [C]Nuclear Free pacific ConferenceResource Centre,Polinesian. [C]

NATIVE AMERICANS (M.A.I.)

022 Bill Wapeppah023 Denis Banks

American Indian MovementAmerican Indian Movement

[AI][AI]

POLINESIAN ISLANDS

024 Ms. Tea Hiroshon

MELANESIAN ISLANDS

Tahitian Alliance [C]

025 Ms. Lorine Tevi026 Ms. Hilda Lini

Fiji,Y.W.C.A.Vanuatu,Nuclear Free Pacific

[C][C]

MICRONESIA ISLANDS

027 David B. Rozario028 Bernie Keldermans029 Nelson Anjain

PHILIPPINES.

030 Sister Christine Tan

031 Senator John N. Diokno032 Father Ed de la Torre

Mariana Alliance,Guam [C]Nuclear Free Pacifc Conference,Palau [C]Marshall, Longelup, Bikini's victim [C]

Central Implementing Task ForceAssociation of Major Religious Superiorsof Women in the Philippines,Quezon.Civil Liberties Union,Manila [C]Catholic Activist for Disarmament [C]

OCEANIA AUSTRALIA

033 Rev. R.F. Wooton

034 Rev. M. Lachberg

NEW ZEALAND

035 Rev. John Hinchcliff,

Australain Council of Churches,MelbourneUniting Church Centre [C]Perth, West Australia [C]

The Boicott,- 3 -

[C]

PACIFIC COAST CENTRAL AMERICA

NICARAGUA

036 Mr. Niguel D'Escoto Minister for Foreign Affairs,Government of Nicaragua

PANAMA

037 Bishop McGrath Archidiocese of Panama

PACIFIC COAST LATIN AMERICA (SOUTH)

CHILLE

038 Mr. Joel Gajardo Director South America, [C]NCCC/USA Division of OverseasMinistries

- 4 -

REGION/II - ASIAN CONTINENT AND INDIAN OCEAN RIM,BASINAND HINTERLANDS

INDIAN SUB-CONTINENT

INDIA

039 The Most Ven. Kushok Bakula Head Lama of LadhakhRimpoche

040 Dr. Prof. Rokesh Chandra,M.P.,Rajya Sabha.

041 Mr. Yashpal Jain042 H.E. Metropolitan Paul

Mark Gregorios

043 Mr. Upendra Maharathi

044 Mr. Radhanath Rath

045 Mr. Sonam Wanuyachuk

NEPAL

046 Ven. Lama Cyan Kazi047 Ven. Sudarshan048 Ven. Gnanapurnika049 Mr. Membaharur Gurung

BHUTAN

050 Ven. Lama Lopon Nado

BANGLA DESH

051 Mr. Deva Priya Barua

BURMA

052 Dr. Ven. Rewata Dhamma,Maha Thero

SRI LANKA

053 The Most Ven. PallegamaGnanaratana Nayaka Thero

054 The Most Ven. BatugedaraYasassi,Nayaka Thero

055 Ven. Mapalagama Wipula-sara Thero

056 Ven. Medagoda SumanatissaVen. Basunagoda Wimala-ratana TheroVen. Walpola Rahula,MahaTheroH.E. Mr. E.L.HurulleDr. P.GunatilakaMr. R.T. De Run

058

059060061

Vice President of the Asian BuddhistConference for Peace [B]Professor of Phylosophy [H]

Writer [J]Metropolitan New Delhi,Vice President of the Christian PeaceConference [C]Member Legisrative Assembly,Bihar,Rajgir Buddha Vihara Society [B]Editor-in-chief,The Samaji,Orissa. [B]Interpreter r ,Its j

Maitreya Maha Vihara, Swayambhu. [B]Gana Maha Vihara, Pokhara. [B]Kathmandu.Pokhara.

Bhutan Buddhist Association [B]

Bangla Desh Bouddha Kristi PracharSangha [B]

Chief Incumbent, Birmingham Maha Vihara,U.K.

Annuladhapura Maha Vihara

Sri Pada Nila Niwasa

Sri Lanka Buddhist Congress

Sri Lanka,A.B.C.P.

Chancellor, Peradenia University

Minister for Cultural AffairsMember,A.B.C.P./C.D.Aisley Estate,MASKELIYA

[B]

[B]

[B]

[B]

[B][B]

IB]

[B]

[B]

[B]

— 5 —

EAST ASIA

MONGOLIAN PEOPLES REPUBLIC

062 Ven. Did-KHAMBOLAMA J. Dambajav063 Ven. Osor064 Dr. Chimdin Jugder065 Interpreter

U.S.S.R.

Mongolian Buddhist CentreMongolian Buddhist CentreA.B.C.P. Secretary General

066 The Most Ven. Bandido KhambolamaJ.Gamboev

067 Dr. Sanjiva Dylykov068 Mrs. Dulma Shagdarova

069 Mr. Tom Labdanov070 Mr. Bato Tzydypov

071 H.E. Metropolitan Juvenali

072 Rev. A.Stojan073 Rev. Hark

074 H.H. Mufti Babakhanov

075 Interpreter

D.P.R. KOREA

076 Ven. Pak Tae Ho

077 Rev. Kim Song Ryul,

R.O. KOREA

078 Mr. Ham Sok Hon

Soviet Buddhist Association

Institute for Oriental Studies

Permanent Representative of

Khambolama in Moscow

Vice Chairman A.B.C.P./C.D.

Secretary A.B.C.P/SNC

Patriarchate Russian Orthodox

Church

Baptist Union of the U.S.S.R.

Estonian Lutheran Church

Head of the Soviet Islams

[B][B]

[B]

[B]

[B]

[B]

[B]

[B]

[B]

[C]

[C][C]

[I]

[C]

Chairman, Korean Buddhist Federation[B]

Chairman, Korean Christian Federation[C]

Friends Yearly Meetong of Korea [C]

SOUTH EAST ASIA

LAOS

079 Ven. Ananta Soungthone

080 Ven. Phong Samluk

KAMPUCHEA

081 Ven. Thep Vong

082 Mr. Prum Sang Heng

President, Lao United Buddhist FellowshipMovement [B]Secretary General, Lao United-BuddhistFellowship Movement [B]

President, Kampuchean Buddhist Sangha[B]

Deputy Director,Kampuchean News Agency,Punom Penh[B]

- 6 -

VIETNAM

083 The Most Ven. Pham The Long

084 The Most Ven. Thich Tri Tu

085 Ven. Thich Minh Chau086 Mr. Nguyen Quan Hui

087 M. Sgr.

088 M. Sgr.

089 Interpreter

THAILAND

090 Ven. Dr. Nakorn Khemapali,Ph.D.

091 Ven. Pura Khara SheelanandaMaha Thero

MALAYSIA

092 Ven. Dhammananda Nayaka Thero

SINGAPORE

093 Mrs. Pit Chin Hui

094 Rev. Yap Kim Hao

Vietnam Unied Buddhist AssociationVice President, A.B.C.P. [B]President, All Vietnam UnifyingCommittee of Buddhist Orders [B]Secretary General, [B]Member A.B.C.P/C.D. [B]

[C]Vietnam Patriotic Catholic

Vietnam Patriotic Catholic [C]

[B]

Mahachulalongkorn Rajavidyalaya,Wat Maha Dhatu, Bangkok [B]

Buddha Padipa Vihara, London

Kuala Lumpur Maha Vihara

[B]

[B]

Singapore Buddhist Association [B]

Secretary General [C]Christian Conference of Asia

INDAIN OCEAN BASIN COUNTRIES

MAURITIUS

095 Rev.

MADAGASKAR

096 Rev.

REUNION

097 Rev.

INDIAN OCEAN COST AFRICANS

ZAMBIA

098 Rev.

ZIMBABUE

099 Rev.

[C]

[C]

[C]

[C]

[C]

- 7 -

INDIAN OCEAN RIM AFRICANS

TANZANIA

100 Rev. [C]

ARABS IN THE MIDDLE EAST

JLUSAREM

101 Mr. Rouhi El-Khatib

P.L.O

102 Mr.

ARAB LEAGUE

103 Mr. Khali1 Azhari

OMAN LIBERATION MOVEMENT

104 Mr.

D.P.R.YEMEN

105 Mr.

Mayor of Jelusarem [I]

Palestine Liberation Organization[I]

Representative of the Arab League

In Tokyo [I]

[I]

REGION III - EUROPEAN CONTINENT AND ATLANTIC RIM,BASINAND -HINTERLANDS

NATO ZONE

UNITED KINGDOM

106 Right Honourable Lord PhilipNoel Baker

World Disarmament Campaign,U.K. [C]International Peace Bureau

107

108

109

110

111

M. Sgr. Bruce Kent

Hurry Robertson

M. Sgr. Michael Moran

Dr. Ven. H. SaddhatissaNayaka Thero

IRELAND

Mr. Sean MacBride,S.C .

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament [C](C.N.D.)British National Peace Council [C](N.P.C.)British National Pax Christi, [C]European Nuclear DisarmamentBritish Buddhist Sangha Council [B]

President,Special NGO Disarmament[C]Committee,President,International Peace Bureau

112113

114

115

116

Dr. Rev. Mattin NiemfllerHerrn Dr. Kurt Scharf,Bishof i.R.

Prof. Heinrich Alberts

Ven. Sri GnanawimalaMaha Thero

Dr. Rev. Karlheinz Koppe

BELGIUM

117 Mr. Etienne de Jonghe

German Peace Council ' [C]Stihnezeichen/Friedensdienste, [C](Vorsitzender der Aktion

DFG/VK [C]

Berlin Buddhistische Haus [B]

German Soceity for Peace and ConflictResearch [C]

I.P.I.S.Pax Christi International

[C]

118

119

NETHERLANDS

FRANCE

Mr. Roaer Bille

Inter-Church Peace Council of [C]Netherlands

French Peace Movement [C]UNESCO NGO Standing Committee

ITALY

120 Bishop in-charge [C]Pontifical Commission for Justiceand Peace

SPAIN

121 Justizia y Paz,

9 -

[C]

PROTUGAL

122 Committee Anti-Nuclear de Lusboda [C]

NATO FRANKS (NORTHERN)

SWEDEN

123 Mr. Thomas Magnusson

NORWAY

124 Mr. Swen Gurdberg

FINLAND

125 Mr. Likka Taipale

International Peace Bureau

International Peace Bureau

Finihs Peace Council

[C]

[C]

[C]

NATO FRANKS (SOUTHERN)

GREECE

126 General Georges Koumanakos

CYPROS

127 A

Greem Committee against ForeignMilitary Bases

CYPRIOT for Sovereignty

[GO]

[GO]

NON-ALLIGNED EUROPE

SWITZERLAND

128 Mr. Petre Whittle

YUGOSLAVIA

129 Mr. Bogdan Osolnik

ROMANIA

130 Dr. Prof. Domitru Chitoran

AUSTRIA

131 Mrs. H. Goss-Myr

Friends Committee for World [C]Consultation

Yugoslave League for Peace,IndependenceAnd Equality of Peoples [YO]

Romanian Peace Committee

Verstfhnungsbund, WIEN

[C]

[C]

10 -

REGION III EUROPEAN CONTINENT, ATLANTIC OCEAN RIM ANDTHEIR HINTERLANDS

PART II

EAST EUROPE AND THE WATO

POLAND

132 Mr. Josef Cyrankievcz

133 Mr. Rysard Tyrluk

GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC

134 Dr. Karl-Wolfgang Trttger,

BULGARIA

President, Polish Peace Committee[C]

Secretary General, P.P.C. [C]

C.P.C. [C]

135 H.E. Metropolitan Josef of VarnaAnd Breslav. Alexandrofsky Church, Sofia. [C]

HUNGARY

136 Dr. Karoly Thot

137 Dr. Josef Gerhatti

C.S.S.R.

138 Dr. Patriarch Novak

139 Dr. Rev. Ljubomir Mirejousky

President, Christian Peace Conference

[C1

Secretary General, [C]

President, Husite Protestant"Church[C]

Secretary General, C.P.C.

- 11 -

ATLANTIC COAST OF AMERICAS

NORTH AMERICA (EAST COAST)

U.S.A.(EAST COAST)

140 Bishop Gurnbleton

141 M. Sgn. Father Richard G.McSoreley,S.J.

142 Rev. Robert Moore

143 M. Sgr. Father Paul Mayor

144 Sister Annette Muley

145 Mr. Boone Schirmer

National President, [C]U.S. PAX CHIRSTI, Detroit

Centre for Peace Studies, [C]Georgetown University,Washington D.C.

National Coordinator, [C]U.S. Mobilization for Survival

Religious Task Force, [C]U.S. Mobilization for Survival

Mary Knoll Sister's Centre [C]MaryknollFriends of Filipino People [C]

CANADA (EAST COAST)

146 Rev. Murrey Thompson

147 Rev. Martin Duckworth

Project Ploughshare

Project Proughshare

[C]

[C]

148

NATIVE AMERICANS (EAST COAST)

Mr. Leon Shenandoah Six Nation Representative [IN]

- 12 -

CENTRAL AMERICA (EAST COAST) - PARISIAN SEA RIM

CUBA

149 • Rev. Raoul Fernandez Ceballos President, Cuban Council of Churches[C]

PUERTO RICO

150 Rev. Eunice Santana de Veelz International Committee for [C]Of Presa Solidarity With Puerto Rico

151 Bishop Antulio Parill- San Juan,Puerto Rico [C]Bonilla,S.J.

SOUTH AMERICA (EAST COAST) -ATLANTIC RIM

BRAZIL

152 Bishop Don Helder Camara Catholic Pacifist [C]

ALGENTINE

153 Mr. Adolfo Perez Esquivel, Nobel Peace Prize Winner [C]

- 13 -

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

ATLANTIC COAST AFRICA

NIGERIA

H.E. Mr. Olu Adeniji

ALGERIA

H.E.

GHANA

ANTI-APARTHEID MOVEMENT

Chiarman Committee on DisarmamentWorking Group on C.P.D.Chairman, Preparatory CommitteeS.S.D.-II,1982.

Member, Committee on Disarmament

14 -

TO:A:

THROUGH:S/C DE:

FROM:DE:

SUBJECT:OB JET:

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

The Secretary-General

20 -

N A T I O N S U N I E S R

MEMORANDUM 1NTERIEUR

. 19 February 1981

REFERENCE:

Jan Martenson \Officer-in-Charge \<^N ,,,v,, .,Department of Political and* SecurityCouncil Affairs \

New Report on Hucleat Explosion Over South Atlantic

1. In my memorandum of yesterday, 18 February 1981, Idrew your attention to a report in the "Washington Post"that on 15 December 198O, the United States had recordedfor the second time what appeared to have been a nuclearexplosion over the South Atlantic.

2. Today's New York Times carries a different inter-pretation of the incident. It states that the US DefenceDepartment analysts believe that the event detected byan early warning satellite was not that of a nuclear weaponstest but that of a meteor entering the atmosphere. They,however, maintain their contention that the earlier flashof 22 September 1979 had "the signature of a nuclear test".No additional evidence has been advanced to confirm this.

3. I shall inform you of any further developments.

TO:A:

THROUGH:S/C DE:

FROM:DE:

SUBJECT:OBJET:

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

The Secretary-Genera!

N A T I O N S U N I E S

MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR

VRECEIVEDIB 181981

DATE: 18 February 1981

REFERENCE:

Jan Martenson \Of ficer-in-ChargeDepartment of Politcal and^SecurityCouncil Affairs \

New Report on"Nuclear Explosion ©ver South Atlantic

1. According to a report in today's "Washington Post",which is attached, the US on 15 December 198O recordedfor the second time what appears to have been a nuclearexplosion flash in the atmosphere over the South Atlantic.

2. If this report is correct, the flash recorded by aUS satellite in 1979 is very likely also to have beencaused by a nuclear explosion, rather than by other causesas stated in the scientific report issued thereon by theWhite House.

3. The smallness of the explosion is thought to pointto a very sophisticated nuclear device. It is not knownwhich state may have set off the explosion.

4. You may recall that in resolution A/RES/35/146, onSouth Africa's plan and capability in the nuclear field,the Secretary-General is, inter alia, requested to followclosely South Africa's activity in the nuclear fieldand to report thereon to the General Assembly at its nextsession. This event would seem to be relevant in thatconnexion. The Permanent Mission of the United Stateshas been asked to supply any available information.

5. As soon as any further information is obtained, Ishall advise you.

* »-.. *

Rowland Evans and Robert Novak

,A_ -mysterious "flash" , signifying- alikely nuclear explosion in tie farreaches of the South Atlantic,' eerilysimilar to th& still-unexplained Septem-ber 1979 flash in the same general area,was' secretly recorded on Dec. 15 bysensitive U.S. monitoring devices.

IF the' "flash" was indeed a very small.nuclear .test blast, as is strongly sus-pected by top intelligence officials whoare now certain that that is what oc-curred in-1979, President Reagan is con-

. fronted" with one of" the gravest, most•' csrplexing mysteries, of the nuclear age.• The mystery: is the "'nuclear club* ex--panding another notch, or. has a card-carrying, member taken advantage of theremote waters where the South Atlantic,joins the Indian Ocean to test weaponswithout risk that the world will ever dis-cover who he ia? • •'. : :K •" ;•--.'.,.' •' ' ' '

Whatever the answer, tire December"flash" monitored by a U.S. reconnais-sance satellite makes one fact clear withdeadly logic. With all its monitoring andverification- tools, the United' States isstill unable to solve two enigmatic nu-clear riddles, either one of which couldaffect the course of world history. Thatsurely counsels caution in current com-prehensive test ban treaty negotiationswith the Soviet Union,

Some Carter administration officialswere convinced "that President Carter'seffort to explain away the 1979 explosionas an event that never happened was a•direct result of inability to solve the rid-dle. To acknowledge publicly that a nu-clear test could be cenducted even in a

' remote area without-the United States'knowing which country triggered it.would'- undermine Carter's zealous pur-

. suit of the comprehensive test bantreaty. It would also mock his wholenon-proliferation program.

So the White House Office of Scienceand Technology issued its shocking reportlast July contending that the 1979 eventwas not a nuclear test at all but rather achance collision between the reconnais-sance satellite and a very small meteor.Specialists in the Carter administrationwere aghast at this kiss-off of what in facthas created an agonizing mlgmma' for theUnited States and a dangerous game forthe world: anonymous weapons testing.

The contrary opinion written by theDefense Intelligence Agency was putunder a tight "secret" seal after it was readbv Carter White House aides. Its still un-disclosed findings: the probability is over-

• whelming that the "event" in September1979 was no space collision by a low-yield

weapons test. Since that DIA report, sentto the White House last spring, new evi-dence further bolsters tnat verdict-

As for the second anonymous test Dec.15, evidence is only slightly less compel-ling and still being gathered. Indeed, fewif any high Reagan officials have yetbeen informed that U.S. monitoring de-vices picked up the telltale signals in thesame general area—a vast waterlandwith a diameter of 3,000 miles—south-west of the South African coast.

Questions now being urgently ad-dressed in the intelligence communityare not confined to the identity of thefugitive state responsible for triggeringnuclear tests behind the world's back, al-though that question is clearly an impor-tant one. There is no consensus as to theguilty party, with this exception: it prob-ably is not the Soviet Union.

- Intelligence specialists, however, arenot-unanimous even on this point. It ispossible, we were informed, that theRussians • lofted the low-yield weaponson-balloons from a submarine or trawlerand fired them simply to test whetherAmerican verification devices werecompetent to pick up the small blasts.

Most analysts, however, lean to lessconspiratorial theories: that the two testssignaled the entry of a new state into thenuclear club, possibly Israel (known topossess nuclear devices) or South Africa;that they are a culminating testing pointfor nuclear-club member France in de-veloping its own neutron bomb; or that

. they belonged to India or even Pakistan.: Whoever the villain is that chooses tokeep on testing nuclear devices in the at-mosphere, the deeper significance toReagan and his men is this: technology

for discovering nuclear testing and veri-fying performance of states pledged notto engage in certain types of testing;is.dangerously lagging.

Surely that raises the question of /whether the United States should forget!about negotiating the comprehensive jtest ban treaty and at once launch a'weapons testing program to catch up to''unprecedented Soviet testing the past)few years. Although that program ap-.pears to be unconnected to the mysteri-'ous tests in the faraway South Atlantic, •what happened there is a warning signal,that the United States may know far less '-.about the difficulties of verification thanit has believed. If so, it could be suicidalto rely on good will, good intentions oreven signed treaties that cannot be to-tally verified.

01831, Field Enterprises, Inc. '

j& '' V

TO:A:

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

INTEROFFICE MEMORAND

The Secretary-General

Mr. Mikhail D. SytenTHROUGH: Under~Secretary-Gene

and Security Council A:S/C DE:

FROM:DE:

N A T I O N S U N I E S :'''

MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR

Jan MartensonAssistant Secretary-GeneralCentre for Disarmament

SUBJECT:OBJET: Non-Proliferation; IAEA S

DATE: 13 February 1981

REFERENCE:

ards in .Spain

1. Spain, which is not a party to the Treaty on theNon-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), has an ambitiousnuclear programme both in terms of research and powergeneration. So far, the IAEA has applied its safeguardsthere to nine power reactors, four research reactors, andsome ancillary research installations, by virtue of variousagreements. Several installations, including a largepower reactor and a pilot plant for the separation ofplutonium from spent fuel ("reprocessing") were notspecifically submitted to safeguards and were inspectedonly as long as they contained material subject to theother agreements.

2. The Government of Spain has now unilaterally requestedthe IAEA to apply its safeguards to the installations thathad not so far been covered and the Agency's Board ofGovernors is expected to adopt an agreement for that purposein late February.

3. Although Spain has now de facto submitted all itsexisting nuclear facilities to IAEA safeguards, it hasnot accepted a so-called "full-scope" safeguards agreement,which would provide for application of safeguards to allpresent and future nuclear installations.

TO:A:

THROUGH:S/C DE:

FROM:DE:

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

INTEROFFICE M E M O R A N D U M

The Secretary-Gener

Mr. Mikhail D. SyteUnder-Secretary-Generand Security Counci

Jan MartensonAssistant Secretary-GeneraCentre for Disarmament

SUBJECT:OBJET: Non-Proliferation;

N A T I O N S U N I E S

ORANDUM INTJERIEUR

DATE 13 February 1981

REFERENCE:

Ratificati/on of NPT by Egypt

1. It is reported that the Egyptian Senate on 7 Februaryratified the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) which Egypt hadsigned in 1968. The Middle Eastern States party to theNPT are: Democratic Yemen, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon,Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Syria and Turkey.

2. Egypt has so far been one of six States withsignificant nuclear facilities not subject to IAEA safe-guards (the other five are India, Israel, Pakistan, SouthAfrica and Spain). Egypt has a two-megawatt nuclear researchreactor constructed by the Soviet Union about 2O years ago.In 1976, the United States undertook to supply Egypt withnuclear power plants capable of generating 2,QQQ to 3,OOOmegawatts. Construction will begin as soon as the U.S.Congress has approved the agreement. The United StatesNuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978 requires that allpeaceful nuclear activities in the receiving country arecovered by safeguards.

3. The ratification of the NPT by Egypt perceptiblystrengthens that Treaty.

10 February Mr.Rafeeuddin 3800 50281981 Ahmed

EOSG

UNIC

NEW DELHI, INDIA

FOR ROHAN FROM AHMED.

FOLLOWING MESSAGE ADDRESSED TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL WAS RECEIVED

THROUGH PERMANENT MISSION OF INDIA FROM SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE

NON-ALIGNED FOREIGN MINISTERS' CONFERENCE.

(CABLE OPERATIONS UNIT - PLEASE INSERT HERE THE ATTACHED .TEXT) ..

(Rafeeuddin Ahmed)

. Chef de Cabinet

t C c ! V E D

S.V. PurushottamActing Permanent Representative

No. NY/PM 1/1 28/8/80

PERMANENT MISSION OF INDIA

TO THE UNITED NATIONS

VSO THIRD AVENUE

NEW YORK. N. Y. 1OO17

February 9, 1981

Excel lency,

1 1 have the honour to convey the fo l lowing message to you from

the Secretary-General, Non-Aligned Foreign Ministers' Conference, New Delhi:

" Excel lency,

1 I have the honour to convey to you the fol lowing

message on behalf of the Conference of Foreign Ministers

of Non-Aligned countries currently meeting in New Delhi.

The Conference of Foreign Ministers of the

Non-Aligned countries meeting in New Delhi strongly condemns

the aggression by a group of commandos from the racist regime

of South Afr ica against Matola, a settlement in the outskirts of

Maputo, the Capital of the People's Republic of Mozambique.

The target of the commandos was three residences of

South African refugees. Eleven refugees as well as an

expatriate Portuguese serving in Mozambique were assassinated

by the attackers.

The barbarous aggression on the part of the minority

South African regime is part of an imperialist plan intended to

weaken, terrorise and unsettle the independent States of

Southern Africa and to divert attention from the explosive internal

situation in South Afr ica, the sole cause of which is the

disgraceful policy of apartheid.

1 In the days fol lowing the attack, the Government of

Mozambique reported a growing concentration of South African

troops and combat equipment near its border and systematic

and frequent violations of Mozambique1^ air space.

/2

No. NY/PMi/128/8/80 (continued)

PERMANENT MISSION OF INDIA

TO THE UNITED NATIONS

750 THIRD AVENUE

NEW YORK. N. Y. IOO17

February 9, 1980

South Africa has also withdrawn South African citizens in

Maputo, which indicates that it is preparing attacks on a

large scale, with incalculable consequences, and that a

situation of declared or undeclared war is becoming acute.

With arrogant insolence, the authorities of Pretoria

acknowledged resppnsibil ity for the aggression that had been

perpetrated and threatened the Government of the People's

Republic of Mozambique for having accepted South African refugees

on its territory and for implementing the United Nations resolution

condemning apartheid . There is no doubt that the racist regime

feels itself encouraged by the increasing support it receives from

its al l ies.

The Conference of Foreign Ministers of the Non-Aligned

countries condemns the criminal acts that have been committed and

reports the dangerous situation for the independence, territorial

integrity and security of Mozambique that is represented by the

atrocious acts of the South Africa regime.

The Foreign Ministers of the Non-Aligned countries

give notice that they wi l l fulf i l their obligations of solidarity with

the frontline States and solemnly reaffirm that Mozambique w i l l

not stand alone against the mil i tary escalation practised by the

racist regime in Pretoria. They appeal to all States to increase

their financial and material assistance to the frontline States in

accordance with the resolutions of the United Nations and the

Organisation of African Unity with regard to strengthening the

defensive capacity of those countries.

No.NY/PMI/128/8/80 (Continued)

PERMANENT MISSION OF INDIA

TO THE UNITED NATIONS

"75O THIRD AVENUE

NEW YORK. N. V. 1OOI7

February 9, 1981

The Conference appeals to the United Nations

and to world public opinion to adopt energetic and immediate

actions to prevent such acts of aggression, which threaten

peace and security in the region and the world.

Sd/-Secretary-General

Non-Aligned Foreign Ministers' Conference,New Delhi . "

2. Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest

consideration.

(S.V. Purushottam)Acting Permanent Representative

His Excel lencyDr. Kurt Waldheim,Secretary General,United Nations,NEW YORK

-."_ -ZCZC 1ISCOOS8 •. . ^

/' S3 NED - ' . ' .7

. M E t f Y O R K ( U W Y J . I O 2352Z . •„.' / "• •;•' - : . ' • • - ' . . / ; • ; . , . ' . . ?« . -* • " " " • ' " ' ' • • . " ~*- - '

MISC008S-02" .FOR ROHAN. FOLLOWING KESSAGE ADDRESSED TO THE •/"*'-

SECRETARY-GENERAL VAS RECEIVED T H R O U G H PERMANENT MISSION OF -,'. - -

"" .. I N D I A FROM SECRETARY-GENERAL OF T H E ' N O N - A L I G N E D FOREIGN MINISTERS*

CONFERENCE. '/BEGINS QUOTE ' .. •-/ ' ' , ' . ' . ' ' / ' . ;. . "./"'';

•" ' • ' I - H A V E THE HONOUR TO CONVEY TO YOU THE FOLLOWING ?fESSAGE ON

' SEHALF OF THE CONFERENCE OF FOREIGN MINISTERS OF NON-ALIGNED COW-"

.' TRIES CURRENTLY HEETIKG IK' NEW DELHI. - . . / , . V,:-, / ' • * . ' . .;. .

. ' THE CONFERENCE OF FOREIGN MINISTERS OF THE NON-ALIGNED COIN-"

TRIES M E E T I N G Iff NEW DELHI STRONGLY COMDEX'S THE AGGRESSION BY A ; ' '

GROUP OF COKKANDOS. 'FROM THE RACIST REGIME OF SOUTH AFRICA AGAINST .. '

tfATOLA, A SETTLEMENT IN THE OUTSKIRTS OF MAPUTO, THE CAPITAL OF •

: THE PEOPLE'S R E P U B L I C ' O F MOZAMBIQUE. / '"/-V/.-'"," - \ ' \ . ' ' " . ' . ' . . / . " ' : • • • - ' •

./-- .. THE TARGET OF, THE COMMANDOS VAS THREE RESIDENCES OF S O U T H . - '

: AFRICAN REFUGEES. " .ELEVEN REFUGEES AS WELL AS AN EXPATRIATE PORT-:'

UGUESE " S E R V I N G IN KOZAKBIOIJE VEHE ASSASSINATED BY THE ATTACKERS..: ; . THE BARBAROUS AGGRESSION ON THE PART OF THE M I N O R I T Y SOUTH .'.

• A F R I C A N REGIME IS PART OF AN IMPERIALIST PLAN INTENDED TO WEAKEN, -

T E R R O R I S E ' A N D trrfSETTLE THE INDEPEITOENT STATF.S OF SOUTHERN AFRICAATO TO .DIVERT ATTENTION FROM THE EXPLOSIVE INTERNAL SITUATION IN

SOUTH A F R I C A , THE SOLE CAUSE OF U'HICH IS THE DISGRACEFUL POLICY

O F APARTHEID. ' - . - . . . - ' • • " . . . . . .

IN THE DAYS FOLLOWING THE ATTACK, THE G O V E R N M E N T OF HOZAI?-

5IOLC. RE PORTED A G R O W I N G CONCENTRATION OF SOUTH A F R I C A N TROOPS

AND COMBAT EQUIPMENT N E A R ITS EORDFR AND SYSTEMATIC AK'D FREQUENT

V I O L A T I O N S OF K O Z A M B I O J J E ' S AIR SPACE. . , . '•

SOUTH A F R I C A HAS ALSO jmgj?AUNjaun(_AF_RTCAtt CITIZENS 1K..__^.

V

I . - -— .¥r .~' :Zx&~£?:-zr:-: : ty£^

r •;.

I •:- -:,..'•

.

-a*TKs^

SCALEe WITH INCALCULABLE CONSEQUENCES, AND THAT A SITUATION OFD E C L A R E D OR UNDECLARED . W A R IS BECOMING ACUTE. . ' , : . - , ." . . . . .

WITH A R R O G A N T INSOLENCE, THE A U T H O R I T I E S OF PRETORIA ACK-

; NOWLEDGED RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE AGGRESSION THAT HAD BEEN .PERPET-

RATED AMD THREATENED THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF. • • - V M O Z A M B I Q U E . FOR HAVING ACCEPTED " SOUTH A F R I C A N REFUGEES ON ITS

" T E R R I T O R Y AND FOR IMPLEMENTING THE UHITED N A T I O N S RESOLUTION

. . ' C O N D E M N I N G APARTHEID. THERE is KO JXJUFT THAT THE RACIST REGIME/•. ;FEELS ITSELF ENCOURAGED BY THE INCREASING SUPPORT IT. RECEIVES '

: ' - ..TROW ITS A L L I E S . ' " r-.:V. - ; . ' . - . . • ' / - . , ' . - ' : " • ^ \- . - - . • ; - - . ,

' • • • - • : ; • . - • ' THE CONFERENCE OF FOREIGN MINISTERS OF THE N O N - A L I G N E D C0UN-. . . T R I E S "CONDEMNS THE C R I M I N A L ACTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMMITTED AND

PEPORTS THE DANGEROUS SITUATION FOR THE INDEPENDENCE f TERRITORIAL• / " • I N T E G R I T Y A^,ID SECURITY OF MOZAMBIQUE THAT IS REPRESENTED. BY THE:..•' "ATROCIQU_S ACTS OF THE SOLTH A F R I C A REGIME. ', • • ': : . , .-

• • ' ' • ' . ' • ' ' " T H E FOREIGN MINISTERS O F T H E N O N - A L I G N E D COUNTRIES GIVE NOT- ' .

ICE THAT THEY WILL FULFILL THEIR O B L I G A T I O N S O F , S O L I D A R I T Y H I T H .

THE FRONTLINE STATES AND; SOLEMNLY R E A F F I R M THAT ' MOZAMBIQUE ' WILL'.". ?,'NOT STAND ALONE AGAINST THE M I L I T A R Y ESCALATION PRACTISED BY T H E .R A C I S T . R E G I M E IN PRETORIA." THEY APPEAL TO ALL STATES TO INCREASET H E I R . F I N A N C I A L ' A N D M A T E R I A L ASSISTANCE TO THE FRONTLINE STATES -IH ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESOLUTIONS OF "THE UNITED N A T I O N S AND THE

O R G A N I Z A T I O N OF A F R I C A N UNITY WITH R E G A R D TO STRENGTHENING"THE ' •

OE.FEMSIVE. CAPACITY OF- THOSE COU^RIES. - . . / ' ' • ' • - • ' • " • • • ^^.-^'.'-'•THE CONFERENCE APPEALS TO THE UNITED NATIONS AND TO WORLD

.PUSLIC, .OPINION TO ADOPT ENERGETIC AMD IMMEDIATE ACTIONS-TO PREVENT'SUCH ACTS OF AGGRESSION, W H I C H T H R E A T E N PEACE AND SFCURITY IN T H E "

. R E G I O N AND THE WORLD. • . . • • . • . " / • . • • • ' ' - ' -

^-j : COL HISC008S-02

, "• i . NHNH - :'..

TO:A:

THROUGH:S/C DE:

FROM:DE:

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

The Secretary-General1

Mr. Mikhail D. SyteUnder-Secretary-Gene'r l for Band Security Council Affa^

Pal Csillag ~>Officer-in-Charge I \^Centre for Disarmament x

Nuclear Activities in India

vs "

N A T I O N S U N I E S

MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR

DATE: 6 February 19

REFERENCE:

1. The New York Times of today, 5 February 1981, reportsthat India has decided to "reprocess" nuclear fuel used inpower reactors with a view to extracting the plutonium there-from. The report, which stresses a disagreement betweenIndia and the United States on the question of reprocessing,needs some clarification.

2. The nuclear material in question appears to be from theRajasthan power plant. This was constructed with Canadianassistance and submitted to IAEA safeguards. The initialagreement has lapsed but the installation is still coveredby IAEA safeguards by virtue of the fact that it usesheavy water from the USSR, whose Government has required thatIndia accept safeguards in that connexion. These safeguardsalso cover the nuclear material while it is being reprocessed,and any plutonium extracted therefrom, wherever that maybe used.

3. India disagrees with the United States about the implementa-tion of the agreement for the supply of the Tarapur powerplant. This foresees in principle that India might reprocessthe United States supplied nuclear fuel. The pertinent agree-ment with the IAEA provides for the application of safeguardsin that eventuality. But since the conclusion of thoseagreements the United States Government has begun to requirethat its consent be obtained before nuclear material it hassupplied may be reprocessed. India objects to this and hasintimated that it might abrogate the agreement.

4. However, for the present all the nuclear .material referredto in the "Times" article is under IAEA safeguards

TO:A:

THROUGH:S/C DE:

FROM:DE:

SUBJECT:OBJET:

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

The Secretary-Gene

Mr. Mikhail D. Syt&fcoDnder-Secretary-GenJral fa

and Security Council

Pal CsillagOfficer-in-ChargeCentre for Disarmament

Study on Israeli Nuclear Armament

N A T I O N S U N I E S

MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR

5\>J V t D••• •''. 0 *i

: 3 February 1981

REFERENCE:

1. The group of experts established by the Secretary-General pursuant to General Assembly resolution 34/89 toprepare a study on Israeli nuclear armament held itssecond session from 19 to 30 January 1981.

2. The group, composed of five consultants engaged intheir personal capacities, worked harmoniously and wasresponsive to Secretariat suggestions regarding the needto make an objective and factual report.

3. The group discussed the main part of a preliminarydraft text of the report and achieved considerable agreementthereon. The text is being edited by the Secretariat andwill be sent around for further discussion. Before thethird session each member of the group will prepare adraft conclusion, on the basis of which the Secretariatwill endeavour to prepare a consolidated conclusion of thereport.

4. It is hoped that the group can complete its report atits next session, on 2O April - 1 May 1981.

C f-i't *^--i - * L " • • > , i ?-' ;^ ft"'',«,.--•-•-•* "H<•*,{•"(ii-'^-j <L,I s i,.--,j',5G ji!iUi^^i;i5yn

United Nali.-AS, new York

^u^/^CUfyjb;.;. ,/\'S?sivr;> y ;.$$ DC/ 13 3 7Wv^^fTK^ PT/799V>v, C"~~ p - ^>s-/ -' • -V£> --'— '''S?* 20 January 1981

SECRETARY-GFKESAL CALLS FOR INTERNATIONAL POSTER COMPETITION ON DISARMAMENT

Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim has called for a world-wide competitionfor a United Wat ions poster design devoted to the General Assembly ' s 19 #2special session on dis?rmamen t. The poster design would project the dangersof the continued arras race, the need for increased e f fo r t s in the field ofdisarmament and the central role of the United "ations in this regard.

An international selection committee at United Cations Headquarters willchoose the winning design from among national entries. It ''.'ill become anofficial poster of the Organization, to be used all .over the world. The nameof the winning f ina l i s t , who wi l l receive a cash prize of $2,500, will beannounced by the Secretary-General on 24 October, the opening day ofDis ar ma men t VJeek .

The call was made in a letter from the Secretary-General to all PermanentRepresentatives and Observers at the United Nations. Mr. Haldheim suggestedthat the international competi t ion for an appropriate poster for the specialsession should be part of a world-wide campaign to mobilize public support forthe purposes and goals of the General Assembly's Declaration of the 1^80s asthe Second Disarmament Decade, adopted on 3 December

It is s tated in the Declaration that "in spite of the posit ive andencouraging outcome of the special session devoted to disarmament, the Decadeof the 1980s had s tar ted with ominous signs of deterioration in theinternational s i tuat ion ...". The Declaration also says that the goals of theSecond Disarniament Decade should be conceived "in the context of the ul t imateobjective of the e f for t s of States in the disarmament process which is generaland complete disarmament under effect ive international control".

Consistent with this over-all object ive, it s t a tes , the goals of theDecade should be the fol lowing; "halting and reversing the arms race,part icular ly the nuclear arms race; concluding and implementing e f fec t iveagreements to the achievement of general and complete d isarmament , which willcontribute s igni f icant ly to the achievement of general and completedisarmament under e f f e c t i v e international control', developing on an equitablebasis the l imited resul ts obtained in the f ield o'f disarmament in the 1970s inaccordance with the provisions of the Final Document' , s t r eng then ingin terra tonal peace and securi ty in accordance with the Charter of the UnitedNat ions and making available a substant ial par t of the resources released by

..Cmore.) ~ -

For information media - not an official record

- 2 - Press Release DC/1337PT/29Q

20 January 1981

disarmament measures to promote the a t ta inment of the Third United NationsDevelopment Decade, and , in par t icu lar , the economic and social development ofdeveloping countries, so as to accelerate the progress towards the newinternational economic order".

In his current annual report on the work of the Organization, theSecretary-General pointed out the need for tangible demonstration of a renewedcommitment to these objectives. The Second Disarmament Decade, theSecretary-General s t ressed, o f f e red a suitable framework for set t ingpol i t i ca l ly attainable concrete targets and making substantive progress inthat direction.

The competiton will draw the part icular attention of United Nationsassociations and other non-governmental organizat ions, educat ionalins t i tu t ions , art ists and their profesional unions, government bodies and mediato the role of the 1982 Assembly special session in this regard.

On 4 December 1^80 the Se ere tar y- General, opening the firstorganizational meeting of the Preparatory Committee established in thisconnection, said that the second special session "should be a genuine turningpoint in our e f f o r t s to implement real and substant ial measures aimed atachieving the u l t imate goal of general and complete disarmament underef fec t ive international control".

•if

AKU/atk File: Disarm. bf:AR/MKP/GMI4/CCF/AF/xRef: £ • • < M J S

9. Janneryll931

Dear Judge Wise,

I wish to thank you for your letter of12 December 1980 and the enclosures which I willnot fail to bring to the Secretary-General's attentionupon his return from official travel abroad.

Disarmament, as you know, is one of the majorareas of concern to the United Nations. The Secretary-General attaches great importance to these mattersand has indeed not hesitated to make public statementsurging effective disarmament measures. In his latestreport on the work of the Organization, he has, inparticular, expressed his concern about the continuingescalation of the arms race and the lack of progressin the field of disarmament.

Prom my own experience I know that the Secretary-General has on many occasions discussed disarmamentquestions with statesmen and world leaders. In 1978,a special session of the General Assembly was solelydevoted to disarmament. The Final Document that wasadopted at this session laid down the basis for aneffective approach for disarmament. Though progresshas been made on some of its basic provisions, theFinal Document still has to be translated into sub-stantive action. As the Secretary-General stated in

Judge Raymond L. Wise11930 l-Torth Bayshore DriveNorth Miami, Florida 33181

a recent address: "It is true that the Special Sessionesnsleeid us with a consensus on principles, prioritiesand machinery. But it is easier to agree on principlesand priorities than to implement them".

You nay be sure that the Secretary-General willcontinue his efforts to promote disarmament measures.I know that he will be interested to learn of your viewsand I should like to thank you on his behalf for thegood wishes you have addressed to him.

Yours sincerely,

Rafeeuddin AhmedChef de Cabinet

3OS-S93-2I22

RAYMOND 1L. WISE

The Honorable Kurt Waldheim,Secretary General of the //£$# jVorti 3tL**sA*>reUnited Nations, ^The United Nations,New York, N.Y. J ^ a

Dear Sir: Dec.12,1980

I write you because you are a person of influence, with a re-

putation of getting things done.

I believe we have reached a point in history at which, by a well

orchestrated effort, the leaders of the world could be persuaded to

create a substitute for the use of force in the settlement of inter-

national disputes. The nuclear bomb has made force obsolete as an

effective instrument of national policy. Yet, the world is in great-

er danger of nuclear war than ever before. There has never been a

more insane or immoral situation. World leaders insist that the only

road to peace is by threatening to murder 100 million men, women,

and children by burning them alive! To preserve civilization, those

who control power must be persuaded to act rationally and promptly.

They must create an international police bomb squad to defuse the

ticking nuclear bomb.

It is much easier than it sounds. First of all, the 153 nations

have already agreed, in the United Nations Charter, "to refrain, in

their international relations from the threat or use of force",

except in self-defense, or collectively to preserve world peace.

They also promised to "save succeeding generations from the scourge

of war." Thus, all we have to do is to get them to keep the promises

they have already made in writing.

Secondly, in those 153 nations there is not more than an average

of ten persons who formulate their nation's foreign policy. Thus,

there are only about 1500 people to persuade, not an impossible task.

Third, the Soviet Union has every reason to be co-operative.

-2-

They have a 4-000 mile common border with China whom they fear .par-

ticularly now that the U.S. and China have amicable relations. The

Soviet Union has a 1200 mile common border with Afghanistan. They

believe they must maintain a puppet state there because of the hos-

tility of the 600 million Muslim world toward the atheism of Commun-

ism. They are beginning to import oil. The Polish workers have

shown the Soviet brand of Communism does not fulfill its promises

to the "proletariat". The Soviet Union has many problems. In

1970, it was thought equally impossible for the U.S. to make

friends with China. The Soviet Union will welcome a gleam of ration-

ality in an insane world.

To accomplish an acceptable substitute for the present insanity,

two major steps are needed. First, power must be balanced so over-

whelmingly against any potential aggressor that aggression becomes

impossible, and, hence, none will be attempted. Therefore, the U.S.,

China, the U.S.S.R. and our allies and their allies would have to

enter into a fifty year non-aggression, mutual assistance treaty.

All other nations should also be invited to sign. All those who do

will be protected by the shield of collective security power.

Second, there must be a rational, acceptable substitute for war,

if we are to have any hope of such a treaty. An International

Arbitration Board, to which all disputes must be submitted, should

be created. It should be composed of five members chosen for their

known integrity, intelligence and non-partisan fairness. They

should serve as a permanent board for an agreed lengthy term of

service. Each side to a dispute should be entitled to appoint two

more temporary members. No decision should be binding unless eight

of the nine were in agreement. Nations are apparently not yet

-3-

ready to submit their sovereignty to an International Court which is

"bound "by international law. With the proposed treaty in effect they

would voluntarily accept a fair settlement arrived at "by means of

fair arbitration.

The third step would require other amendments to the U.N. Charter.

First, enforcement should "be the duty of the signatories to the treaty.

Second, the World Court should "be revised so as to provide a system

of regional and intermediate appellate courts. Other changes should

"be made until a court is evolved which every nation would willingly

resort to and obey. Third, the Security Council "veto" should be

revised so as to limit it strictly to use only when the security of

the nation using it is clearly seriously threatened by the proposal

sought to be vetoed.

To implement these suggested changes, there is an obvious and

practical way to proceed. The 1500 leaders who must be persuaded to

effect world order appointed the members of the 153 U.N. delegations.

The Secretary General of the U.N. should be asked to urge the members

of the delegations to persuade the leaders in their respective coun-

tries to enter into the suggested treaty, create the Arbitration Board

and adopt the U.N. amendments.

The machinery could thus be set in motion with a realistic hope

of ultimate success in devising a substitute for the use of force.

If we can walk on the moon, we ought to be able to walk together

in peace on earth.

The recommendations made herein are not Utopian. They are

inevitable. Talleyrand said "The art of statesmanship is to ac-

celerate the inevitable." I write you in the hope you can do some of

the accelerating!

With every good wish, sincerely, ouu^^i L *

(JUDGE) RAYMOND L. WISE.

EDITOR'S NOTE'

W7W e are delighted thai Ambassador

Charles \V. Yost has accepted a joint ap-pointment as Counsellor to the UnitedNations Association of the United Statesand as Distinguished Lecturer in ForeignPolicy in the Coh/inbia University Schoolof International Relations. And more par-ticularly we are delighted that Ambassa-dor Yost will join VISTA as a regular col-umnist and will chair our editorial board.

At his final press conference beforeleaving his post as the U.S. Ambassadorto the United Nations, Ambassador Yostassessed the United Nations as goingthrough a "discouraging period" at themoment and suffering a decline in publicsupport caused by the 1965 financial crisisand its inability to act on Vietnam. How-ever, be concluded on a more hopeful noteby saying he was convinced "this is a pass-ing phase" and that "the best way to keeptrs out of future Vielnams is by indicatingthat local conflicts should be dealt withmultilaterally throng!} the world organiza-tion rather than bilaterally by big powers."

Few can speak as knowing!}' or write aswell about the United Nations. Ambassa-dor Yost participated in its earliest plan-ning at Dumbarton Oaks and San Fran-cisco. He has ably represented the UnitedStates in diplojnalic posts in Asia, the Mid-dle East, and both Eastern and WesternEurope. Before his appointment as U.S.Ambassador to the United Nations heserved in two UN General Assembliesand as a deputy to both A mbassador AdlaiStevenson and Ambassador Arthur Gold-berg.

His latest book, "The Insecurity of Na-tions," is one of the best written and mostknowledgeable books on the necessity forinternational organization a! this stage inman s history.

CONTENTS

Letters £•

UN Notebook 8 by Kay Rainey Gray— A bi-monthly review

A Lid on Pot 1 Q by S. Taqi

A Study in Discord 1 8 by Thomas A. Hoge

From Shadow to Substance? 22 by Andrew' Boyd

The UN and the Future 24 by Walt Rostow

ApresDe Gaulle 30 by Anne Titckerman

PAGES

Somalia

Personal Opinion:If I Were the Secretary-General

by Edward Rice

by Raymond L. Wise

Washington Window C3 by Tristram Coffin

Toward Further Knowledge 50 by John In man

Report From UNA 53

EDITORMANAGING EDITORASSISTANT EDITOR

EDITORIAL CONSUL! ANTART DIRECTORS

PUBLISHER

Albert II. Fu'rns it orth^\.:rion KjurRii /bL. Missc?

Ronald f\u/ili JTdGeorge H. d:slrui<:h. Jr.

avaiLXcl-y^-srripiionl :.L-3r 5 ';, 2:,rtrs 57.3n.-ars 5 10.Sozor.d ch^v^PcXP-'^x^'-1"' Vo:V:,N.Y-.DnJat jjuj-

VISTApuW^hcdU-nvr. ihlvKL'NA USA.833LTni:cdNj:^^sFI.i7.i.N.jv. \VrV..N.Y K/U"Volume 6. No. t . M . i r . J ] - A : T i l . c « v v r i i ; h r C. 1971

UniTL^JN'j!ioni.-\>s.x'i.it 10.^c.'th-.-1rr.:ii.JS:j:.->ni'An:-.::.•:-. l-.c.AII ri^h[.srot;r\«.•«.!. Rf;'iL>Ji.otio:un v ;•. .-li-yr p.ir: ••• .•!:hoist Ani^k-s in \'ISTA -ire ',,.-!ccic^ a» cumrihui ior .s to

wri r icn r».TnijSii."-n ij s^'ictl1. ^n '. l •! .:-.-!.! inforrv. j l i d n j tvuc i n f - . - r r n i ion.;! or;-.j n i / j t i u n nut :Ba5!cnit.nit<,r>hipj!:riu.i:duL-i ^7 , in^ luJL- ;V ' lb 1 A. A.r^j cxpi 'Css ;«--n uf i'u!io' of L'ni 'r^-J Na t ions Associiitic-n,

Covt r: John A !co: n

j Raymond L. Wise j

PERSONAL OPINIONIf I Were the Secretary-General

This article has been re-printed from the March/April

issue of Vista (c) 1971 "by the United Nations Association

of the United States of America, Inc, with the kind

permission of the copyright owner.

I f I were the Secretary-General, the firstthing I would do is to take a month off

from my regular duties and devote myselfexclusively to the following task:

I would confer, one at a time, with eachof the 127 Ambassadors representing the127 members, saying something of thissort to each one:

"It would seem that the way to strength-en the UN is an amazing paradox: it is toappear to weaken it! Subtract from it allcontrol over the use of force and it couldand would become an enormously power-ful instrument for world order—and, asa corollary, for improving the lot of man-kind.

"Even with the meager tools allowed itby the nation^rnembers, the UN has per-formed miracles in international coopera-tion in every field except in the preven-tion of the use of force to settle disputesbetween nations. Even there, it has beeneffective in Korea, Kashmir, Lebanon,West Iran, the Congo and elsewhere. Inaddition there have been many situationswhere the UN has prevented the outbreakof war.

"Remove from its Charter all right touse military force, and all its resolutionsfor a more humane and more orderlyworld could be implemented far moreeasily.

"West Germany and Japan are now themost prosperous and efficient nations be-cause no other nation fears them mili-tarily. They do not rely on force.

"The reason the UN has not realizedthe 1945 dreams of its idealistic founders

"West Germany andJapan are now the mostprosperous and effi-cient nations becauseno other nation fearsthem militarily. Theydo not rely on force!'

is because the nations of the world werenot, and are not now, ready for such ex-alted unselfishness as the surrender ofpower to a supra-national organization.Not even with the addition of the 'veto'to make the idea more palatable.

"The fatal error was to attempt to givethe UN any military power at all. This isproved by the simple fact that, althoughthe agreements under Article 43, whichcalls upon Member States to providearmed forces and other facilities to theUN when needed, were to be negotiated'as soon as possible! in 25 years not a sin-gle agreement has been concluded.

"Realizing that it might take some timeto set up a world police force under UN

Raymond L. Wise, a former municipaljudge in Surf side, Florida, where be is nowretired, has bad long legal experience inNeiv York and Florida and is the author ofmany books anda~;icies on legal subjects.

control, the drafters of the Charter pro-. vided in Article 106, that, 'in the transi-

tional period,' the five permanent mem-bers of the Security Council, the U.S.A.,theU.S.S.R., the United Kingdom, Franceand 'Nat ional is t China, together wi thother members of the UN who may de- PAGE "isire to cooperate, should maintain 'inter-national peace and security!

"We are still in the 'transitional period!. For the obvious reason of the apparent

conflict of interest between the NATOnations and the Warsaw Pact nations, Ar-ticle 106 has not been implementedeither.

"Furthermore, even if the transitionalperiod had ended, the UN was never ex-pected to control any of the permanentmembers of the Security Council by force.They would all have to cooperate with theUN in maintaining order. The UN couldnever be a super-state.

"Consideration of the facts leads inevi-tably to the conclusion that the realisticway to make the UN effective is to urgeall the nations in the world—not just UNmembers —to form a collective securityforce of their own, to cooperate with theUN in its efforts to create a world inorder.

"But such a force would remain underthe direction and control of the nationssupplying it and not be under the controlof the UN. The difference in form mayappear slight, but it is the difference be-tween wishful thinking and the possible,between a dream and attainable reality!

"The 10 most powerful nations with

VISTA M A R C H - A P R I L

987° of the force in the world must agreeto settle differences by orderly means andto use their power jointly to keep orderin the world.This must be done only, how-ever, with the agreement and full assentand cooperation of the other nations. Allnations —in or out of the UN —are agreedthat war should be abolished. The troubleis no one is working seriously to achieveit.

"I suggest, therefore, that a meeting ofall independent nations, the 127 UNmembers plus the additional dozen or sothat are termed nations under interna-tional law, be convened as a 'World Or-der Commission' to formulate the neededtreaty which would constitute a globalanswer to the global problem of worldorder.

"It is incredible and absurd that thereis no such official body, representing allnations, conferring to perform such atask.

"To those who say it is impossible toabolish war, I would reply that only 20years ago it was seemingly equally impos-sible for men to walk on the moon. Wehave the desire to abolish war. All that is

PAGE 42 lackjng is the cooperation to effect thedesire. The first step is for all nations tobe officially discussing ways and means ina joint meeting.

"I realize that my proposal would re-quire a completely cooperative effort be-tween capitalist and communist nations.I am confident that such a detente can andinevitably will be accomplished. Talley-rand said 'The art of statesmanship is toaccelerate the inevitable! Premier Kosy-gin said, in January, 1968, 'Cooperationbetween the Soviet Union and the UnitedStates is inevitable!' President Kennedysaid, 'Mankind must put an end to war, orwar will put an end to mankind!

"Because no one can win a nuclear warand because of the danger of an acci-dental nuclear war, capitalism and com-munism will ultimately compose theirdifferences. Why not now?

"Their apparent polarity is of little realsubstance. Their differences of opinionare readily reconcilable. There is a vastcommunity of interest between them.Thecommon people in neither system eitherhate, or desire to make war on, the com-mon people in the other system. Theyboth detest war and hope fervently forits abolition. The happiness and prosper-ity of all people can exist only in an orderlyworld.

"The major differences do not stemfrom economic ideology, but solely frommutual fear that each group plans to de-stroy the other by force. There is no realground for this senseless fear. It is the re-sult of false propaganda. Neither side hasany intention of attempting to conquerthe other. Atomic science has made thatimpossible. Yet the hideous, costly mythpersists in a sort of weird political 'Alice-in-Wonderland'fashioninbothgroups.

"To break this hypnotic political spell,both capitalist and communist nationsneed Kamikaze statesmen ready to hurlthemselves to political death "in attack-ing the misunderstandings which arecausing senseless fears and preventingcooperation for world order. They mustshow them that the danger is not the'over-kill' in the stockpiles of hydrogenbombs, but in the 'under concern' at theimmorality of their unilateral use. Theymust teach all of us that our civilizationcan perish—as others have —if we fail tomeet the challenge of our age. They musttell us that our production of intelligentideas must keep pace with our productionof material goods. We must learn fromthem that man's real struggle is neveragainst his fellow man.

"I am hopeful because men and nationsact from self-interest. The ultimate rec-ognition by both capitalism and commun-ism that there are colossal gains to bederived from world order will overcometheir mutual, groundless fears. By revers-ing their polarity, they will attract eachother. The capitalist world would not fearnon-violent communism and, of course,the communist world would not fear non-violent capitalism. The realization ofthe advantages to both capitalism and com-munism of world order, which would beproductive of a new trillion dollar market,will prevail.

"For all these reasons, I am confidentthe needed detente can be achieved.

"The concept of the collectivity of allnations acting for the good of all mankindis practical. It benefits all. If the balanceof power theory is extended to the pointwhere power is collectively weighted soheavily against any potential aggressor thatsuccessful aggression becorhes impossible,the desired goal can be achieved. Worldpower must be fused and redirected, notdismantled. The Security Council Resolu-tion of March 7,1968, in which the UnitedStates, the Soviet Union and the UnitedKingdom were sth.'ed to have offered joint

assistance to any nation, signatory to theAtomic Nonproliferation Treaty, whichis thereafter threatened with nuclearattack, shows clearly the likelihood of theneeded detente. There is nothing in thepolitical or economic systems of capitalistor communist nations to prevent it.

"There are two compelling reasons forall nations to abolish war. One, there is nolonger any profit in war. Science has putwar beyond the margin of utility. Two,there is great potential profit in an orderlyworld. There are 2!/2 billion people livingon less than $ 100 a year. If by cooperation,the rich, industrialized nations raised thatincome to only $500 a year, they wouldcreate a new trillion dollar market forworld trade. Global welfare should replacenationalistic warfare. A possible way toobtain the needed flow of capital, instead ofthe present foreign aid give-away program,would be to encourage self-help by the poornations by putting their modernization ona sound business basis. The bonds of thepoor nations can become salable under asort of world collective insurance programin which, for an appropriate discount, thenations of the world, through the WorldBank, could guarantee the payment ofprincipal and interest. Of course, thiswould also require supervision of the use ofthe money so as to make sure that it wasused for the purposes intended, and thatthe proposed projects were feasible. Thiscould be done through United Nationssupervision.

"Today, global war is avoided by a'balance of terror! We keep order by theinsane means of threatening to burn alive100 million men, women, and children.No concept could be more immoral. Worldleaders should be morally outraged andshould use every effort to change thismonstrous situation.

"Furthermore, our present alternativesto this mad course are unrealistic. It is bynow obvious that nations will not volun-tarily disarm, nor turn their armamentover to the United- Nations or to a worldgovernment, even if one could be created—presently a Utopian concept.

"The World Order Commission, once ithad successfully created the necessarymechanisms to maintain order, could dele-gate to the UN the important tasks ofmodernizing the underdeveloped nationsand of preventing wars by removing theirmain causes: famine, overpopulation,poverty, illiteracy, disease, and racism.

"The Commission's main task would beContinued on page. 48

\ M . \ o r n - A P K U

PERSONAL OPINIONContinued from p.;ge 42

LETTERSContinued from frige -1

to draft a 'Convention on the Use of Force'which would renounce war,'provide forchange by orderly means and for the settle-

I ment of disputes by legal means, instead ofby force. The treaty would spell out the de-tails of the maintenance of collectivesecurity enforcement to maintain order,and in modernization to eliminate thecauses of war. The doctrine of non-inter-vention which permitted a Hitler must beradically revised. At present it is lawfulonly if done on behalf of an existing govern-ment at its request, but order under inter-national collective security would requirethe right of intervention.

"The proposed plan is rational andrealistic. It is not practical to attempt toabolish national military power or to trans-fer it to a supra-national body.The problem,rather, is one of reorientation, of redirect-ing the power in the world to cooperativeuse for global welfare. We leave the powerwhere it is now and persuade, not compel,its possessors to change the rules for using

PAGE 48 it. It is possible to persuade those possess-ing power to use it wisely. It is impossibleto compel them to surrender it to be usedagainst them. Force used pursuant tocollective international agreement ceasesto be violence and becomes an instrumentof order.

"The time is now. The sooner a WorldOrder Commission is in session, the soonerwe will have world order. Science has atlast made it possible to have a world with-out waror want. The benefits to all nationswould be innumerable: reduction in arm-ament, with consequent funds for domesticneeds, modernization of the poor nations,increaseof international trade and finance,using the atom and the resources of theoceans for all mankind and countlessothers. And final ly, most important to us,strengthening and making truly effectivethe United Nations and the InternationalCourt of Justice.

"Therefore. I urge you. sir, as soon aspracticable to request the nation you rep-resent to issue or to join in a call for a meet-ing of all nations, as a World Order Com-mission. Sovereignty can be used for thegood of all.

"To build a house we must have a blue-print . Let us at least have a meeting ofevery nation in the world to discuss whatkind of house we want to and can build!' n

December 1970 issue of VISTA, "Viet-nam, the U.S. and the UN Charter." It isthe best article I have ever seen concerningour involvement in the Vietnam war.

John M. WeaverSpokane, Washington

INTERN A TIONAL LANGUAGE

The article "Drowning in Words" byRichard Walton (November/DecemberVISTA) presents one of the most per-suasive pleas for ONE language as amedium of translation for internationaluse. Clearly it makes sense to use ONElanguage into and out of which all in-formation can be translated —rather thanthe present system of translating every-thing into and out of ALL the languagesin use at the UN.

Since the nations will not agree on onenational language for such a role, it isclear that a neutral language must beused. Tests of translations using Espe-ranto show it is superior to nationallanguages for such purposes.

William H. SchulzeHillsborough, Calif.

ECOLOGY

Re: "The Ecology Backlash" (Septem-ber/October VISTA). I agree with theArusha principle which has the rich na-tions support international ecology in theunderdeveloped countries. I see a majorpolitical problem for its proper implemen-tation, namely the population growth ofan area. As long as the economics, andsocial habits of the indigenous populationare unchanged during this process of at-tempted development of a poor nation, anyaid. whether it be money, food or medicine,will ultimately cause an ecological dis-aster and fail to reach the goals of trans-forming that country. In short, there mustbe a total economic, social, ecological andpolitical plan for thecountry. Then aid maybe worthwhile.

EricG. Johnson, Jr.Boulder, Colo.

FROM SHADOW TO SUBSTANCE?

Continued from page 22

A point to which Lie, Hammarskjold,and Thant all attached importance wasthat these periodic meetings in the Coun-cil "should not be expected to producegreat decisions every time!' All the experi-ence of the past 25 years has shown how-right the Secretaries-General were to em-phasize this. Instead of developing ahabit of holding unspectacular meetingsat regular intervals, the major powers haverepeatedly tried to stage "summit" con-ferences which have been surrounded byall kinds of ballyhoo. The results -havebeen almost uniformly disastrous.

The trouble with "summits" and simi-lar dramatic encounters is that theyarouse expectations that are quite unreal.The statesmen who are involved becometerrified of coming away from the confer-ence table "empty-handed!' So they aretempted to fake up claims about importantachievements; and when it later emergesthat nothing was really achieved, there isin'evitably a lot of bitter disenchantment.Or the statesmen may be led into makingunwise concessions in order to avert abreakdown of the talks. Or, if there is abreakdown, they feel obliged to accusethe other governments concerned oftrickery, obstinacy and i l lwil l , in orderto explain away the failure. So there arevery real dangers that these over-pub-licized meetings will make- the wholeinternational atmosphere worse.

The whole point about using theSecurity Council for regular quiet talks isthat this need not excite undue expecta-tions. Foreign ministers are accustomed tovisiting UN headquarters anyway. In thefirst weeks of each General Assemblysession there are usually a good manyministers in New York, and they take theopportunity to meet each other privatelyand informally. But there are certain snagsabout this procedure. For one thing, theforeign ministers normally make majorpolicy statements in the Assembly'sgeneraldebate, and these public statements of posi-tion may restrict their freedom of man-euver in private talks. For another, the facttha t they are tied to the Assembly time-table means that their talks may have to beheld under the shadow of some particularcrisis. In contrast, meetings in a SecurityCouncil context can be held at any time ofyear, and this greater f lexibi l i ty about dates

VISTA M A R C H - A P R I L

(305)893-212.2

RAYMOINTD L. WISE

4*930 y

J. 3F*£ 33181

Born: New York City, 1895.

Education: Horace Mann High School, New York, 1912.

Columbia University, A. B., 1916; LL.B., 1919.

Associate Editor, Columbia Law Review, 1919.

War Service: 1st Lieutenant, Infantry, U.S.A., 1917-1918.

Member of New York Bar, since 1919.

Member of the Florida Bar, since 1952.

Special Assistant to the United States Attorney for the Southern

District of New York, 1921-1922.

Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the State of New York, 1928-29.

Member of the Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties

Union, 1933-1951.

Member of Committee on Professional Ethics, the Florida Bar, 1964-68.

Chairman, Committee on Professional Ethics, Dade County Bar

Association, 1962-1966.

Councilman, Surfside, Florida, 1962-1964.

Municipal Judge, Surfside, Florida, 1965-67.

Author, Legal articles in Bar Journals.

Author, "ORDER PLEASE", Central Book Company, Brooklyn, N.I. 1970.

Author, article in Miami Herald (9/2/79) entitled "Ford's Pardonof Nixon Probably Unconstitutional".

Author, "Legal Ethics" published by Matthew Bender, New York,(1966, 2nd Edition 1970) Supplements on Judicial Ethicsand Legal Ethics, 1973, 1975, 1977 and 1979, 757 pages.

November 1980

R A Y M O N D L . W I S E

On March llth, newspapers carried a storyreporting on a study by two Washington,D.C., physicians, Dr. Frederic Solomon andDr. Mary Coleman. They wrote that, in anall-out nuclear war, 90 percent of thepopulation of both the United States and theSoviet Union would die as a direct result ofthe thermonuclear blast and radiation. Mostof those who did not die immediately wouldperish within two weeks, either from acuteradiation sickness or from lethal burns fromthe sun. The nuclear exchange would destroymost of the ozone layer in the earth's at-mosphere. The sun's rays, without the ozonescreen, which now protects us, would killanyone within one hour whose skin was un-covered.

A second article, published in newspapersthe next day, was even more frighteningbecause it was an official study of the UnitedStates government, compiled by the Office ofTechnology Assessment for the SenateForeign Relations Committee. It predictedthat 88 percent of the population of theUnited States would be killed in a nuclearexchange but only 40 percent to 50 percent ofthe population of the Soviet Union, becauseof the "more scattered nature of the popula-tion of the Soviet Union" and because of thehigher yield of Soviet warheads.

In addition to the danger of an intentionalnuclear war there are the possibilities of anaccidental nuclear war and of a wildcatnuclear war.

The danger of an accidental nuclear war isgreater than generally realized. The image of afalling meteor could be misread on a radarscreen for a nuclear attack. In October, 1960,a freak of the moon's rays looked like Sovietmissiles. Fortunately, Air Marshal RoySlemon of Canada took action to avoid thegreatest disaster-by-mistake in history. OnNovember 9, 1979, and again twice in June,1980, computers of the North American AirDefense Command gave an erroneous warn-ing of a Soviet attack. Luckily checks quicklyrevealed the errors.

A "wildcat war" is extremely unlikely, butcould be started without authority by those incharge of nuclear command centers.

The vast numbers of nuclear weapons are adanger in and of themselves. The SovietUnion has 20,000 warheads and bombs andthe United States 30,000 warheads andbombs, each with the equivalent of from onemil l ion to twenty million tons of TNT in

Against this background, we should insistthat politicians of both parties come up with afeasible plan for preventing nuclear war.Nothing is being done and something must bedone to avoid nuclear destruction. There mustbe desire, a plan, persistent, co-operative ef-fort, and leadership.

There are 154 countries in the UnitedNations, When they signed the UN Charter,they agreed to abolish war. We must find away to get them to live up to their agreement.There are only an average of about ten menand women in each country who make theprincipal policy decisions. Thus, in a sense, atotal of about 1,500 people control the world.We have only to convince them.

When a public utility wants higher rates andlower taxes, it lobbies legislators for them. Noone is "lobbying" the 1,500 leaders to abolishwar. Nations as well as people act from self-interest. The 1,500 must be persuaded that itis to their own individual self-interest and tothe self-interest of their nations to preventwar.

The UN Secretary General is in an excellentposition to do some lobbying. Our govern-ment could also do some of it. To persuadenations to abahdon the use of force to settleinternational problems, however, they mustbe offered an effective practical substitute forwar. At present, there is none. There is theInternational Court of Justice, but it candecide onry legal issues and has no way to en-force its decisions. Iran's refusal to appearbefore it hi connection with the seizure of theAmerican hostages is the latest example ofwhat is wrong with the court as a substitutefor the use of force. What is needed in addi-tion to the court is an international board ofarbitration which would be entirely differentfrom the court.

It should consist of five individuals ap-pointed by the UN and respected and admiredall over the civilized world for their integrity,knowledge and intelligence. They should beappointed for life or as long as they are com-petent to serve.

If two nations had a conflict, they couldagree to submit it to arbitration by the board.

, Each nation would be entitled to appoint twoadditional arbitrators, making a temporarynine member-board. No decision would bebinding unless seven of the nine were in agree-ment. Then it would be enforced by the col-lective power of every other nation.

;/Lar;~^"T^e;niViCi;i, compiled by iJie Office ofTechnology Assessment for the SenateForeign Relations Committee. It predictedthat 88 percent of the population of theUnited States would be killed in a nuclearexchange but only 40 percent to 50 percent ofthe population of the Soviet Union, becauseof the "more scattered nature of the popula-tion of the Soviet Union" and because of thehigher yield of Soviet warheads.

In addition to the danger of an intentionalnuclear war there are the possibilities of anaccidental nuclear war and of a wildcatnuclear war.

The danger of an accidental nuclear war isgreater than generally realized. The image of afalling meteor could be misread on a radarscreen for a nuclear attack. In October, 1960,a freak of the moon's rays looked like Sovietmissiles. Fortunately, Air Marshal RoySlemon of Canada took action to avoid thegreatest disaster-by-mistake in history. OnNovember 9, 1979, and again twice in June,1980, computers of the North American AirDefense Command gave an erroneous warn-ing of a Soviet attack. Luckily checks quicklyrevealed the errors.

A "wildcat war" is extremely unlikely, butcould be started without authority by those incharge of nuclear command centers.

The vast numbers of nuclear weapons are adanger in and of themselves. The SovietUnion has 20,000 warheads and bombs andthe United States 30,000 warheads andbombs, each with the equivalent of from onemillion to twenty million tons of TNT instrength. The 1945 Hiroshima bomb had onlythe equivalent of 15,000 tons of TNT.

interest. The 1,500 must be persuaded that itis to their own individual self-interest and tothe self-interest of their nations to preventwar.

The UN Secretary General is in an excellentposition to do some lobbying. Our govern-ment could also do some of it. To persuadenations to abandon the use of force to settleinternational problems, however, they mustbe offered an effective practical substitute forwar. At present, there is none. There is theInternational Court of Justice, but it candecide only legal issues and has no way to en-force its decisions. Iran's refusal to appearbefore it in connection with the seizure of theAmerican hostages is the latest example ofwhat is wrong with the court as a substitutefor the use of force. What is needed in addi-tion to the court is an international board ofarbitration which would be entirely differentfrom the court.

It should consist of five individuals ap-pointed by the UN and respected and admiredall over the civilized world for their integrity,knowledge and intelligence. They should beappointed for life or as long as they are com-petent to serve.

If two nations had a conflict, they couldagree to submit it to arbitration by the board.

„ Each nation would be entitled to appoint twoadditional arbitrators, making a temporarynine member-board. No decision would bebinding unless seven of the nine were in agree-ment. Then it would be enforced by the col-lective power of every other nation.

As a practical matter,. arbitration wouldwork somewhat as follows:

In the Iranian situation, for example, in-

stead of taking the position that the only issuewas the illegal seizure of the hostages, andthat the United States had always beenwithout fault, the State Department couldhave told the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini:"You have violated international law. Youclaim that you have acted as you did becauseof your grievances against the Shah and prioradministrations of this government. We arewilling to present these matters to the Interna-tional Board of Arbitration."

In all probability, Iran would have beendelighted to accept. With two of its own ar-bitrators on the board and with a seven out ofnine decision, Iran would have been willing topresent its side, which it could not do beforethe world court, where the only issue was theillegality of seizing hostages. Before the ar-bitration board, Iran would have been able totell its story and "try" the Shah.

Similarly, in the case of the invasion ofAfghanistan by the Soviet Union, our StateDepartment could have said to Moscow:"You have violated international law by in-vading an independent nation. Your conductis indefensible. We are, nevertheless, willingto arbitrate with you as to some rational solu-tion of the problems, real or imaginary, whichcaused you to take the improper steps youdid."

Again, the Soviet Union would havereasons to accept arbitration. Now that Chinaand the U.S. have become closer, the Sovietsare even more deeply concerned over the4,000 mile common border with China theymust defend. To the southwest they have a1,200 mile common border with Afghanistan.There are some 500 million Moslems in theworld, over 15 million of them in the SovietUnion. There is a general world-wide Moslemrising against Communism because of itsintolerance of religion and of individualfreedom. Afghanistan is, predominantly,Moslem. The Soviets would be delighted if itcould be turned into a neutral buffer state,either through the United Nations or by somecollective security agreement with the NATOcountries. A board of arbitration could takethe first steps in this direction.

And finally, the Middle East situationcould be more easily resolved if there were aninternational board of arbitration to whichIsrael and the Arab nations could submit

Raymond L. Wise is a Florida attorney andthe author of Legal Ethics (Matthew Bender,1970).

questions such as the right of Israel to existwith security and with recognition of theintegrity of its borders, whether the P.L.O. isor is not entitled to recognition or legal status,whether the Palestinians have a right to agovernment of their own, whether the terri-tory seized by Israel in the 1967 war should bereturned, how Jerusalem should be governed,the West Bank settlements, and other ques-tions.

As a first step, the State Department incooperation with the Secretary General of theUnited Nations should urge the members ofthe UN to call a world conference to deviseacceptable substitutes for the use of force in

settling disputes, such as a revised world courtsystem, and the creation of an internationalboard of aribtration.

Individuals can influence events. If youbelieve an international board of arbitrationcould prevent war, you can join a peaceorganization and urge it to advocate such aboard. Write the President, your two U.S.

•Senators, your Congressman, your favoritenewspaper, TV station, radio station, andother media. Get your clergyman, priest, orrabbi to preach a sermon about it. Makespeeches about it.

Ask candidates for office to do somethingabout it. Civilization as we know it is indanger, and the time is short.

THE WEATHER REPORT .

c/o DC Gazette

1739 Conn. Ave. NW, DC 20009

Please send me a free trial subscription:NAME:.

ADDRESSZIP

Please send a free trial subscription to:NAMEADDRESS

NAME

ADDRESS..ZIP.

Include your name and we'll tellthem who thought up this great idea.

Of course, if you already know andlike \VR, sending us the regularsubscription price of $5 would helpus continue and grow.

RAYMOND L. WISE M<305-S93-2I22

Chef d' Cabinet Raffeeuddin AhmedUnder-Secretary of theUnited NationsThe United Nations,New York. N.Y. 10017. Dec. 12. 1980.

Dear Mr. Secretary:

Your organization is doing a fine job. I have some ideas which

I hope will be of help. I also hope that the enclosed letter

addressed to the Secretary General will find enough favor in your eyes

that you will request him to read it himself.

The nuclear bomb, as you know, hasoutmoded war as a viable in-

strument of national policy. Many world leaders do not yet realize it.

D'Estaing and Schmidt do and have correctly said there must be ra-

tional negotiations between the Nato and Warsaw powers. In short,

we must make the world safe for the diversity which exists and will

not go away by itself. The surest road to peace is to make friends

out of potential enemies.

My studies lead me to believe that if the U.N. initiated negoti-

ations for a long term non-aggression pact between the Nato and Warsaw

Pact nations the effort would succeed. I hope the U.N. undertakes

such a frontal approach to world peace.

I also enclose some of my shorter published writings on the

subject, together with my personal history so you may know more about

me. At the age of 85 I wish nothing for myself except a better world

for my grand-children and the other billion children in it.

With best wishes for your continued success,

Cordially and sincerely,

(Judge) Raymond L. Wise