First Committee Monitor, Vol. 21, No. 1
Editorial: Choosing Disarmament Over Deadlock
1 October 2023
Ray Acheson
This year’s First Committee takes place once again in the midst of multiple devastating wars. This is not unusual, but that must not mean it should be accepted as “normal”. The First Committee, and the entire UN system, was created from the ashes of war, with the goal of preventing such calamity from ever occurring again. Since then, unfortunately, many states and governments that profit from making, selling, and using the tools of war have warped the institutions meant to prevent armed conflict. Delegates to the First Committee have a special responsibility to address the structural violence that governments have wrought upon the world, including by committing their countries to actions that facilitate disarmament and demilitarisation instead of competition and conflict.
Nuclear risks rising
Russia’s war in Ukraine, repeated threats to use nuclear weapons, and decision to station nuclear weapons in Belarus has visibly increased the risk of nuclear war over the last two years. But the other nuclear-armed states actively contribute to this current state of affairs. Some have increased the size of their stockpiles; all are modernising their nuclear bombs and delivery systems and spending increasing funds on their arsenals. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)’s expansion and its retrenchement of its nuclear doctrine; China’s build-up of its nuclear arsenal; the United States’ growth of its nuclear weapon facilities; the Australia-United Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) military alliance and sharing of nuclear-powered submarines have all increased tensions, military spending, and the risks of nuclear proliferation and nuclear war.
The most recent meeting of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), held just two months ago, offered an opportunity for nuclear-armed states and other governments to recommit to their Article VI obligation to achieve nuclear disarmament. Instead, they fought over who is to blame for the deteriorating “international security environment,” which they each claim compels them to maintain and expand their nuclear capabilities in direct violation of the Treaty. Reaching a new low point even for the NPT review cycle, states were not able to adopt a summary of the meeting—or even allow the Chair to publish a summary under his own authority.
A path to peace
In stark contrast to the continued stalemate within the NPT context, states parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) have spent the last several months advancing the implementation of the Treaty and the Action Plan adopted at its First Meeting of States Parties in June 2022. The collaboration between states parties, civil society organisations, affected communities, and international organisations that has been inherent to the TPNW process continues to offer an alternative to the competitive hypocrisy of the NPT regime. The TPNW, through its legal provisions and Action Plan, provides a clear pathway and mechanism for nuclear disarmament. It is imperative that all governments, especially the nuclear-armed states, join and implement this Treaty without delay.
It is also imperative that all governments work towards preventing new technologies and forms of violence, including those stemming from cyber technologies and artificial intelligence. One specific action that all delegations to this year’s First Committee can take is to co-sponsor and vote in favour of the new resolution being tabled on autonomous weapon systems.
In his newly launched policy brief A New Agenda for Peace, the UN Secretary-General unequivocally calls for multilateral negotiations to conclude, by 2026, a legally binding instrument to prohibit autonomous weapon systems. He urges that this treaty prohibit those systems that function without human control or oversight and that cannot be used in compliance with international humanitarian law, and that it regulate all other types of autonomous weapons.
As the Stop Killer Robots campaign has noted, “The Secretary-General’s unprecedented timeline for action comes amid increasing reports of the use of weapons systems with concerning levels of autonomy in conflict. A rapid advancement in technology is causing harm right now, with growing digital dehumanisation and automated harm around the world.” The Secretary-General’s recommendation paves the way for action by delegations to the First Committee to support the new resolution calling for international consultations on autonomous weapons, which is a key step towards a new treaty.
Choosing diplomacy over deadlock
Autonomous weapons and nuclear weapons are just two issues on the First Committee’s agenda; Reaching Critical Will’s First Committee Briefing Book dives into the details of all the other issues delegations will face this year. In dealing with the challenges this portfolio contains, states should follow the advice of the UN Secretary-General in A New Agenda for Peace, and rely on the principles of trust, solidarity, and universality to guide their relations, instead of competition and animosity.
“War is always a choice,” says the Secretary-General in the Agenda. Diplomacy offers an alternative. “The driving force for a new multilateralism must be diplomacy. Diplomacy should be a tool not only for reducing the risks of conflict but for managing the heightened fractures that mark the geopolitical order today and carving out spaces for cooperation for shared interests.”
The First Committee is the frontline of diplomacy for disarmament and demilitarisation. All delegates must take this responsibility seriously and work not simply to represent narrow national interests articulated by those within their systems that profit from war, but to work for collaborative approaches to peace and security that promote the well-being of all who share this planet.
[PDF] ()