First Committee, 25th plenary meeting - General Assembly, 80th session

The 26th meeting of the Disarmament and International Security Committee, First Committee, of the 80th session of the General Assembly is called to order. Distinguished delegates, this afternoon the Committee-- oh, yo, yo, sorry. I apologize. This morning, The committee will continue to take action on all draft resolutions and decisions submitted under agenda item 92106. I would like to remind delegations that the committee will meet all day today. Therefore, delegations will be able to exercise their right of reply at the end of the afternoon meeting. We will begin today by turning to cluster five, other disarmament measures and international security as contained in informal paper 2/Rev.4. Now, I shall give the floor to delegations wishing to make either a general statement or to introduce new or revised drafts under cluster five. I recognize the distinguished representative of Cuba.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The delegation of Cuba would like to make a general statement under other disarmament measures and international security. We invite delegations to support the documents that the NAM is putting forward, L11, L13, which is the observance of environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of agreements on disarmament and arms control. L14, the promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation. And we also urge all delegations to vote in favour of PP4 of draft resolution L11, which refers to the outcome of the 19th summit of the NAM movement, which was held in Kampala in 2024. This outcome document is pertinent because it shows that the movement has the ability to coordinate positions and to act together to address the current challenges that we are facing. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Cuba. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Netherlands.

Chair, over the past year, the conversation on artificial intelligence in the military domain has only grown in relevance. The rapid evolution of these technologies continues to influence military capabilities as well as global security dynamics. This makes it essential for the international community to remain engaged, cooperative, and forward-looking. For this reason, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, together with the Republic of Korea, tabled a resolution on artificial intelligence in the military domain and its implications for international peace and security for the first time last year. Encouraged by the strong support received, we are pleased to table the resolution again this year. We welcome and have taken careful note of the Secretary-General's report published earlier this year. We have remained actively engaged in close dialogue bilaterally, in smaller groups, within our cross-regional core group, and in open consultations. The feedback received has helped shape the updated resolution before you today. Chair, we recognize that some states are ready to move quickly, while others are still developing their national approaches. That is why we propose a gradual step-by-step approach, one that respects different national paces and ensures that we move forward together inclusively. We do not presume a fixed endpoint. Rather, we believe this should be defined collectively as our shared understanding evolves. The main new element in the text is the proposal to convene three days of informal exchanges in 2026 to be held in Geneva. We already look forward to these open and inclusive discussions and thank UN ODA in advance for their preparation and support. Our appreciation also goes to the core group for their engagement and to the 63 member states that have already joined as co-sponsors. Your support provides a strong mandate. Let me conclude by reiterating our appreciation to all delegations for engaging with us on this topic and requesting your full support for this resolution. Chair, I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Netherlands and give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Republic of Korea.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have the honor to take the floor to introduce the draft resolutions entitled Artificial Intelligence in the Military Domain and its Implications for International Peace and Security and Use Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, containing documents L46 and L53. Mr. Chair, artificial intelligence is reshaping the way we process knowledge and information and is rapidly transforming all aspects of our daily lives. Its profound implications for international peace and security require our urgent attention. To turn the transformation of the AI era where light and shadow coexist into opportunities for the international community, we should unite to establish principles for its responsible use. In this regard, the Republic of Korea took several initiatives, including convening the first ever high-level open debate on AI and international peace and security at the Security Council in September this year. With strong participation from around 80 member states and observers, this open debate reaffirmed the broad and growing interest of member states in this issue. We believe it is crucial to maintain this momentum and that the UN, in particular this first committee, which is responsible for disarmament and international peace, has an important role to play in this endeavor. Building on this, the Republic of Korea, in partnership with the Kingdom of the Netherlands, has tabled a follow-up resolution on the AI in the military domain. This year's resolution includes plans to convene informal exchanges aimed at further sharing states' perspectives on all aspects of AI use in the military domain, including opportunities, risk, and implications. As of today, we are joined by more than 60 co-sponsors to whom we extend our sincere appreciation. This follow-up resolution builds upon last year's resolution, which garnered widespread support among Member States. The newly added informal exchange is a part of the step-by-step process envisioned by this resolution based on the extensive discussion, and we look forward to the fruitful exchanges next year. Mr. Chair, the Republic of Korea, a strong champion of youth engagement, as elaborated in action 38 of the Secretary-General's Agenda for Disarmament, has also tabled for the fourth time the resolution entitled Youth, Disarmament and Non-Proliferation. This draft resolution aims to provide an avenue for Member States to work together to empower, engage and educate young people in the field of disarmament and non-proliferation. Throughout the formal session of this committee and informal discussions, including the first ever Youth for Disarmament Forum held on October 16 to 17 and sponsored by the Republic of Korea, many delegations expressed their strong support and high expectations for promoting the meaningful and inclusive participation of youth in disarmament and non-proliferation. This draft resolution seeks to serve as a catalyst in that regard by calling upon Member States, the United Nations, relevant specialized agencies and regional and sub-regional organizations to develop and implement policies and programs for young people. Active youth participation will not only enhance diversity in related discussions, but also ensure their sustainability. Since its inception in 2019, this biennial resolution has been adopted by consensus. Given its inherently consensual and cooperative nature, my delegation calls upon all Member States to lend their support to this draft resolution. I'm pleased to note that it already enjoys the support of almost 80 co-sponsors, yet another indication of the strong and enduring interest in this important topic. We sincerely thank all delegations that have already joined as co-sponsors and encourage others who have not yet done so to join this important initiative. I thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Republic of Korea. Before the Committee proceeds to take action on the draft resolutions and decisions in cluster 5, we will hear from delegations wishing to explain their position on those drafts. I recognize the distinguished representative of France.

Thank you, Chairman. France is delivering this explanation of position on behalf of France, the United Kingdom, and the United States. On L11, our three countries continue to question the notions implied in PP7 of a symbiotic relationship between disarmament and development, and of a diversion of military expenditures from development needs. We want to make clear that conditions conducive to effective arms control and disarmament are not dependent on development only. Defence investments are also necessary to deliver peace and security and, in return, facilitate development. There shall be no shortcut here. We also express reservations regarding PP4 of the resolution, which refers to the final document of the 19th summit of the Non-Aligned Movement held in Kampala on January 19 and 20, 2024. This document contains numerous problematic statements that run counter to our national positions, particularly on non-proliferation and nuclear deterrence. On L13, regarding environmental norms, we want to make clear that our three countries operate under stringent domestic environmental impact regulations. We see no direct connection, as implied in this resolution, between general environmental standards and multilateral arms control. Finally, While we recognize the need to understand the benefits and challenges of the development of science and technology in the field of disarmament, non-proliferation, and arms control, as expressed in resolution L21, we underscore that the rights referenced in this resolution relate to those specified in the CWC, the BTWC, and the NPT. As PP5 makes clear, states must exercise those rights in accordance with their international obligations, including their non-proliferation obligations under those treaties. None of these three treaties recognizes a right to technologies or a right to sensitive materials that entitles a state to obtain such technologies or materials from other states. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of France. I give the floor now to the distinguished representative of Belarus.

Thank you, Chair. The Republic of Belarus fully supports the draft resolution presented by Singapore, L20, on open-ended working group on security in the use of ICTs and on ICTs themselves. We welcome the outcome of the Working Group's 11th session this year and, in particular, the unanimous adoption of the final report this session. The compromise reached within the framework of this group is truly an important achievement, demonstrating that even in the current climate of fundamental differences, countries can still find common ground. This undoubtedly gives hope for positive results in further cooperation between UN member states in this area. We welcome the creation of the new platform following the session of the UN open-ended permanent mechanism on ICT security in the context of international security. We are ready to actively contribute to the work of future mechanisms, and we urge all countries to cooperate constructively with a view to developing agreed parameters to regulate this area. Chair, we cannot support draft resolution L46, the use of artificial intelligence in the military domain and its implications for international peace and security. Last year, we abstained both on the text of the resolution as a whole and on the separate voting of the paragraphs. And the reasons for our position have not changed. Although the resolution is intended to establish a framework and parameters to regulate cooperation between states in the use of AI in the military, it doesn't It doesn't provide clear definitions of key concepts. And the resolution also fails to distinguish between the specific features of regulation in terms of security disarmament such as conventional weapons, chemical weapons, and so on. We proceed from the view that we must focus on these issues within the framework of existing multilateral cooperation mechanisms, namely the GGE on LAWS and the CCW. The UN Disarmament Commission, including its relevant working subgroups, also serves as an appropriate forum for discussing these issues. Like last year, we will abstain on the resolution as a whole, as well as on all those paragraphs put to a vote. And in conclusion, we wish to stress that the Republic of Belarus, maintaining its consistent position, supports all resolutions submitted on behalf of the NAM in the cluster under consideration. Thank you.

I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation.

Distinguished Chair.

We would like to clarify the position of the Russian Federation on draft resolution on the use of AI in the military domain and its implications for international peace and security, L46. Last year, Russia voted against the South Korea Netherlands UNGA resolution 79/239 on the military use of AI, which is referenced in PP1 of the current draft. Nevertheless, our country made a substantial contribution to the UNSG's report on the implementation of the aforementioned resolution, which it set out in detail where it set out in detail Russia's position on the document and the initiative as a whole. The aim of the current draft, as before, is to promote an exclusively Western approach to the use of AI tech in the military sphere based on the so-called concept of responsible use. This is included in PP3 and PP10. These includes controversial criteria that are not known to international humanitarian law and do not enjoy consensus support. In particular, it postulates that responsible use must be human-centered, reliable, and trustworthy. The approaches of other states, including the Russian position on the need to analyze the existing international frameworks and its applicability to AI-based systems are not taken into account. The draft also promotes non-inclusive regional formats, for example, in PP15 and OP4. First and foremost, the summit on the use, responsible use of AI in military sphere. The emphasis is on the risks of the use of such tech, new technology in PP6, 9, 17 and OP3, as well as the human rights aspect which prevails over the norms and principles of international law. We consider it unacceptable to exaggerate the risks and threats of AI use. We are convinced that this application in weapon systems can significantly increase the effectiveness of task completion, including reducing the likelihood of errors and miscalculation. We view it to be counterproductive to assert the applicability of international human rights law to to AI technologies for military purposes in PP2 and OP1, as well as the participation of NGOs, including academia, civil society, business, and industry, which is included in PP14 and OP7, the initiative to organize under the UN at Geneva a an informal consultation under the auspices of the ODA as included in OP9 has questionable added value given the possibility of holding a similar informal exchange of views on military AI at no additional cost at the UN Disarmament Commission as part of consideration of the agenda item on new technologies in the context of international security. We also draw attention to the lack of detail in the modalities of these consultations, which we see in PPs 9 and 10, including a lack of clarity regarding the structure of the discussion, the participation of observers, the status of the final report, and the procedures for its approval. Without a clear understanding, there is a risk of repeating the experience of the consultations of the UN GA resolution 7962 in May of this year in New York which boiled down to a repeat of a well-known positions by a limited number of participating States the consideration of the topic of AI in this committee will also not require additional decisions on numerous organisational and financial issues related to these consultations. in view of the above we intend to vote against draft l forty six as a whole as well as paragraphs. PP1, 3, 9, 10, OP7, OP8, OP9, OP10, and we will abstain on PP2, 6, 11, 15, OP1, 3, and 4. Thank you.

Russian Federation, I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Cuba.

Mr. Chairman, we join the consensus on L20 on the open-ended working group on security of and in the use of ICTs 2021-2025 established pursuant to General Assembly resolution 75240. This draft resolution calls on the SG to provide the necessary support to from next year onwards to implement all mechanisms of the global mechanism to measure progress in the context of ICTs and to foster responsible behaviour from states in the use of ICTs. This new intergovernmental mechanism, which will work on the basis of consensus, and will work under the aegis of the United Nations is a significant step forward. The delegation of Cuba worked actively to contribute to this goal on the basis of our commitment to the working group. This was established at the behest of Russia and other countries, and we attach particular importance to the group's work, particularly for developing countries. We'd like to thank other countries for working with us. on this in spite of how long it took to reach this outcome. Given discussions within this context, there is no common understanding about this supposed neutrality of the ICTs and we shouldn't force the notion of the applicability of international law to cyberspace. Some states are of course developing offensive capabilities through ICTs, but we think that the possibility of an armed conflict in cyberspace is a real one, and that is why we must preserve ICTs being used solely for peaceful purposes and to bring about development. In this new stage that is now opening up, we need to look at legally binding standards in this domain. This would facilitate common understanding about how international law can be applied to this domain as we look at bridging the legal loopholes that currently exist. We are committed to contribute actively to achieving these goals. Thank you.

I thank you, distinguished representative of Cuba. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Israel.

Thank you, Chair. Israel would like to deliver an explanation of vote before the vote on resolution L11, relationship between disarmament and development. Even though Israel has joined consensus on the resolution as a whole in the past, we requested a vote on PP4. This paragraph makes a reference to a document that was not agreed by the General Assembly membership, and many countries, including Israel, were not involved in its drafting, nor do they agree with its content. We do not object to references made to the meeting in Kampala as such, as can be seen in other resolutions of the Non-Aligned Movement, but Israel will not support a positive reference to the final document as a whole, And we call on all member states to consider their position regarding this paragraph. I thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Israel. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Iran.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to explain our position on resolutions L63 and L46. My delegation will vote against draft decision L63, which reflects yet another example of hypocritical policies of the United States and therefore merits a firm no. The draft is redundant and unnecessary, given the existing robust compliance mechanism under international arms control, disarmament, and non-proliferation treaties. Ironically, the United States itself has repeatedly failed to comply with these mechanisms, abusing them for political purposes. Its practices of issuing unilateral reports accusing others of noncompliance serves only to exert pressure and advance its own political agenda. This double standard is unacceptable, particularly considering the US record of violating its own international obligations. The United States continues to expand and modernize its nuclear arsenal, contradicting its commitment under Article 6 of the NPT. Instead of pursuing a world free of nuclear weapons, it increases military spending, lowers the threshold for nuclear use, and seeks strategic dominance in missile defense and outer space. In this context, my delegation wishes to draw the attention of the First Committee to the profoundly alarming statement made by the President of the United States last week, announcing plans to start testing nuclear weapons and boasting the US has enough nuclear weapons to blow up the world 150 times. Such statements constitute an explicit nuclear threat and a clear declaration of intent to resume nuclear testing. in violation of Article VI of the NPT and contrary to the object and purposes of the CTBT. These remarks seriously undermine the global moratorium on nuclear testing and the decades-long international disarmament efforts. As a depository of the NPT, the United States bears a special legal and moral responsibility to uphold the treaty. Instead, it has chosen to glorify nuclear weapons and erode confidence in the international disarmament regime. We are also deeply alarmed by the US-led campaign of disinformation portraying Iran's peaceful nuclear program as a threat. The unlawful attacks carried out by the United States and the Israeli regime in June 2025 against Iran's safeguarded nuclear facilities represents a grave breach of international law and a dangerous precedent that undermines the entire disarmament and non-proliferation architecture. The United States has also failed to fulfill its obligation under other international treaties. It has not met the time-bound requirement of the Chemical Weapons Convention, has engaged in activities inconsistent with the Biological Weapons Convention and continues to destabilize arms transfer, notably to the Israeli regime, thereby becoming complicit in serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. For these reasons, my delegation will vote firmly against draft decision L.63. Turning to draft resolution L46 on artificial intelligence in the military domain, our position is as follows. Despite ongoing discussions, our understanding of the implication of artificial intelligence for international peace and security remains limited. It would be premature to claim that international law, international humanitarian law, and human rights law are fully applicable to AI. A comprehensive and inclusive study must precede any determination on whether further legal development is needed. In this regard, we recall that even after 25 years of deliberation within the OEWG on ICT security, significant divergence among States persists concerning the application of international law. We reaffirm the inalienable right of all States to develop and use emerging technologies and stress that such technologies must not be monopolized by a few countries. We are concerned about the ambiguous notion of responsible application, which reflects a selective and restrictive tendency. Accordingly, we will vote against paragraphs in both preamble and operative sections containing this terminology. In light of this explanation, my delegation will abstain on the draft resolution as a whole and on some of its paragraphs and will vote against PP3, PP10, OP7 and OP8. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Iran. The committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L11 entitled Relationship Between Disarmament and Development. I give the floor to the secretary of the committee.

Draft resolution L11 was submitted by the representative of Indonesia on behalf of the states members of the United Nations that are members of the movement of non-aligned countries on 10 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/L.11.

I thank the Secretary Committee for the statement. A separate vote has been requested on the fourth preambular paragraph of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.11. We shall now begin the voting process. I shall therefore put this paragraph to vote first. Those in favour of the fourth preambular paragraph, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on the fourth preambular paragraph of draft resolution L.11.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 112, against 3, abstentions 14. The fourth preamble paragraph is retained. The committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L11 as a whole. Those in favour of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.11 please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on draft resolution L11 entitled Relationship between disarmament and development as a whole.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

Result of the voting is as follows: in favour 172, against 1, abstention 1. Draft resolution L-11 is adopted. The Committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L.13 entitled Observance of environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of agreements on disarmament and arms control. I give the floor to the Secretary of the Committee.

Draft resolution L13 was submitted by the representative of Indonesia on behalf of the States members of the United Nations that are members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries on 10 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/L.13.

Thank you, Chair.

I thank the Secretary of the Committee for his statement. A recorded vote has been requested. The committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L13. Those in favour of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.13, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on draft resolution L13 entitled Observance of environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of agreements on disarmament and arms control.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 170, against 1, abstentions 2. Draft resolution L13 is adopted. The Committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L.14 entitled Promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation. I give the floor to the Secretary of the Committee.

Draft resolution L.14 was submitted by the representative of Indonesia on behalf of the States members of the United Nations that are members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries on 10 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/L.13. Thank you, Chair.

A recorded vote has been requested. We shall now begin the voting process. Those in favour of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.14, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on draft resolution L14 entitled Promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is unlocked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 122, against 6, abstentions 48. Draft resolution L14 is adopted. Committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L20 entitled Open-ended Working Group on Security of and in the Use of Information and Communications Technology 2021-2025 established pursuant to General Assembly resolution 75/240. I give the floor to the Secretary of the Committee.

Draft resolution L20 was submitted by the representative for Singapore on 11 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/20. The present oral statement is made in the context of rule 153 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. The present statement will also be distributed to Member States. Under the terms of operative paragraph 1, 2, 3 of the draft resolution, the General Assembly would, a, Decide to endorse the final report of the open-ended working group as contained in document A slash 80 slash 257 paragraph one B. request the Secretary General to provide the necessary support to operationalize all aspects of the global mechanism on developments in the field of ICTs in the context of international security and advancing responsible state behavior in the use of ICTs starting in 2026. in accordance with the elements agreed in Annex C of A/79/214 as endorsed in General Assembly resolution 79/237 and the additional elements agreed in Annex I of A/80/257 in order to ensure a smooth and seamless transition from the OEWG to the global mechanism. Paragraph 2. C also request the Secretary General to provide the necessary support to establish the dedicated global ICT security cooperation and capacity building portal in accordance with A slash 80 slash 257 paragraph three three The requests contained in operative paragraphs one, two, and three of the draft resolution would constitute additional workload to the departments for general assembly and conference management, section two. Office for Disarmament Affairs, section 4, the Department of Global Communication, section 28, and the Office of Information and Communication Technology, section 29C, as follows. A, for the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management, section 2. Additional resource requirements estimated at 467,000 for 2026 and 360,400 for 2027 and subsequent years, excluding staff assessment, would be required. Interpretation in all six languages would be provided for a) the two-day organizational session in New York in 2026, b) the one-day global roundtable meeting in New York in 2026 and annually thereafter. C, the five day substantive plenary session in New York in 2026 and annually thereafter, except in 2030 and every fifth year thereafter. And D, the five day review conference in New York in 2030 and every fifth year thereafter. Documentation in all six languages would be provided in the respective years for the organizational session, the dedicated thematic group meetings and dedicated intercessional meeting, the substantive plenary session and review conference. In accordance with established practices, the dates of the meeting would be determined in consultations with the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management. B. for Office for Disarmament Affairs section four additional resource requirements estimated at 153,600 for 2026 and $180,600 for 2027 and subsequent years excluding staff assessment, would be required to cover a consultant to provide technical support to ensure mandates, present and future, of the online portal that are implemented. for one administrative assistant GSOL and associated non-post cost to provide the necessary administrative support, documentation and conference servicing to meetings, both formal and informal to the global mechanism. C, for the Department for Global Communications, section 28, additional resources estimated at $12,900 for 2026 and subsequent years, an additional $6,000 for 2030 and every fifth year thereafter to cover webcasting services. D, for the Office of Information and Communication Technology, Section 29C, Additional resource requirements estimated at $349,000 for 2026 and $100 and $200 for 2027 and subsequent years would be required to cover a IT conferencing services for the organizational session. the global roundtable meetings, the substantive plenary sessions, the review conference, the simulation exercises, as well as dedicated thematic group meetings and dedicated inter-sessional meetings with video conferencing, and B, the establishment and ongoing maintenance of the dedicated global ICT security cooperation capacity building portal. Four, should the General Assembly adopt draft resolution A/1/80 L20, the Secretariat will, to the extent possible, seek to absorb these requirements within the overall approved regular budget resources for 2026, with any portion that cannot be absorbed to be reported in the context of the financial performance report for this year, the related Resource requirements for 2027 and subsequent years may be included in the proposed programme budget for the relevant years for the consideration of the General Assembly. The Secretariat also wishes to inform the General Assembly that its ability to implement the mandate will depend on the availability of adequate liquidity resources. Thank you, Chair.

I thank the Secretary of the Committee for his statement. The sponsor of the draft resolution has expressed the wish that the draft resolution be adopted by the Committee without a vote. If I hear no objection, I will take it that the Committee wishes to act accordingly. It is so decided. Draft resolution L20 is adopted. The Committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L.21 entitled "Role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament". I give the floor to the Secretary of the Committee.

Draft resolution L.21 was submitted by the representative of India on 12 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80. slash L21. The additional co-sponsors in the e-delegate portal of the first committee are currently reflected on the screen. Are there any delegations not reflected on the screen who wish to co-sponsor draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.21? If yes, May we kindly request those delegations to indicate by pressing the speaker button in order for them to be added to the list of sponsors and be duly recorded. Burundi. The additional co-sponsors for draft resolution L20 are Burundi and the Congo. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. The sponsors of the draft resolution have expressed the wish that the draft resolution be adopted by the committee without a vote. If I hear no objection, I will take it that the committee wishes to act accordingly. It is so decided. Draft resolution L21 is adopted. The committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L28 entitled Objective information on military matters, including transparency of military expenditures. I now give the floor to the Secretary of the Committee.

Draft resolution L-28 was submitted by the representative of Germany and Romania on 13 October. The sponsors of this draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/L.28. The additional co-sponsors in the e-delegate portal of the first committee are currently reflected on the screen. Are there any delegations not reflected on the screen who wish to co-sponsor draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.28? If yes, may we kindly request those delegations to indicate by pressing the speaker button in order for them to be added to the list of sponsors and be duly recorded? There are no additional co-sponsors.

I thank the Secretary of the Committee. The sponsor of the draft resolution has expressed the wish that the draft resolution be adopted by the Committee without a vote. If I hear no objection, I will take it that the Committee wishes to act accordingly. It is so decided. Draft resolution L28 is adopted. The committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L46 entitled Artificial Intelligence in the Military Domain and its Implications for International Peace and Security. I give the floor to the Secretary of the committee.

Draft resolution L46 was introduced by the representative of the Netherlands and the Republic of Korea on 14 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/46. The present oral statement is made in the context of Rule 153 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly. The present statement will also be distributed to Member States under the terms of operative paragraphs 9 and 10 of the draft resolution.

The General Assembly would decide to convene informal exchanges in Geneva.

For States to further share perspectives on observations and conclusions as presented in the report of the Secretary-General, including opportunities and challenges, existing and emerging normative proposals and next steps, and that the Office for Disarmament Affairs will provide the necessary support to convening the informal exchanges and a written factual summary to the first committee at its 81st session, operative paragraph nine. B, decide that the formal exchanges should be composed of a three-day meeting in 2026 and that these consultations shall be open to the full participation of all member states and observer states and international and regional organizations. The International Committee of the Red Cross, academia and civil society, including the scientific and technological community, and industry, operative paragraph 10. Three, the request contained in operative paragraphs nine and 10 of the draft resolution would constitute additional workload to the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management, section two, Office for Disarmament Affairs, section four, and the United Nations Office in Geneva, 29E, as follows. For the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management, Section 2, implementation of the mandate would entail resource requirements estimated at $65,700, excluding staff assessment, in 2026. Interpretation in all six languages would be provided for the three-day meeting consisting of two three-hour meetings per day over the three-day period in Geneva in 2026. The request over documentation would entail one pre-session document with a total word count of 3,000 words in all six languages in 2026. In accordance with established practice, the date of the meeting would be determined in consultations with the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management in Geneva. B. For Office for Disarmament Affairs, section 4, additional resource requirements estimated at $9,500 would be required for 2026 to cover the travel cost of two staff of the Office of Disarmament Affairs to provide technical and substantive support for the meeting in Geneva. For the United Nations office in Geneva, section 29E, additional resource requirements estimated at $2,400 would be required in 2026 for a sound technician and recording operator for the meeting in Geneva. Four, should the General Assembly adopt draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.46, the Secretariat will, to the extent possible, seek to absorb these requirements within the overall approved regular budget resources for 2026 with any portion that cannot be absorbed to be reported in the context of the financial performance report for the year the secretariat also wishes to inform the general assembly that its ability to implement the mandate will depend on the availability of adequate liquidity resources The additional co-sponsors in the delegate portal of the first committee are currently reflected on the screen. Are there any delegations not reflected on the screen who wish to co-sponsor draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.46? If yes, may we kindly request those delegations to indicate by pressing the speaker button in order for them to be added to the list of sponsors and be duly recorded. There are no additional co-sponsors here.

I thank the Secretary of the Committee. Separate votes are being requested on first, second, third, sixth, ninth, tenth and fifteenth preamble paragraphs. and operative paragraphs one, three, four, seven, eight, nine, and 10 of the draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.46. We should now begin the voting process. I shall therefore put these paragraphs to the vote first, one by one. Those in favour of the first preambular paragraph, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on the first preambular paragraph of draft resolution L.46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 151, against 1, abstentions 6. The first preamular paragraph is retained. Those in favour of the second preamular paragraph, please signify, those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on the second preambular paragraph of draft resolution L.46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked, Chair.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 145, against 1, abstention 11. The second preamble paragraph is retained. Those in favour of the third preamble paragraph please signify, those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on the third preambular paragraph of draft resolution L.46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked, Chair.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 148, against 2, abstentions 7. The third preamble paragraph is retained. Those in favour of the sixth preamble paragraph, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

Yeah. The committee is now voting on the sixth preambular paragraph of draft resolution 46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed.

The machine is locked.

Chair.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 150, against zero, abstentions eight. The sixth preambular paragraph is retained. Those in favour of the ninth preambular paragraph, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on the ninth preambular paragraph of draft resolution L.46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 149, against 2, abstentions 7. The ninth preamble paragraph is retained. Those in favour of the tenth preambular paragraph, please signify those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on the tenth preambular paragraph of draft resolution L46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 147, against 2, abstentions 8. The tenth preamble paragraph is retained. Those in favour of the 15th preambular paragraph please signify, those against abstentions.

The committee is now voting on the 15th preambular paragraph of draft resolution L-46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 146, against zero, abstentions ten. The fifteenth preamble paragraph is retained. Those in favour of operative paragraph one, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on operative paragraph one of draft resolution L46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows in favour 144, against one, abstentions 12. Operative paragraph one is retained. Those in favour of paragraph 3 please signify, those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on operative paragraph 3 of draft resolution L-46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is unlocked.

Is locked, sorry.

The machine is locked.

Chair.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 148, against 1, abstentions 7. Operative paragraph 3 is retained. Those in favour of operative paragraph 4, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on operative paragraph 4 of draft resolution L46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 149, against zero, abstentions seven. Operative paragraph four is retained. Those in favour of operative paragraph seven, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on operative paragraph seven of draft resolution L46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that the votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 144, against 3, abstentions 9. Operative paragraph 7 is retained. Those in favour of operative paragraph 8, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on operative paragraph 8 of draft resolution L-046.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 147, against three, abstentions four. Operative paragraph eight is retained. Those in favour of operative paragraph nine, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on operative paragraph nine of draft resolution L-46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 148, against three, abstentions six. Operative paragraph nine is retained. Those in favour of operative paragraph ten, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on operative paragraph ten of draft resolution L46.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 143, against 4, abstentions 7. Paragraph 10 is retained. The committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L-46 as a whole. Those in favour of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.46, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on draft resolution L46 entitled Artificial Intelligence in the Military Domain and its Implications for International Peace and Security as a whole.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 163, against five, abstentions five. Draft resolution L-46 is adopted. The Committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L-53 entitled Youth, disarmament and non-proliferation. I now give the floor to the Secretary of the Committee.

Draft resolution L.53 was submitted by the representative of the Republic of Korea on 14 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/L.53. The additional co-sponsors in the e-delegate portal of the first committee are currently reflected on the screen. Are there any delegations not reflected on the screen who wish to co-sponsor draft resolution A/C.1/78/L.53? Yes, may we kindly request those delegations to indicate by pressing the speaker button in order for them to be added to the list of sponsors and be duly recorded. The additional co-sponsors for draft resolution L.53 are as follows: Congo, Sierra Leone, Canada.

Separate votes have been requested on the eighth and 14th preamble paragraph of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.53. We shall now begin the voting process. I shall therefore put this paragraph to the vote first. Those in favour of the eighth preamble paragraph, please signify those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on the eighth preamble paragraph of draft resolution L-53.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 157, against 1, abstention 4. The eighth preamble paragraph is retained. Those in favour of the fourteenth preamble paragraph, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on the 14th preambular paragraph of draft resolution L.53.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 152, against one, abstention five. The 14th preamble paragraph is retained. The committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L-53 as a whole. Those in favour of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.53, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on draft resolution L53 entitled Youth, disarmament and non-proliferation as a whole.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed, the machine is locked.

Result of the voting is as follows: in favour 169, against 2, abstention 1. Draft resolution A-53 is adopted. The Committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L-63 entitled Compliance with Non-Proliferation, Arms Limitation and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments. I give the floor to the Secretary of the Committee.

Draft decision L-63 was submitted by the representative of the United States of America on 16 October. The sponsors of the draft decision are contained in document A/C1/80/L63. Thank you, Chair.

A recorded vote has been requested. We shall now begin the voting process. Those in favour of draft resolution A/C1/80/L63, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on draft decision L-63 entitled Compliance with Non-Proliferation, Arms Limitation and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows in favour 162, against 2, abstentions 6. Graph resolution L63 is adopted. I now call on delegations wishing to explain their position after the vote. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Argentina.

Thank you very much, Chairman. We would like to make an explanation of vote on L11 and L53, which we voted in favour of, which contains language on the SDGs and the 2030 Agenda. from which we disassociate. We have been saying that for us, the 2030 agenda is made-up of non-binding obligations and states have the liberty to decide whether or not to implement them themselves.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Our delegation abstained on L63, compliance with non-proliferation, arms limitation and disarmament agreements and commitments because we believe that the United States does not have the moral right to put forward a text such as this in the first committee. In the international domain, the United States has historically undermined the non-proliferation disarmament agenda. the United States is the only country that has used a nuclear bomb and spends much more on weapons than any other state the United States has the highest number of nuclear weapons ready to be used and it has an aggressive military doctrine it also has a rather ambiguous threshold for potentially using such weapons. In practice, the United States violates the spirit and the letter of these agreements as well as the achievements from review conferences. The United States also continues to delay its ratification of the CTBT. There is another speaker speaking in the room and it is making it difficult to interpret. The United States is the country that is hindering the full implementation of Article 10.

If I interrupt this intervention, I have a point of order as made Israel, please.

Mr. Chairman, this same country is also hindering the implementation of Article 11.

Sorry, I have to interrupt this intervention. I give the floor to the representative of Israel for a point of order.

Thank you, Chair. I'm sorry to interrupt, but I am obliged to raise a point of order. In accordance with the established practice of the General Assembly and its committees, as reflected in official documents and guidelines issued by the United Nations, delegations are expected to refrain from any form of visual or political display during meetings. This includes the exhibition of flags, banners, posters, photographs, or other visual materials of a political nature within the assembly hall or conference room. I would therefore like to request through you, Chair, that the representative of Cuba respects this forum and refrain from displays that are inconsistent with the decorum of the United Nations. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Israel. I take duly note of her statement. I encourage all delegations to respect the decorum of meetings of the UN. I give back the floor to the representative of Cuba to finish her intervention.

Thank you very much, Chairman. Just to conclude with our statement, I just wanted to say that we believe that the United States promotes non-conventional wars throughout the world and encourage terrorism with complete disregard for international law. This goes against international peace and security. Thank you.

I thank the representative of Cuba. I give now the floor to the distinguished representative of India.

Thank you, Chair. On L46, India has voted in favor of the resolution. However, India has abstained on its PP2 and OP1. India would like to record its view that armed conflict is governed by international humanitarian law. India does not accept obligations arising out of international human rights law in armed conflicts, including the use of emerging technologies such as the use of AI in the military domain. Further, the application of international human rights law does not fall under the subject matter of this committee. I thank you, Chair.

I thank the representative of India. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mexico.

Thank you, Chairman. Mexico voted in favor of the draft L46, Artificial Intelligence in the Military Domain and its Implications for International Peace and Security, because we are convinced of the importance of the first committee addressing this matter. I reiterate that for my country the applications of swift technological change should be used to foster human development and not to make the military machinery more efficient. Because this is a new matter in the first committee, it seems to us that some paragraphs or concepts could impact the future treatment of the topic and that is why we abstained on some paragraphs. We do not agree with the persistent use of the phrase responsible use or the responsible application of AI in the military domain in PP3 when member states have not yet had the opportunity to reach an agreement on what this actually means. And particularly if the co-authors decided to determine a priori what they believe responsible to mean. We also see a potential trend for the development or establishment of standards or norms of behavior in this area. The asymmetry in the discussion between those countries who already incorporate AI into their military activities in comparison with those who don't do so is quite clear. This is particularly clear in the parties to the resolution moving forward in some sections of the resolution, who are trying to speak about recognising inclusive multilateral exchanges that have taken place and those that can be understood as talks between small groups of like-minded countries as is enshrined in PP15. Mexico also wishes to raise its concern about the resistance to include clear references about the importance of significant human control of artificial intelligence. Thank you.

I thank the representative of Mexico. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Egypt.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to deliver this explanation of vote regarding Egypt's position on L.46. Egypt acknowledges positively the efforts of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and South Korea in drafting this resolution on artificial intelligence in the military domain and its implications for international peace and security. We welcome the consideration of the General Assembly through its first committee of such an important topic with wide-ranging implications on international peace and security, particularly within the current context of heightened geopolitical tensions and increased polarization. It's for this reason that Egypt has voted in favor of the draft resolution as well as its voted paragraphs, as it is our belief that it contains good basis to be built on. That said, Egypt is of the view that the draft resolution could have benefited from a more enhanced and strengthened language, particularly in the following aspects. First, Human control can neither be disregarded nor referenced in a thinned out manner when it comes to human life. Aspects of judgment, control, and usage must all be clearly defined and contextualized in discussions addressing artificial intelligence in military domain. Second, without prejudice to potential opportunities of AI, these opportunities shouldn't be equated with the serious challenges and risks posed by military applications of AI. Our focus needs to be directed to addressing those challenges and risks as a priority. Third, the full applicability of international law, including international humanitarian law in all areas and aspects of military applications of artificial intelligence and throughout its life cycle should be respected. Finally, we wish to affirm our readiness as a core group member to continue our engagement with the aim of updating and developing the text in a manner that copes with the current challenges. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the representative of Egypt. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States.

Thank you, Chair. We would like to provide explanations for some of the U.S. votes in cluster five on other disarmament issues and international security. The United States is pleased to join consensus on the resolution regarding the open-ended working group on security of and in the use of information and communications, ICT technologies. We appreciate the efforts made to produce this resolution. The United States recognizes the significance of the global mechanism and maintains that it must not add any new exorbitant costs to the UN budget. We also affirm that the UN has no operational role in capacity building aside from facilitating voluntary mechanisms. Acknowledging the benefits and progress made by the final report of the OEWG, the United States reiterates its strong disassociation with paragraphs 9, 12, 28, 43d, and 53a of the final report. The United States remains deeply disappointed that the report retains references to gender and the UN Sustainable development goals. These topics distract from the discussion of security and use of information and communication technologies, including cyberspace. The United States strongly affirms that the references to gender and SDGs have no place in a report on cyberspace stability and will continue to push back when discussion under the global mechanism references these topics. Chair, we would like to use this opportunity to explain our opposition to L46, Artificial Intelligence in the Military Domain, and its implications for international peace and security. The Trump administration has made clear that the United States will reject any and all efforts by the UN to assert control over AI. This resolution risks starting down the unwelcome and unhelpful path of creating a global governance regime designed to institute centralized control over a critical technology and the United States of America's war fighters. Attempting to determine the future of AI at the UN would be a gross violation of national sovereignty and would stifle innovation. We also want to clarify our position specifically with regard to PP2 and OP1. The United States rejects the inclusion of international human rights law as relevant for this topic. While we appreciate the resolution sponsors engagement with the United States, the United States has been and will continue to be the gold standard for how AI is used in all domains, including the military. The United States Department of War was the first military in the world to issue a policy on autonomy in weapons systems and to adopt ethical principles for the use of AI in military operations. While we welcome engagement with nations on this topic outside the UN, we cannot support the proposed resolution. Chair, finally, on the resolution regarding L13, observance of environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of agreements on disarmament and arms control, We remain concerned with both the implied direct connection between the general environmental standards and multilateral arms control, as well as with the periodicity of the resolution. The United States policy on L13 observance of environmental norms in the drafting and implementation of agreements on disarmament and arms control was described in the joint statement delivered by France on behalf of France, the United Kingdom, and the United States. While the United States broke consensus and voted against this resolution, we would like to emphasize the significant leadership of the United States government, in particular, the National Nuclear Security Administration in efforts to address environmental remediation. Thank you.

I thank the representative of the United States. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Iran.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. My delegation position on draft resolution L20 and L21 is as follows. On draft decision L20 entitled OEWG on Security of and in the Use of ICT, established pursuant to General Assembly Resolution 75/240, my delegation extends its sincere appreciation to Ambassador Ghafur, his team, and the Secretariat for their tireless and professional efforts which led to the establishment of a single track, state-led, consensus-based United Nations global mechanism. While we acknowledge the progress made and welcome improvements in the final report, we remain concerned about the imbalance between implementing existing voluntary norms and developing new norms, including the elaboration of legally binding obligations in the use of ICTs. The report also fails to fully reflect the range of threats identified by a number of states, especially those related to the responsibility of private sector actors and platforms with extra territorial impact. To address these shortcomings, my delegation proposed the compilation of list of new norms and threats identified by states during the OEWG process to guide the future work of the UN global mechanism. We believe these proposals would help bridge the significant gaps within the pillars on norms and threats. In line with paragraphs 14 and 36E of the final report, my delegation will remain engaged in promoting the consideration of new norms and critical threats within the framework of the UN global mechanism. Given the unique characteristic of ICTs, we also emphasize the importance of developing legally binding instruments to ensure their peaceful use. The mandate of the future mechanism, as reflected in Annex C of the Third Annual Progress Report, includes such development. We welcome this decision that accredited stakeholders will participate on a non-objection basis and hold a consultative status, consistent with the intergovernmental nature of the process. It is essential that the five pillars of the mechanism mandate are treated equally with full respect of a state sovereignty and consensus-based decision-making, as clearly reaffirmed in Annex C of the third APR. Iran remains committed to working constructively within the United Nations global mechanism to strengthen the security of and in the use of ICTs. On draft resolution L-21 entitled Rule of Science and Technology in the Context of International Security and Disarmament, we recognize the vital importance of the international exchange of dual use and high technology products, services, and know-how for peaceful purposes, which are essential for the socioeconomic development of all societies, particularly developing countries. At the same time, we acknowledge that certain military applications of the scientific and technological advances may contribute to the development of weapons of mass destruction. It is therefore necessary to strike a careful balance between facilitation, the fullest possible exchange of technology for peaceful purposes, and preventing its misuse for the development of WMDs. In regulating such transfers, the legitimate defense and security concerns of all states must be fully respected. This objective can only be achieved through an inclusive, transparent, and non-discriminatory multilateral process leading to universally applicable guidelines negotiated with the participation of all states. In this regard, Iran reiterates the concerns of developing countries over the exclusive and ad hoc export control regimes that restrict access to dual-use technologies and hinder the socio-economic development. Further adjustments to the draft remains necessary to restore its balanced intent. I thank you.

Thank you, representative of Iran. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Israel.

Thank you, Chair. Israel would like to deliver an explanation of vote after the vote on resolution L20. Israel wishes to express its sincere and profound appreciation to Singapore and to Ambassador Ghafur and his very skilled team, as well as the devoted and highly professional UNODA Secretariat for their steadfast leadership throughout the OEWG process, culminating in the successful adoption by consensus of the final report. This achievement underscores the fundamental importance of consensus as the cornerstone of the OEWG's work. It is in this spirit of inclusivity and shared ownership that has allowed us to advance to a common understanding of what constitutes responsible state behavior in cyberspace. While some of our reservations remain unresolved and not all of our concerns have been fully reflected in the final version of the report, we have recognized the inherent value of compromise. In the spirit of consensus, Israel has demonstrated its flexibility. Accordingly, Israel joined other delegations and supported the adoption of this final report and its annexes as presented in A/RES/80. We reaffirm that Israel remains committed to working collaboratively with fellow member states and to maintaining a constructive and forward-looking approach in advancing an inclusive and transparent dialogue on cybersecurity within the UN framework. Chair, as the mandate of the current OEWG has terminated and we turn now our attention to the establishment of a future permanent institutional dialogue, Israel underscores the need for consensus to remain the guiding principle in all our decision-making. Upholding this principle leading to the creation of our new mechanism and while working in it is essential in ensuring that the interests and perspectives of all member states are respected and that our collective efforts are credible, balanced, and effective. Israel further reiterates that building a common understanding of the application of international law to the use of ICTs by states must precede the formulation or adoption of any new rules, norms, or principles. In this context, we also reaffirm Israel's position that there is currently no need for any new legally binding instruments. Finally, Israel strongly supports international capacity building efforts, especially those aimed at enhancing the global cyber resilience. These efforts must be demand driven, transparent, and politically neutral, and must respect the sovereignty and needs of recipient states. The Israeli delegation participated in this process from its inception. Israel has long been an active and constructive voice in the cybersecurity domain, including as a member of the 2015 GGE, which helped lay the foundation for the current framework of responsible state behavior in cyberspace. Moreover, Israel will continue to contribute meaningfully to global cyber resilience and to the stability and security of the cyberspace. I thank you, Chair.

I thank the representative of Israel, distinguished delegates. We have heard from the last speaker for the explanation of vote after the vote on cluster five, other disarmament measures and international security. The committee will now turn to cluster six, regional disarmament and security as contained in informal paper 2/Rev.4. First, I shall give the floor to delegations wishing to make general statements or to introduce draft resolutions or decisions under cluster six. I recognize the distinguished representative of Algeria.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to present you with draft resolution L27. strengthening of security and cooperation in the Mediterranean region after the necessary technical amendments were made. This draft resolution is a commitment to turning the Mediterranean into a locus for dialogue, prosperity and stability. This region is a meeting point for civilizations and economic progress. It also faces security challenges, including terrorism and transborder organized crime as well as illicit trafficking and weapons and this requires a multi-pronged and comprehensive approach and coordination of efforts. The draft resolution acts on the following: a security pillar through the establishment of regional international cooperation to counter terrorism in all its forms and phenomena as well as addressing transborder illicit trafficking in weapons as well as transborder organized crime in addition to the transfer of information and institutional capacity building the political pillar strengthening political dialogue to peacefully settle conflicts amongst member states in full respect to the UN or for the UN charter and relevant international law principles development and humanitarian pillar by addressing socioeconomic gaps thanks to or based on national efforts to ensure effective and dignified participation by all peoples of the region in sustainable development. I wish to thank all those who have enriched the relevant Secretary-General's report, including through valuable contributions to this year's report. We hope that this draft resolution will continue to be supported. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, representative of Algeria. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the European Union.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have the honor to speak on behalf of the EU and its member states with the alignment of North Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine, Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iceland, Norway, and San Marino to deliver a general statement with regard to draft resolution L27, Strengthening of Security and Cooperation in the Mediterranean Region. OP5 of the draft resolution calls upon all countries of the Mediterranean region to adhere to relevant multilaterally negotiated legal instruments related to the field of disarmament and non-proliferation, thus creating the conditions necessary for strengthening peace and cooperation in the region. We would like to underline that the reference to relevant legal instruments includes, in our view, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which, despite 178 ratifications, has regrettably not yet entered into force. The CTBT has established a powerful norm against nuclear testing and is making an invaluable contribution to international peace and security for the good of humanity. Promoting the universalization and early entry into force of the CTBT are among the EU's top priorities. All EU 27 member states have ratified the treaty and remain strongly committed to pursuing the achievements of its objectives. The EU also continues to provide significant financial support for the activities of the Preparatory Commission of the CTBTO in order to strengthen its monitoring and verification capabilities. Confirming the EU Member States continued active engagement, the EU has become a supporter of ten actions of the UN Secretary-General's agenda for disarmament, among which action four bring the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty into force. Mr. Chair, The EU deeply deplores Russia's decision to revoke its ratification of the CTT, bringing the number of remaining annexed two states from eight to nine, thus further delaying the entry into force of the treaty, which requires all 44 annexed two states to ratify. The European Union calls on Russia to continue to respect the object and purpose of the treaty, of which it remains a signatory. The EU reiterates its call on all states who have not yet done so to sign and ratify the CDBT without any preconditions or delay. In particular, we address this call to the now nine remaining Annex II states whose ratification is essential for the treaty's entry into force. Pending the CDBT's entry into force, The EU calls upon all states to maintain moratoria on nuclear weapons test explosions or any other nuclear explosions and to refrain from any actions that would undermine the treaty's object and purpose. Nuclear weapon test explosions or any other nuclear explosions represent a serious threat to international peace and security and undermine the global non-proliferation regime. It is important that all state signatories adhere to the objectives of the treaty. Nonetheless, the absence of the CTBT's entry into force prevents the use of on-site inspections, an important verification tool. Only the entry into force of the treaty would outlaw in a verifiable way nuclear weapon test explosions or any other nuclear explosions. We therefore continue to use every opportunity to advocate the treaty's ratification and universalization also during this first committee session. Mr. Chair, the EU also supports the universalization of the Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation, currently with 145 subscribing states, that aims at curbing the proliferation of ballistic missiles capable of delivering WMDs and contains confidence building measures to reduce the risk of miscalculation posed by the flight tests of ballistic missiles and space launches, thus contributing to objectives of OP-6 of the draft resolution. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the representative of the European Union. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Pakistan.

Thank you, Chair. I wish to introduce Pakistan's annual resolutions presented under cluster six. Chair, the importance of regional approaches to regulating arms, fostering confidence, and securing peace have long been recognized. Drawing lessons from several regions of the world, Pakistan has for decades led initiatives in the UN to advance regional disarmament, conventional arms control, and CBMs. These resolutions reaffirm the complementarity between regional and global approaches to arms control, disarmament, and confidence building as essential to international peace and stability. Draft resolution L6 links CBMs to regional concerns, emphasizing peaceful dispute resolution and disarmament for development. It calls for dialogue, compliance with arms control agreements, and UN consultation with states in regions of tension to further CBM efforts. Draft resolution L7 takes note of proposals for disarmament at regional and sub-regional levels and underlines the need for efforts to promote regional disarmament in accordance with the specific characteristics and requirement of each region. Draft resolution L8 recognizes the crucial role of conventional arms control in promoting regional and international peace and security and notes that balance in the preservation of defence capabilities of states at the lower level of armaments contributes to peace and stability and should be a prime objective of conventional arms control. It also notes with interest initiatives taken in various parts of the world. Chair, recognising the feedback received from delegations in previous sessions, we have replaced Conference on Disarmament with the UN Disarmament Commission, considering its deliberative mandate to consider formulation of principles that can serve as a framework for regional agreements on conventional arms control. We will be ready to engage with delegations to discuss proposals for the next cycle of the Disarmament Commission. Taking this opportunity, we wish to thank delegations for their strong support to these resolutions in previous years, and we look forward to their continued support. Mr. Chair, I thank you.

I thank the representative of Pakistan. The committee will now listen to delegations wishing to explain their position before we take action on the draft proposals listed under class six, regional disarmament and security. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of.

Belarus.

Thank you, Chair. The Republic of Belarus is a staunch supporter of arms control and confidence and security building measures at the regional and sub-regional levels. This is why we fully support resolution L9, confidence and security building measures in the regional and sub-regional context. L7 regional disarmament and L8 conventional arms control at the regional and sub-regional level. The purpose of regional conventional arms control instruments and CSBM's is to reduce the risk of military incidents and the possibility of military activity in general. This also decreases the risk of incidents at the borders of participating states. In the European continent, an entire system of mutually connected and mutually supported political and legally binding agreements on arms control and CSBMs were formed. The central elements include the treaty on the conventional forces in Europe, the Open Skies Treaty and the Vienna Document on CSBM. Unfortunately, in the context of a deep crisis in European security, the CFE treaty has effectively ceased to exist and the visibility and effectiveness of the OST and Vienna Document have significantly diminished against a backdrop of escalating military and political, increased political tensions in Europe, there has been a sharp rise in military expenditures leading to the militarization of the full region. We hope that the resolution adopted today will remind everyone that security and stability should be strengthened not by building up military capabilities and arms races, but by developing and implementing arms control and CSBM.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair. India will vote against the resolution on L8 as well as its OP, which requests the UN Disarmament Commission to consider the formulation of principles that can serve as a framework for regional agreements on conventional arms control. In 1993, the UNDC had by consensus adopted guidelines and recommendations on regional disarmament. In 1999, the UNDC adopted guidelines on conventional arms control and disarmament. Further, in 2017, the UNDC adopted by consensus recommendations on practical confidence building measures in the field of conventional weapons. In light of this, we fail to see what value will be added by UNDC in further deliberations on this subject, which has already been considered at length earlier by it. Further, we believe that the security concerns of the states extend beyond narrowly defined regions. Consequently, the notion of preservation of a balance in defense capabilities in the regional or sub-regional context is both unrealistic and unacceptable. We are therefore not convinced that conventional arms control, which is a global issue, needs to be pursued primarily in the regional and sub-regional context. Due to this reason, India will vote against PP7. I thank you, Chair.

Thank you, the representative of India. The committee will now proceed to take action on the draft resolution L6 entitled Confidence Building Measures in the Regional and Sub-Regional Context. I give the floor to the secretary of the committee.

Draft resolution L6 was submitted by the representative of Pakistan on 3 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/L6. The additional cosponsors in the delegate portal of the First Committee are currently reflected on the screen. Are there any delegations not reflected on the screen who wish to cosponsor draft resolution A/C.1/80/L6? Is it the case that the delegations are ready to sponsor the resolution? C1/80/L6. If yes, may we kindly request those delegations to indicate by pressing the speaker button in order for them to be added to the list of sponsors and be duly recorded. no additional co-sponsors, Chair.

The sponsors of the draft resolutions have expressed the wish that the draft resolution be adopted by the Committee without a vote. If I hear no objection, I will take it that the Committee wishes to act accordingly. It is so decided. Resolution L-6 is adopted. Committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L7 entitled Regional Disarmament. I give the floor to the Secretary of the Committee.

Draft resolution L7 was submitted by the representative of Pakistan on 3 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/L7. The additional co-sponsors in the e-delegate portal of the First Committee are presently reflected on the screen, are there any delegations not reflected on the screen who wish to co-sponsor draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.7? If yes, may we kindly request those delegations to indicate by pressing the speaker button in order for them to be added to the list of co-sponsors and be duly recorded. There are no additional co-sponsors here.

The sponsors of the draft resolutions have expressed the wish that the draft resolutions be adopted by the committee without a vote. If I hear no objection, I will take it that the committee wishes to act accordingly. It is so decided. Draft resolution L7 is adopted. The committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L8 entitled Conventional arms control at the regional and sub regional levels. I give now the floor to the secretary of the committee.

Draft resolution L8 was submitted by the representative of Pakistan on 3 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/L.8. The additional co-sponsors in the delegate portal of the first committee are currently reflected on the screen. Are there any delegations not reflected on the screen who wish to co-sponsor draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.8? If yes, May we kindly request those delegations to indicate by pressing the speaker button in order for them to be added to the list of sponsors and be duly recorded. There are no additional co-sponsors.

Separate votes have been requested on the seventh preamble paragraph and operative paragraph two of the draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.8. We shall now begin the voting process. I shall therefore put these paragraphs to the vote first, one by one. Those in favour of the seventh preambular paragraph, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on the seventh preambular paragraph of draft resolution L8.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 156, against one, abstention five. The seventh preamble paragraph is retained. Those in favour of operative paragraph two, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on operative paragraph two of draft resolution L-8.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 105, against three, abstentions 50. Operative paragraph two is retained. The committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.8 as a whole. Those in favour of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.8, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on draft resolution L.8,

entitled Conventional Arms Control at the Regional and Sub-Regional Levels as a whole.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 171, against 1, abstention 3. Graph resolution L8 is adopted. Committee will now proceed to take action on graph resolution L10. entitled Implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace. I now give the floor to the Secretary of the Committee.

The draft resolution L10 was submitted by the representative of Indonesia on behalf of the States members of the United Nations that are members of Non-Aligned Movement on 10 October. The sponsors of the draft resolution are contained are contained in document A/C.1/80/L.10. Thank you, Chair.

I record the vote has been requested. We shall now begin the voting process. Those in favour of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.10, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee.

Is now voting on draft resolution L10 entitled Implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the floor?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 122, against 6, abstention 33. Draft resolution L10 is adopted. The Committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L27 entitled strengthening of security and cooperation in the mediterranean region. i will give the floor to the secretary of the committee.

Draft resolution l twenty seven was submitted by the representative of algeria on thirteen october. the sponsors of the draft resolution are contained in document A/C.1/80/L.27. The additional cosponsors in the e-delegate portal of the first committee are currently reflected on the screen. Are there any delegations not reflected on the screen who wish to cosponsor draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.27? If yes, May we kindly request those delegations to indicate by pressing the speaker button in order for them to be added to the list of sponsors and be duly recorded. The additional co-sponsors for draft proposal L.27 are as follows: Yemen, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Uganda, Sudan. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Separate votes have been requested on operative paragraphs two and five of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.27. We shall now begin the voting process. I shall therefore put these paragraphs to the vote first, one by one. Those in favour of operative paragraph two, please signify. Those against. Abstentions.

The committee is now voting on operative paragraph two of draft resolution L.27.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favour 153, against 5, abstentions 2. Operative paragraph 2 is retained. Those in favour of operative paragraph 5 please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The committee is now voting on operative paragraph 5 of draft resolution L27.

The voting machine is unlocked.

Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows. In favour 155, against four, abstention two, operative paragraph five is retained. The committee will now proceed to take action on draft resolution L27 as a whole. Those in favour of draft resolution A/C.1/80/L.27 please signify, those against abstentions.

The committee is now voting on draft.

Resolution L27 entitled Strengthening of security and cooperation in the Mediterranean region as a whole.

The voting machine is unlocked.

The delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the board?

The voting has been completed. The machine is locked.

The result of the voting is as follows in favour 164 against four abstention three the after resolution l twenty seven is adopted i now call on delegations wishing to explain their position after the vote I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation.

Distinguished Chairman, we would like to speak on our decision in terms of draft L.8, conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels. Russia voted in favor of draft L8 as a whole, as well as PP7, and is grateful to Pakistan for its efforts in finalizing this document. At the same time, we consider it necessary to clarify our vote on OP2, which calls on the UN Disarmament Commission to consider developing principles for regional agreements on conventional arms control. We do not object in general to the possible consideration of conventional arms issues by the DC. However, we believe that the issue is not a priority. and needs no discussion in the near future. This is especially true given that relatively recently, in 2017, the DC agreed by consensus on the recommendations on practical CBMs in the field of conventional arms. At this stage, the document appears to be sufficient. At present, we are satisfied that the Commission is studying both the traditional topic of nuclear disarmament and the issue of new technology in the context of international security. We are convinced that this approach best addresses the current interests and requests of the international community. In view of the above, we assume that the topic of conventional weapons in OP-2 will not be included in the agenda of the DC in the near future. In this regard, Russia abstained from the vote on this paragraph. Thank you.

I thank the representative of the Russian Federation and I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Israel.

Thank you, Chair. I would like to present Israel's explanation of vote after the vote on resolution L-27, strengthening the security and cooperation in the Mediterranean region, specifically regarding OP2 and OP5, as they do not reflect the reality in the Middle East and the Mediterranean region. Regarding OP2, it is important to stress that peace in the Mediterranean, and specifically in the Middle East, is the ultimate goal of the State of Israel. As stated throughout this committee, Israel endorsed President Trump's peace plan for the region. This plan seeks to extend ties and bonds between states and people, yet doesn't compromise the necessary and legitimate security needs of states, which cannot be underestimated in our region. Yet this one-dimensional paragraph is misleading and does not reflect the new regional reality. Some examples of the omissions that are missing in the text are the activities of non-state actors and radical groups that promote terror in the whole region, the ongoing missile proliferation by the Islamic Republic of Iran to numerous terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis, as well as Iran's clandestine activities in the R&D of chemical and biological weapons. Regarding OP5, Israel believes that due regard should be given first and foremost to the serious lack of compliance. Noncompliance remains a serious, alarming issue, especially in the Middle East. For these reasons, we voted no on these paragraphs and the resolution as a whole. I thank you, Chair.

I thank the representative of Israel. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States.

Thank you, Chair. We would like to provide explanations for several of our votes in cluster six on regional disarmament and security. The United States must disassociate from text in several resolutions in cluster six and across different thematic clusters, including L4, L8, L9, L11, L13, L19, L26, L30, L33, L42, L49, L51, L52, L53, L54, and L55 due to unacceptable and unnecessary texts on or related to sustainable development goals, gender, and/or pact for the future. The United States rejects all references to SDGs and firmly believes that the 2030 agenda and the SDGs advance a program of soft global governance inconsistent with US sovereignty and adverse to the interests of Americans. We believe all countries should be similarly wary of such an affront to their sovereignty. At the same time, we respect the sovereignty of other nations. We understand that they may choose to pursue individual objectives covered within the SDGs. In many cases, the United States proposed replacing text calling for achieving SDGs with text called for achieving global prosperity in its place. We regret that the pen holders were unwilling to accept these suggestions towards a goal that we believe could have united us all. Furthermore, the United States must again make clear its position that the pact for the future does not create or alter existing international legal obligations. Chair, it is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female. To achieve this, we insist upon using clear and accurate language that recognizes women are biologically female and men are biologically male. The United States expects the UN to ensure that its documents and programming align with that policy by using terminology that clearly refers to women and men, girls and boys, and avoids ambiguous terms. Likewise, the United States does not support organizational practices that promote diversity, equity, or inclusion initiatives. These are important aspects of the U.S. government's broader, quote, back to the basics, end quote, approach to multilateral institutions, as well as the administration's concerted efforts to oppose efforts to hijack this committee's work and furtherance of social goals unrelated to this committee's core mission. Chair, at the same time, I want to be clear that the United States strongly supports the protection of women and girls, the defense of their rights, and their empowerment. To that end, we remain committed to protecting and promoting the ability of women and girls to engage in all aspects of social, civil, political, and economic life. That said, the United States opposes considerations of anything other than merit in hiring or promotion. For this reason, the United States must also disassociate itself from text in these and additional resolutions, including L8, L29, L43, L47, L51, L52, L53, L58, L59, and L60, which calls for, recognizes, or promotes, quote, inclusivity, end quote, and or the equal equitable or full participation of women and/or women and men in relevant conventions, processes, or decision-making, or, quote, equitable geographical and gender representation, end quote, rather than decisions about participation on the basis of merit. Thank you, Chair.

I thank the representative of the United States. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Iran.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have taken the floor to explain the position of my delegation on draft resolution L27 entitled Strengthening of Security and Cooperation in the Mediterranean Region. On L27, Iran voted in favor of operative paragraph two of this draft resolution, which calls for the elimination of all causes of tension in the region, along with promotion of just and lasting solutions to its persistent problems. More importantly, our support for this paragraph is based on its call to ensure the withdrawal of foreign forces of occupation while respecting the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of all countries of the region, as well as the right of people to self-determination, including full adherence to the principles of non-use or threat of use of force and the inadmissibility of the acquisition of the territory by force. These are the basic principles of international law and enjoy our strong support. My delegation also voted in favor of operative paragraph five of this draft resolution as it highlights the importance of adherence to all of the multilaterally negotiated legal instrument on disarmament and non-proliferation. The Israeli regime is the only case in point. Therefore, this is in line with the repeated calls by successive NPT review conferences on Israel to accede without any delay and precondition as a non-nuclear weapon party to the NPT. Should these calls be heard and implemented accordingly, a main source of regional and global insecurity caused by the clandestine WMD program of the Israeli regime and its nuclear threat against others will be eliminated. It is important to emphasize that the negative impact of this regime in the region extends beyond the nuclear threat it poses. Recent concerns have also brought to light the use of chemical weapons by the Israeli army, crying wolf against defenseless Palestinian populations. Addressing this issue urgently is imperative, and every effort should be made to prevent any such use by this regime. There are strong reasons to stop this regime's secret biological weapons program as well. We categorically reject and condemn the baseless accusations made by the Israeli regime against Iran, as well as its brutal actions in the region. Finally, my delegation did not participate in the action on this draft resolution as a whole, as this draft resolution has not factually reflected the realities in the region. Among them, the situation in the occupied territories, including the continued killing of innocent Palestinians in the occupied territories of Palestine and the imposition by the Israeli regime of the most severe genocidal war in the Gaza, as well as its aggression and terrorist attacks in Lebanon. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the Representative of Iran, distinguished delegates, we have heard from the last speaker for the explanation of vote after the vote on cluster six, regional disarmament and security. The committee will now turn to cluster seven, disarmament machinery. First, I shall give the floor to delegations wishing to make general statements or to introduce draft resolutions or decisions under cluster seven. I recognize the distinguished representative of Mexico.

Mr. Chairman, Mexico, through Ambassador Francisca Mendez, had the difficult task of being the last president of the Conference on Disarmament in 2025. She took on this role with seriousness and responsibility in line with Mexico's unwavering commitment to multilateralism and to achieving the goals of the disarmament agenda. In this capacity, we did our utmost to ensure a final report and a resolution to then submit it to the General Assembly, which would be approved without a vote. Given the absence of a program of work adopted by the CD which would allow members to fulfill their mandate, that is to say to negotiate binding instruments in the domain of disarmament, issues which were subject to discussion in the approval of the report and the resolution, there were less on substantive aspects of the function of the CD and more on participation or procedure. For instance, in the draft resolution, the main topics were the rights of states who are not members of the body to participate in the CD's work, as well as visions about the continuity of the fora for deliberation. In addition to this, the validity of including a reference to the last program of work that the CD managed to approve in 2009 was also called into question. And on that matter, the presidency recognized that on these three topics, the language from previous years was not to the approval of all states. And that is why they promoted changes that would reflect factually what had happened in the 2025 session. with a view to achieving minimal amendments as well as to achieve consensus which several members of the CD considered to be critical. On the matter of the participation of states who are not members of the conference, the presidency tried to go beyond generic language on a principle of multilateralism and decontextualised inclusivity, which is ambiguous in terms of its meaning, directly linking it with the exclusion of states who are not members of the CD in the participation in the Conference's work. That led to the exclusion of the participation of some states who had requested to take part in the 2025 session. On the matter of the continuity of the work of the CD, the Presidency reflected the re-establishment of the subsidiary bodies and the goals of their discussions to find potential common ground which would make it possible to make headway on substantive work. Language from the final report was also included on the reassumption of the organs activities, bearing in mind decisions from 2024 and 2025 and language in paragraphs OP3 and OP6 were adjusted for that end. Given the positions on the 2009 programme of work, the reference to that was contextualised in OP3 so that consultations between presidencies that will aim to achieve a comprehensive and balanced programme of work in next year's session would also be borne in mind, what would also bear in mind other decisions taken by the Conference. Mr. Chairman, Mexico was clear from the moment it took on the presidency of the CD on that while it would carry out the role with responsibility and impartiality, it would not renounce its national position, that is to say that the CD has not approved or implemented its program of work. The conference has not been able to fulfill its mandate for some 30 years now. We're also skeptical about the utility of the CD's deliberative practices because they are duplicating the role that falls to other bodies within the disarmament agenda, particularly the Disarmament Commission. In this regard, and given the call for the draft resolution to be put to a vote, my country only could abstain, not because we-- and the microphone has been cut off.

I thank the distinguished representative of Mexico. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Guatemala.

Thank you, sir. My country recognizes the important role of regional centers for peace and disarmament because they are a fundamental pillar for providing substantive support in supporting regional and national initiatives to strengthen peace, to promote disarmament, and to foster economic and social development at large. Guatemala would urge all countries to support resolutions in this domain. Particularly L42 entitled United Nations Regional Centre for Peace, Disarmament and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean. We commend the important role that this centre carries out, particularly in providing technical assistance for capacity building at the national level. We in particular value its commitment to providing states with support in addressing common challenges, by tailoring programs to countries' needs, promoting regional dialogue and mobilizing the necessary resources for these goals to be attained. We're also proud of the director's role, a Guatemalan woman who has shown through her work our country's commitment to disarmament and the equal meaningful participation of women in terms of these matters addressing international security. Mr. Chairman, we conclude by reaffirming our unwavering commitment to global and regional efforts to achieve complete disarmament. We are convinced that a world without weapons is possible.

I would like to thank Guatemala for the statement and I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Paraguay.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chair, Paraguay through our Minister had the delicate task of chairing the disarmament commission and that is why we put forward document L48, the report of the disarmament commission. Mr. Chairman, as all delegations know, the draft resolution L48 rev.1 contains new OP9, I would like to switch to English.

I request the disarmament commission to dedicate three days of this alternative session of 2026 in informal.

Primary mode to exploring possible adjustments to its work and working methods with a view.

To considering such adjustments in the commission as early as possible.

Sir, we would like to thank all delegations for their support to us during our our role as chair and we would ask all delegations to support this proposal. Thank you. Thank you very much.

I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Nepal. You have the floor.

Mr. Chair, our delegation has the honor to introduce the draft resolution entitled United Nations Regional Center for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific. contained in L49 for the consideration of the Committee. Nepal has always remained a strong advocate for regional disarmament, which complements the global efforts on disarmament and peace. As the host of the UN Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific, Nepal acknowledges the Centre's pivotal role in fostering dialogue and confidence building, promoting participation of women and youth, and supporting country-specific needs for advancing sustainable peace and disarmament process in the region and beyond. We remain deeply committed to continuing extending our unwavering support to the Center to ensure effective and efficient discharge of its mandates. While commending the partners for their continued support and solidarity, we reiterate our call on the international community to make voluntary financial contributions to the Center so as to maintain and further expand its activities. Mr. Chair, my delegation would like to sincerely thank the esteemed member states, including the co-sponsors, for their continued support to the UN RCPD resolution, which has been adopted by consensus every year. In tabling this draft resolution, my delegation has spared no efforts to consult and accommodate constructive suggestions and inputs of all member states. We have carried out the whole process in a more inclusive, transparent, and consultative manner. I assure all distinguished delegates that this draft resolution contains the agreed format and language to update the activities and initiatives of the regional center based on consultation with member states and in line with the Secretary General's report. It is regretful that a vote has been requested in one of the preambular paragraphs of this draft resolution. We would like to request the distinguished delegation concerned to demonstrate utmost flexibility in the spirit of collective solidarity and cooperation for the adoption of this draft resolution by consensus. In closing, Mr. Chair, we are confident in receiving continued positive support from all member states for the adoption of this draft resolution by consensus. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Nepal for his statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Slovenia. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. I have the honor to speak on behalf of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Costa Rica, Czechia, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, North Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Kuwait, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Montenegro, the Philippines, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, as well as Thailand, who will deliver the second part of this statement, and my own country Slovenia, who all traditionally applied to become observer states and some have applied to become member states to the Conference on Disarmament. We would first like to thank Mexico for the broad, transparent and inclusive consultation process on the text and their attempts to find a suitable text. We commend that. At the same time, we regret that once again it was not possible to take a clearer stance on the continued exclusionary practices against the requests to become observers by states who are not members of the Conference on Disarmament, but who have a keen interest in shaping the matters of international security in the Conference deliberations. In 2023, we had the unprecedented situation of no decision being taken on the request by 39 states to become observers. In 2024, while the Conference welcomed many states requesting to become observers, the challenges remain. This year, 16 states were once again blocked from participating as observers while others were accepted. This is contrary to the principles of multilateralism and inclusivity that should guide the work of the conference and indeed arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation. Chair, may I kindly ask for the Chair to recognize Thailand, which will deliver the second part of the statement?

I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Thailand. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. The decision adopted by the 10th Special Session on Disarmament of the UN General Assembly on the 30th of June, 1978, clearly stated that, and I quote, "Since the process of disarmament affects the vital security interests of all States, they must all be actively concerned with and contribute to the measures of disarmament and arms limitation, which have an essential part to play in maintaining and strengthening international security." This is a principle that all States should adhere to and promote. Disarmament is undoubtedly a matter concerning all States, as clearly demonstrated here in the First Committee. Limiting participation undermines not only the credibility but also the transparency and accountability of the CD as a single multilateral disarmament negotiating body. In addition to that, in line with the UNAT initiative, we believe that the Conference should regain its efficiency and deliver on its mandate in order to ensure that it remains relevant and addresses the current challenges in the field of disarmament. As we reassert the importance of multilateralism during the UN's 80th anniversary, we should commit to ensuring that no UN member states are blocked from taking part in the activities of the Conference on Disarmament while continuing to pay to its budget. It is our expectation that starting with the 2026 session the principles of inclusivity and multilateralism quoted in the resolution we have in front of us will be fully respected and observed thank you chair.

I thank the distinguished representatives of both Thailand and Slovenia for their statements I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Chad you have the floor.

Mr. chairman excellencies delegates I have the honor to speak on behalf of Chad and the uh economic Council of Africa on draft resolution a stroke 8054 entitled regional confidence building measures activities of the United Nations Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions in Central Africa. For more than 30 years, the Advisory Committee has remained a pillar of preventative diplomacy, regional disarmament, and constructive dialogue between the states of Central Africa. This resolution aims to bolster its mandate and consolidate its progress made and ramp up synergies with the UN system, the African Union and others. The thesis is articulated around five primary principles. It reaffirms the importance of disarmament and control over small arms and light weapons through the implementation of the Kinshasa Agreement and the ATT. It encourages a creation of a national commission and bolstering of the relevant funds to combat the illicit trafficking in weapons and to support development. Secondly, it focuses on major advancements made in maritime security through the AOWD code being reworked, as well as increases in the work done in the Gulf of Guinea, which is a vector for peace, prosperity, and resilience in the face of climate change. Thirdly, the resolution highlights the progress that has been made in the peace progress in the CAR and the Republic of Congo, all by stressing the peaceful resolutions achieved between Equatorial Guinea and Gabon after the 2025 advisory opinion of the ICJ. This example illustrates the rule of law being central as in Central Africa. Fourthly, we have implemented the on the 16th of May 2025 and was operationalized in October in a province of Chad. We have implemented a joint force between the CAR and Chad to combat insecurity and to allow the free movement of persons and goods, which is the completion of a process that was begun in 2024. Faced with the fight against Boko Haram, transporter crime, environmental crime, migration, and the prevention of hate speech, All of these are being ensured while adhering to women's rights and in the context of peace and security. Sir, traditionally, this resolution is adopted by consensus, reflecting the trust and cooperation that we have cultivated for years. This year, a nation has asked for a vote. We respect its rights, but recall that balanced tests, the text is balanced and without controversy. Therefore, we would ask that member states maintain our tradition of consensus, which is the symbol of common unity and commitment to peace in Central Africa. This draft 54 expresses a vision of a unified Central Africa based on stability and the microphone has been cut off.

I thank the distinguished representative of Chad for his statement. The Committee will now listen to delegations wishing to explain their position before we take action on the draft proposals listed under cluster 7, disarmament machinery. I give the floor to to His Excellency the Permanent Representative of the Netherlands. Excellency, you have the floor.

Since a few years it is possible that women are permanent representatives. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have the honour to deliver an explanation of vote on L58, the resolution on the report on the Conference on Disarmament on behalf of Belgium. Canada, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Lithuania, Sweden, and my own country, the Kingdom of the Netherlands. We appreciate and commend the efforts invested by the Mexican CD Presidency toward achieving consensus. However, we are not in a position to support the resolution this year. We have the following two main concerns. First, we believe the resolution should acknowledge that the CD has once again failed in delivering on its mandate to negotiate disarmament instruments, extending a decades-old stalemate. The resolution should also reflect the work that the Conference has carried out, or failed to carry out, during the year. Despite a promising start, the CD failed to adopt any subsidiary body report, and its final report lacks in substance. All of this should have been reflected more accurately and factually in the resolution, particularly given the UNAT process. Second, the CD once more this year fell short in terms of inclusivity, and the resolution does not accurately reflect that 16 UN member states were prevented from becoming observers to the conference. One state alone blocked 15 states, contrary to the principle of inclusive multilateralism. It is not acceptable that 16 UN member states, eager to contribute and which pay their share of the cost for the Conference on Disarmament, were again excluded. Amidst tightening budgets and UN reform, this situation is even less tenable. These concerns stem primarily from the fact that a few CD members are abusing the consensus rule as a de facto veto power. Our votes on this resolution signal our concern. We stand ready to work on improving the functioning of the conference and the participation of states therein. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank her Excellency for her statement, and I apologize for my mistake. And I'm very happy that we have women PRs among us. Thank you. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Denmark. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. I have the honour to deliver this explanation of vote of Member States of the European Union. The candidate countries Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Montenegro and the Republic of Moldova and the EFTA countries Iceland and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, as well as San Marino, align themselves with this statement. I take the floor. to explain our decision to abstain on PP11 and OP8 of the draft resolution L58 on the report of the Conference on Disarmament, the CD. At the outset, we wish to commend President of the CD, Her Excellency Ambassador Francisca Mendez Escobar of Mexico, and her delegation for their tireless efforts to guide the work of the CD at the adoption of its report and to steer this resolution towards consensus. The Mexican presidency has worked constructively under difficult circumstances and we greatly value its engagement and leadership. Chair, our countries remain firmly committed to the purpose and principles of the CD and to the strengthening of the UN disarmament machinery as a whole. However, during the 2025 session, 16 states were once again selectively prevented from participating as observers in this body, as clearly reflected in its records. This is regrettably obstruction in 50 cases exercised by Russia and in one case by Turkey. It run counters to the principles of transparency and inclusiveness that underpins the UN disarmament machinery and has been ongoing for several years. Therefore, we are not in a position to support PP11 and OP8 of this draft resolution as they fail to accurately reflect recent development concerning the participation of observers in the work of the CD, despite the broad and growing support within and outside of the membership. By omitting this reality, the resolution risk normalizing exclusion and further weakening the credibility of the CD. These two paragraphs do not acknowledge sufficiently the persistent procedural and substantive impasse. Mr. Chair, we continue to believe that the CD has a historical responsibility within the UN disarmament machinery. However, it is important to deliver tangible results and operate in the spirit of cooperation and inclusivity. The CD's legitimacy ultimately rests on its ability to serve the broader membership of the UN and to advance disarmament objectives that reflect today's global realities. Our decision to withhold support for these paragraphs is therefore a principled position. It is not directed against the mandate of the CD as such or the pen holder, but against the failure to uphold its inclusive and representative character despite being funded by all UN member states. It signals our strong conviction that its procedures and structures must evolve to meet the expectations of all States. We urge all delegations to work constructively to overcome this procedural blockage, to restore confidence in the CD and to ensure that it can resume its intended role as a single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum of the international community. I thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Denmark for his statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Morocco.

You have the floor.

Chair, the Kingdom of Morocco has the honor to speak on behalf of the Arab Group to explain our vote on draft resolution L 58 on the report of the Conference on Disarmament. We thank Mexico and the co-sponsors of this work, the Arab Group, consistently supports the Conference on Disarmament, which is the essential forum for delegations when it comes to disarmament instruments within the UN architecture for disarmament. The Arab Group once again reaffirms that this CD must be allowed to play its role effectively. The Arab Group notes the report on the Conference on Disarmament positively, both this year and last year, including the nominations of the chairs and other members of the five subsidiary bodies. We note that it is extremely important to stress its work. We need a balanced agenda for the CD to allow the conference to carry out its deliberations in a balanced and coordinated manner. And we must bolster international efforts, including in nuclear disarmament and the fight against nuclear war and nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear proliferation. As laid out in the first UN special session on disarmament. The Arab group welcomes the added value of the work and in of the disarmament architecture, in particular the CD, because those must note that non-members of the CD must participate as observers. We must respect the methods of work of the CD and we must combat the double standards and politicization. We reaffirm that the State of Palestine has the right to be a part of the work of the conference of disarmament as an observer as they are an observer to the United Nations we must take into account the prerogatives of the state of Palestine in accordance with unga resolution during the 10th SS it's resolution 23/10 from 2024 The Arab group regrets that the request from the state of Palestine were denied and were unable to participate as an observer at the CD, but other states were able to. The Arab group urges all states who are interested in the participation of observers to approve the legitimate request of the State of Palestine to participate in the CD as an observer, and this should be carried out without discrimination. This would reaffirm our commitment to allowing all states to participate in the deliberations of this unique forum on multilateral deliberations on disarmament. Thank you.

Distinguished representative of Morocco for his statement. Distinguished delegates, we have exhausted the time available to us this morning. The next meeting of the committee will be held this afternoon at 3pm in this conference room. We will continue to hear statements in explanation of vote before the vote for cluster seven. The meeting is adjourned.