I am delivering the UK explanation of vote against the draft resolution L.39 ‘Nuclear War Effects and Scientific Research’.
We have always recognised that a nuclear war could have devastating consequences for humanity. This point is not new it was written into the Preamble of the NPT in 1968, captured in the outcome document of the first Special Session on Disarmament in 1978, and reaffirmed many times since.
The international community has long been aware of the facts in this area.
The UK supports the use of scientific research, to keep at the forefront of minds, for future generations, the long-held knowledge of the devastating consequences of nuclear war, as set out in the NPT.
The UK has supported efforts to ensure this understanding continues.
Against this background of clearly established views on the effects of a nuclear war, we are not persuaded of the utility of an Independent Scientific Panel as proposed by the Resolution. Such a panel could not change our collective understanding of the horror of a nuclear war.
There is abundant scientific information and research available on this topic. A panel of the type proposed could not produce “new” evidence. It cannot advance us towards our collective long-term goal of a world without nuclear weapons.
We also consider that the objectives of the Panel are ill-defined and ambiguous.
It is for these reasons that the UK was unable to support this Resolution.
Additionally, Madame Chair, this Resolution contains budgetary implications. In a year of multiple requests and constrained resources, we hope these costs can be met through voluntary contributions.
