Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, May 12, 1995 TAG: 9505120059
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-16 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE: UNITED NATIONS LENGTH: Medium
It was a diplomatic victory for the U.S.-led nuclear powers, which resisted efforts by non-nuclear states to make extending the 25-year-old treaty conditional on greater, faster cuts in the nuclear arsenals.
American U.N. Ambassador Madeleine Albright hailed it as a ``sterling success,'' and President Clinton, visiting Ukraine, said it would ``build a better future for our children and the generations to come.''
But one delegate here, echoing widespread sentiment in the Third World, called it little more than a ``carte blanche'' for nuclear powers.
The indefinite extension was gaveled into effect, without a vote, by the conference's presiding officer, to a brief burst of applause among more than 170 national delegations.
The decision will perpetuate an international system under which only five nations are recognized as legitimate nuclear powers - whose governments are supposed to work ``in good faith'' toward eliminating their weapons.
Trying to meet Third World demands, the weapon states agreed to a compromise package: a list of arms control goals, including a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty next year, and annual meetings to review progress toward the goals.
A handful of delegates took the floor after the treaty was formally extended to register - for the record - their unhappiness with the results, citing the nonbinding nature of the goals.
It represents a ``carte blanche,'' said Malaysia's Hasamy bin Agam, that ``might be interpreted as justifying nuclear weapon states for eternity.''
Chief U.S. negotiator Thomas Graham Jr., speaking with reporters, countered that the goals are ``politically'' if not legally binding, and the package establishes ``a measure of accountability for the nuclear weapon states.''
by CNB