2005, Rob Young, United Nations General Assembly

In line with the biannual cycle, the UN General Assembly, after discussion and decision in the First Committee, on December, 2, 2024, adopted Res. 79/49 on “Effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium”.

Earlier the year, the UN Secretary General has transmitted his report on the issue. Six countries have submitted statements to be included in the report. Qatar proposed setting up an international framework (intergovernmental group) to have a look into controlling and regulating DU’s use in warfare. Suggestion was made on the establishment of a voluntary fund to finance independent studies on DU contamination and its remediation, with initial contributions from the countries responsible for the contamination – a very interesting idea being in parallel to the concept of an international trust funds presently under debate within the setting of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

Mexico, having raised similar concerns in the past reports, expressed deep concern over the environmental and health impacts of DU used in military contexts. Although not directly affected, Mexico aligns with affected nations and remains committed to advocating the creation of legally binding standards to regulate military uses of depleted uranium. Cuba reiterates its previous statements that long-term and severe damage to the environment caused by the use depleted uranium weapons cannot be denied and further investigation is required. Particular support for those investigations and research is needed from member states that have used such weapons and should urgently provide information in this regard.

Guatemala emphasized the recognized dangers of depleted uranium on both health and the environment, citing investigations by experts, including the World Health Organization, which has confirmed DU’s hazardous impact. Despite existing findings, Guatemala called for more in-depth research to fully assess the associated risks. It aligns still with international treaties urging countries to avoid the use of weapons that cause indiscriminate harm.

Serbia highlighted the severe consequences of NATO’s use of depleted uranium (DU) during the 1999 bombings of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Serbia underscored the extensive contamination in affected areas and detailed the country’s efforts to monitor radioactive exposure through collaboration between military and scientific institutions. Serbia also noted the health concerns observed among international contingents deployed in contaminated regions. Serbia remains an active voice in advocating for continued research and monitoring of DU’s long-term effects, recommending the establishment of a national health monitoring program for military personnel, further international studies, and targeted medical care for potentially affected individuals.

Finally, Ukraine on its side, called on Member States to critically evaluate Russia’s claims about the “alleged” radiological and environmental risks of using DU weapons, labeling them as part of an ongoing campaign of misinformation and psychological warfare of the aggressor country. This statement cannot but to be deplored and criticized as, in fact, there are such risks, and, therefore, both the aggressor and the countries acting in self-defense are obliged to refrain from applying DU weaponry.

Incidentally but also symbolically, on the 6^th of November, date of the UN Day for Preventing the Exploitation of the Environment in War and Armed Conflict, after discussions, the First Committee voted and adopted draft resolution A/C.1/79/L.52 on the DU issue.

This draft resolution is identical with previous ones, including the most recent adopted in 2022, in both content and language. It underscores the importance of transparency and international cooperation, urging states to share information and best practices to enhance understanding of the health and environmental impacts of depleted uranium weapons. Additionally, it calls for further research to „assess the health risks and environmental impact“ associated with the use of depleted uranium ammunition and refers to the importance of precautionary approach.

Despite the symbolic date on which happened the vote, neither a link nor any other sort of reference has been included in the text towards the broader discourse on environmental destruction through war and the general connection between environment and armed conflict being so evident (e.g. in the Ukraine, or Gaza war, context). ICBUW has repeatedly pointed out this connection that is inherent to any modern high intensity conflict nowadays.

This year’s vote within the First Committee, and later in plenary has seen the abstentions rise partially compared to 2022, but the resolution gathered once again a clear majority of the member countries’ votes in favor (in plenary) – rising from 143 to 152 (!). As for the nuclear powers, they either abstained (China did not participate in the vote) or voted no (US, UK, France), also Israel voted no. Ukraine abstained as did Russia (which contradicts its explicitly critical DU position voiced in the Ukraine war context). Germany did not change its position and abstained again, a position that has been sharply criticized by ICBUW.

It is to be very much regretted that Finland, Iceland, New Zealand and Sweden who voted yes in 2022, abstained this year – which may be due to (just adopted) NATO membership or the (wrongly interpreted) Ukraine war scenario.  On the other hand, there are countries like Austria, Belgium, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands and Norway continuing to vote in favor of the resolution.rere

So, taken altogether, it is most important that – in these turbulent times – a great majority within the UN General Assembly supports the critical process in relation to DU weaponry which supports our work aiming at a total ban. This may even stronger be used as a reference to introducing and discussing our Draft Convention as well as to arguing for existing illegality of the use of DU weapons.

(Nicolas Deriquehem/Manfred Mohr)