A/74/247

United Nations

General AssemblyDistr.: General
29 July 2019
Original: English

Seventy-fourth session
Item 102 of the provisional agenda*
Review of the implementation of the recommendations
and decisions adopted by the General Assembly at its
tenth special session

Work of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters
Report of the Secretary-General
Summary
At its seventy-first and seventy-second sessions, the Advisory Board on
Disarmament Matters dealt with the following substantive items: measures to mitigate
civilian harm resulting from contemporary armed conflict; and the role of thedisarmament, arms control and non-proliferation regime in managing strategiccompetition and building trust in a deteriorating international security environment.
In its deliberations on ways and means to mitigate civilian harm resulting fromcontemporary armed conflict, the Board proposed several measures for the Secretary General to consider to systematically tackle the devastation caused to civilians by thegrowing occurrence of warfare in populated urban areas. That included, among a larger
set of recommendations, producing a report on the use of explosive weapons in populat ed
areas to catalyse debate in the General Assembly, strengthening inter-agency coordinationon that topic, and increasing the Secretary-General’s advocacy of the issue.
In its deliberations on the role of the disarmament, arms control andnon-proliferation regime in managing strategic competition and building trust, theBoard, focusing on nuclear weapons, proposed short-term steps to advance the agenda
for disarmament of the Secretary-General, such as increased engagement to mitigate
the risks posed by renewed strategic competition; holding a meeting at the ministerial
level during the review of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons;
encouraging strong and full participation at the conference on the establishment of a
Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, tobe held in November 2019 and reaffirming the peace and security interests at stake inthat region; and initiating new expert-level engagement, studies or seminars to identify
actions that could be taken to reverse the current trends that impede renewed progresson disarmament, so as to rebuild confidence and contribute to risk reduction.

* A/74/150.

19-12934 (E)160819*1912934*

A/74/247

In its capacity as Board of Trustees of the United Nations Institute for
Disarmament Research (UNIDIR), the Board engaged in substantive discussions on
three new UNIDIR workstreams: gender and disarmament; the role of conventionalarms in preventing and mitigating urban conflict and violence, and strengthening
compliance and enforcement of regimes on weapons of mass destruction. The Board
also reviewed the plan drawn up by UNIDIR to implement the recommendations givenby the Secretary-General in his report on the thirty-fifth anniversary of UNIDIR(A/73/284). Those included moving from a project-based approach to theestablishment of multi-year programmes oriented towards key issues of the agenda fordisarmament; the streamlining of business processes and the establishment of
arrangements with United Nations service providers, and the strengthening ofcommunication, partnership and resource mobilization efforts. Lastly, the Board
highlighted that 2020 marked the fortieth anniversary of the Institute. It noted that theanniversary could provide an opportunity to highlight the unique role of the Institutewithin the disarmament machinery in facilitating dialogue with and among
stakeholders, including the private sector, research and academic communities, civilsociety and technical experts.

2/15

19-12934

A/74/247

I. Introduction
1.
The Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters held its seventy-first session in
Geneva from 30 January to 1 February 2019 and its seventy-second session in New
York from 26 to 28 June 2019. The present report is submitted pursuant to General
Assembly resolution 38/183 (O). The report of the Director of the United Nations
Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) was approved by the Advisory Board,in its capacity as the Institute’s Board of Trustees, and has been submitted in
document A/74/180.
2.
Steffen Kongstad (Norway) presided as Chair over both sessions of the Advisory
Board in 2019.

II. Substantive discussions and recommendations
3.
At its seventy-first and seventy-second sessions, the Advisory Board dealt withthe following substantive items: measures to mitigate civilian harm resulting fromcontemporary armed conflict; and the role of the disarmament, arms control andnon-proliferation regime in managing strategic competition and building trust.
4.
At its seventy-first and seventy-second sessions, the Board was briefed by theHigh Representative for Disarmament Affairs, which set the scene for its discussions
about the two topics on its agenda. In her remarks, the High Representative called
upon the Board to consider, in its deliberations on measures to mitigate civilian harm,
what could be done to tackle this topic systematically and to explore how the United
Nations system could come together to address it. With respect to the agenda item on
managing strategic competition and building trust, the High Representative
encouraged the Board to consider how the existing arms control regime could be
augmented and reinforced, and she welcomed ideas from members for a new vision
to guide efforts in that area. In addition, the High Representative briefed the Board
on various initiatives being undertaken by Member States and United Nations entities
in relation to the two agenda items.

A.

Measures to mitigate civilian harm resulting from contemporary
armed conflict5.
At its seventy-first session, during its deliberations about the agenda item on
measures to mitigate civilian harm resulting from contemporary armed conflict, theBoard took a broad approach and considered a myriad of factors, such as theurbanization of conflict and its disproportionate impact on women, children andminority groups; the shift from State to non-State actors as the main combatants; thefact that small arms and light weapons from both licit and illicit sources were
becoming a major driver of harm done to civilians; the increasing impact of newtechnologies on armed conflict; and the protraction of armed conflict. The Board also
engaged with a panel of experts from the civil society organization Article 36, with
the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the Office for the Coordinationof Humanitarian Affairs and the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research(UNIDIR).
6.
The panel of experts noted that humanitarian motives for regulating or
prohibiting arms were already in evidence in the nineteenth century and that there
were two major ones: prevention of superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering of
combatants, and protection of civilians from harm. The Board also noted that, in thefirst half of the twentieth century, there were an estimated eight soldier fatalities for

19-12934

3/15

A/74/247

each fatal civilian casualty. In today’s conflicts, there are eight civilian fatalities foreach soldier who is killed.
7.
The panel underscored the trend that, since 2008, more than half of the world ’s
population lived in urban environments. It further noted predictions that, by 2050,
64 per cent of the developing world and 86 per cent of the developed world would beurbanized. It judged that the implications were enormous, as the lethality of modern
military forces continued to grow. The panel pointed out that protracted conflicts inurban environments had led to a staggering 128 million people worldwide who werein need of humanitarian assistance and protection, and that 65 million civilians weredisplaced within and across borders. These were the highest numbers since the Second
World War.
8.
These facts are relevant to disarmament and arms control in that protracted
armed conflicts are being fuelled by a steady supply of arms and ammunition that are
too easily available. The panel stated that disarmament and arms control were not justtools to maintain international peace and security and to prevent or end armed
conflict, but that they were also a critical means to mitigate the impact of armed
conflict when it occurs and, in doing so, support international humanitarian law.
9.
The panel argued strongly that there needed to be rules to limit or prohibit theuse of certain weapons because of the unacceptable harm they caused, harm that waseasily witnessed first-hand at the frontlines of urbanized armed conflict.
10. During its seventy-second session, the Board was given a presentation by ICRC
on weaponry and international humanitarian law. ICRC highlighted the challenges
faced in pursuing the difficult and delicate balance between military necessity and theprinciple of humanity. ICRC noted that it operated through the prism of evidence bothin how it addressed superfluous harm to civilians and how it dealt with thecombatants, who must operate within international humanitarian law. Because various
actors were involved in issues related to the use of weapons, ICRC engaged with both
political and technical personnel.
11. The presenter noted that international humanitarian law did not require theimpossible of States and that it was deeply pragmatic in nature. The presenter
examined the period in the 1980s when ICRC began collecting data on anti -personnel
landmines. This effort eventually led to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use,
Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their
Destruction as a key elaboration of international humanitarian law, and an instance inwhich the international community came together in an effort to reduce superfluous
harm. With respect to mitigating civilian harm resulting from contemporary armed
conflict, the presenter further spoke about accountability to affected populations,gender dimensions and the need to create a policy understanding about the wide-area
effects of explosive weapons designed for the battlefield. The presenter also notedthat there was a need to think about the potential implications that new and emerging
technologies, including cybertechnologies, could have for the mitigation of civilian
harm.
12. The Board noted that the need to protect civilian populations fromindiscriminate attacks – due to the inappropriate selection of weapons, failure by
warring parties to be vigilant in the application of inter national humanitarian law oreven intentional targeting by belligerents – featured prominently in the agenda fordisarmament of the Secretary-General, 1 and that it was the principal element ofpart III entitled “Disarmament that saves lives”.
__________________
1

4/15

Securing our Common Future: An Agenda for Disarmament (United Nations publication, Sales
No. E.18.IX.6).
19-12934

A/74/247

13. The Board, in its deliberations, used the following categories to frame its review
and recommendations: (a) avoiding the use of explosive weapons in populated areas;(b) sharing policy and practice to protect civilians; (c) strengthening inter -agency
coordination on improvised explosive devices; (d) developing common standards forarmed uncrewed aerial vehicles; (e) establishing a trust fund dedicated to small arms
control to be known as the “Saving lives entity”; (f) addressing the gendered impactof arms; (g) and building understanding of the impact of arms on conflict
management.
Key points and recommendations(a)

Avoiding the use of explosive weapons in populated areas

Recommendations(i) The Board suggests exploring a legislative basis for the SecretaryGeneral to produce a report on the use of explosive weapons (limitations,common standards, and operational policies) in populated areas toencourage further debate by the General Assembly. In that regard, theBoard identifies the following options:a.
Holding, through engaged Members of the Security Council, apossible open meeting of the Council;b.
Submitting the issue as an item on the agenda of the First
Committee, perhaps organized as a side event;(ii) The Board proposes that one outcome of the report could be thetasking of relevant United Nations entities to further develop criteria,
indicators and appropriate methodologies to measure the reverberating
impacts of the use of explosive weapons in populated areas on civilian
populations;(b)Sharing policy and practice to protect civilians

Key points
To raise awareness about the issue and facilitate the sharing of good practices
and policies, accurate reporting and collection of data is required. Multiple
United Nations entities are separately collecting data on the effects on civiliansof explosive weapons in populated areas, including the Department of Economic
and Social Affairs, the Office for Disarmament Affairs, the United Nations Institutefor Disarmament Research, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs, the United Nations Children’s Fund, and the World Health Organization.
A coherent and consistent way of integrating these data is currently lacking;Recommendations(i) The Board recommends developing a systematic, collective andcomprehensive approach, with consistent methodologies, to pooling datacollected by multiple United Nations organizations on the effects of the useof explosive weapons in populated areas on civilians;(ii) The Board expresses its support for efforts to collect, in addition, dataon the economic impact of explosive weapons in populated areas todemonstrate the multidimensional impact of explosives on people’s lives;(iii) The Board suggests exploring ways to make those consolidated,comprehensive and robust data publicly accessible and communicating them
actively using United Nations websites, reports and outreach events;
19-12934

5/15

A/74/247(iv) The Board believes that the effect of existing mitigation approaches,
including the experiences of civilian harm mitigation cells by national
and/or regional forces, should be examined so that Member States may takeappropriate action to address, mitigate, and remedy harm to civilians;(c)Strengthening inter-agency coordination on improvised explosive devices

Recommendation
The Board holds the view that accurate and comprehensive statistics about
improvised explosive devices are required to support the establishment of awhole-of-system approach to that threat;(d)Developing common standards for armed uncrewed aerial vehicles

Recommendation
The Board believes that, in the light of the current lack of interest among
Member States to explore regulatory frameworks for armed uncrewed
aerial vehicles, consideration could be given to exploring the scope ofexisting arms export control arrangements to incorporate information on
the accountable transfer, holding and use of armed uncrewed aerial vehicles
and associated technology, including through the Wassenaar Arrangement
on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods andTechnologies, and the Arms Trade Treaty;(e) Establishing a trust fund dedicated to small arms control to be known
as the “Saving lives entity”
Recommendations(i) The Board supports the idea of effecting change at the country level
through the “Saving lives entity” fund and underscores the importance of
supporting efforts to build national capacity for weapons and ammunition
management. The Board therefore recommended that, in addition to theestablishment of the “Saving lives entity”, criteria and guidance forcountry-level proposals be developed for use by national authorities andUnited Nations country teams;(ii) The Board suggested that consideration could also be given to
ensuring a sufficient United Nations pool of expertise that could support
national authorities and United Nations country teams in the development
and implementation of projects;(f)Addressing the gendered impact of arms

Recommendations(i) The Board recommends systematically integrating disarmamentissues into the meetings held under the women and peace and security
agenda and reporting on meetings about women, peace and security;(ii) The Board recommends encouraging States to include detailed
information in their reports under the Arms Trade Treaty on theirexperiences with responding to the Treaty’s criteria on gender;(iii) The Board recommends mainstreaming gender in disarmament issues
as part of the agenda of the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality andthe Empowerment of Women (UN-Women);

6/15

19-12934

A/74/247(iv) The Board recommends continuing to include that gendered aspects
of disarmament in the report of the Secretary-General on the work of theOrganization;(g)

Building understanding of the impact of arms on conflict management

Recommendations(i) The Board considers that experiences and insights from the field werea requirement for better understanding the impact of arms that should be
integrated into assessments, risk analyses and conflict prevention activities;(ii) The Board emphasizes the adverse impact of arms on development,
for which reason arms control can, in its judgment, make an important
contribution to development; thus, it encourages the Secretary-General toensure that arms and arms control issues are mainstreamed across all
United Nations entities.

B.

The role of the disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation
regime in managing strategic competition and building trust
14. Given the progressive erosion of major existing instruments of the arms control
and non-proliferation architecture (including the impending end of the Treaty between
the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the
Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, as well as
challenges to the sustainability of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, theextension of the Treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States ofAmerica on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive
Arms beyond 2021, to the norm against nuclear testing and the eventual entry into
force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty), the Board judged that it had
an obligation to highlight the importance of preserving and bolstering the overall
structure of bilateral, multilateral, and global arms control efforts of many decades.
It also believed that there were possible opportunities and avenues for progress in
implementing the agenda of the Secretary-General, be they unilateral, bilateral or
plurilateral. In that respect, the Board highlighted that it was of special importance aswell as necessary that the Secretary-General robustly continue to promote and defend
the essential principles of disarma ment and arms control.
15. The Board considered that, in the current environment, multilateral efforts to
reduce the risk of use of nuclear weapons was urgently required and must be a priority
for the Review Conference of the Parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty to be heldin 2020. The Board was of the view that nuclear risk reduction could provide a basis
for dialogue among the permanent members of the Security Council, with othernuclear possessor States, as well as between nuclear and non-nuclear weapons States.
The Board recognized that there were many facets to nuclear risk reduction andpossible related actions and that finding consensus on specific steps could bechallenging. In that respect, it considered the framework for nuclear risk reduction
recently offered by UNIDIR – which defined four areas of risk and possible pathways
to address them – to be a helpful conceptual and practical tool to facilitate dialogue
between Member States.
16. Members of the Board were of the view that the impact of ne w technologies,
including in the domains of cyberspace, outer space and artificial intelligence, should
be fully taken into consideration in pursuing effective disarmament, non -proliferation
and arms control.

19-12934

7/15

A/74/247

17. Reiterating the goals outlined by the Secretary-General in part II of his agenda
for disarmament (“Disarmament to save humanity”), the Board expressed full support
for the implementation plan crafted by the Office for Disarmament Affairs and urged
the Secretary-General and the High Representative for Disarmament Affairs tocontinue their ongoing efforts to that end. Focusing on nuclear weapons, the working
group of the Board that examined this issue expressed grave concern about theincreasing competition among the major Powers and the ongoing deter ioration ofexisting disarmament, non-proliferation and arms control arrangements. It also notedthat emerging technologies would have important implications in this area.
18. Despite these challenges, the Board acknowledged four short-term opportunitiesof which the Secretary-General could avail himself to keep the implementation ofpart II of his agenda moving forward. Those were:(a) The Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferationof Nuclear Weapons to be held in April and May 2020. The Board believed that ameeting could be held at the ministerial level that could provide new opportunities
for high-level engagement;(b) The conference on the establishment of a Middle East zone free of nuclear
weapons and other weapons of mass destruction to be held in November 2019 and thesustained exploration of a new instrument encompassing all types of weapons of mass
destruction and their means of delivery;(c) Continued high-level diplomatic engagement with the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea with a view to achieving the denuclearization of the
Korean Peninsula;(d) In a polarized environment that was impacting disarmament, groups ofgovernmental experts were an important means of facilitating discussion and allowing
the identification of concrete ways to increase transparency and establish norms that
could help to manage complex challenges, whether related to emerging technologies
or not.
19. The Board agreed that there were major stakes for the major Powers and all
Member States in preserving what remained of the arms control architecture and thatthe major Powers still had a common interest in avoiding the worst outcomes, which
lay the foundation for potential cooperative security measures. Board members agreed
on four principles that should serve as a guide to identifying measures aimed at
reducing the risks posed by the renewed strategic competition between major Powers,
namely:(a) “Do no harm” – The first priority should be to preserve and reaffirm thevalue of the existing disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation instruments andnorms;(b) “Do not do unto others” – Member States should see to it that measurestaken to ensure their security do not come at the expense of the security of others and,in designing responses to deal with those issues, provide a base for a wider audience
to be engaged; and(c) “Transparency is essential” – Major Powers and other Member Statesshould reduce strategic and operational ambiguity surrounding capabilities andintentions, and refrain from behaviours and capability developments that add touncertainty, in the hope of reducing the risk of war.
(d) “Pursue cooperation” – All Member States should cooperate to preserve
the disarmament, non-proliferation and arms control regime, address risks to it andpursue opportunities to strengthen it.

8/15

19-12934

A/74/247

20. Based on the aforementioned principles and opportunities, the Board identified
the following recommendations to the Secretary-General.
Recommendations(a) Continued engagement by the Secretary-General with high-level
officials of the five permanent members of the Security Council on theimportance of cooperation among major Powers to sustain the Non-Proliferation
Treaty. This should be aimed at underlining the potential of an erosion and an
unravelling of the Treaty, the unique importance for the five permanent
members of the Council of maintaining a stable non-proliferation regime, theneed to work cooperatively among themselves to reduce strategic competitionand nuclear risks; encouraging them to reaffirm their commitment to restraint
by formal or informal means, to avoid further erosion of the existing
instruments; and restoring a regular dialogue at multiple levels to findopportunities to move forward cooperatively;(b) Encourage support for and participation in the conference on theestablishment of a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and other weaponsof mass destruction by all States in the region, the five permanent members of
the Security Council and organizations by highlighting the interests at stake forthe non-proliferation regime, the opportunity for dialogue among all States of
the region and the potential value of creating a new innovative and ambitious
instrument;(c) Initiate new expert-level engagement, studies and seminars throughthe High Representative for Disarmament Affairs to identify actions to reverse
current trends impeding progress on disarmament. Such United Nations
activities could provide a means to facilitate informal military-to-military anddefence dialogue among key countries (and represent a step toward bilateralexchanges), as well as reinforce nuclear doctrine discussions among the five
permanent members of the Security Council. Such activities should be aimed at
identifying confidence-building measures to decrease strategic tensions among
the major Powers and reduce nuclear risks, thereby supporting a focus on
nuclear risk reduction at the 2020 Review Conference of the Parties to the
Non-Proliferation Treaty. In turn, those activities could be aimed at supportingand feeding debates within new and existing groups of governmental experts
about critical and emerging technologies and their impact on strategic stability;(d) Ensure that action point 32 of the agenda for disarmament, in which
the Secretary-General calls for a study of ways to better coordinate and integrate
the work and expertise among the various disarmament bodies, includes acomprehensive review of the existing disarmament machinery and the effect of
their current paralysis.

C.

The role of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters
21. In discussing the role of the Board, the members believed that the agenda fordisarmament of the Secretary-General, published in 2018, should be a core area for
its future work. The Board strongly believed that there were a number of actions
covered by the agenda in which they could, individually or collectively, play
important roles by providing substantive input and effective contributions to further
the implementation of those actions.
22. Board members discussed making presentations, writing opinion pieces andengaging in communication and outreach. They explored the idea of furthering theirwork through intersessional processes. The Board believed that the for tieth19-12934

9/15

A/74/247

anniversary of UNIDIR and the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations
provided two excellent opportunities to further the Board ’s work. In that context,
members of the Board expressed interest in contributing to work on the future ofmultilateral cooperation.

III. Board of Trustees of the United Nations Institute for
Disarmament Research
23. The Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters, acting in its role as the Board ofTrustees of UNIDIR, met twice in 2019, on 29 January in Geneva and on 2 5 June in
New York.
24. At those meetings, the Director briefed the Board on progress in theimplementation of the three-year research agenda approved by the Board in June
2018. The Board noted that all four research programmes (weapons of mass
destruction and other strategic weapons; conventional arms; security and technology;
and gender and disarmament) were under way and producing innovative work that
had policy relevance. The Board also welcomed the initiation of work to examine,with support from the European Union, efforts to establish Middle East zone free of
weapons of mass destruction. The Board considered that that work could fill a
research gap and identify ideas, options and opportunities for inclusive dialogue
relating to regional security issues. The Board considered that such a workstream
could contribute to ongoing efforts, including the United Nations conference to beconvened on the issue in November 2019.
25. The Board expressed the view that, together with the High Representative for
Disarmament Affairs, UNIDIR was currently one of the most effective and influential
actors to advance the agenda for disarmament. It welcomed UNIDIR leadership in theimplementation of several agenda actions, including with regard to efforts to reduce
the risk that nuclear weapons would be used. By its framing of the issue, UNIDIR ismaking a valuable contribution to international policy discussions on nuclear risk
reduction in the critical run-up to the Review Conference of the Parties to the
Non-Proliferation Treaty.
26. The Board engaged in substantive discussions on three new UNIDIR
workstreams: gender and disarmament; the role of conventional arms in preventing
and mitigating urban conflict and violence; and strengthening compliance andenforcement of regimes on weapons of mass destruction. These timely and relevant
topics address key themes of the agenda for disarmament and help to integrate
disarmament in the priorities of the broader United Nations system, especially in thecase of the first two topics. Rigorous and practical research with policy relevance onthese topics offers an entry point for arms control and disarmament to reinforce andstrengthen broader objectives such as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
and the women and peace and security agenda. Identifying options to strengthen
regimes on weapons of mass destruction and enable them to be used to respondeffectively to contemporary threats and challenges can be an important contribution
to broader efforts to reinforce multilateral rule-based order.
27. The Board reviewed the UNIDIR plan to implement the recommendations givenby the Secretary-General in his report on the thirty-fifth anniversary of UNIDIR(A/73/284), which included moving from a project-based approach to theestablishment of multi-year programmes oriented towards key issues of the agenda
for disarmament; the streamlining of business processes and the establishment of
arrangements with United Nations service providers, and the strengthening ofcommunication, partnership and resource mobilization efforts.

10/15

19-12934

A/74/247

28. The Board welcomed the investment made by UNIDIR in communications andoutreach, noting the greater visibility of the Institute on a variety of social media
platforms. The Board endorsed plans to update the UNIDIR website and encouraged
the Institute, subject to the availability of resources, to consider translating key online
content, such as programme descriptions and publication summaries into the official
languages of the United Nations. It also welcomed online streaming of UNIDIR
flagship conferences, such as the upcoming innovations dialogue, as a practical way
to enable a wider audience to benefit from the high -quality dialogue and expert
perspectives featured in those events. With a vie w to further enhancing the visibilityof UNIDIR, the Board encouraged the Director to explore and report back on practical
options to increase the profile and engagement of the Institute in New York. The
Board also endorsed the Institute’s commitment to increased activities outside
Geneva and New York.
29. The Board welcomed the fact that the Institute focused on expanding
partnerships to support outreach, diversity and impact. Members of the Board
encouraged UNIDIR to build new partnerships or strengthen e xisting ones across theOrganization and offered suggestions on potential entry points for new partnerships,
such as with key regional organizations, in particular the African Union, andsubregional organizations, research institutes and foundations. Membe rs of the Board
welcomed efforts to expand the range of activities undertaken with partners andvoiced support for the initiation, together with the Office for Disarmament Affairs, ofan induction course in Geneva for newly arrived diplomats. The Board fel t that this
could be a valuable contribution to broader disarmament education efforts and tosupporting the full participation of all Member States in disarmament deliberations.
30. At its meeting held in June 2019, the Board considered and approved the re portof the Director on the activities of the Institute for the period between June 2018 andApril 2019 and the proposed programme of work and financial plan for 2019 and 2020
(A/74/180). In the view of the Board, the report of the Director captured the breadthof the Institute’s work programme and the increased activity currently under way. The
Board recommended that, going forward, the reporting period cover the calendar year,
and encouraged the Director, in consultation with the Controller, to identify moreaccessible and user-friendly ways to present its financial accounts. The Board further
recommended that the report of the Director include a section reflecting the added
value of the Institute’s contributions and the impact of its work over the course of theperiod under consideration, following, where appropriate, the Institute ’s monitoringand evaluation policy.
31. The Board welcomed the increase in 2018 of the Institute ’s annual income,which it considered to be a reflection of Member States’ growing interest and belief
in the relevance of the Institute’s work to their efforts to address international security
threats and challenges. The Board reiterated its firm conviction that the autonomy of
the Institute and the independence of its research were essential to this confidence
and formed the foundation under the Institute’s ability to conduct credible andimpactful policy research, produce knowledge and ideas, and provide technical advice
and support to Member States, the expert community and other disarmament
stakeholders.
32. While recognizing that UNIDIR would continue to be financed primarily withvoluntary funding, the Board believed that near-total reliance on extrabudgetary funds
challenged the Institute’s autonomy and the independence of its research. Its relianceon extrabudgetary funding left the Institute open to the criticism that it was being
driven by a very small number of donor States and limited its capacity to respondflexibly to critical arms control developments, support those States that did not havethe resources to actively engage in multilateral processes, and engage with Africa,
Asia and Latin America in a sustained way.
19-12934

11/15

A/74/247

33. To provide those core services predictably and consisten tly, moreover, UNIDIR
required a stable and sustainable operating environment and financial basis. The
Board took note of the Institute’s commitment to realizing the recommendations
contained in the report of the Secretary-General on the issue (A/73/284) and theprogress that was being made. To ensure the sustainability of the reforms that thatentailed, the Board believed that an increase in the annual subvention to UNIDIR
from the regular budget was required. The Board has consistently recommended anincrease in the subvention. In 2018, it considered the findings of the independent
third-party assessment of UNIDIR requested by the General Assembly and it strongly
endorses the recommendations made in that regard by the Secretary-General at therequest of the States Members of the United Nations. With regard to the subvention
from the regular budget, the Board welcomes the proposal made by the Secretary General in his report that this grant should:(a) Fully cover the salary and related costs of the Institute’s Director so as toensure the independence impartiality and accountability of UNIDIR leadership to thefull membership;(b) Cover the costs of at least one additional Professional post to represent theInstitute, serve as certifying officer and report to the Board in the absence and/or
incapacitation of the Director and to assist the Director in all management andadministrative functions;(c) Provide resources for the provision of quarterly briefings on research andideas of relevant disarmament topics to all regional groupings and, as further
requested by Member States, with a view to supporting the informed participation of
all Member States in disarmament deliberations;(d) Enable UNIDIR to organize at least three events in countries that are notmembers of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to promote
disarmament and non-proliferation knowledge, ideas and dialogue to a broader andmore diverse community.
34. Noting that it was the Board’s responsibility to provide a recommendation for asubvention from the regular budget of the United Nations to the Secretary -Generalfor his subsequent transmittal to the General Assembly for approval (see the statuteof the Institute, art. VIII, para. 3), the Board requested the Secretariat to provide itwith an estimate of the budgetary resources required to assume the four functions set
out by the Secretary-General in his report. In reply, the Board was informed that, atpresent, the estimate amounted to $649,019. The Board therefore recommends anannual subvention from the 2021 regular budget to UNIDIR of $649,019.
35. While recognizing the multiple demands on the assessed contributions ofMember States to the Organization, the recommended amount is a modest one, given
the range of services that includes, apart from those listed, briefings, primers,
knowledge transfer activities, training and research, and technical advice freely
accessible for all Member States. The Board believes that the recommended amountis fully justified, given today’s polarized international security environment, the factthat arms control, non-proliferation and disarmament have returned to the centre ofinternational security debates, the urgent need for new thinking to advance practicalprogress in the governance of weapons technologies of long and more recent standing,and the Institute’s potential to contribute to meeting those challenges. The Board
encourages the General Assembly to approve this budgetary proposal and, thereby
enable the predictable and consistent provision of services to multilateraldisarmament efforts.
36. The Board highlighted that 2020 marked the fortieth anniversary of the Institute,a year in which many important institutional disarmament anniversaries would take
12/15

19-12934

A/74/247

place. The Board encouraged UNIDIR to use that opportunity to take a forward looking approach and, through carefully curated events, support dialogue and new
thinking about the elements that could make up effective arms control in the future,including issues, actors and processes essential to advancing practical progress in old
and new areas of arms control. The anniversary could prove to be an important
opportunity to highlight the Institute’s unique role within the disarmament machinery
as a facilitator of dialogue with and among stakeholders, including those in the private
sector, the research and academic communities, civil society and among technicalexperts. The Board recommends that UNIDIR seek to create synergies with thecommemoration of the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations, in particularwith efforts to engage with young people and communities from around the world on
their priorities and perspectives.

IV. Future work and other matters
37. The Board proposes the following topics for discussions during the meetings to
be held in 2020:• The application of the agenda for disarmament of the Secretary-General withrespect to the Korean Peninsula, including issues related to resuming dialogue
with key stakeholders, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, a Korean
Peninsula zone free of nuclear weapons, and risk reduction;• Possible norms, principles and measures relating to the advancement of stability
and security in outer space;• Biotechnological developments – what are the issues and is there scope formultilateral processes to address them?
38. It is recommended that representatives of the relevant United Nationscommittees and groups of experts be invited, as well as other (outside) experts, tobrief the Board on the agenda topics.

19-12934

13/15

A/74/247

Annex
Members of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters 2019
Steffen Kongstad (Chair)
Ambassador
Permanent Representative of Norway to the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe
ViennaSetsuko Aoki
Professor of Law, Keio University
Tokyo
Selma Ashipala-Musavyi
Ambassador
Permanent Secretary, Ministry of International Relations and Cooperation of
Namibia
Windhoek
Corentin Brustlein
Director
Security Studies Center
Institut français des relations internationales
Paris
Lucia Dammert
Associate Professor
Universidad de Santiago de Chile
Santiago
Lewis A. Dunn
Former United States Ambassador to the Review Conference of the Parties to theTreaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
Virginia, United States of America
Fu Cong
Ambassador
Director-General, Department of Arms Control, Ministry for Foreign Affairs ofChina
Beijing
Amandeep Gill 1(on sabbatical leave from the Advisory Board)
Arminka Helic
MemberHouse of Lords of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
LondonAnton Khlopkov
Director
Center for Energy and Security Studies
Moscow__________________
1

14/15

Amandeep Gill is on interim leave as an official of the Government of India and is currently atemporary staff member of the United Nations Secretariat.
19-12934

A/74/247

Merel Noorman
Assistant Professor
Tilburg University
Tilburg, Netherlands
Enkhtsetseg Ochir
Ambassador-at-Large
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mongolia
Ulaanbaatar
Abiodun Williams
Director of the Institute for Global Leadership and Professor of the Practice ofInternational Politics, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University
Medford, United States of America
Motaz Zahran
Ambassador
Deputy Assistant Foreign Minister for Cabinet Affairs
Cairo
Renata Dwan (ex officio)
Director of the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research
Geneva19-12934

15/15