The undertaking that, at the initiative of Mexico, the Latin American republics undertook at the beginning of 1963 and which was to culminate in February 1967 with the opening for signature of the Treaty of Tlatelolco, has been of short duration if compared to that of the majority of projects aimed at reaching agreements on disarmament measures, especially nuclear disarmament.

1.- The Declaration of the five presidents

The starting point of the persevering efforts that made the military denuclearization of Latin America possible was the Joint Declaration made public on April 29, 1963 by five Latin American Presidents, at the initiative of the then President of Mexico, Adolfo López Mateos, who directed, On March 21 of that year, letters to the Presidents of Bolivia (Víctor Paz Estenssoro), Brazil (João Goulart), Chile (Jorge Alessandri) and Ecuador (Carlos Julio Arosemena), inviting them to jointly “a Declaration by which we would announce our willingness to sign a multilateral agreement with the other countries of Latin America, in which the commitment not to manufacture, receive, store or test nuclear weapons or nuclear delivery devices is established.” Said Declaration would highlight the desire that the rest of the Latin American nations could eventually adhere to it, so that it would constitute for our peoples a kind of liberating letter from all nuclear threats.

The suggestion of the President of Mexico was honored with a prompt and enthusiastic reception by the four heads of State to whom it was addressed, which allowed it to be announced simultaneously in the capitals of the five countries on April 29, 1963 that the Declaration It was solemnly adopted by them from that moment on.

In the message he addressed to his people on radio and television, the Mexican President wanted to dispel even the most remote possibility of a misinterpretation of the reasons that had prompted him to address, in the first place, only four of the leaders. of State of Latin America, providing the following details in this regard:

"It only remains to explain the reason why, having always distinguished Mexico for its feelings of fraternal friendship and respect for each and every one of the Latin American peoples, I decided to address, in this first phase of our undertaking, only the aforementioned heads of state. . The reason, quite simple indeed, is that these four countries had the singular honor of having co-sponsored, in the last session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, a draft resolution that also tended towards the denuclearization of Latin America. At the request of the co-authors of the project, its discussion was postponed. I considered, therefore, that it was to these four States that I should suggest the convenience of inviting the other sister republics to join forces in favor of banning the nuclear threat from Latin American lands. For the rest, I am very pleased to announce that without loss of time I will send fraternal messages to the heads of State of the other countries of Latin America, making the most fervent wishes that we can count on their invaluable collaboration in this common enterprise.”

It was also on that same date when the text of the Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of Latin America was made public, which is worth reproducing here in its entirety:

“The Presidents of the Republics of Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador and Mexico,

 Deeply concerned about the current evolution of the international situation that favors the spread of nuclear weapons,

Considering that, due to their invariable pacifist tradition, the Latin American States must unite their efforts in order to convert Latin America into a nuclear-free zone, thereby contributing to reducing the dangers that threaten world peace,

Desiring to preserve their countries from the tragic consequences that a nuclear war would bring, and

Encouraged by the hope that the conclusion of a Latin American regional agreement may contribute to the adoption of a contractual instrument at the global level,

On behalf of their people and governments they have agreed as follows:

1. Announce now that your governments are willing to sign a multilateral Latin American agreement, by which countries would commit to not manufacture, receive, store, or test nuclear weapons or nuclear delivery devices.

1. Make this Declaration known to the Heads of State of the other Latin American Republics, hoping that their governments adhere to it through the procedure it deems appropriate.

1. “Cooperate among themselves and with the other Latin American republics that adhere to this Declaration, so that Latin America is recognized as soon as possible as a denuclearized zone.”

2.- Resolution 1911 (XVIII) of the UN General Assembly

Five days after the Declaration of the five Latin American Presidents was made public, the Secretary General of the United Nations, U Thant, in a press conference that took place at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, on May 3, responded to the question that a journalist asked him regarding said Declaration in the following terms:

“The United Nations General Assembly seems to have always leaned in favor of the establishment of nuclear-free zones in some parts of the world. I estimate that the sentiment of most African nations last year and the year before was that Africa should become a nuclear-free zone. Last week, a few days before leaving New York, I received a communication from five Latin American governments in which they declared their intention for Latin America to become a nuclear-free zone. My personal opinion is that such an attitude on the part of a growing number of United Nations Member States should be welcomed, because I am firmly convinced that any denuclearized area represents a form of territorial disarmament.

Three days later, on May 6, the 128th session of the Disarmament Committee, Composed of Eighteen Nations, was also held in Geneva, in which the Representatives of Mexico, Lic. Luis Padilla Nervo, and Brazil, Mr. Josué de Castro, officially presented the Declaration of the Five Presidents to the Committee, making a detailed presentation of its origin, purposes and meaning within the framework of disarmament.

Immediately after that intervention, almost all of the remaining members of the Committee made a series of successive interventions supporting the Latin American initiative or, at least, expressing the special interest with which they welcomed it.

The pronouncements of the UN Secretary General and the members of the Disarmament Committee, which could rightly be considered the most appropriate United Nations body to give an opinion on the matter, strengthened the intention that the parties had harbored from the beginning. States co-authors of the Declaration of the Five Presidents to obtain the moral support of the fully representative body of the world Organization, that is, the General Assembly, for the Latin American initiative. Hence, in a meeting that its representatives held in Mexico, on the eve of the opening of the 18th period of sessions of the Assembly, in whose program the denuclearization of Latin America appeared for the first time as a separate topic, it was agreed to fight for the approval of a resolution for that purpose.

It was up to me, as Representative of Mexico in charge of the subject in question, to prepare at the headquarters of the United Nations, at the beginning of October 1963, a preliminary draft resolution which, after being subject to some modifications as a result of its consideration, first, by the representatives of the other four co-authoring States of the Declaration and, then, by the Latin American Group as a whole, it was presented to the First Committee of the Assembly with the original co-sponsorship of ten, and finally of the following eleven Latin American delegations: Bolivia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Panama, Uruguay and Mexico.

This project was examined during eight sessions of the First Commission held between November 11 and 19, and was approved by the Commission, without any changes, in this last arrow. A week later, on November 27, the plenary session of the General Assembly also approved it, so it became resolution 1911 (XVIII), in whose operative part the Assembly expressed its support and encouragement for the Latin American initiative and asked the Secretary General to provide the Latin American States, when requested, with the technical services they may require to achieve the purposes set forth in the resolution, the full text of which is as follows:

"The general assembly,

Bearing in mind the vital need to protect current and future generations from the scourge of nuclear war,

Recalling its resolutions 1380 (XIV) of 20 November 1959, 1576 (XV) of 20 December 1960 and 1665 (XVI) of 4 December 1961, in which it recognized the danger that an increase in the number of States would entail possessors of nuclear weapons since such an increase would necessarily result in the intensification of the arms race and the multiplication of the obstacles encountered in the maintenance of peace in the world, thus making it difficult to achieve an agreement on general disarmament,

Noting that in its resolution 1664 (XVI) of December 4, 1961, it expressly noted that countries that do not possess nuclear weapons have a capital interest in the preparation and application of measures aimed at ensuring the cessation of nuclear weapons testing and prevent the further spread of nuclear weapons and also have an important role to play in this area,

Considering that the recent conclusion of the Treaty Prohibiting Tests of Nuclear Weapons in the Atmosphere, Outer Space and Under Water, signed on August 5, 1963, has created a favorable environment for efforts to make parallel progress in prevention of the further spread of nuclear weapons, a problem that is closely linked to the previous one, as indicated by the General Assembly in its resolutions 1649 (XVI) of November 8, 1961 and 1762 (XVII) of November 6, 1962,

Considering that the Heads of State of five Latin American republics formulated on April 29, 1963 a declaration on the denuclearization of Latin America in which they announced, on behalf of their peoples and governments, that they are willing to sign a Latin American multilateral agreement, which the countries committed not to manufacture, receive, store or test nuclear weapons or nuclear delivery devices,

I recommend the need to preserve in Latin America conditions that prevent the countries of the region from being involved in a dangerous and ruinous nuclear arms race,

1. Takes note with satisfaction of the initiative for the denuclearization of Latin America contained in the joint declaration of April 29, 1963;

1. Expresses the hope that the States of Latin America will initiate studies, as they deem appropriate, in light of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the agreements, on the measures that should be agreed upon to achieve the purposes of the aforementioned statement.

1. Trusts that, at the appropriate time, when a satisfactory agreement has been reached, all States, and especially the nuclear Powers, will present their full cooperation to effectively implement the peace purposes that animate this resolution;

Requests the Secretary General to provide the States of Latin America, when requested, with the technical services they may require to achieve the purposes set forth in this resolution.”

When resolution 1911 (XVIII) was definitively approved in the plenary session of November 27, 1963, I had the opportunity to give a brief speech as spokesperson for the Delegation of Mexico. In it I emphasized that the resolution constituted both a testimony and a challenge. It was a testimony that Latin America has now come of age and knows how to correctly perceive the authentic designs of its people. It was a challenge to the capacity of the Latin American States to work together and achieve unanimous results that reflected the desire for peace that animated them all.

And after stating the main purposes of the enterprise of the banning of nuclear weapons in Latin America, I concluded by stating:

“We are not going to act thoughtlessly and hastily. Let's hurry slowly, as the wise Latin aphorism advises, but let's hurry.

ALatin America begins today, starting from the historic resolution that this Assembly has approved, its march towards denuclearization. And we are convinced that this march, sooner or later, in the short or long term, will prove to be an unstoppable march, because it has the unrestricted and enthusiastic support of all peoples.”

Those words already very clearly prefigured a line of conduct that would soon be proven by facts.

3.- The Creation of COPREDAL

Following the close of the eighteenth session of the United Nations General Assembly, the Mexican Foreign Ministry began active consultations with the other Latin American republics regarding the procedures that could be most effective for achieving the purposes contemplated in resolution 1911 ( XVIII).

The result of these consultations was to be the Preliminary Meeting on the Denuclearization of Latin America (REUPRAL), which took place from November 23 to 27, 1964 and in which, with the exception of Guatemala, all the Latin American republics that had voted in favor participated. of the aforementioned resolution. The sessions of the Meeting were held in one of the buildings of the Independence Unit of the Mexican Social Security Institute located in San Jerónimo Lídice, which, as is known, is included within the Federal District.

The agenda approved at the opening session was, in itself, a convincing indication that the participating States were determined to take seriously the responsibilities entailed by the resolution that the Assembly had adopted the previous year. It was clear from it, in fact, that, although there was no desire to proceed hastily, neither was there any intention to waste time in Byzantine discussions. The two points he included clearly demonstrated this, since they were conceived as follows:

"1. Measures that should be agreed upon with a view to achieving the purposes for the denuclearization of Latin America, contained in the Declaration of April 29, 1963 and reiterated in Resolution 1911 (XVIII) of the General Assembly of the United Nations.

"2. “Preliminary examination of the main aspects implicit in the conclusion of a contractual instrument on the denuclearization of Latin America.”

In the same opening session, the Meeting proceeded to elect the Members of its Board of Directors, having had the honor of occupying the Presidency, since, as is customary in similar cases, the representative of the host country was designated for such position. The representatives of Brazil, Ambassador José Sette Cámara, and of El Salvador, Ambassador Rafael Eguizábal Tobías, were elected, also by acclamation as the President had been, to occupy the two vice-presidencies, and the Mexican Ambassador Carlos Peón del Valle was in charge of the General Secretariat. This integration of the Table had to be maintained during the two years of work of the Preparatory Commission for the Denuclearization of Latin America (COPREDAL) that took place from March 1965 to February 1967, with the only modification that, during the second part of the fourth and final session of the Commission, Ambassador Sergio Correa da Costa took the place of Ambassador Sette Cámara, who for reasons of force majeure was unable to attend.

As a result of its brief session, REUPRAL adopted two substantive resolutions. In the first of them, it was specified that the purposes stated in the Declaration of the Five Presidents and ratified in Resolution 1911 (XVIII) on the denuclearization of Latin America, the term "denuclearization" should be interpreted as "absence of nuclear weapons." In the second resolution, whose significance would be difficult to exaggerate, REUPRAL, acting as a constituent Assembly, created the Preparatory Commission for the Denuclearization of Latin America, to which it gave the very precise task of preparing “a preliminary draft of a multilateral treaty for the denuclearization of Latin America” and, to this end, previously carry out the studies and procedures that it considers pertinent.

The resolution included, among others, the following paragraph, by virtue of which it was mandatory for the Preparatory Commission to establish certain subsidiary bodies:

“The Commission will establish from among its members the working groups that it deems necessary - which will carry out their functions, either at the headquarters of the Commission or in any other place, as circumstances make it advisable -, as well as a committee in charge of coordinate their work, which will be titled "Coordinating Committee."

The Commission was also recommended to give priority in its work to the following issues:

• The definition of the geographical limits of the nuclear weapons-free zone.
• The study of verification, inspection and control methods.
• Carrying out efforts aimed at achieving the collaboration of all Latin American republics;
• Get the States internationally responsible for territories located within the zone to agree to apply to said territories the denuclearization treaty that is concluded, and
• Obtain from the nuclear powers the commitment that they would strictly respect, in all its aspects and consequences, the legal status of the denuclearization of Latin America.

REUPRAL also agreed, in the resolution I have been talking about, that COPREDAL would have its headquarters in Mexico; It would be made up of the seventeen Latin American republics that had participated in the Preliminary Meeting and those that subsequently adhered to the resolution itself; that the Commission should adopt its own regulations and that the inaugural session of its first session would be held on March 15, 1965. Finally, it asked the Government of Mexico to designate the Secretary of the Commission and to provide adequate premises and the personnel required for its Secretariat.

The closing of REUPRAL took place on November 27, 1964, a date that by happy coincidence also marked the first anniversary of the approval of resolution 1911 (XVIII) by the General Assembly of the United Nations. In accordance with the provisions of resolution II of the Meeting, less than four months after it closed, on March 15, 1965, the Preparatory Commission for the Denuclearization of Latin America inaugurated, in the same building in San Jerónimo Lídice, its first session that would end after a week, on March 22.

The agenda adopted for the session was even more categorical than that of the Preliminary Meeting regarding the objective pursued and which was defined as:

"Preparation of the preliminary draft of a multilateral treaty for the denuclearization of Latin America and, to this end, carrying out the previous procedures and studies referred to in Resolution 11 of the Preliminary Meeting on the Denuclearization of Latin America."

The Commission adopted a Regulation that, without mincing details, included all the necessary provisions to facilitate its orderly and efficient operation. Two of its most important articles were, without a doubt, those that dealt with the creation of working groups and the integration of some fundamental aspects of the Coordinating Committee. All the decisions approved by the Commission in its first period of sessions regarding the organization, powers and operation of the Coordinating Committee and the three working groups that were established, were included in the resolution that, in the corresponding final act, was numbered 1 (I) and the title of “Organization of the work of the Preparatory Commission for the Denuclearization of Latin America.”

In the same resolution it was also foreseen that the Coordinating Committee could request from the Secretary General of the United Nations “the technical facilities that it deems pertinent for the best performance of its functions” and, in another resolution that was numbered 4 (I) , COPREDAL asked the President of the Commission to transmit to the Secretary-General of the United Nations the final minutes of its first session "with kind request that he distribute it as a document of the General Assembly for the information of the Members of the Organization." and in relation to paragraph 2 of resolution 1911 (XVIII).”

COPREDAL interpreted this resolution as having permanent validity and, consequently, its President always transmitted the final minutes of the subsequent sessions of the Commission to the Secretary General of the World Organization with the same request as that formulated in the case of the first. Thanks to this, all these minutes were reproduced, translated into the other official languages ​​of the United Nations and distributed to all its Members as official documents of the General Assembly, which greatly facilitated their consultation in international forums.

4.- Preparation of a Preliminary Draft of Articles on Control and a Declaration of Principles

If the outstanding decisions of the first period of sessions were those referring to the organization of the work of COPREDAL, including the adoption of its regulations, in the second period of sessions the first place corresponded to those destined to the establishment of a verification system, inspection and control; to the approval of a declaration of principles that, as stipulated in the corresponding resolution, would “serve as the basis” for the preamble of the future Treaty for the military denuclearization of Latin America, and to the constitution of a Negotiating Committee.

The most salient aspects of these three issues are examined below.

As will be remembered, COPREDAL had created, immediately after its constitution, three working groups that were asked to transmit on August 1, 1965 the reports that had to be submitted through the Coordinating Committee to the Preparatory Commission for its consideration. , in its second session. In accordance with this assignment, the three groups presented reports on the work that they had been able to carry out in the five months available to them to carry out their functions.

Regarding the reports of Group A, which was in charge of presenting proposals for the definition of the geographical limits of the nuclear weapons-free zone and of carrying out negotiations with the Latin American republics that were not yet part of COPREDAL and with the States internationally responsible for territories that could be included within the zone.

Working Group C was entrusted with the task of obtaining the cooperation of the Nuclear Powers so that the legal status of the denuclearization of Latin America was strictly respected. These reports, as indicated therein, were of a very preliminary nature.

Concerning Working Group B, whose mandate had been to carry out a study on the verification, inspection and control methods deemed most convenient to ensure faithful compliance with the obligations derived from the Treaty. Its report included a fairly complete preliminary draft of articles on the subject that should subsequently allow, contrary to what had happened with the majority of multilateral instruments on disarmament measures, the provisions relating to control to be one of those that, at the time sooner, would get general approval.

Working Group B was installed on May 14, 1965, having agreed that same day to ask the President of the Preparatory Commission to transmit to the Secretary General of the UN, based on the provisions of paragraph 4 of resolution 1911 (XVIII ), a request in which, after highlighting that the Secretariat of the Organization constituted “the most important repository of knowledge and experience in the matter” with which the Group was going to deal, requested the cooperation of the Secretary General himself in order to to be provided with the following technical services:

"TO. The preparation, as a matter of urgency, of the following two working documents:

• A selected compilation of the most significant proposals presented by States, specialized institutions or experts, to ensure the verification and control of nuclear disarmament, and
•  A tabulation, arranged by specific topics, of the content of the proposals and other material included in the previous working document.

The secondment to Working Group B, in the capacity of Technical Consultant, for a period of one month and, if possible, as of June 15, 1965, of an official of the United Nations Secretariat expert in the matter entrusted to the Group. "

In response to this request, the Secretary General of the United Nations provided Group B with the services of Mr. William Epstein, Head of the Disarmament Affairs Group of the Organization's Secretariat, and transmitted to him three documents in which a abundant documentation of the main antecedents relating to disarmament control, especially nuclear disarmament.

After holding five sessions in which the working documents prepared by the UN Secretariat were analyzed and the Technical Consultant of the same was heard, the Group agreed that the COPREDAL Secretariat, with the cooperation of the former, prepare a preliminary draft Of articles. Once it was ready, the group devoted several sessions to its consideration and, after introducing some modifications, it was adopted and sent by the Coordinating Committee to be submitted to the Preparatory Commission, as an annex to its report, with the title of “Preliminary Draft of Articles for the Treaty on the Denuclearization of Latin America, relating to verification, inspection and control.”

The Preparatory Commission, after receiving the opinion of a subcommittee, which, among other things, it had entrusted with examining the preliminary draft, adopted its resolution 9 (II) in which, after expressing the “special appreciation” that it had deserved the Preliminary Draft of Articles, he emphasized that the eminently technical nature of the provisions contained in said preliminary draft make its study by the Member States necessary.

Taking into account the foregoing, the Commission resolved to transmit the preliminary draft to the governments of the Member States and request them to send their observations on said preliminary draft to the Secretary General of the Commission, “no later than January 15, 1966, requesting that, As far as possible, these observations were “presented with appropriate wording for direct use in the preparation of the articles of the Treaty.”

The Commission also agreed to ask its Coordinating Committee to prepare, based on the Preliminary Draft Articles and the comments made by the governments, a working document that would serve to formulate a new version of the preliminary draft and to instruct it to transmit to the governments themselves. said working document, no later than February 28, 1966.

Finally, COPREDAL expressed in the resolution its recognition to the Secretary General and the Technical Consultant of the United Nations, for the collaboration they had provided in its work on this matter.

Even though the preliminary draft articles, as the title itself indicates, had been prepared to serve as a starting point for the study of the issue in the Treaty, its quality should allow that, even though it was the subject of several additions and modifications of a secondary, its essential provisions would be incorporated in the future treaty.

The second issue referred to above, that is, the preparation of a declaration of principles that should serve as the preamble of the instrument that was in development, its genesis was, in summary, the following:

The Coordinating Committee, in its third session held on August 9, 1965, decided to entrust the COPREDAL Secretariat with the preparation of a working document that would contain “elements that could be used in the drafting of the preambular part of the preliminary draft of the Multilateral Treaty for the denuclearization of Latin America”.

The Preparatory Commission, in its fourteenth session held on August 27 of the same year, created a subcommittee to which it transferred the study of several documents, among others, the working document prepared by the Secretariat in compliance with the order of the Coordinating Committee and reproduced with the acronym COPREDAL/S/DT/1.

The Commission itself, in its sixteenth session, which was held on August 31, considered the draft resolution COPREDAL/L/8 submitted to it by the subcommittee to which I previously referred and in which it had incorporated the text prepared by the Secretariat with some slight modifications; The main one consisted of adding as last considering an express reference to resolution 1911 (XVIII) of the UN General Assembly.

At the same session, the Commission, taking into account the observations made by some representatives, agreed that the draft resolution be modified so that, instead of saying: «Resolves to approve as a Preamble to the preliminary draft of the Treaty […]» said "Resolves to approve as a declaration of principles that will serve as the basis for the preamble of the Preliminary Draft Treaty [...]", and immediately adopted it unanimously.

The declaration of principles in question only subsequently had to be the subject, in the two subsequent sessions, of a few modifications consisting of the addition of what constitute, in the Treaty, the fourth, sixth and seventh recitals of its Preamble; in the section of it that begins with the words “Persuaded that”, the addition of the paragraph referring to the fact that “The establishment of militarily denuclearized zones is closely linked to the maintenance of peace and security in the respective regions”, and that of two clauses, one of which specified and the other expanded the meaning of as many paragraphs. Apart from these additions, the reference to devices for the delivery of nuclear weapons that had appeared in the ninth and thirteenth paragraphs of the Declaration of Principles was omitted.

It can, therefore, be rightly said that the Preamble of the future Treaty was practically adopted on August 31, 1965, when the Preparatory Commission approved the Declaration of Principles to which I have been referring and whose full text was as follows:

“On behalf of their people and faithfully interpreting their desires and aspirations, the Governments represented in the Conference of Plenipotentiaries for the Denuclearization of Latin America,

  Desiring to contribute, to the extent of their possibilities, to putting an end to the arms race, especially nuclear weapons, and to the consolidation of a world at peace, based on the sovereign equality of States, mutual respect and good neighborliness;

  Recalling that the United Nations General Assembly, in its Resolution 808 (IX), unanimously approved, as one of the three points of a coordinated disarmament program, the total prohibition of the use and manufacture of nuclear and all types of weapons of weapons of mass destruction", as well as the transformation for peaceful purposes of existing stockpiles of nuclear weapons, and

  Also recalling Resolution 1911 (XVIII) of the General Assembly of the United Nations, by which it was established that the measures that should be agreed upon for the denuclearization of Latin America must be taken "in light of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations United and regional agreements,

Persuaded that:

The incalculable destructive power of nuclear weapons has made it imperative that the legal proscription of war be strictly observed in practice, if the survival of civilization and of humanity itself is to be assured;

Nuclear weapons, whose terrible effects affect both armies and the civilian population without distinction, constitute, due to the persistence of the radioactivity they generate, an attack on the integrity of the human species and can even make the entire Earth it ultimately becomes uninhabitable;

General and complete disarmament under effective international control is a vital issue that is equally demanded by all the peoples of the world;

The proliferation of nuclear weapons, which seems inevitable unless States, using their sovereign rights, limit themselves to prevent it, would greatly complicate any disarmament agreement and would increase the danger of a nuclear conflagration;

The privileged situation of the States represented at the Conference, whose territories are completely free of nuclear weapons and devices for their launch, imposes on them the unavoidable duty, both for their own benefit and for the good of humanity, to preserve such situation;

The existence of nuclear weapons in any country in Latin America would make it a target for possible nuclear attacks and would fatally provoke a ruinous nuclear arms race throughout the region, which would imply the unjustifiable diversion towards warlike purposes of the limited resources available for development. economic and social;

The above factors, together with the traditional pacifist vocation of its people, make it essential that nuclear energy be used in Latin America exclusively for peaceful purposes.

The denuclearization of vast geographical areas, adopted by the sovereign decision of the States included in it, will have a beneficial influence in favor of other regions;

Convinced, in conclusion, that:

The denuclearization of the States represented at the Conference, understood as the internationally agreed commitment in the present Treaty to keep their territories free forever, as they have been until now, of nuclear weapons or devices for their launch, would constitute a measure of protection for their people against the waste of their limited resources in nuclear weapons, and against possible nuclear attacks on their territories; a significant contribution to preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and a valuable element in favor of general and complete disarmament, and that

Latin America, faithful to its tradition imbued with the sense of universality, must not only strive to banish from its lands the scourge of a nuclear war and fight for the well-being and progress of its people, but also to cooperate in parallel with the realization of the ideals of humanity, that is, the consolidation of a permanent peace based on equal rights, economic equity and social justice for all, in accordance with the principles and purposes enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations,

They have agreed on the following: […]”

The third resolution, also worthy of special mention among those approved in the second period of sessions, is the one numbered 7 (11) in the Final Act, by which, as I also noted before, a Negotiating Committee was established that in The practice came to replace Working Groups A and C, and together with the Coordinating Committee was, from its establishment, one of the two main subsidiary bodies of COPREDAL.”

5.- The Contribution of the Coordinating Committee

The Coordinating Committee whose constitution had been foreseen by the Preliminary Meeting and carried out by COPREDAL in its first period of sessions, was made up, in accordance with article 14 of the regulations of the latter, by the President and the two Vice-Presidents of the Preparatory Commission , who were, respectively, the Representatives of Mexico, Brazil and El Salvador and by the Representatives of Ecuador - Ambassador Leopoldo Benites Vinueza - and of Haiti - Ambassador Julio Jean Pierre-Audain - in their capacity as Presidents of Working Groups A and B, an additional member not having been necessary for Group C since its presidency was carried out by the same representative of Brazil -Ambassador José Sette Cámara- who held one of the two vice-presidencies of the Commission.

The constructive influence of the Coordinating Committee and the results of its effective work were felt on numerous occasions throughout the work of the Preparatory Commission. One of the most outstanding examples of his work was the preparation of a working document already drawn up in the form of a complete preliminary draft of the Treaty, which was submitted to the third session of COPREDAL.

The accomplishment of this task by the Committee was possible thanks to the provisions that for the preamble and for the establishment of a control system had already been approved in the second session of COPREDAL, as well as the fact that Mexico submitted the observations that the Preparatory Commission had requested in its Resolution 9 (II) in a working document that had the form and content of a preliminary draft treaty.

Taking these three documents as a basis and also taking into account some preliminary general observations submitted by Chile, as well as a draft resolution presented by Argentina at the first session of COPREDAL, for the establishment of a “Latin American Permanent Committee on Denuclearization ", the Coordinating Committee, in the course of nine sessions held from March 8 to 14, 1966, prepared the aforementioned working document entitled "Preliminary Draft Treaty on the Denuclearization of Latin America."

In said Preliminary Draft - which included a preamble and twenty-five articles - the declaration of principles was literally reproduced with the modification of deleting in the ninth and thirteenth paragraphs the phrase "and devices for its launch", by virtue of which, given its nature so general, it could be interpreted as implying a ban on modern aircraft and ships that, in principle, could be used for the delivery of nuclear weapons.

If the preparation of the Preliminary Draft Treaty was to give extraordinary impetus to the efforts of COPREDAL, the contribution that the Committee provided to the Preparatory Commission in its last report, dated December 28, 1966, constituted, without a doubt, an element that had to allow it to successfully complete the task entrusted to it and unanimously approve the Treaty of Tlatelolco in its fourth session.

In effect, that report contained a compromise formula that, as a result of two sessions held at the headquarters of the Permanent Mission of Mexico to the United Nations, on December 27 and 28, 1966, the Committee had managed to formulate. To assess these results in all their value, it is worth briefly recapitulating some illustrative background.

The entry into force of the Treaty was probably the issue that provoked the most prolonged discussions within the Preparatory Commission and for whose solution the greatest obstacles had to be overcome. When it was first considered within the Commission in April 1966, two distinct trends became apparent.

According to the first - among whose sponsors Mexico was from the beginning - the Treaty should enter into force, in accordance with the general rule applicable in these cases, between the States that had ratified it, on the date on which the deposit was made. of their respective instruments of ratification. As for the Latin American Organization established by the Treaty, provision should be made for its entry into operation as soon as eleven instruments of ratification had been deposited, since that number would constitute a majority of the twenty-one members of the Preparatory Commission.

The States that sponsored the second trend advocated, on the contrary, that the Treaty, even if it were signed and ratified by all the Member States of the Preparatory Commission, should only enter into force when four requirements, which are essentially the same, had been met. which appear in the first paragraph of Article 28 of the Treaty of Tlatelolco and which can be summarized as follows: signature and ratification of the Treaty and Additional Protocols I and II by all States to which the three instruments in question were open and celebration of agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency on the application of its Safeguards System by all signatory States of the Treaty and Additional Protocol I.

As in the course of the third session it was impossible to find a solution to the problem posed by these two divergent tendencies, the Preparatory Commission incorporated in the Proposals it approved on May 3, 1966 two parallel texts in which they were formulated, respectively , the provisions that the Treaty should contain if the first thesis were accepted or if the second were preferred.

To resolve the problem, the Coordinating Committee, in its Report of December 28, 1966, suggested the adoption of a conciliatory formula that could receive the approval of all the Member States of the Commission, without prejudice to the respective positions that on the merits of The issue was specified in the two alternative texts included in the Proposals.

It was this formula that, with some modifications, had to be finally adopted and incorporated into Article 28 of the Treaty. According to it, the Treaty will enter into force for all signatory States only when the four requirements specified in paragraph 1 of the article have been met. This, however, as paragraph 2 of the same article says, “it will be the imprescriptible power of every signatory State to waive, in whole or in part, the requirements established in the previous paragraph, by means of a declaration that will appear as an annex to the respective instrument of ratification and that may be formulated at the time of depositing it.” or later. For States that make use of this power, this Treaty will enter into force with the deposit of the declaration, or as soon as the requirements whose waiver has not been expressly declared have been met.

As can be seen, an eclectic system has been adopted that, while respecting the points of view of all the signatory States, prevents any of them from attempting to veto the entry into force of the Treaty for those States that wish to voluntarily submit to the statute. of denuclearization in it defined and stated.

6.- Approval and Opening for Signature of the Treaty of Tlatelolco

On February 12, 1967, COPREDAL unanimously approved the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and, two days later, on the 14th of the same month and year, it was opened for signature at the headquarters of the COPREDAL. Ministry of Foreign Affairs located in the neighborhood of the Mexican capital that bears the Aztec name of Tlatelolco.

I find nothing better to reflect the prevailing feelings on both occasions than to reproduce here some paragraphs taken from the addresses I had the privilege of delivering then.

I began the first of them by emphasizing that we had just «approve the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America, through which we hope to be able to banish forever from our lands the terrible threat posed by these instruments of mass destruction, whose scope may be incalculable, but whose effects have already been proven. certainly terrifying", and I ended it by addressing the Representatives of the Member States in the following terms:

“Dear Representatives:

In the course of my activities as an internationalist and diplomat I have had to attend around fifty international conferences and chair a few. I can, however, assure you that for me the Preparatory Commission for the Denuclearization of Latin America will always occupy first place among all of them, for which two years ago you did me the honor of electing me President. I am convinced, in fact, that it will not be possible for me to contribute again, at least to the same degree to which your generous cooperation made it possible in this case, to an enterprise with such noble and lofty purposes as this collective enterprise that we have were able to bring together to a successful conclusion: that of laying the foundations to ensure in Latin America, through a freely agreed upon multilateral Treaty that we hope will receive universal observance, the total and perpetuity absence of those terrible instruments of mass destruction that are nuclear weapons; to leave, with the greatest solemnity, forever consecrated the banning of nuclear weapons in Latin America.

Regarding the closing session of COPREDAL, the words that I will allow myself to recall below are taken from the speech I gave on February 14, 1967:

“Mexico considers it a privilege to have been able to contribute to the realization of the task that the Governments and peoples of our America entrusted to the Preparatory Commission. The signing of the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America constitutes, without a doubt, a historical event of incalculable importance for progress towards disarmament and the consolidation of peace. With the successful completion of its work, the Commission offers the world the inspiring example of the first Treaty ever concluded to guarantee the total absence of nuclear weapons in a region inhabited by man.

The Representatives who are gathered here are undoubtedly worthy of all kinds of congratulations, but even more than you, the Latin American people themselves must be congratulated. The validity of the Treaty will mean that we will have been lucky enough to prevent, before it began, an upward spiral of nuclear weapons that would have been senseless. Latin America will thus never have to bear the intolerable burden that such weapons represent. And its virgin lands of atomic sites that threaten other countries will not become a magnet that in turn attracts nuclear attacks from possible adversary powers.

Perhaps there are those who can say that the new instrument suffers from some deficiencies and could have been better. I do not believe, however, that this should worry us, since the same applies to all the essentially perfectible fruits of human effort. I am convinced that it is destined to exert a moral influence of inestimable value despite its limitations. […]

Of course, militarily denuclearized zones do not constitute an end in themselves, but rather a means to achieve, at a later stage, general and complete disarmament, among whose main objectives it is, as approved more than two decades ago by the General Assembly of the United Nations, the total prohibition of the use and manufacture of nuclear weapons and all types of weapons of mass destruction. It is obvious, however, that in the current conditions of a world that is still unfortunately divided, it would be illusory to attempt to immediately achieve such an ambitious goal. Mexico has long spoken in favor of a procedure that, without losing sight of the ultimate goal, would allow effective progress made in stages. Hence, we fully share what the Preamble of the Treaty states, emphasizing that the military denuclearization of Latin America will not only benefit the peoples of the region, but will also constitute a significant contribution to avoiding the proliferation of nuclear weapons and a valuable element in favor of general and complete disarmament. We trust that it will exert a favorable influence on the negotiations that will resume in Geneva next week for the conclusion of a non-proliferation treaty in the world order. We also hope that it can help ensure that efforts to militarily denuclearize other regions, where conditions analogous to those of Latin America exist, have the same success as ours.

On the other hand, the agreement reached on a matter as difficult and complex as the one discussed in this forum demonstrates the capacity of Latin American countries to jointly carry out undertakings of high magnitude and particular significance. The fruitful solidarity that this Treaty forged must now be put at the service of other tasks of similar urgency for our countries, among which I would like to highlight that of expanding and accelerating their economic integration and narrowing and strengthening their solidarity action at all levels for the aggrandizement of their towns. If we persevere with equal determination in these endeavors, the area of ​​peace that we have forged will one day also become an area of ​​prosperity and well-being.

Dear Representatives:

After the long road traveled since the Preparatory Commission for the Denuclearization of Latin America held its first session in this city, two years ago, we have today victoriously reached the goal that the Commission itself had set for itself.

I believe that we can feel fully satisfied with the results obtained. The Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America with which we have concluded our deliberations in this corner of Tlatelolco, constitutes an instrument of peace and harmony whose fruitful derivations will become more evident every day with the passage of time. and from now on I believe it can be stated without hyperbole that it makes you worthy of the gratitude of posterity.”

The Site of Tlatelolco

Credits Amalia González Caballero Photo Library. Diplomatic Historical Heritage. Secretary of Foreign Relations. Mexico.

7.- The Inauguration of the OPANAL General Conference

From June 24 to 28, 1969, the “Preliminary Meeting for the constitution of the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America” was held in Mexico City. Eight projects were approved that covered the following topics: the Regulations of the General Conference; the Agreement between OPANAL and the Government of the host State; the Convention on privileges and immunities of OPANAL; the OPANAL Secretariat Staff Statute; the OPANAL Financial Regulations; the OPANAL Budget for 1969-1970; the Scale of Quotas for the proration of OPANAL expenses, and the establishment of an OPANAL Operating Fund.

The General Conference of the Agency dedicated the first session of its “supreme body”, the General Conference, almost entirely to the examination and approval of all these projects, having also adopted some decisions, such as the one to appoint Acting Secretary General of the Conference to Ambassador Carlos Peón del Valle, who had acted as Secretary General of COPREDAL during its four sessions. The interim period in question came to an end in the second part of the same first session of the General Conference, when in resolution 30 (1) Ambassador Leopoldo Benites Vinueza was appointed Secretary General of OPANAL for a period of four years from January 1, 1971.

As the General Conference began its deliberations, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, U Thant, delivered a speech in which, among other things, he said:

“It is a great pleasure for me, and truly an honor, to be in Mexico City at the inauguration of the General Conference of the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America, which is known by its Spanish acronym, OPANAL. . The Agency is, in a sense, an offspring of the United Nations. In November 1963, by its resolution 1911 (XVIII), the General Assembly gave for the first time its approval and encouragement of the idea of ​​creating a nuclear-free zone in Latin America. It was believed then that the creation of this zone would not only be very beneficial to the peoples of Latin America by guaranteeing their security and allowing them to concentrate their energies and resources on peaceful economic and social activities, but that it would also be beneficial to the peoples of the entire world. world by eliminating the threat of an atomic arms race and nuclear war in an important area of ​​the world and thus contributing to promoting the cause of disarmament and international peace and security […]

 It is no secret that, as happens with any great effort and any advanced project, some harbored serious doubts about the possibilities of the Latin American States to succeed in their work or to achieve concrete results. However, these States persevered in their efforts and made steady progress year after year towards achieving their goal. Today we see the culmination and fruition of five years of arduous and thorny work. I would like to sincerely congratulate all the governments and statesmen who have worked so long and so well to reach the goal reached today, and in particular the government of Mexico, which has hosted all of your meetings with hospitality...

 It is a source of deep regret for me that successes in the field of disarmament have been few and far between. Of course, it is easy to see the magnitude of the obstacles that hinder progress in the complicated and frustrating field of disarmament and arms control. But these very difficulties increase the merit and significance of your achievement. In a world that too often seems dark and ominous, the Treaty of Tlatelolco will shine like a beacon. This treaty is a practical demonstration for all humanity of what can be achieved when there is sufficient dedication and the necessary political will.

 The Treaty of Tlatelolco is unique in several aspects. It is true that the Antarctic Treaty and the Outer Space Treaty have prevented the arms race from spreading to those regions, and that concerted international efforts are now being made to prevent it from spreading to the seabed and ocean floor. All these regions have in common the characteristic of not being inhabited. The Treaty of Tlatelolco is unique because it refers to an important inhabited area of ​​the Earth. It is also unique because the body created in this session will have the advantage of having a permanent and effective control system with a series of innovative features. In addition to applying the system of protective measures of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the regime established by the Treaty contains provisions for special reports and investigations and, in cases of suspicion, special inspections. This Treaty includes a number of aspects of the system known as “challenge verification”, which is one of the most promising new concepts in the complicated issue of verification and control.”

It was my turn, in my capacity as President of the session of the General Conference to which I have been referring here, to close the speeches delivered at the solemn opening session of the same. The paragraphs reproduced below are taken from what I deemed appropriate to express on that occasion:

“Tuesday, September 2, 1969 will be a day of perennial remembrance, not only in the annals of Latin America, but also in the history of humanity's efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons and contribute to the strengthening of peace.

 To realize that there is no hyperbole in the previous statement, it will be enough to reflect for a moment that the nuclear weapons-free zone that the Treaty of Tlatelolco aims to one day cover the entire surface of the Latin American subcontinent, already has, as of today, more of five and a half million square kilometers, not of plains covered by perpetual snow or desert sidereal bodies, but of fertile lands inhabited by around one hundred million inhabitants.

 The Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America, we must not forget, is the only current international instrument designed to ensure, through an effective international control system under its own permanent supervisory body, the total absence of nuclear weapons in a densely populated region of the Earth. Absence, I have said, repeating the definition that since November 1964 was reflected in the first resolution adopted by the Preliminary Meeting on the Denuclearization of Latin America. Absence, a concept of clear clarity that does not allow for erroneous or subtle interpretations nor can it mean anything other than the non-existence, in perpetuity, of nuclear weapons in the territories of the Contracting Parties to the Treaty, regardless of the State under whose dominion or control these could be found.

 Hence it has been possible to affirm, with all reason, that the establishment of nuclear weapon-free zones constitutes an effective measure of nuclear disarmament, and that, if it were to become feasible for a treaty of universal scope analogous to the Treaty of Tlatelolco to come into force, The problem of nuclear disarmament would have been automatically resolved, since this would entail the elimination of the gigantic nuclear arsenals that currently exist in the world.

 For the Latin American States that are already Parties to the Treaty, as well as for those that become so, the regime of total military denuclearization established therein entails a double benefit: that of removing from their territories the danger of become the target of possible nuclear attacks and to avoid the waste of their resources, essential for the economic and social development of their people, in the production of nuclear weapons. [...]

 The Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America - to which the acronym OPANAL corresponds and whose main and fully representative body, the General Conference, begins its work today - constitutes the culmination of almost five years of persevering joint efforts by the Latin American States, starting from the Preliminary Meeting of November 1964. Its objective will be to ensure that the provisions of the Treaty are practically applied and that the two fundamental purposes of the Treaty to which I have previously alluded are fulfilled: to guarantee the total absence of nuclear weapons and to equitably promote the peaceful use of the atom[...]

 I am going to conclude this intervention. I think it would be appropriate to do so by highlighting the same point with which I began it.

 I am convinced that all the Member States participating in this First Meeting of the General Conference share without reservations the votes expressed by the President of Mexico, in the Message he has just addressed to the Conference, in the sense that very soon the OPANAL can bring together all the countries in our area.

 When this happens and when, in addition, the Treaty of Tlatelolco also covers all the other territories located in the area, the statute of absolute prohibition of nuclear weapons will apply to an area of ​​just over twenty million square kilometers. in which, at the current level of population density, about two hundred and sixty million human beings would live.

 This is the ideal that we must pursue and whose realization must be one of the main efforts of OPANAL."

(*) Text published in the commemorative book of the “Twentieth Anniversary of the Treaty of Tlatelolco (1967-1987)” Pages 11-35, OPANAL