Reaching Critical Will

Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)

Conference on Disarmament

General Assembly First Committee

UN Disarmament Commission

Special Session on Disarmament

General E-News Advisories
2008

Archives
2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003

Subscribe to the Reaching Critical Will General E-News Advisories:
send an email to the Project Associate, subject line "subscribe e-news"

27 April
1) Report on the Disarmament Commission
2) Students for a Nuclear Weapons-Free World

11 April
1) Report on the plenary meetings of the UNDC, 7–8 April 2008
2) Nuclear disarmament and a Department of Peace: News from Canada
3) Important information for NGOs going to the NPT
4) Time to go to Omaha: Annual Space Organizing Conference
5) Upcoming International Panel on Fissile Materials event in New York
6) One week left to submit articles, advertisements, and artwork to the News in Review

1 April
1) The Conference on Disarmament closes its first session of 2008
2) The United Nations Disarmament Commission is set to open its 2008 session
3) Think Outside the Bomb in Boston and Washington, DC
4) Subscribe to the News in Review
5) Calling for articles, ads, and art for the News in Review

14 March
1) Update on Iran's nuclear programme
2) International Women's Day Disarmament Seminar Statement
3) Report on RCW's event at the Commission on the Status of Women
4) Invitation to subscribe to the Arms and Security Initiative E-News
5) Registration for the small arms meeting of states parties
6) Deadline for NPT PrepCom registration and accreditation

21 February
1) Discussions on outer space in the Conference on Disarmament
2) Commission on the Status of Women: events related to disarmament
3) Update on Iran
4) WILPF member to deliver the 2008 Bertrand Russell Peace Lectures
5) Calling for submissions to the News in Review

6 February
1) Update: Accreditation and Registration for the NPT PrepCom

31 January
1) Drafting Statements for the 2008 NPT PrepCom
2) Report on cluster munitions
3) News from the Conference on Disarmament
4) New sanctions against Iran?
5) Upcoming WILPF-sponsored events
6) Photography Exhibit: The Nuclear Dilemma
7) Colombia ratifies the CTBT

14 January
1) NPT PrepCom 2008
- Registration and Accreditation
- The role of NGOs at the PrepCom
- NGO Side Events
- NGO Statements
- News in Review
- What to do if you can't go to Geneva
- Links for more information
2) Conference on Disarmament 2008
3) WILPF on the Inside: The Secretary-General's Advisory Board on Disarmament
4) Follow the news on North Korea and Iran
5) Disarmament Calendar for 2008

27 April 2008

Dear Reaching Critical Will friends and advisors:

Greetings from Geneva, where the second session of the PrepCom for this current NPT review cycle is about to commence. Don't forget to subscribe to the News in Review to follow the daily proceedings - just send me an email with the subject line "subscribe nir". All statements, papers, reports, News in Reviews, and other information will be posted in near-real time at http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/legal/npt/2008index.html throughout the conference.

In peace,
Ray Acheson, Project Associate

1) Report on the Disarmament Commission
The United Nations Disarmament Commission (UNDC) failed to adopt recommendations in either of its working groups: nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation; and practical confidence-building measures in conventional weapons. The UNDC has essentially been considering these agenda items for the past 8 years - from 2000-2003, the Commission's agenda was: ways and means to achieve nuclear disarmament; and practical confidence-building measures in conventional weapons. In 2004 and 2005, the UNDC was unable to agree on an agenda and did not hold any substantive sessions.

The final plenary meeting of the 2008 session was cancelled, but closing remarks were delivered at earlier session, where most delegates lamented the UNDC's failure and the continued stagnation of disarmament machinery. Some representatives were critical of the Commission's working methods, arguing that the lack of experts participating in the session impeded the chances of its success. As noted in Reaching Critical Will's first report on this year's UNDC, several governments did not send any representatives; the vast majority of those who did participate did not send their disarmament experts from Geneva, but relied on staff in NY. The United States sent two representatives part way into the informal meetings, reportedly at the European Union's request.

In the nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation working group, the Middle East and negative security assurances reportedly continued to be contentious issues. Participants discussed the Chair's working paper but were unable to reach agreement on its content. In the confidence-building measures in conventional arms working group, participants reportedly were able to reach consensus on several points in the Chair's working paper, though the group was unable to agree on recommendations. In the final meeting, Russia's delegation noted that China, Russia, and the United States were able to agree on language related to outer space. In her closing remarks, Ambassador Mona Juul of Norway noted that the working group was not able to state its support for the Mine Ban Treaty (Ottawa Convention), the Arms Trade Treaty, or the ongoing negotiations to ban cluster munitions causing unacceptable harm to civilians. Weak language on cluster munitions was reportedly agreed to after much discussion.

In the final meeting, the Chair of the UNDC, Ambassador Piet de Klerk of the Netherlands, again raised the issue of inviting experts from specialized agencies, intergovernmental organizations, research institutes, and think-tanks to participate in the UNDC. He proposed that out of the existing four plenary meetings, one meeting (Monday afternoon) be set aside for presentations and panel discussions by invited experts. He suggested that if this was not acceptable, the programme of work could be amended to provide for an additional plenary meeting on Wednesday morning of the first week. He also noted that experts would only be invited for the first and second session of the Commission's three year cycle.

Reportedly, many delegations objected to the proposal of inviting outside experts to address the Commission. Some argued that experts would not be able to help bridge the fundamental differences between government positions and policies. However, other delegations argued that experts could help illuminate and articulate salient arguments and explain technical or legal elements of items under discussion, thus enhancing government participants' understanding of the issues, their contexts, and their implications.

Next year, the UNDC will start a new three year cycle. It will have to adopt a new agenda, providing a good opportunity to modify the Commission's methods of work. The Chair has reportedly requested suggestions to this end by the time of the First Committee in October. In that time, delegations should seriously consider ways to revitalize both the Commission itself and their participation in it.

2) Students for a Nuclear Weapons-Free World
Dr. Hans Blix, President of the World Federation of United Nation Associations (WFUNA), in partnership with the World Academy of Art and Science, has launched Students for a Nuclear Weapons-Free World: a global essay, video and poster competition designed to mobilize youth to strive towards a world free from the threat of weapons of mass destruction. Students (aged 18-30 years) are invited to engage in discussion and debate over the following question:

What do you think can lead governments to stay away from, or do away with, nuclear weapons?

The authors of the most outstanding contributions will be awarded an airfare and accommodation to attend the Students for a Nuclear Weapons-Free World seminar in Geneva, to be held at the Palais de Nations from July 13th-16th 2008.

Take part in the initiative by either writing an essay (1500 words), producing a video (2 minutes) or designing a poster. The deadline for submissions is May 31th 2008. Visit www.disarmamenthub.org to find all details.

11 April 2008

Dear Reaching Critical Will friends and advisors:

On 7 April, the United Nations Disarmament Commission (UNDC) began the final session of its three year cycle of deliberations on its two current agenda items: recommendations for achieving the objective of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons; and practical confidence-building measures in the field of conventional weapons. Reaching Critical Will is monitoring and reporting on the process and posting all governmental statements and papers on the RCW website. The Commission can make recommendations, but this opportunity should be seized to cooperate and compromise at a time when multilateral disarmament negotiations (and even deliberations) are at such an impasse. As the results of the Commission are not legally-binding, this is the time for delegations to demonstrate flexibility and sincerity, attitudes which could carry forward to the upcoming nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Preparatory Committee and the second part of the Conference on Disarmament's 2008 session. As the Chair of the UNDC, Ambassador Piet de Klerk of the Netherlands, said, no one is exempt from the call to find common ground.

In peace,
Ray Acheson, Project Associate

1) Report on the plenary meetings of the UNDC, 7–8 April
Plenary meetings were held for the first two days of the UNDC's current session, at which a number of delegations delivered general statements conveying their governments' policies and their views on the work of the UNDC. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon addressed the opening meeting, renewing his call for delegations "to move forward in a spirit of compromise and accommodation." He argued that the "solemn duty" of pursuing disarmament and non-proliferation

cannot be fulfilled through confrontation, condemnation or the adoption of intractable policy positions.... There is little doubt that we will not go far if each delegation proceeds expecting to achieve—here and now—nothing less than 100 per cent of their desired objectives. The pursuit of maximalist goals by some will yield only minimal results for all. Worse, we could see this institution itself decline under a cloud of pessimism and despair. It is not a defeat to move forward today on those issues where progress is possible, and to pursue other goals tomorrow. There is no shame or loss of pride in acting according to the laws of reason.

Participation and representation during the plenary phase, however, did not reflect the urgency and importance that was stressed by the Secretary-General, the Chair of the Commission, and many of the delegates who spoke—most of whom were Permanent Representative of UN Missions. France, the United Kingdom, and the United States did not deliver statements to the plenary or have any representatives of their delegations attend the meetings. During the final plenary meeting, on the afternoon of 8 April, the conference room felt deserted. Only about half of UN member states sent representatives.

Agenda Item I: Nuclear Disarmament and Non-Proliferation
The majority of delegations who spoke focused on the first agenda item in their statements. Most delegations expressed support for the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)—Iraq's representative announced that Iraqi Parliament is now processing its ratification of the CTBT—nuclear weapon free zones, the negotiation of a fissile material treaty, and the complete, verifiable, irreversible elimination of nuclear weapons. Most representatives also emphasized the need for balance between nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation efforts, arguing that one cannot be pursued without the other with any hope of success. Egypt's Permanent Representative, Ambassador Maged Abdel Aziz, said it is regrettable that "efforts aimed at granting priority to non-proliferation without achieving parallel progress in nuclear disarmament" are still ongoing, arguing, "the efforts of the five nuclear-weapon-States in the multilateral context remain extremely limited, especially when compared to the commitments undertaken by those [non-nuclear weapon] States in the [NPT]."

Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
Many delegations reiterated their support for the 1995 and 2000 NPT outcomes, particularly the resolution on a nuclear weapon free zone in the Middle East and the 13 practical steps toward nuclear disarmament. Egypt's Ambassador Aziz argued that the "lack of resolve [toward implementing the Middle East resolution] has become a threat to the very principle of Treaty universality at the core." He urged the UNDC to push toward the implementation of the 1995 and 2000 NPT Review Conference outcomes "as a plan of action that enhances the credibility of the Treaty and its review process."

Ambassador Aziz also argued that the possible amendment of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) guidelines likewise threatens "to do away with the principles and objectives of the NPT," as the US-India deal, which the NSG amendments might be made for, "categorically contradicts the letter and spirit of the NPT and the 'Decision on Principles and Objectives of Nuclear Non-Proliferation' adopted as part of the NPT indefinite extension package." He said, "Such a development will forever eliminate the opportunity to destroy nuclear weapons developed outside the NPT regime and the opportunity for non-NPT member States to join it as non-nuclear-weapon-States in order to realize its universality."

Most delegations underscored the vital importance of the NPT's full implementation. Many urged those outside of the NPT who possess nuclear weapons to join as non-nuclear weapon states, and for nuclear weapon states to fulfill their obligations under Article VI of the Treaty. The Permanent Representative of Cuba emphasized that nuclear weapon states "have the legal obligation to, not only pursue, but also to bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control." Others stressed the importance of respecting all three pillars of the NPT—disarmament, non-proliferation, and peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

Proposals and recommendations
Some delegations made concrete proposals or requests. Speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, Dr. R.M. Marty M. Natalegawa of Indonesia called for an international conference to establish a phased programme for the complete abolition of nuclear weapons within a time-bound framework, to eliminate all existing nuclear weapons and prohibit their development, production, acquisition, testing, stockpiling, transfer, use or threat of use, and to provide for their destruction.

Lamenting the "alarming rate" of increase of global military expenditures, which "is in itself a factor that raises distrust and legitimate international concern," Ambassador Rodrigo Malmierca Diaz of Cuba reiterated his country's proposal to create a UN-managed fund, "to which at least half of the current military spending would be devoted, in order to address the economic and social development of the countries in need." He argued that this initiative, in addition to its "evident benefit," would "bear the added value of being a confidence-building measure."

Dr. T. Hamid Al-Bayati, the Permanent Representative of Iraq, called "upon the nuclear-weapon-states to refrain from nuclear sharing for military purposes under any kind of security arrangements in conformity with their obligations."

Ambassador Igor N. Shcherbak of the Russian Federation called for "strict implementation of existing international legal documents and development of new ones." He expressed his government's concern about the "looming prospect of expiration of the treaty limitations on strategic offensive arms" between the United States and Russia while the United States increases its efforts to deploy its global anti-ballistic missile system. He said his government "offered the idea of developing and concluding a new full-fledged agreement on further and verifiable reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms" three years ago. Ambassador Shcherbak also announced that during the upcoming NPT Preparatory Committee, the US and Russia will hold "an informal briefing highlighting accomplishments of either Party in eliminating intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles, as well as their positive impact on the European and global security," and to set forth their approaches related to the unofficial paper distributed to the Conference on Disarmament on 12 February 2008, "Basic elements of an international legally-binding arrangement on the elimination of intermediate-range and shorter-range (ground-launched) missiles, open for broad international accession." The briefing will be held at the UN in Geneva on Tuesday, 29 April 2008, 1:15-2:45pm and is open to all delegates, UN staff, and civil society representatives.

India's Permanent Representative, Ambassador Nirupam Sen, called attention to the working paper his delegation submitted to the UNDC last year, on "Recommendations for achieving the objective of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons," which outlines several steps towards achieving nuclear disarmament. He repeated these points in his statement, as did India's representative to the Conference on Disarmament, Ambassador Rao, during his statement on 28 February 2008. Ambassador Sen also emphasized the importance of the Rajiv Gandhi Action Plan delivered to the UN General Assembly in June 1988, which called for a binding commitment by all nations to eliminate nuclear weapons in stages by 2010; for all states to participate in the process of nuclear disarmament; the importance of tangible progress at each stage in order to demonstrate good faith and to build confidence; and for governments to change doctrines, policies, and institutions in order to sustain a world free of nuclear weapons and to undertake negotiations for the establishment of a comprehensive global security system under the aegis of the UN. Ambassador Rao also highlighted the Action Plan during his statement to the CD on 28 February.

Arguing that nuclear technology "is no clean and safe energy source" due to security and environmental risks, Austria's Ambassador Alexander Marschik said that as long as some states rely on nuclear energy to even partially cover their energy needs, enrichment and reprocessing must be restricted exclusively to facilities under multilateral control. He outlined Austria's proposal for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to serve as a "virtual broker for all transactions in the civilian nuclear fuel cycle." Under this plan, every buyer would purchase their nuclear fuel through the IAEA, gradually giving the IAEA control rights over the enrichment and reprocessing facilities, transforming all such facilities from national to "essentially multilateral operations under the auspices of the IAEA." He argued this proposal would not undermine developing countries' access to nuclear energy or Article IV of the NPT, saying, "having a right also gives the owner the possibility to decide to use it exclusively together with other states or through an international organisation. By entrusting the IAEA to control and monitor the facilities, we are in fact, making joint use of our right and benefiting from the peaceful use of nuclear technology together in a fair and equal manner." He also argued that though this proposal sounds ambitious, it has been done before on a regional level, pointing to the European Union as an example, where coal, steel, and nuclear industries have been put under the control of multilateral institutions.

Ambassador Marschik also called for the establishment of a multilateral missile control arrangement, perhaps using the joint statement made by Russia and the United States on 25 October 2007 during the UNGA First Committee on multilateralizing the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty as a basis for this. He also called for the US and Russia to demonstrate leadership in fully complying with the obligations of the Hague Code of Conduct Against Ballistic Missile Proliferation.

"New consensus"
Pakistan's Permanent Representative, Ambassador Munir Akram, called for a special conference "to evolve a new consensus [on disarmament and non-proliferation] that is concordant with new realities." He explained this "new consensus" should: regenerate commitments by all states to complete nuclear disarmament; eliminate discrimination; normalize the relationship of the three "ex-NPT nuclear weapon states" with the NPT; help realize the objective of verifiable international disarmament; address new issues like access to WMD by non-state actors and vertical proliferation; help states agree on "universally applicable non-discriminatory rules for ensuring fulfillment of every state's right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy"; enshrine legally-binding negative security assurances to non-nuclear weapon states; address the issue of missiles in its entirety including development and deployment of anti-ballistic missile systems; "strengthen existing international instruments to prevent the militarization of outer space including development of" anti-satellite systems; tackle "the disturbing trend of escalation in armed forces and accumulation and sophistication of conventional weapons"; "arrest the disturbing trend of escalation in the number of sophistication of conventional weapons which as a causal relationship with the continuing reliance on nuclear weapons"; identify the means of implementing the UN Programme of Action on small arms and light weapons; and revitalize the UN disarmament machinery.

The following day, Ambassador Aziz of Egypt said non-NPT states must be made to understand, "they are the ones outside the 'international consensus,' and that the so called 'new consensus' that is talked about by some is both unacceptable and invalid." He argued, "the 'International Consensus' on which the NPT was built still exists and did not and will not change." He insisted that this issue, along with the "false illusion" that those who developed their nuclear programmes outside of the NPT can call themselves nuclear weapon states, must be dealt with within the context of the NPT 2010 Review Conference, "a context that allows no room for destructive ambitions of power or twisted principles."

Iran's nuclear programme
On behalf of the European Union, Ambassador Sanja Štiglic of Slovenia said, "Iran's nuclear programme poses a major challenge to the non-proliferation regime," asserting that Iran has hidden "clandestine nuclear activities," is pursuing uranium enrichment and heavy water related activities, is developing a ballistic missile programme, and "has cooperated with the IAEA only when pressed, and in piecemeal fashion." Iran's representative issued a right of reply to this statement, arguing that the statement did not acknowledge the information the IAEA has given about the non-divergence of Iran's nuclear material to weapon programmes or that Iran's cooperation with the IAEA has been "far beyond its Treaty obligations."

Speaking generally about the issue of proliferation, Ambassador Hu Xiaodi of China called for dialogue and normalization of relations in order to confront the "complex causes" of proliferation of nuclear weapons. He said, "it is necessary to address both the root causes and symptoms in a comprehensive manner," arguing, "Embargo and pressure can hardly offer a fundamental solution to the proliferation concerns." Speaking specifically about Iran, Ambassador Hu said diplomatic negotiation is the best way to solve the issue, and called for all parties to "intensify diplomatic efforts in reaching agreement on possible ways to resume negotiations at an early date, with a view to seeking a long-term, comprehensive and appropriate solution to the Iranian nuclear issue."

Working Paper
A few delegations commented on the working paper submitted by the Chair of Working Group I, "Draft outcome on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons." The paper outlines some general principles for achieving nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation and lists recommendations toward this goal. The paper is an expanded version of the Chair's final working paper from the UNDC's 2007 session. Its recommendations are general and appeal to the lowest common denominator. Ambassador Khazaee of Iran said the working paper "contains elements of a consensus document. However, there is still room for refinement and improvement in order to strike a proper balance." Australia's Ambassador Robert Hill said the working paper is a constructive contribution to the debate.

Agenda Item II: Practical confidence-building measures in the field of conventional weapons
Most delegations acknowledged the importance and benefits of confidence-building measures (CBMs) as a tool for increasing transparency, building trust, and enhancing stability and security. Nigeria's representative said the ultimate objectives of CBMs are "to strengthen international peace and security, to ameliorate relations among states and promote socio-economic and cultural well-being of peoples of the world and prevent wars." Brazil's Ambassador Piragibe Tarrago expounded on this, saying CBMs

aim to alter inaccurate perceptions and to avoid misunderstandings about military actions and policies that might otherwise provoke violent conflict. Over time they can pave the way for more stable political and diplomatic relations, transform the parties' ideas about their need for security, and even encourage moves to identify shared security interests and highlight the importance of effective disarmament initiatives.

Cautionary arguments
While agreeing that "CBMs do have the potential to create an atmosphere conducive to arms control and disarmament," the representative for the Non-Aligned Movement emphasized that CBMs "are neither a substitute nor a pre-condition for disarmament measures." Cuba's representative stressed that CBMs must not be imposed, arguing that success depends "on the achievement of a true consensus among the States." Iran's Ambassador Khazaee likewise argued that CBMs "are merely 'voluntary measures'" and cannot "be converted to legally binding obligations." Ambassador Sen of India emphasized that CBMs "should take into account the specific political, military and other conditions prevailing in [each] region," arguing that a "prescriptive approach that negates the sovereign right of States to choose CBMs best suited to their interest should be avoided." China's Ambassador Hu similarly argued, "We need to develop CBMs in light of the concrete situation of different regions and time, with an objective and pragmatic attitude, and in a step-by-step and incremental manner."

Military spending
Many delegations, including the Non-Aligned Movement, expressed their support for "unilateral, bilateral, regional and multilateral measures adopted by some governments aimed at reducing their military expenditures, thereby contributing to the strengthening of regional and international peace and security." The African Group's representative noted that the reduction of military expenditures is an important CBM. Ambassador Kim of the Republic of Korea noted, "Sharing objective information on military expenditures will greatly contribute to the sense of security by all Member States." China's representative reiterated his government's announcement made during the 2007 UNGA First Committee that China has begun to report to the UN Instrument for Reporting Military Expenditures.

The Permanent Representative of Tanzania said his country has consistently stressed the linkage between disarmament and development in the context of military expenditures. He argued that spending on military capabilities and armaments "should be curbed by generating political will to implement disarmament measures, credible confidence building measures and disarmament proceeds and by cultivating a culture of peace in present and succeeding generations."

Transparency in armaments
Several delegations spoke favourably about the UN Register of Conventional Arms as "successful in enhancing the level of transparency in military affairs" (Republic of Korea) and "one of the important international systems for promoting confidence-building among States" (Japan). Ambassador Shinyo of Japan, however, cautioned that more than 15 years after the Register was established, there are still grave dangers of "expansion in armaments through distrust among States."

Small arms and light weapons
Many delegates spoke about the UN Programme of Action on small arms and light weapons (SALW), looking forward to the upcoming Biennial Meeting of States to be held at UN Headquarters in New York on 14–18 July 2008. Ambassador Shinyo of Japan indicated that the voluntary form for SALW in the UN Register of Conventional Arms, created in 2006, should "have a synergistic effect in the future." Other delegates welcomed the Group of Government Experts on Ammunition and on the Arms Trade Treaty. Ambassador Kim of the Republic of Korea announced that it will host a UN workshop on the implementation of the International Tracing Instrument in Seoul on 27–28 May 2008 together with Norway and the European Union. Austria's representative explained his government supports "the strengthening of national legal regimes and capacity building as well as practical disarmament measures through financing three projects" in Africa.

Cluster munitions
A few delegations offered their support for the ongoing processes to ban cluster munitions. Austria's representative urged all states to actively participate in the upcoming conference in Dublin, which will seek to develop a legally-binding instrument to prohibit cluster munitions that cause unacceptable harm to civilians. He argued that such a ban "will contribute substantially to save the lives, limbs and livelihoods of many civilians." He also announced that late in 2007, Austrian Parliament adopted a national law that "prohibits the development, production, supply, sale, procurement, import, export, transit, use and possession of cluster munitions and provides for the destruction of national stockpiles by January 2011." The law does not contain exceptions for "smart cluster bombs" or for weapons with a low number of sub-munitions. He argued, "This is disarmament in concrete terms which we believe is best suited to build confidence among states."

Working Paper
Representatives from both Cuba and Australia noted the existence of a working paper by the Chair of Working Group II, which Ambassador Diaz of Cuba described as "an excellent basis for the success of our deliberations on this issue;" however, this paper is not currently available through the UN document system nor was it distributed during the plenary meetings.

Work of the UNDC
All delegations who delivered statements to the plenary session emphasized the importance of the work of the UNDC and the need for flexibility and compromise. Many also insisted on the separation of the two issues on the Commission's agenda, arguing, as Brazil's representative did, that the working groups "are distinct in nature and scope. Advances in one cannot be made contingent upon parallel progress in the other." The Rio Group likewise argued that while progress in all areas is desirable, delegations should not allow advances in one area to be conditioned by equivalent advances in another. He argued, "Taking into account the complexity of the topics, the insistence in a parallel development in negotiations would mean, in practice, preventing the Commission from reaching, at least, partial results in its work."

Civil society participation
In his opening statement, the Chair of the Commission raised the issue of participation by external experts or civil society representatives. This idea was raised during the Commission's 2006 session, studied during 2007, and now the Chair intends to engage in further consultations during the 2008 session. He indicated that several questions would have to be settled, such as would these representatives address the plenary meetings or the working groups; would the Commission forgo its general debate in favour of a structured thematic discussion with experts; etc.

When this issue was raised in 2006, the United States, India, and France objected to inviting NGO representatives and external experts to participate in the Commission's discussions, while Indonesia and Egypt supported it. The issue was not addressed in statements to the plenary meetings this year—nor did the United States or France address the plenary—so it is unclear if these positions have changed at this time. Currently, NGO representatives are not allowed to attend working group meetings, just as they are not allowed to attend the informal meetings of the Conference on Disarmament. Several delegations, most recently Syria, Norway, Algeria, and Australia at the CD, have argued for broader civil society participation in multilateral disarmament fora.

As noted in a recent CD Report, the exclusion of civil society from the CD and the UNDC is contrary to its welcomed participation in other multilateral disarmament processes. Patrick McCarthy of the Geneva Forum gives the example of NGO involvement in the recent Wellington conference on cluster munitions, where NGO representatives "intervened at will in the discussions and openly criticized certain States for attempting to weaken the Wellington text." They "provided valuable inputs to the debates based on sound research, interpretation of evidence and testimony of victims. In short, civil society was an integral, dynamic and vital element of the Wellington conference that influenced the outcome of the meeting." While McCarthy explored some possible explanations for this "schizophrenic" behaviour in a subsequent post on Disarmament Insight, overall the question of civil society involvement in the CD appears to be another anachronism in the "'community of practice' to which disarmament diplomats belong" that John Borrie, also writing on Disarmament Insight, referred to in a post about telephone booths.

In 2006, a representative of the Syrian Arab Republic argued in the CD that "the states that objected to [NGO] participation [in the CD] are the same states that daily call on us to step up participation of NGOs in matters related to democracy, human rights, peace and security. These states seem to wish NGOs to be tools of their own policy." As Reaching Critical Will argued then, if states are truly impartially supporting or objecting to NGO access, their positions should be consistent across issues, from human rights to disarmament.

2) Nuclear disarmament and a Department of Peace: News from Canada
On 4–5 April 2008, the Toronto Chapter of the Canadian Department of Peace Initiative hosted a conference and Annual General Meeting. On Friday, 4 April, Canadian Senator Douglas Roche (Chair of the Middle Powers Initiative) spoke on the “Human Right to Peace,” the culture of war and culture of peace, and the changes in attitude that are necessary to bring one to triumph over the other. Senator Roche emphasized the effects of militarism and violence on our planet and collective human psyche. He explained that the culture of war is built upon the lie that weapons bring security, particularly nuclear weapons, and argued that the appeal of nonviolence is that it challenges the “logic” of trying to make the world a more peaceful place by using violence as a tool.

His keynote speech was followed by a roundtable discussion on the need and vision of a Department of Peace and Canada’s role in peacebuilding with Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party, and Members of Parliament Olivia Chow (New Democratic Party) and Borys Wrzesnewskyj (Liberal Party). Despite repeated invitations, a member of Canada's ruling party, the Conservative Party, did not attend. The politicians answered questions from the audience regarding Canada's relationship to the US “missile defense system” in Europe, gender and politics, military spending, their parties' positions on a Department of Peace, and more. Each argued that a Department or Ministry of Peace would help institutionalize the culture of peace that Senator Roche talked about, acting as a counter-weight to the Department of Defense. The Initiative's website explains, “A Department of Peace would develop a coordinated and coherent paradigm for a sustainable peace across all government departments. Its Minister would advance an agenda for a new architecture of peace by supporting and establishing activities that promote a culture of peace and assertive non-violence in Canada and the world.” Nuclear abolition is high on Department's proposed mandate.

On Saturday, 5 April, workshops were held all day on Nuclear Disarmament with Douglas Roche (Middle Powers Initiative), Murray Thompson (Pugwash), Phyllis Creighton (Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons), and Vinay Jindal (Physicians for Global Survival); Women and Peace Building with Helen Chilas and Jo-Ann Rodrigues (Canadian Voice of Women for Peace); Civilian Peace Service with Gord Breedyk (Civilian Peace Service Canada) and Lyn Adamson (Nonviolent Peaceforce Canada); Peace Education with Robert Porter (Global Campaign for Peace Education), Anne Goodman (Interchange and OISE), and Penny Sanger (Educating for Peace); Involving Youth in Peace with Dr. Peter Stockdale (Canadian Department of Peace Initiative, Youth Coordinator) and the students Andrea Cowan, Marya Jaleel and Zoë Tupling (Gloucester High School, Ottawa); Cities of Peace with Dr. Richard Preston (McMaster University) and Jean Trudel (Circle de Paix / Peace Circle, Montreal); and Legislative Action and Advocacy with Rob Acheson (Co-Chair Toronto Chapter) and Federal MPs.

In the nuclear disarmament workshop, participants primarily discussed NATO's nuclear sharing policy and what Canada's role in NATO means for its own nuclear disarmament policy. Senator Douglas Roche highlighted a report from a seminar held 3–4 February 2008, sponsored by the Middle Powers Initiative, Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, the Rideau Institute, Canadian Pugwash Group, Physicians for Global Survival, and the Simons Foundation, called “Restoring Canada's Nuclear Disarmament Policies.” The report explains, “Canada has been slowly shifting away from its traditionally strong support for nuclear disarmament at a time when the global propensity to use nuclear weapons has increased dramatically in the last several years.” It argues, “Canada, like other NATO members who are also signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), holds contradictory nuclear policies.” According to the report, participants at the seminar made a strong call “for Canada to work with Germany and Norway in their current efforts to overhaul NATO’s outdated policies, particularly as set out in its Strategic Concept, for retention of nuclear weapons.”

The sponsors of the seminar set out an urgent agenda, which says,

Canada must work for a review of NATO nuclear policy to reject the fiction that nuclear weapons “preserve peace.” Canada should press NATO to revise its Strategic Concept to acknowledge that nuclear weapons pose an unacceptable risk to humanity, and that their early elimination is essential to human security. To move from words to action, NATO should be challenged to remove, and dismantle, all US tactical nuclear weapons from the territories of non-nuclear weapon states of the alliance and to call on Russia to reciprocate with cuts to its arsenal of tactical weapons as a step toward complete nuclear disarmament.

Eight chapters of the Canadian Department of Peace Initiative presently exist in Victoria, Vancouver, Calgary, London, Hamilton, Toronto, Ottawa, and Montréal. For more information on joining your local chapter or starting one, please see www.departmentofpeace.ca.

3) Important information for NGOs going to the NPT
The rooms to be used during NGOs during the upcoming NPT PrepCom in Geneva have been allotted by the Office for Disarmament Affairs. For the first week we will use Room XXV. For the second week, we will move (due to non-NPT demand for rooms) to Room VIII. For those unfamiliar with the Palais des Nations, the UN Office at Geneva has a “virtual tour” on its website: http://www.unog.ch/virtual_tour/palais_des_nations.html

Important: Those who have reserved the NGO Room for side events during the PrepCom: please let the project associate know by Tuesday next week if you need any equipment so that ODA can make the necessary reservations. Please note that any costs for equipment will have to be covered by the NGO requesting it.

4) Time to go to Omaha: Annual Space Organizing Conference
The Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space is holding a three-day conference near StratCom, in Omaha, Nebraska, on 11–13 April, to protest the weaponization of outer space and other destabilizing activities, and to educate the public through panel discussions and workshops about space law, US space policy, the military-industrial-academic complex, and nonviolent civil resistance. The event is hosted by Nebraskans for Peace, and is co-sponsored by many organizations, including WILPF.

For more information, the agenda, and a list of speakers, please see the Global Networks' page, www.space4peace.org, or Nebraskans for Peace, www.nebraskansforpeace.org/ASCO/welcome.php.

5) Upcoming International Panel on Fissile Materials event in New York
On Thursday, 17 April 2008 at 1:15pm in Conference Room 2 at the UN in New York, Frank von Hippel, Professor of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University and Co-Chair of the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM) will give a presentation, “A Fissile Material (Cut-off) Treaty and its Verification: A Progress Report from IPFM.” IPFM's work on this potential treaty will be the centerpiece of its Global Fissile Materials Report 2008, which will be published in October. Previous IMPF annual and topical reports can be found at www.fissilematerials.org.

This event is sponsored by the NGO Committee on Disarmament, Peace and Security. If you do not have a UN pass and wish to attend, please contact the Committee at 212.687.5340 or disarmtimes[at]igc.org immediately.

6) One week left to submit articles, advertisements, and artwork to the News in Review
The deadline for submissions to the News in Review, the daily NGO publication produced by Reaching Critical Will during the NPT PrepCom, is next Friday, 18 April. We encourage you to submit to this year's News in Review. The guidelines are as follows:

Feature articles: In addition to the daily analysis of the proceedings of the PrepCom, the News in Review also contains feature articles that cover a range of nuclear disarmament issues. We welcome submissions from NGO experts around the world, regardless of whether or not you will be in Geneva. Articles should be between 500-1000 words. Please submit in .doc format and the body of the email. Articles will be attributed to the author and may be edited for length.

Advertising space: You can use the News in Review to publicize an important announcement, event, or project hosted by your organization. NIRs are hand-distributed to all of the delegates at the PrepCom, sent by email to more than 2000 subscribers, and are archived on our website. Contact the project associate for pricing.

Cartoons, photos, artwork, poetry: We are accepting all forms of anti-nuclear artwork, to be sent in either a .jpg, .gif, or .pdf file. Photos, paintings, doodles, cartoons, collage, mixed media, and drawings are all welcome.

Submit your ad, article, or artwork by sending:

your organization's name;
contact person;
email address;
phone number;
type of submission (for ads, please specify the size of the ad, dates for it to run, and payment method); and
the submission

to the project associate. The deadline for all submissions is 18 April.

1 April 2008

Dear Reaching Critical Will friends and advisors:

The Conference on Disarmament has finished the first part of its 2008 session without adopting a programme of work. While the diplomatic community continues to struggle (and struggles to continue), civil society has some exciting projects underway to educate and activate people against nuclear weapons. The Middle Powers Initiative just held the fifth meeting of the Article VI Forum in Dublin, Ireland; the youth network Think Outside the Bomb is holding conferences and events leading up to their annual summer conference (see below for details); the Campaign to Establish a Canadian Department of Peace will be holding a conference featuring nuclear disarmament and other relevant issues on 4-6 April in Toronto; the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space will hold its Annual Space Organizing Conference and Protest in Omaha on 11-13 April; and the World Court Project to Abolish Nuclear Weapons is holding a conference in Geneva on 1 May on "Good Faith, International Law, and the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons: The Once and Future Contributions of the International Court of Justice". There are also numerous NGO events scheduled during the upcoming session of the NPT Preparatory Committee. For information about these events and others, see Reaching Critical Will's 2008 Disarmament Calendar.

In peace,
Ray Acheson, Project Associate

1) The Conference on Disarmament closes the first part of its 2008 session
27 March marked the final plenary meeting of the first part of the Conference on Disarmament's 2008 session. From January to March, the Conference listened to statements by many high-level delegates and welcomed the introduction of a draft treaty on the prevention of weapons in outer space and a new presidential draft decision (CD/1840). Yet the CD continues to struggle forward without a programme of work, ending the first part of its 2008 session on 27 March without coming any closer to adopting an agreement that would allow negotiations to begin on a fissile material cut-off treaty or any other issue.

No member state has formally rejected CD/1840 yet, though it is virtually identical to the 2007 proposal for a programme of work, L.1 and CRP.5, which some delegations objected to because the operational paragraph on negotiating a ban on fissile materials did not reference the 1995 Shannon Mandate. It is unclear if the programme of work will be adopted in the second part of the 2008 session, which will run from 12 May to 27 June.

The next plenary of the Conference is scheduled for Thursday, 15 May at 10am. To subscribe to the CD Report, email the RCW project associate with the subject line "subscribe cdreport". For all statements, papers, press releases, and archived reports, please see the RCW website: http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/political/cd/cdindex.html#2008.

2) The United Nations Disarmament Commission is set to open its 2008 session
The UN Disarmament Commission (UNDC) is a deliberative body that considers and makes recommendations on various problems in disarmament. The UNDC will hold its 2008 session from 7-25 April at UN Headquarters in New York, finishing its three year cycle of deliberations on its two agenda items: recommendations for achieving the objective of nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation of nuclear weapons; and practical confidence-building measures in the field of conventional weapons.

During the 2007 session, the UNDC's nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation working group made some headway. The Chair, Ambassador Zinsou of Benin, produced a paper that was relatively well-received. However, after nearly a week of additions, the paper grew to a formidable 16 pages, turning into more of a compilation of views than a document of consensus recommendations. On the suggestion of several governments, he resubmitted a relatively short simple paper that could be agreed upon, but was clearly the lowest-common denominator and deficient in disarmament. The Report of the Disarmament Commission for 2007 notes that the Chair hopes his working paper "will be a basis for further deliberations for the formulation of consent recommendations" at the end of 2008.

2008 Chairs
Chairperson: Ambassador Piet de Klerk (Netherlands)
Chair of Working Group I: Mr. Jean Francis Zinsou (Benin)
Chair of Working Group II: Mr. Carolos Luis Dantas C. Perez (Brazil)

Information and Reports
As in previous years, Reaching Critical Will will be reporting on the Commission throughout April on this email list. We will also post all governmental statements, non-papers, and working papers on our website:
http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/political/dc/dcindex.html#2008

3) Think Outside the Bomb in Boston and Washington, DC
On Saturday, 12 April, the Think Outside the Bomb network is holding a youth regional conference at American University in Washington, DC. This one-day conference will aim to bring youth and students together with experts in the fields of nuclear disarmament, nuclear power, and nuclear waste in order to build an atmosphere of education and resistance towards the nuclear weapons complex. Go to http://www.thinkoutsidethebomb.org/menu/conference/dc_spring_2008/schedule.htm for more information and to http://www.thinkoutsidethebomb.org/menu/conference/dc_spring_2008/apply.htm to register for the conference.

Think Outside the Bomb has also arranged a speaking engagement near Boston, MA with prominent linguist, author, and social critic Noam Chomsky on Wednesday, 9 April, in collaboration with Massachusetts Peace Action, Tufts University Peace & Justice Dept, and American Friends Service Committee. Noam will be speaking at Tufts University in Somerville, MA, at the Cabot Intercultural Auditorium (170 Packard Ave) at 6 PM, with a program titled, "Youth and Securing a Nuclear Free Future", followed by a Q&A session and book signing. See http://tinyurl.com/23kadf for more information.

4) Subscribe to the News in Review
The News in Review is a daily publication produced by Reaching Critical Will during NPT Preparatory Committee and Review Conferences. It features analysis of the day's events, feature articles from NGO representatives around the world, interviews with diplomats and NGO representatives, nuclear facts, announcements, cartoons, a calendar of events, and more. You can access archived NIRs online at http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/legal/npt/nirindex.html.

To receive a PDF copy of the News in Review in your inbox each day during the PrepCom, please email the project associate with the subject line "subscribe nir".

5) Calling for articles, ads, and art for the News in Review
We encourage you to submit to this year's News in Review. The guidelines are as follows:

Submit your ad, article, or artwork by sending:

your organization's name;
contact person;
email address;
phone number;
type of submission (for ads, please specify the size of the ad, dates for it to run, and payment method); and
the submission

to the project associate. The deadline for all submissions is 18 April.

14 March 2008

Dear Reaching Critical Will friends and advisors:

On 13 March, the six rotating presidents of the Conference on Disarmament (CD) introduced a "new" proposal for a programme of work to the CD, which has not adopted such a programme since 1999. It is virtually identical to the proposal made by the six presidents of the Conference in 2007 and it is unclear if progress toward its adoption is anticipated or not. Outside of the CD, the Security Council has imposed new sanctions against Iran, the United States is moving forward with its "Complex Transformation" programme to ensure the indefinite production of nuclear weapons, and conflicts around the world continue to increase geopolitical tensions. We need progress in the CD and other multilateral disarmament fora to help change the international security environment instead of allowing the security environment to continuously stall progress in multilateral disarmament fora. Reaching Critical Will doesn't have all the answers but we do have the information. See below for details.

In peace,
Ray Acheson, Project Associate

1) Update on Iran's nuclear programme
On 3 March 2008, the UN Security Council voted 14-0 (with one abstention, Indonesia) in favour of Resolution 1803 (2008), a new sanctions resolution against Iran's nuclear programme. Acting under Article 41 of Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, the Council affirmed its earlier decision that Iran should suspend its uranium enrichment and heavy-water-related projects, as previously stipulated in resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), and 1747 (2007). The thrust of the resolution is to widen the scope of existing sanctions on imports of materials listed on Nuclear Supplier Group and Missile Technology Control Regime guidelines and to add to list of sanctioned individuals and entities. As in past resolutions on Iran's nuclear programme, the Council again declined to make a determination that Iran's efforts constitute a threat to international peace and security, a requisite for the Council to impose either sanctions or authorize military force under Article 39 of the UN Charter. The Associated Press noted that for the first time, the resolution bans trade with Iran in goods which have both civilian and military uses. It also extends the freezing of the financial assets of persons or entities supporting its proliferation-sensitive nuclear activities or the development of nuclear-weapon delivery systems. The Council also decided that if Iran should fail to comply with its decisions, it would adopt additional measures under Article 41 (sanctions).

In the Conference on Disarmament, Foreign Minister Verhagen of the Netherlands argued that the statements delivered at the Council session by the five veto-wielding nuclear weapon states and Germany (P5+1) "underlines their sincere intentions to offer everything reasonable to reestablish a respectful relationship between Iran and the international community." However, as Ambassador Kumalo of South Africa pointed out at the Council session, the sponsors of the resolution persisted with the same text they had tabled before the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General's latest report was released. He noted that the resolution did not adequately take into account the progress that has been made between Iran and the IAEA, and that the vote on the new resolution was not even postponed until the IAEA Board had a full opportunity to review the report and consider the matter, leaving the impression that the progress made was virtually irrelevant to the co-sponsors.

The IAEA's latest report demonstrated, according to South African Ambassador to the IAEA Abdul Minty, "increasing confidence" that Iran does not intend to use its nuclear programme for military purposes and that Iran is cooperating with the IAEA. In explaining his country's abstention, Ambassador Marty Natalegawa of Indonesia said that "more sanctions are not the best course," arguing that sanctions "would only give a potential negative impact at a time when progress is being made." However, the P5+1 argued that recently declassified Western intelligence suggesting Iran conducted high-explosives tests and design work on a missile warhead as part of a covert nuclear arms programme was a serious concern that needed to be addressed by Iran immediately. Mike Veiluva of DisarmamentActivist.org pointed out on 26 February,

The "one remaining issue" relevant to the programme is "the alleged studies (by Iran) on the green salt project, high explosives testing and the missile re-entry vehicle." ("Green salt" is an alleged uranium conversion process.) The report references discussions in late January; however, Iran was only given access to US information pertinent to these matters in February. The timing is not explained; Iran was given literally days to address this purported new evidence. The UK is now contending that this evidence indicates Iran was conducting weapons work after 2003, but the larger question is why we are only hearing of this now—perhaps the proximity of a new UN Security Council meeting has something to do about it.

The United States recently briefed the IAEA about "evidence" on Iran's alleged pre-2003 nuclear weapons programme gathered from the so-called "laptop of death," a stolen Iranian laptop given to the IAEA by the United States. Jeffrey Lewis of ArmsControlWonk.com pointed out that the details available in various media reports indicate that nothing new was presented from when the details were first reported in 2005. However, on 11 March, the Washington Post reported that documents from "two countries other than the United States" provided to the IAEA recently "partly match information" from the laptop. According to the Post, "IAEA officials say these documents identify [Iranian nuclear engineer Mohsen] Fakhrizadeh and other civilian scientists as central figures in a secret nuclear research program that operated as recently as 2003." The documents also

purport to show advanced research into a variety of nuclear-related technologies, including uranium ore processing, warhead modification and the precision-firing of high explosives of the type used to detonate a nuclear device. Other documents point to attempts by civilian scientists to purchase sensitive equipment of the kind Iran would eventually use in its uranium enrichment plants.

The article notes that none of the documents "specifically include the word 'nuclear,' and IAEA officials say there is no evidence that any of the plans advanced beyond the paper stage."

Michael Spies of the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy emphasizes that all of this "in itself does not demonstrate a determined effort to acquire and deploy nuclear weapons." He points out,

even if we were to accept all this "evidence" as true, the IAEA Secretariat has clearly stated that Iran does not appear to have ever undertaken any work using nuclear material on the basis of the documents or laptop. On its face, it is troubling if Iran is pursuing secret studies to build knowledge on nuclear weapons, as this might suggest it intends to develop them in the future. But the scale and scope of the "evidence" that has been released so far still doesn't seem to reflect a major, serious, and concerted attempt to acquire and deploy nuclear weapons. A handful of scientists conducting paper studies over a period of a decade doesn't seem to fit very well with efforts to acquire nuclear weapons in other states, most of which did not have IAEA inspectors roving around their territories trying to piece all aspects of their past nuclear work together.

The IAEA has been careful to caution that this sort of evidence has more to do with judging Iran's intentions, rather than determining the state of Iran's compliance with its non-proliferation obligations. The Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission noted in its final report,

As it is very difficult to prove a negative, it is unlikely that the IAEA would ever be able to conclude with absolute certainty that Iran - or at least key elements within its governing system - have not had the intention to use an enrichment capability for weapon purposes. In any case, even if such intentions never existed, there could be a change of mind once Iran's enrichment technology was fully operational. Accordingly, the question of intention is not decisive.

Spies says, "Following from this, one can conclude that the conversation about intentions is a distraction from what some of the real issues are: the role of the US and Iran in the greater Middle East and bilateral relations."

2) International Women's Day Disarmament Seminar Statement
The International Women's Day (IWD) Disarmament Seminar Statement, which was drafted by the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom on behalf of the Geneva NGO Working Group on Women, Peace, and Security and NGO Committee for Disarmament and adopted by the Seminar participants, was read by rotating President Ahmet Üzümcü of Turkey at the Conference on Disarmament on 11 March. The statement "highlighted the crises of human security and sustainable development caused by military spending, war and weapon profiteering, and the persistence of ideas and expectations of gender that shape how war, women, and peace are considered." It reported on the IWD Seminar held in the Council Chamber of the Palais des Nations last Thursday, which included over 100 NGO representatives from more than 40 countries. The women called "on governments to abandon narrow concepts of military security and instead focus human and economic resources on addressing the real daily threats to the security of their citizens, such as poverty, hunger, insecurity, HIV and AIDS, climate change, and environmental degradation." They called for a paradigm shift in resource allocation, rejected the idea that the military industry or the arms trade brings jobs, prosperity, or security, and called for the Security Council to act in compliance with Article 26 of the UN Charter by delivering a plan for reducing armaments.

The Seminar "focused on the roles and responsibilities of women, outlined in Security Council Resolution 1325, to participate in conflict prevention, disarmament, and all levels of security decision-making," and emphasized how important it is for women "to contribute their perspectives, help determine the direction of policy options, and have a greater say over budgetary allocations." It revealed the need "to examine the relationship between masculinity and war as much as the relationship between women and peace," arguing that wisdom about gender roles and expectations "will contribute to the peace that can be achieved."

The statement ended with a call to speak with our own voices—voices "which are often suppressed or ignored"—in the CD. President Üzümcü read,

We as women have addressed this body since 1984. We would like to be able to do this ourselves rather than through an intermediary. Indeed, not allowing us to read our own statement undermines the seriousness of [the] CD in the eyes of people around the world. In this year of the 30th anniversary of SSOD1, is it not time to allow civil society organizations the chance to address the CD on a regular basis?

The representatives of Syria, Norway, Algeria, and Australia supported this call. Abdulmaola Al Nuquari of Syria thanked the NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security for their contribution, and reiterated his country's position that NGOs should be given the opportunity to address the Conference personally. Norway's Ms. Hilde Skorpen argued that the involvement of civil society is vital to moving forward, pointing out that NGOs have helped in other areas such landmines, small arms and light weapons, and cluster munitions. She said she would like to see the women deliver our own statement in the future. Likewise, Algeria's Mr. Hamza Khelif expressed regret that consensus has allowed the President of the CD to continue delivering the International Women's Day statement on behalf of civil society, arguing that as the nuclear threat endangers the entire international community, the concerted efforts of the entire community is needed to address it. He said he hoped the CD would allow the women's NGOs to take the floor in the future, pending a decision by member states to widen participation in the CD to other NGOs. Mr. Craig Maclachlan of Australia agreed that NGO representatives should be allowed to address the CD themselves and argued that supporting civil society is part of Australia's commitment to disarmament.

For more information on the 2008 IWD Seminar, please see http://www.wilpf.int.ch/events/2008IWD/index.html.

3) Report on RCW's event at the Commission on the Status of Women
For the 52nd session of the Commission on the Status of Women, the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom organized a parallel event on Women, War, and Budgeting for Peace. The event explored and revealed the waste of human and economic resources on war and armaments, highlighting the implications that excessive military spending, especially in the United States, has on gender equality and sustainable peace and development. It featured experts and activists on the issues of military budgets, gender perspectives in post-conflict situations, and UNSC resolution 1325, including Frida Berrigan of the New America Foundation, Mary Beth Sullivan of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, and Eva Zillen of Kvinna til Kvinna.

The panel was moderated by WILPF president Kerstin Grebäck and WILPF's project associates, Sam Cook of PeaceWomen and Ray Acheson of Reaching Critical Will, delivered some introductory remarks to explain the work of the projects. They also highlighted several tools that WILPF has developed around the subject of military spending vs. social spending, including a great leaflet "You Get What You Pay For", which compares and contrasts money spent on the military and money spent on development, particularly the Millennium Development Goals and financing for gender equality.

Other relevant tools regarding the military-industrial complex and war profiteers, subjects touched upon by Ms. Berrigan and Ms. Sullivan in the panel, include WILPF's Dirty Dozen project, which highlights the twelve biggest corporations involved in the nuclear industry, and the Aerospace Annex, which covers these companies plus more than 20 others that are benefiting from the weaponization of outer space - corporations that eat up millions of dollars a year developing absurd technologies to further destroy our world and undermine the social and ecomomic well-being of human beings around the world. These resources can be found online at:

You Get What You Pay For: http://www.wilpf.int.ch/PDF/EconomicJustice/YouGetWhatYouPayFor.pdf
Dirty Dozen: http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/corporate/dd/ddindex.html
Aerospace Annex: http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/corporate/dd/ddannex.html

For more information on the 52nd session of the Commission on the Status of Women, see the PeaceWomen website: http://www.peacewomen.org/un/ecosoc/CSW52/index.htm

4) Invitation to subscribe to the Arms and Security Initiative E-News
The Arms and Security Initiative is part of the New America Foundation and the successor to the World Policy Institute's Arms Trade Resource Center: http://www.newamerica.net/programs/american_strategy/arms_security

The Arms and Security Initiative offers a regular E-Newsletter covering the arms trade, military budget developments and foreign policy issues. It is punchy—informative and stimulating without being too wonky or too gloomy and includes our new feature: "What's Good," highlighting successes, victories and great ideas.

If you're interested, sign up at http://groups.google.com/group/arms-and-security-updates

or email berrigan@newamerica.net and you'll be added directly.

5) Registration for the small arms meeting of states parties
The UN has invited NGOs to apply for accreditation for the Biennial Meeting of States on Small Arms (BMS), to be held at UN Headquarters in New York (US), 14 – 18 July 2008.

Accreditation for the BMS is not handled by Reaching Critical Will, please contact Mark Marge, UN Liaison Officer for the International Action Network on Small Arms at mark.marge@iansa.org for details.

The deadline for applications is 13 April 2008.

IANSA members will find a sample letter on our website to make it easy to apply for accreditation. You can adapt this standard letter with details of your NGO: http://www.iansa.org/un/bms2008.htm. Even if you are not an IANSA member, you can adapt this letter to your needs.

You should send a letter to the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (ODA) applying for accreditation.

1. The letter should:

be on your organisation's letterhead
be signed by your organisation's director or legal representative
outline the purpose of your organisation
outline your programs or activities related to small arms
list the names of the individuals from your organisation seeking accreditation. You may list as many individuals as you like
state whether your organisation has been accredited for previous UN small arms meetings (the 2006 RevCon or Prepcom, the 2005 or 2003 BMS or the 2001 UN Small Arms Conference) OR state whether this is the first time your NGO has applied for accreditation to a small arms meeting
reach the UN ODA before 13 April 2008.

2. Once the letter is signed, send it to the UN, by one of these methods:

a) attach the signed letter to an email and send to salw-unoda@un.org, with a copy to mark.marge@iansa.org. You may have to use a scanner to make an electronic copy of your letter which you should attach to the email.

b) fax your letter to +1 917 367 5369

c) send the original of your letter through the post to Ms. Silvia Mercogliano, Information & Outreach Branch, Office for Disarmament Affairs, United Nations, Office S-3151 E, New York, NY 10017, USA

3. If you have any questions, please email Mark Marge, UN Liaison Officer for IANSA, mark.marge@iansa.org

Note: Your letter MUST contain all the information listed above

Your letter must reach the UN by 13 April 2008.

It is a good idea to send it earlier, so that Mark can look at your letter and notify you if any of the requirements have been missed.

4. Please note that receiving accreditation does not mean you will be funded to attend the Biennial Meeting of States. The UN cannot assist with funding or with visas. IANSA will have some funds available, but they will be extremely limited – so it is essential that you look for other funding sources if you want to attend.

For more information on NGO participation at the BMS, please see the UN's aide memoire at:
http://disarmament2.un.org/cab/ThirdBMS/Aidememoirefinal.pdf

6) Deadline for NPT PrepCom Registration and Accreditation
Please that the deadline for accreditation and registration for the NPT PrepCom is SUNDAY, 23 MARCH 2008. Your accreditation package and your registration form must be received by the Office for Disarmament Affairs by 23 March in order for you and your organization to attend the PrepCom.

For more information on registration and accreditation, please see http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/legal/npt/2008index.html