We use Google Analytics to learn more about who is reading the resources on our website. Please read Google Analytics privacy policy for further information. Close

logo_reaching-critical-will

23 March 2007

On behalf of the six Presidents (P6), Sri Lanka presented a proposal for work, and a draft decision (CD/2007/L.1) for the Conference on Disarmament (CD) to endorse that proposal, on Friday, March 23. The draft decision appoints a Coordinator to preside over negotiations on a treaty to ban the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons (FissBan or FM[C]T). It also appoints Coordinators to preside over substantive discussions on nuclear disarmament and the prevention of nuclear war, issues related to the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS), and appropriate international arrangements to assure non-nuclear weapon states against the threat or use of nuclear weapons (NSAs). The P6 intend for the CD to take this decision next week, and if it is adopted, the CD will begin negotiating a new disarmament treaty for the first time in 10 years. 
This package represents a compromise among competing priorities, and the extremely careful language derives from extensive consultations with all CD members. The United States, which has adamantly opposed a package approach in the past, said on Friday that it would not block consensus on this proposal. Russia also said it would not object. The United Kingdom said it would support the proposal. China, India and Pakistan all said they had to check with capital first, but showed resistance to the proposal by indicating intentions to make changes that would disrupt the current delicate balance. France, Israel and North Korea did not speak at the formal session on Friday. Interestingly, Egypt and Algeria also indicated resistance to the proposal.

A FissBan treaty would constrain those states that have fewer fissile materials stocks and either are producing or may wish to produce more fissile materials for nuclear weapons. Thus, such a proposal would put particular constraints on India, Israel, North Korea and Pakistan, all of whom are continuing to produce plutonium for military purposes. Also, although China stopped producing fissile materials for nuclear weapons by 1991, it has not declared a moratorium on fissile materials production like the other nuclear weapon states. China owns significantly less plutonium than the other nuclear weapon states.

In the past, these states could all safely say they agreed to negotiating a FissBan treaty because the United States was blocking consensus in the CD due to its opposition to other issues in the package. Now that the US has agreed to the package that these states claim they require to move forward, we will see whether links to other issues were created out of priority for other issues, or opposition to a FissBan. In 2003, China made a significant concession when it dropped its requirement for negotiations and agreed instead to "substantive discussions" on PAROS, its priority issue, in the "Five Ambassadors" package proposal, which also included negotiations on a FissBan. However, the US opposed any links at all, and in 2004 even changed its position on the FissBan. Now that the US is willing to hold these "substantive discussions" on PAROS, and China has conducted an anti-satellite test, it will be interesting to see where China stands on the package. The CD also briefly agreed to negotiate a FissBan in 1998, when, following their nuclear tests, India and Pakistan were cowed into agreeing to it without links to nuclear disarmament. This agreement did not hold into the following year, when China insisted PAROS be linked to negotiations on a FissBan.

In the next week, we will see whether governments are prepared to negotiate a ban on the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons, and turn off the taps for the bombs. As Ireland said on Friday, delegations must stop using procedural questions to mask substantive concerns, because "the moment deserves better than that." Also, although delegations will certainly need to check with capital on such an important decision, this basic package has been on the table for years and states must not stall to postpone the decision indefinitely. Although Pakistan made some attempts to cloak its position in procedural concerns, it did admit that it needed the proposal, which "reflected ingenuity," to reflect national security interests as well. India said it needed verification to be included in the parameters of negotiating a FissBan, which it is not currently. Egypt, Algeria and China all implied they might make amendments to the proposal, which would kill it. 

Either states are ready to negotiate this treaty, and continue discussing nuclear disarmament, PAROS, and NSAs in the CD, or they are not. As the Netherlands said, diplomats know that although the negotiating mandate for a treaty is important, "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed", which should allay concerns about surprises during the negotiations. The US, Australia, the UK, Russia, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Italy, the Netherlands, Chile, Germany, Argentina, Turkey, Ireland, Japan, and Mexico indicated on Friday that they are ready to move forward. We expect to hear back from Egypt, India, Pakistan, Cuba, Algeria, and China next week. 

The next formal plenary CD session will be held Tuesday, March 27, at 10am. We hope the CD will be able to approve this proposal then, and begin negotiating an new disarmament treaty for the first time in a decade.