CD Reports 2010

The CD Report is a reporting service from Reaching Critical Will.
Archives: 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003

Part Three

24 September: High-level meeting on revitalizing the CD serves as catalyst for action
14 September: CD debates disarmament machinery and closes 2010 session
7 September: CD discusses its draft report and other matters ... behind closed doors
31 August: Still disagreements on the high-level meeting and the CD deadlock
24 August: More debate on the purpose, process, and outcome of the 24 September meeting
17 August: How to get the CD back to work again: a suggestion from Poland and more on the 24 September high-level meeting
10 August: Third and final part of the CD's 2010 session begins with no sign of work

Part Two

Part One

23 March: Disarmament is the priority, not the Conference
16 March: Back to shadow-fighting?
11 March: The CD debates the draft programme of work
9 March: International Women?s Day and the introduction of a draft programme of work
5 March: The Conference hears from Foreign Minister of Kazakhstan
4 March: Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan addresses the CD
3 March: Romanian Secretary of State addresses the CD; a look at the draft programme of work
2 March: CD makes historic decision about the International Women's Day statement
25 February: Arguing for sustainability through collectivity
18 February: Enhancing collective security through action
16 February: Negotiations: a tool of political will
11 February: ?I?m sorry Mr. Secretary-General, nothing is going on?
9 February: More talk about the NPT than the CD
2 February: Discussions on programme of work are ongoing
26 January: CD adopts its agenda, discusses importance of a programme of work
19 January: CD opens its 2010 session without adopting agenda

24 September 2010
High-level meeting on revitalizing the CD serves as catalyst for action
Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

On Friday, 24 September 2010, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon convened a high-level meeting on “revitalizing the work of the Conference on Disarmament and taking forward multilateral disarmament negotiations”. Seventy-four foreign ministers and other high-level officials addressed the meeting, in addition to representatives from three groups of states, three international organizations, the UN Secretary-General, the President of the General Assembly, and the President of the Conference on Disarmament (CD). (Reaching Critical Will notes that of the 83 speakers, only three were women.)

While the majority of interventions focused on the need to find creative ways to revitalize the CD, divergences clearly remain over how best to do this. Some delegations believe the working methods and structure of the CD need to undergo modifications; others believe that the trouble lies with government priorities and (lack of) political will. The only clear area of agreement is that multilateral disarmament negotiations are suffering from the impasse in the CD, to the detriment of international peace and security.

Highlights

• 10 delegations indicated that they are ready to set a deadline for the CD’s resumption of work and to take disarmament negotiations outside of the forum if it fails to get back to work, while 8 delegations insisted that the CD should remain the sole multilateral disarmament negotiating body. Four delegations indicated they recognized going outside the CD as a potential result of continued stalemate, but didn’t express their position on this possibility.
• 12 delegations explicitly called for a review of the CD’s rules of procedure while 11 delegations, plus the Non-Aligned Movement, argued that the rules of procedure are not the problem.
• Many delegations called for a comprehensive review of the CD and other disarmament machinery; they made a variety of suggestions for how this could be done, including through a fourth special session on disarmament, a working group of the General Assembly, or an eminent persons panel.
• States still hold differing priorities for the substantive work of the CD, though the majority are interested in pursuing nuclear disarmament and a fissile material (cut-off) treaty.
• Eight delegations, and the European Union, called for broader participation of civil society in the work of the CD.
• Most delegations agreed that the CD needs to expand its membership; 15 delegations, along with the European Union, Non-Aligned Movement, and Informal Group of Observer States to the CD, called for the appointment of a special coordinator to expand the CD’s membership by the start of its 2011 session.
• The UN Secretary-General issued a Chair’s Summary of the meeting, in which he also suggested four follow-on actions, including that: the 2011 session of the CD adopt the 2009 programme of work; the 2011 session of the General Assembly include an item on the follow-up to this high-level meeting, to be considered in plenary and First Committee; the Secretary-General will ask his advisory board on disarmament matters to “undertake a thorough review of issues raised” at the high-level meeting, including the possible establishment of a high-level panel of eminent persons to focus on the functioning of the CD; and that the Secretary-General will report on this meeting and subsequent follow-up to the first preparatory committee of the 2015 NPT Review Conference.

Going outside the CD to negotiate disarmament treaties
While delegations inside and outside of the CD have made comments in the past about the possibility of taking multilateral disarmament negotiations outside of the CD as a reaction to its continued deadlock, the high-level meeting marked the first time for so many countries to go on record lending their support to such an initiative. Ten delegations—Australia, Austria, Norway, Japan, Canada, Mexico, Ireland, Netherlands, United States, and Uruguay—explicitly indicated their willingness to take negotiations outside of the CD if the forum is not able to resume work soon. Describing the CD as operating in “Cold War mode,” Mexican Ambassador Heller said the international community must take the next step forward, even if it means leaving the CD behind. Most of these delegations set the end of the CD’s 2011 session as a deadline for its resumption of work. Austria and Uruguay specified that the General Assembly should take over the CD’s work until it is able to resume its functions.

Finland, New Zealand, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom acknowledged that a continued impasse may lead states to consider alternative venues for negotiating disarmament treaties, but did not explicitly indicate whether or not they would support such an initiative.

Australia, Chile, France, and New Zealand emphasized that they would prefer to work within the CD. New Zealand’s foreign minister argued that working within the CD “offers the best prospects for reaching agreement on a durable and comprehensive agreement that addresses and accommodates the concerns of all.” France’s delegate suggested that if negotiation of an FMCT did not include all of the main countries concerned, it would impose new constraints on those who have already stopped producing these materials, while leaving the other free to continue to accumulate them.

Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Iran, Russia, and Turkey indicated their opposition to the CD’s work being conducted elsewhere, though Argentina acknowledged the success of work on conventional arms outside of the CD.

Rule of consensus
Views on the consensus rule cut across regional and political boundaries. States in favour of revising or reviewing the application of the rule of consensus included Canada, Chile, Ireland, Lesotho, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland. Most suggested the rule of consensus be limited to substantive decisions and not be applied to procedural decisions; Mongolia’s delegate suggested the CD could vote on procedural decisions if consensus could not be reached.

Delegations against revising the rule of consensus, and/or which do not believe the rule of consensus is the problem, included the Non-Aligned Movement, Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, China, Germany, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Nigeria, Russia, and Tanzania. Russia’s deputy foreign minister unequivocally argued, “consensus is the only possible method to develop multilateral disarmament agreements.” Ecuador’s delegate, while not firmly expressing opposition to changing the rule of consensus, argued that the problems in the CD are the result of “strictly political situations,” which require politically negotiated ways out, “without arbitrariness or false solutions”.

Reviewing the disarmament machinery
While the (dys)function of the CD was the primary agenda item, most delegations acknowledged that all of the UN disarmament machinery has faltered over the last decade. Several delegations called for a comprehensive review of the CD and other disarmament machinery, including the European Union, Bangladesh, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Lesotho, Malaysia, Norway, Philippines, and Switzerland.

Several called for the convening of a fourth special session on disarmament to review the work of disarmament machinery, including the Non-Aligned Movement, Belarus, Colombia, Iran, Morocco, Norway, Philippines, and Switzerland.

Malaysia’s foreign minister suggested the General Assembly could set up a working group to review the disarmament machinery, or an eminent persons panel could be established to undertake this work and report to the General Assembly. The Netherlands and Republic of Korea supported the idea of an eminent persons panel.

In his suggested actions listed in his Summary of the meeting, the UN Secretary-General indicated that he would have his disarmament advisory board “undertake a thorough review of issues raised” at the high-level meeting, including the possible establishment of a high-level panel of eminent persons to focus on the functioning of the CD (see “Notes from the overflow room,” below, for analysis of this proposal).

Priorities for negotiation
The Non-Aligned Movement, Algeria, Cuba, Ecuador, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Malaysia, and Nigeria all urged nuclear disarmament to be the first priority of the CD. The Non-Aligned Movement, Ecuador, Indonesia, and Iran called for the negotiation of a nuclear weapons convention. Austria called for states to “begin discussing the parameters that will enable us to reach and maintain Global Zero” and Brazil argued that concrete nuclear disarmament cannot wait for the conclusion of the negotiation of the related treaties. The UN Secretary-General’s five-point plan, of which a nuclear weapons convention is the first point, was welcomed by the European Union, Republic of Korea, Uruguay, Luxembourg, and Austria. Uruguay announced that it will host a regional conference this fall to discuss the five-point plan and identify additional concrete proposals for the effective regulation of conventional weapons.

Many delegations, including the European Union, Australia, Austria, Brazil, China, Croatia, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay highlighted a fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT) as a priority for negotiation.

Greece and Russia said the CD should start negotiations on both an FMCT and a treaty preventing an arms race in outer space. Bangladesh and Italy advocated for work on an FMCT and negative security assurances. Several delegations, including Brazil, China, Ecuador, Libya, Switzerland, Uruguay highlighted the importance of engaging in substantive work on all the four core issues.

Kazakhstan called for the drafting of a Universal Declaration of Nuclear Weapon Free World as the “next and critical step”. Israel called on the CD to address arms transfers to non-state actors and terrorists “as a matter of priority”.

Expansion of the CD: civil society and member states
Several delegations called for broader participation of civil society, including the European Union, Austria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Chile, Ireland, Malaysia, Mongolia, and Norway.

Many governments called for the expansion of CD member states and the appointment of a special coordinator to undertake this initiative by the start of the CD’s 2011 session, including the Informal Group of Observers to the CD (chaired by Thailand), the European Union, the Non-Aligned Movement, Croatia, Estonia, Greece, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Nigeria, Norway, Philippines, Portugal, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Tanzania, and Uruguay.

Other suggestions
Delegates made a variety of suggestions on revising either the substantive or working methods of the CD. Norway called for the elimination of regional groups; Bulgaria and Ukraine called for annual high-level meetings to review the operation of the CD; Bangladesh and Italy suggested the programme of work be carried over from one year to the next unless there is a specific request for its modification; and Bangladesh called for the revitalization of the CD’s agenda to account for new security concerns of the “fast-changing world”.

On substantive matters, Norway called for humanitarian concerns to guide the work of the CD, while Bangladesh, Cuba, Uganda, and the UN Secretary-General all highlighted the problems that excessive and growing military spending creates for disarmament and arms control. Bangladesh suggested that the issues such as reduction of military budgets and armed forces and the impact of disarmament on development should be reintroduced to the CD’s agenda. Poland called for the creation of “a standard educational textbook on disarmament and non-proliferation, compiled by a select group of eminent experts, for use in universities around the world.”

Notes from the overflow room
In advance of the high-level meeting, Reaching Critical Will and the Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy circulated a paper with suggestions for actions that states could undertake to get back to work on multilateral disarmament negotiations. While not exhaustive, the suggestions contained in the paper included many of the elements raised by delegations at the high-level meeting, such reviewing the rules of consensus; expanding the CD’s membership and allowing for more interaction with civil society; revitalizing the CD’s agenda; and much more.

Reaching Critical Will believes that the best way forward for negotiating a FM(C)T would be for it to occur in the Conference on Disarmament, as it would ensure that all of the relevant states, including Pakistan, would participate in the negotiations. Taking FM(C)T negotiations outside of the CD and negotiating with a smaller group of states would likely result in a weaker treaty and not include some or all of the states that are currently producing fissile materials for weapons.

However, if it continues to remain impossible to negotiate in the CD, having the General Assembly take over the functions of the CD until it can resume work is a reasonable alternative. This would allow the participation of all UN member states, rather than just the 65 members of the CD. But if the General Assembly assumes the CD’s responsibilities, it would be better for the international community to also revise the CD’s agenda, the incremental nature of which is outdated and ineffective, and begin substantive work on nuclear disarmament rather than a mere FM(C)T.

The notion that only a FM(C)T is ready to be negotiated should be reconsidered. While it often described as the only “ripe” issue for negotiation by a subset of the CD’s membership, the vast majority of CD member states appear ready to work on any of the other core issues on the CD’s agenda. While an FM(C)T would be part of the architecture of a nuclear weapon free world, as generally envisaged today it seems of limited relevance to nuclear disarmament or non-proliferation. Since non-nuclear weapon states are already committed to IAEA safeguards on their fissile material and related facilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to ensure that such material is diverted to weapons purposes, the few states that possess nuclear weapons could avoid drawn out negotiations on fissile material by engaging directly in nuclear disarmament negotiations, which would encompass a ban on the production of fissile materials for weapons purposes. Likewise, a convention or framework agreement would incorporate the negative security assurances issue as well, precluding the need for separate negotiations on a separate treaty. Many governments have voiced their support for the CD to start deliberations on a nuclear weapons convention, as proposed by the Secretary-General in his five-point proposal.

The lack of truly forward-looking actions in the Chair’s Summary was disappointing. The only concrete action specified was the Secretary-General’s intention to have his advisory board review the issues raised at the meeting, with a focus on the CD. This action was likely aimed at finding a middle ground between those states wanting clear action on changing the CD’s procedure or issuing a deadline for its work, and those insisting that political solutions to the impasse are the only forward. While it offers the opportunity to continue discussing and analyzing the challenges faced by the CD and could result in innovative suggestions for moving forward, the advisory board has no status to determine outcomes or enforce recommendations, meaning it is still ultimately up to states to find a way forward.

However, the high-level meeting did clearly reveal the positions of many governments. Significantly, many governments signaled their intention to push forward, suggesting that the high-level meeting has had a catalyzing effect. Governments made it very clear that the status quo is clearly untenable and that the burden will now fall on First Committee to follow-up and translate the frustration into action. Any follow-up mechanism to deal with the CD may evoke some controversy, but as Malaysia’s foreign minister argued, “The will of the majority must given due recognition.”

14 September 2010
The CD debates disarmament machinery and closes the 2010 session
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) closed its 2010 session on Tuesday, by adopting the annual report as well as continue to deliberate on the future of the CD and the upcoming high-level meeting on 24 September. Cameroon, the United States, Brazil, Syria, Australia, Italy, Russia, India, Canada, France and Pakistan took the floor.

Highlights

• The CD adopted its annual report and CD President, Ambassador Nkou stated that he would start consulting delegations on wordings for a draft resolution put forward to the General Assembly.
• The Brazilian Ambassador argued that he could not discern a clear political will from the nuclear weapons states throughout this year’s session of the CD and stated that he wasn’t sure all regional groups have the same desire to change the situation.
• France argued that the political will of the P5 to start negotiations has been consistent and because of this strong political will from this group of states, Ambassador Danon argued that negotiations of a FMCT “will” start, in the CD or elsewhere.
• The United States signalled that they were starting to look at alternative approaches outside the CD in order to start negotiations of a FMCT.
• Canada suggested that the outcome document of the high-level meeting should include a deadline for the CD to start work.

The future of the CD
As yet another session of the CD closes without any progress, many delegations showed increased frustration with the deadlock while others urged for further patience. Still not agreeing on what the problem is, the delegations shared their different views and suggested solutions. The delegation of Canada argued that the consensus rule might have been appropriate during the Cold War, but was not efficient in today’s multi-polar situation. Ambassador Grinius stated that the current strict interpretation of the consensus rule “is now abused by a handful of states in order to block this body from fulfilling its work” and he doubted that the CD could ever get back to work if such behaviour continued. Mr. Kohker from Pakistan responded to this by highlighting the CD’s two latest achievements, the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, both of which were concluded after the Cold War had ended. He argued that blaming the problems in the CD on the relic of the Cold War was therefore incorrect and urged delegations to show patience, as this was “the only way forward.”

While recognizing that the American administration has previously showed “little enthusiasm” for ad hoc solutions to the stalemate, Ambassador Laura Kennedy stated that “if negotiations in the CD continue to stall, those countries who still wish to negotiate will have to consider whether there are other foras existing or ad-hoc” and noted that “new approaches may be called for.” Ambassador Kennedy emphasized that patience with the CD is running out for many states, including her own.

Also the delegations of Brazil and India took the floor to give their view of the state of the CD. Ambassador Ali Rao of India argued that neither the CD nor its rules of procedure are responsible for the stalemate. Ambassador Macedo Soares from Brazil also agreed that the blame that has incorrectly been placed on the institution itself and the rules that govern it, and called the attribution of responsibility for the CD deadlock on one member state as “nothing more than crocodile tears.” Ambassador Macedo Soares argued that he had not been able to discern a clear political will from the part of the nuclear weapon states, and noted that he wasn’t sure that all groups had the same desire to change the situation.

Ambassador Danon of France disagreed with the Brazilian view and argued that the political will of the P5 on starting negotiations on a FMCT has been constant for a long time. He further believed that “the political will of the P5 to start negotiations on a FMCT means that these negotiations will start. What I hope is simply that this negotiation will occur here.” Ambassador Danon also noted the growing impatience with the stalemate and was confident that eventually this would lead to changes. He hoped that negotiations on a FMCT would include all members of the CD, and that it would take place within the CD.

High-level meeting
At this final plenary meeting, states had an opportunity to raise issues concerning the high-level meeting one final time. Canada highlighted that they wished to see the outcome of, and the follow-up to, the high-level meeting to recommend and include a deadline for the CD to commence work.  Ambassador Woolcott of Australia argued that the high-level meeting was an early opportunity to support implementation of the adopted action plan from the 2010 NPT Review Conference, and urged all NPT states to “get on with the job of supporting the implementation of the action plan including the relations to the CD,” in order for the CD to resume its role in the disarmament arena. While welcoming the initiative of the high-level meeting, the Indian delegation believed that its objective should not be to question the CD or its rules of procedure, which are not responsible for its current impasse or the longer standing deadlock on nuclear disarmament. Ambassador Ali Rao instead argued that the objective should be to refocus the political will that has disappeared since May 2009 and stated “given the nature of the meeting, its summary remains the responsibility of the UN Secretary-General. Follow-up, if any, should be pursued by member states in relevant forums with existing mechanism. In other words, the summary should be related to existing mechanism and forums, in particular the CD and the UN disarmament commission.”

Draft report
After debating the draft report in informal meetings, the CD was able to adopt a revised version in today’s plenary meeting. As the revisions were discussed in informal meetings, we will publish the final version of the annual report as soon as it’s available. Ambassador Nkou also highlighted that he would continue the work as CD president until the 2011 session resumed and that he would start consulting delegation on wordings for a draft resolution put forward to the General Assembly immediately.

Notes from the gallery
Reaching Critical Will is disappointed that another year has passed where the CD has failed to engage in substantive work. While it is frustrating for one or two governments to be able to block work in a body in which 65 states participate, it is also frustrating to see divergent views on priorities accepted as an excuse for inaction. We must all remember that ultimate responsibility for the achievement of the work mandated to the CD lies with each of its members, not just a few. We hope that delegations will engage in follow-up work and move forward on any conclusions that might come out from the high-level meeting on 24 September.

7 September 2010
The CD discusses its draft report and other matters ... behind closed doors
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met for a very short plenary meeting on the morning of 7 September. The CD President, Ambassador Nkou of Cameroon, explained briefly that the CD would move into an informal meeting where delegations would discuss its draft report to the General Assembly in order to finalize it in time before the high-level meeting on 24 September. In the afternoon the Conference resumed its plenary meeting to hear statements from representatives of the Group of 21, Malaysia, the United States, and Chile. Unfortunately, civil society was asked to leave for the informal meeting and was not informed of the resumption of the plenary.

Brief highlights

• G21 and Malaysia called for convening of the Fourth Special Session on Disarmament (SSOD IV).
• Malaysia highlighted the importance of transparency and engagement with civil society in moving the CD forward.
• The United States questioned the feasibility of negotiating a nuclear weapons convention before a fissile material treaty.
• The draft report set the dates for the 2011 CD session: 24 January–1 April; 16 May–1 July; 2 August–16 September.

The draft report
The first draft of the annual report so far only contains a procedural record of what meetings were held, which decisions were taken and what papers have been submitted. As usual, there is no summary of discussions on the substantive agenda items or any explanation of the reasons for continued deadlock. So far, the draft report does not it include the reports of the informal thematic debates either. However, the most striking point of this draft is the lack any reference to the high-level meeting that will take place on 24 September. While the meeting will not have taken place yet at the time of the adoption of this document, the draft report does not even mention the official invitation from the UN Secretary-General to delegations to attend this meeting that is highly relevant for the Conference.

The high-level meeting
Representatives from the Group of 21 (G21), Malaysia, the United States, and Chile all reiterated their support for the high-level meeting. The G21 expressed its determination to promote multilateralism as the core principle of negotiations in disarmament issues. Speaking on behalf of the G21, Ambassador Sajadi of Iran emphasized the necessity of convening a Fourth Special Session on Disarmament (SSOD IV) in order to discuss and consider strengthening the disarmament machinery and expressed deep concern over the lack of consensus on this issue.

Malaysia’s representative voiced support for convening SSOD IV and the high-level meeting. While he noted that the high-level meeting would perhaps not be able to produce a miracle prescription to solve the CD’s problems, he still hoped that the political attention would revitalize and strengthen the Conference. However, he said that he was dismayed by the fact that the CD had yet not been able to agree on elements to be forwarded to the meeting in New York. He stated that it was hard to comprehend that the CD is not able to seize this opportunity, and that delegations allow themselves to fall into the same procedural quagmire that had beleaguered the Conference for a long time. He also hoped that the high-level meeting would look into the expansion of the membership of the CD, as well as enhanced engagement with civil society, since such actions might help create the necessary impetus for the CD to move forward.

Ambassador Kennedy from the United States argued that the meeting should be seen as an opportunity to reinvest in the CD. The Chilean representative said it would have preferred that the CD had brought about this high-level meeting itself.

Notes from the gallery: a nuclear weapons convention?
The G21 highlighted that nuclear disarmament remained their priority and called for the negotiation of a nuclear weapons convention. Ambassador Kennedy of the United States responded to this by wondering how one could deal with a nuclear weapons convention without first dealing with the issue of fissile material. However, Reaching Critical Will believes that since non-nuclear weapon states are already committed to IAEA safeguards on their fissile material and related facilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to ensure that such material is diverted to weapons purposes, the few states that possess nuclear weapons could avoid drawn out negotiations on fissile material by engaging directly in nuclear disarmament negotiations, which would encompass a ban on the production of fissile materials for weapons purposes.

Next plenary meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 14 September.

31 August 2010
Still disagreements on the high-level meeting and the CD deadlock
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on 31 August for the first meeting under Cameroon’s presidency. Mr. Henri Eyebe Ayissi, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Cameroon, delivered a statement and conveyed his president’s strong interest for a successful conclusion of the 2010 session. The Conference also heard statements from Mr. Rezlan Ishar Jenie, Deputy Minister for Multilateral Affairs of Indonesia, CD President Ambassador Anatole Fabien-Marie Nkou of Cameroon, and continued the debate concerning the 24 September high-level meeting and the CD stalemate with comments from representatives of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Pakistan, Sweden, South Africa, Austria, Croatia, United Kingdom, United States, Republic of Korea, Algeria, Belarus, Bangladesh, Mexico, Pakistan, India, and the Secretary-General of the CD, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze.

Highlights

• The President of the CD, Ambassador Nkou of Cameroon, reminded delegations of the remaining four tasks of the third session: to continue consultations on a programme of work, to carry out preparations for the upcoming high-level meeting on 24 September, to consolidate the 7 reports from the coordinators of the informal meetings on all agenda items, and to finalize the draft annual report.
• CD President Nkou circulated a first draft of the annual report for the general assembly and stated that considerations of it would begin early next week.
• Indonesia and Algeria argued for the CD to discuss the high-level meeting in a plenary meeting, rather than in an informal meeting as had been proposed by other delegations.
• Indonesia, Austria, Sweden, South Africa, Croatia, Algeria, and Belarus highlighted the positive contribution of civil society and called for greater participation of NGOs in the CD’s work.
• Croatia proposed the dismantlement of the regional groups in the CD, arguing that it could make the proceedings more efficient.
• Pakistan reiterated its position against starting negotiations of an FMCT, while stating that its delegation remained fully prepared to make progress on other issues on the agenda.
• Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States responded to some of the comments made by Pakistan’s delegation.

High-level meeting
Almost all speakers in today’s plenary meeting endorsed the idea of the high-level meeting in New York. However, when the Secretary-General of the CD, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze, expressed that he wanted to convey to the UN Secretary-General the unanimous support for the high-level meeting from the CD, the representative from Pakistan argued that there was no need to convey such a message and that it would be preferred if countries could express their own views separately on this matter.

When the Secretariat circulated a document of practical information concerning the meeting, it became clear that some differences and unclear issues still remain. The incoming CD President, Ambassador Nkou of Cameroon, explained that he still needed to consult delegations on the format of a preparatory meeting in the CD for the high-level summit in New York on the 24 September. While regional groups had expressed different views on the preferred format, he expressed hope that an agreement could be reached by the end of this week. The Deputy Minister of External Affairs of Indonesia supported the idea of continuing the debate in a plenary meeting, as did Ambassador Jazaïry of Algeria, who argued that a formal discussion would be preferred since it would allow for appropriate follow-up and it would be easier to identify an outcome of the discussions.

As one of the six presidents of 2010, Ambassador Khvostov from Belarus highlighted a number of points that he thought the statement of the CD President to the high-level meeting should include. He argued that the presidential statement should be balanced and based on the report of the CD to the General Assembly. Mr. Ordzhonikidze noted that the President of Cameroon would join the high-level meeting and deliver the statement as President of the CD.

Ambassador Jazaïry of Algeria voiced concerns over the limit of one accompanying member to the Minister at the meeting, and asked the Secretariat for some flexibility on this issue. Ambassador Jazaïry also commented that that while there are many different views on the potential outcome of this meeting, he was pleased to hear many delegations echo the idea of calling for a fourth special session on disarmament (SSOD IV). Ambassador Khvostov of Belarus agreed that an SSOD IV should be considered at the high-level meeting, as did the Indonesian delegation, which expressed hope that the high-level meeting would generate enough support to convene such meeting.

Agreeing that an SSOD IV would aid disarmament machinery better than a high-level meeting, Pakistan's Ambassador Akram listed a series of additional items he considers "key considerations" for the high-level meeting to be based on. These items include: that the CD should ensure the security of all states; that all agenda items should be treated equally; that lack of progress on one issue should not hold back all of the others; that the impasse in the CD is not due to its rules of procedures but the security concerns of states, which need to be addressed; that any attempt to change the CD's rules of procedure would "gravely harm the global disarmament machinery".

The agenda items and the deadlock
In a long statement, Ambassador Akram of Pakistan evaluated the developments during the 2010 session of the CD and provided member states with additional arguments for his delegation’s position on a programme of work. He outlined three main reasons for the impasse: that words from certain states had not been translated into deeds; the pursuit of discriminatory policies by some states in the field of nuclear collaboration; and the refusal of some states to take into account the security interests of all states on the basis of undiminished and equal security for all. “It’s the combination of these three negative factors that has prevented the adoption of a programme of work in the CD”, he stated, and continued by arguing, “it is not through choice but necessity that Pakistan is opposed to negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT).” However, Ambassador Akram highlighted that Pakistan remained fully prepared to make progress on all the other issues on the agenda of the CD, as “the CD should not be kept hostage to the FMCT issue.”

In his farewell speech to the CD, Ambassador Hellgren from Sweden argued that when it comes to protecting national security interests in treaty negotiations there is a “triple veto”: blocking the start of negotiations, blocking the approval of any treaty text, and choosing to not sign and ratify the adopted treaty. Ambassador Hellgren urged those that block the adoption of a programme of work in the CD to consider not exercising the first veto opportunity, since he argued that national security interests could be protected by the other two.

Ambassador Duncan from the UK responded to the comments of Pakistan’s ambassador by arguing that his delegation did not recognize the descriptions of the situations set out in that statement. He regretted that the consensus from last year had disappeared and argued the CD had moved backwards in the last 20 months. Ambassador Kennedy from the United States argued that her country’s words actually had been accompanied by deeds. Ambassador Kennedy argued that she believes that every state can negotiate a FMCT on the basis of undiminished security.

Civil society
Ambassador Strohal of Austria reminded delegations of action 19 from the outcome document of the NPT 2010 Review Conference, where states acknowledged the importance of civil society in disarmament fora. He stated that the Austrian delegation would welcome an informal discussion in the CD on the issue of civil society. The delegations of Sweden, South Africa, Indonesia, Croatia, Algeria, and Belarus also highlighted the importance of civil society. Ambassador Jazaïry of Algeria noted the inconsistency in positions of some states between their policies in the Human Rights Council and in the CD. He argued that transparency is a policy for multilateralism and should equally apply to both human rights and disarmament. Ambassador Khvostov of Belarus suggested that by giving NGOs permanent observer status, the efficiency of the CD could be enhanced and its accountability improved.

Notes from the gallery
As the third and final session of this year quickly moves forward, it is apparent that delegations disagree on more than just the programme of work. On almost all issues that delegations raised in discussion today—details concerning the high-level meeting, negotiations on a FMCT, increased participation of civil society, or the need for an SSOD IV—delegations have a range of views. However, there is one thing that all delegations can agree upon: that the CD is facing a serious challenge. As Ambassador Hellgren said in his farewell statement, “The situation in the CD has, in my view, reached a breaking point. Something will have to give.”

As impatience is growing, delegations must consider the consequences of the current situation. Will continued stalemate, heightened tensions, and increased frustrations perhaps be more harmful to national, regional, and global security than a programme of work or a parallel process? All members of the CD must consider the potential consequences of another year of deadlock and if such potential consequences would be in anyone’s interest. We urge delegations to use the high-level meeting and the First Committee of the General Assembly as efficiently as possible in order to find creative solutions for moving forward in ways that lead to concrete nuclear disarmament, not just incremental non-proliferation steps.

Reaching Critical Will would also like to take this opportunity to bid farewell to Ambassador Magnus Hellgren of Sweden. We are grateful for his encouraging words and for his continued support for civil society and wish him all the best in the future.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 7 September at 10:00 AM.

24 August 2010
More debate on the purpose, process, and outcome of the 24 September meeting
Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

During the longest plenary meeting of the year, the Conference on Disarmament (CD) continued its discussion about the 24 September high-level meeting, which will be convened in New York by the UN Secretary-General. Delegates from Brazil, Algeria, the UN Secretariat, Pakistan, Germany, Canada, the Syrian Arab Republic, the Informal Group of Observer States to the CD, the United Kingdom, the United States, Morocco, Ireland, Sweden, Netherlands, Ukraine, Republic of Korea, Norway, Mexico, Italy, the Russian Federation, Switzerland, Cuba, France, India, Colombia, Iran, and Australia took the floor.

Brief highlights

• Delegates from Germany, Canada, the Informal Group of Observer States to the CD, the United Kingdom, the United States, Morocco, Ireland, Sweden, Ukraine, Norway, Mexico, Italy, the Russian Federation, Switzerland, France, Colombia, and Australia issued support for the UN Secretary-General’s convening of the 24 September meeting.
• The delegations of Brazil, Algeria, Pakistan, and the United Kingdom urged the 24 September meeting to prevent the establishment any “parallel” negotiating initiatives on CD issues.
• Delegates from Brazil, Algeria, and Pakistan called for the convening of a fourth Special Session on Disarmament (SSOD IV) to give impetus to all of the disarmament machinery. The UK and Russian delegations argued there is no consensus on SSOD IV.
• The delegates of Algeria, Syria, and Ireland noted that external factors are important to solving the CD’s problem, not just procedural issues.
• The CD Secretary-General predicted that the CD would probably have at maximum one more year to start working, at which point parallel initiatives would likely be organized by some delegations. The delegations of Pakistan, Cuba, and Iran criticized this comment, but the Dutch ambassador agreed he would not be willing to wait longer than one more year.
• The delegations of Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, and Mexico indicated they are not adverse to parallel processes if the CD is unable to overcome its deadlock.
• Pakistan’s ambassador said it is clear there are options to negotiate a fissile materials treaty outside of the CD and that Pakistan has no problem with that but would not take part in those negotiations.
• The UK representative urged the meeting to support immediate negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty in the CD. Pakistan’s ambassador argued that this is all the western delegations are interested in and predicted that the UN Secretary-General’s outcome summary would simply reflect this position.
• Morocco’s ambassador suggested than instead of a summary outcome the 24 September meeting should issue a compromise document on statements made, or a road map, but India’s ambassador said the outcome should not draw conclusions.
  The representatives of Pakistan and Iran suggested the CD start negotiations on its other core issues.
• India’s ambassador issued his delegation’s support for negotiations of a nuclear weapons convention.
• Delegates from Germany, the Netherlands, the Russian Federation, and Colombia continued to express support for the CD President to convene an informal meeting to discuss the 24 September meeting. The CD President said he would continue trying to convene this informal meeting.

Concerns about “parallel initiatives”
Ambassador Luiz Filipe de Macedo Soares of Brazil argued that the credibility of the CD and other disarmament machinery is directly affected by the Conference’s continued deadlock on the adoption of a programme of work. Noting that the outcome of the 2010 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference led many to expect that the CD would start substantive on its core issues, he urged the 24 September meeting to prevent the establishment of parallel negotiations on CD issues and to promote a disarmament agenda, not just one of non-proliferation. He also suggested that a fourth Special Session on Disarmament (SSOD IV) “could provide the only way for an encompassing and balanced review of the entire multilateral ‘machinery’ in the area of disarmament.”

Algeria’s Ambassador Idriss Jazaïry and Pakistan’s Ambassador Zamir Akram agreed that the 24 September high-level meeting should prevent parallel negotiating initiatives and that SSOD IV should be convened. While the UK’s Rupert Barthorp agreed that the meeting should not seek to change the CD consensus rule or “damage” its role as the “sole multilateral disarmament negotiating forum,” he did not agree that convening SSOD IV is the solution.

Ambassador Jazaïry argued that events outside of the CD have upset the “fragile balance” in the Conference, preventing it from commencing substantive work. Describing the CD as a “captive of external problems,” he posited that the deadlock in the Conference is not caused by the body itself but by security concerns between states and the selective approaches taken by some governments to implementing the non-proliferation regime. He encouraged the summary of the 24 September meeting, to be prepared by the UN Secretary-General, to take into account all priorities expressed and to ensure that any follow-up mechanism “not jeopardize the work of the Conference” but instead strengthen its “authority and prestige”. Ambassador Jazaïry later emphasized that it is not the CD, but the international approach to disarmament, that has created problems. He thus argued that the search for alternative forums would not be a solution as long as the root of the problem goes unaddressed. Syria’s Ambassador Faysal Khabbaz Hamoui agreed with this assessment, arguing that some capitals have neglected disarmament.

Ambassador Gerard Corr of Ireland also agreed, saying it would naïve to assume that all of the CD’s problems lie within the CD itself and that external factors have played perhaps a major role. However, he also questioned the practice of demanding consensus before negotiations could begin in the CD, suggesting this should be addressed.

On the matter of parallel initiatives, Ambassador Marius Grinius of Canada reminded delegations of the success of the Ottawa and Oslo processes. Ambassador Hellmut Hoffman of Germany said that if the deadlock is not overcome soon, his delegation is ready to consider innovative ideas. Ambassador Arturo Hernández-Basave of Mexico said he understands the appeals for opening discussions outside the CD, arguing that as the world moves on, international bodies should not remain static but should evolve in face of the international challenges.

Pakistan’s Ambassador Akram said it is clear there are options to negotiate a fissile materials treaty outside of the CD and that Pakistan has no problem with that but would not take part in those negotiations. In the meantime, he argued, the CD should start negotiating on its other core issues. Iran’s representative agreed. India’s Ambassador Hamid Ali Rao issued his delegation’s support for negotiations of a nuclear weapons convention as called for by the UN Secretary-General.

Sergei Ordzhonikidze, Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament and Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva, explained that through his meetings with member states, he understood the purpose of the 24 September meeting is to revitalize the work of the CD and to address the larger challenges facing the wider disarmament machinery. He said that the UN Secretary-General’s summary would include his own views and the views of delegations, and suggested that CD delegations should write to their foreign ministers and encourage them to make statements in support of the CD during the high-level meeting. Expressing his personal opinion, Mr. Ordzhonikidze said that if the CD is not able to resume its work within the next year, parallel mechanisms and meetings could take place.

Ambassador Akram of Pakistan and Mr. Mohamad Hassan Daryaei of Iran accused Mr. Ordzhonikidze of “threatening” the CD with his remarks and Mr. Juan Antonio Quintanilla Roman of Cuba criticized his remarks as an “ultimatum”. Amabssador Grinius of Canada argued that Mr. Ordzhonikidze’s comment was not a threat but a reality check. Ambassador Omar Hilale of Morocco said he didn’t agree with Mr. Ordzhonikidze’s assessment that the CD would disappear within a year. On the contrary, Ambassador Paul van den Ijssel of the Netherlands indicated he was not willing to wait longer than another year for the CD to commence substantive work.

CD informal meeting to discuss the high-level meeting
Ambassador Hellmut Hoffman of Germany asked if the CD President still intended to convene an informal CD meeting to discuss the 24 September high-level meeting. The President, Ambassador Gancho Ganev of Bulgaria, explained that he received a request this morning from a regional group to postpone the planned informal meeting. Ambassador Marius Grinius of Canada argued that with only four weeks until the high-level meeting, delegations needed to have some more open discussions to prepare. Ambassador Paul van den Ijssel of the Netherlands expressed surprise that this meeting has not already been convened and Ambassador Eric Danon of France noted that the fact that the CD cannot even decided whether to hold an informal meeting is a sign of its growing inefficiency. Brazil’s Ambassador Soares said that if states were uncomfortable holding an informal meeting he would be happy to continue discussions in a plenary meeting. The CD President said that he would try to reschedule the informal meeting.

Suggested agenda items, procedures, and outcomes
Taking up the issues that would likely be discussed during such an informal meeting, Mr. Andriy Kasianov of Ukraine focused on the procedural aspects of the 24 September meeting. He suggested that the meeting be extended to a full day to give everyone a chance to speak and to allow for an interactive dialogue. He also encouraged the outcome to include specific recommendations on how to restart substantive work of the CD. Following these comments, Ambassador Im Han-Taek of the Republic of Korea urged delegations to explain that they would be participating in the 24 September meeting as members of the United Nations, not as members of the CD. Mr. Jon-Erik Strømø of Norway and Ambassador Giovanni Manfredi of Italy expressed hope that the 24 September meeting would start a discussion on the wider disarmament machinery. Mr. Strømø also encouraged the participation of civil society, arguing that their exclusion prevents the CD from benefiting from their experience.

Cautioning the CD against trying to pre-negotiate the outcome of the 24 September meeting, Ms. Riccarda Torriani of Switzerland explained that the Swiss delegation is hoping for a debate on current challenges to the disarmament machinery, medium- and long-term measures to make the CD fit to address the challenges of the 21st century, and a debate on short-term measures to allow progress on the CD’s core issues. Morocco’s Ambassador Hilale suggested than instead of a summary outcome the 24 September meeting should issue a compromise document on statements made, or a road map. India’s Ambassador Rao, on the other hand, supported the idea of the summary, arguing that the outcome should not draw any conclusions.

The UK representative urged the 24 September meeting to help the CD agree on a “balanced” programme of work and support immediate negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty. Pakistan’s ambassador argued that this is all the western delegations are interested in and predicted that the UN Secretary-General’s outcome summary would simply reflect this position.

CD membership
On behalf of the Informal Group of Observer States to the CD, Mr. Uglješa Zvekic of Serbia noted that according to Article 2 of the CD’s Rules of Procedure, the membership of the Conference should be reviewed at regular times. He encouraged the high-level meeting to address this issue and to appoint a Special Coordinator on the expansion of the membership of the CD in 2011. Ambassador Carr of Ireland agreed that the question of the CD’s limited membership needs to be addressed, as all states have an interest in the mandate of the Conference.

Next meeting
The time and date of the next plenary meeting of the CD has not yet been determined.

17 August 2010
How to get the CD back to work again: a suggestion from Poland and more on the 24 September high-level meeting
Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

Upon opening the plenary meeting on 17 August, the current CD President Ambassador Gancho Ganev of Bulgaria bid farewell to Ambassador Zdzislaw Rapacki of Poland, who is moving to a new post. After Ambassador Rapacki delivered his farewell speech, delegates from the Russian Federation, Algeria, Pakistan, and Germany wished him well. India’s Ambassador Rao delivered a statement outlining his delegation’s positions on the CD’s issues and deadlock. The Deputy Secretary-General for the CD, Mr. Jarmo Sareva, informed the Conference of some details related to the 24 September high-level meeting to be held in New York, which promoted questions and comments from the delegates of Algeria, Germany, Pakistan, Ukraine, Brazil, and Cameroon.

Brief highlights

• Ambassador Rapacki of Poland suggested that the majority of CD member states who wish to begin negotiations should do so in plenary meetings, in which all states could make their positions known but would not be able to block progress.
• The Deputy Secretary-General for the CD announced that the high-level meeting on the CD would be held on 24 September from 8:00 AM to 1:00 PM in Conference Room 2 in the North Lawn Building in New York.
• Several delegations urged the CD President to convene an informal meeting of CD member states in advance of the 24 September meeting to discuss possible outcomes and provide input to the Secretary-General. The CD President agreed to convene this meeting, which will be announced at a later date.

On the workings of the CD
In his farewell speech, Ambassador Rapacki of Poland took a firm stance against the continuing deadlock in the CD. He argued that the rule of consensus “is to be cherished by all of us, but it should not apply to purely procedural matters. Obstruction has to have its limits.” Furthermore, he suggested that if the CD continues to suffer from “procedural stalling tactics .. more active consideration should devoted to to the idea of developing an alternative forum or parallel process, in which real work could be undertaken on the ripe core issues, without the constraints of the CD’s rules of procedure.”

However, he also argued that in fact the CD’s existing rules of procedures should allow for the majority of CD member states to start negotiations without a mandate and without an agreement on a subsidiary body, “simply by conscientiously organizing such negotiations among themselves in the plenary meetings.” He noted that such negotiations would have to be organized independently of the CD presidency, which would have to continue leading discussions of member states as a whole.

Taking a different view of the matter, Ambassador Rao of India argued that the consensus rule is not the problem and in fact has served the CD well. He urged for the adoption of programme of work to enable commencement of substantive work.

24 September high-level meeting
The Deputy Secretary-General for the CD, Mr. Jarmo Sareva, confirmed that the high-level meeting on the CD would be held on 24 September from 8:00 AM to 1:00 PM in Conference Room 2 in the North Lawn Building in New York. Several delegations posed questions, which Mr. Sareva took the floor to answer.

Question (Algeria): What consultation have gone on with member states to determine the organization of the meeting?
Answer: The Secretary-General has been consulting a large number of member states both in New York and in his interactions with high-level officials during his travels and will meet with the chairs of New York’s five regional groups.

Question (Algeria) (seconded by Ukraine): Is it possible to extend the meeting to a full day?
Answer: Due to the large number of high-level meetings scheduled to be held on the margins of the UN General Assembly in September, five hours is the maximum possible length of the meeting.

Question (Algeria): How long will each delegation have to speak?
Answer: At most five minutes, but the exact time is yet to be determined.

Question (Algeria): What is the outcome to be? Will there be any follow-up?
Answer: The Secretary-General will produce a final report in the form of a Chair’s summary, which will probably contain a forward-looking aspect.

Question (Algeria): Will statements be recorded?
Answer: Probably not due to the volume of meetings on at the time but there will at least be an official press release.

Question (Pakistan): Will statements be made by regional representatives rather than states (as reportedly suggested by the Secretariat in New York) or are countries or groups free to express their own views?
Answer: The idea of regional statements has been abandoned in favour of having as many high-level officials as possible speak on behalf of their governments, which is why the meeting length has been expanded to five hours.

Question (Pakistan): If the outcome is to be a Chair’s summary, how will CD member states have ownership over the outcome?
Answer: no answer given

Question (Brazil): What is the official title of the 24 September meeting?
Answer: “Revitalizing the work of the Conference on Disarmament and taking forward multilateral negotiations”.

The longest discussion took place over whether or not CD members should and could convene an informal meeting ahead of the 24 September high-level meeting to exchange their views about the purpose and potential outcome of the meeting. Representatives from Germany, Pakistan, Algeria, Brazil, and Cameroon urged the CD President to convene such a meeting, arguing that while an informal meeting would not necessarily effect the outcome of the 24 September meeting, it could at least give an opportunity for CD member states to provide input to the Secretary-General in advance of his summary. The CD President noted that there has not been much enthusiasm for such an informal meeting recently, but after the urging of delegations, he announced at the end of the plenary that he would schedule a meeting and communicate its format at a later date.

Notes from the gallery
Welcoming the initiative of some governments in the CD to discuss the 24 September meeting in advance, Reaching Critical Will also encourages civil society groups to think about the possible outcomes of this meeting and provide recommendations to their governments for discussion at the meeting and for the forward-looking elements of the Chair’s summary. While this may only be a five hour meeting among high-level officials, it is another opportunity for civil society to engage with the CD outside of Geneva and to provide some suggestions on what to do about our stalemated disarmament machinery.

Next meeting
The time and date of the next plenary meeting of the CD has not yet been determined.

10 August 2010
Third and final part of the CD's 2010 session begins with no sign of work
Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The third and final part of the Conference on Disarmament (CD)’s 2010 session opened on Tuesday, 10 August. Ambassador Gancho Ganev of Bulgaria, current president of the CD, opened the meeting with a report on the intercessional period. Ambassador Akio Suda of Japan delivered a statement to mark the 65th anniversary of the US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He also commented on the current stalemate in the CD, as did the ambassadors from Cuba and Algeria.

Brief highlights

• The current CD president explained that consensus has still not been reached on a programme of work. He announced that he will hold an informal meeting to discuss the upcoming high-level meeting on the CD on 24 September.
• Japan’s ambassador argued that the consensus rule should be re-examined in order to find a way out of the CD’s deadlock.
• Cuba and Algeria’s ambassadors argued that consensus is not the problem but rather the selective and discriminatory manner in which items are determined to be “ripe” for negotiation in the CD. Both delegations urged a more comprehensive approach that moves forward simultaneously on disarmament and non-proliferation.

State of play in the CD
Ambassador Ganev of Bulgaria, current president of the CD, explained that during the intercessional period he had conducted bilateral consultations with a large number of delegations on the basis of the latest draft proposal that had been tabled by Brazil during part two of the 2010 session. He noted that he had been unable to garner consensus on a programme of work but would continue his efforts towards reaching a compromise.

Ambassador Ganev also announced that he will organize an open-ended informal meeting, open to members and observers of the Conference on Disarmament, in order to allow for an exchange of views on the upcoming high-level meeting on the CD, to be held in New York on 24 September. He explained that the organizational meeting in Geneva would not draft a final document for the 24 September meeting, but provide an opportunity for delegations to exchange views on its possible outcome. These views and ideas would be submitted to the UN Secretary-General, who could take them into consideration in drafting the final document for the 24 September meeting.

Ambassador Akio Suda of Japan expressed regret over the continued stagnation of the CD, noting that it is “betraying the great expectations of the people of the world including those who gathered in Hiroshima and Nagasaki” to mark the 65th anniversary of the US atomic bombings. He argued that the deadlock is the result of “the lack of a sound understanding of the rule of consensus”. Describing the rule of consensus as “a wisdom for building well-balanced and feasible agreements through mutual respect and mutual cooperation,” he argued that it cannot be used as a “built-in device to allow a member state to paralyze the very function of an international body.” He called for the CD to study and discuss the “most appropriate interpretation and application of the Rules of Procedure that reflects the historical development of the CD and its present situation.”

Also expressing regret about the stalemate in the CD, Ambassador Rodolfo Reyes Rodriguez of Cuba suggested that the CD adopt a programme of work that takes into account all of the disarmament and arms control priorities. He emphasized that his delegation rejects the attempts by some states to ignore or minimize the relevance of nuclear disarmament and instead impose a selective, discriminatory non-proliferation approach in the CD. Among other things, he expressed concern that the current discussion of a fissile material cut-off treaty primarily involves in the interest of Western states. Ambassador Rodriguez issued his delegation’s support for the setting up of an ad-hoc committee for the negotiation of an instrument to abolish nuclear weapons.

Echoing Ambassador Suda’s comments that the CD must meet the expectations of the world’s people to ensure that nuclear weapons are never used again, Ambassador Idriss Jazairy of Algeria asked whether the international community is moving forwards or backwards in fulfilling this responsibility. He argued that the problem is not consensus but rather, as Cuba’s ambassador suggested, the issue is one of selective versus comprehensive undertakings. Ambassador Jazairy argued that it is important to make progress on nuclear disarmament and not to selectively limit international efforts to various items that are of importance to one or another member.

US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Ambassador Suda of Japan noted that August 2010 marks the 65th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He said these are days “for remembering the tragedies that befell these two cities and for renewing our determination to realize a world free of nuclear weapons.” He welcomed both high-level support from the UN Secretary-General but also grassroots support, noting that over one hundred hibakusha, atomic bomb survivors, came to New York in May to participate in the NPT Review Conference. Both the Cuban and Algerian ambassadors expressed their condolences to the victims of the US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Notes from the gallery
Civil society expectations are high for disarmament. Elites from many key governments have spoken of their interest in achieving a nuclear weapon free world and civil society has made clear demands that they follow through on their rhetoric. The month of August provided many opportunities for citizens around the world to raise their voices for the abolition of nuclear weapons. NGOs and civil society organizations held Hiroshima and Nagasaki Day events on 6 and 9 August; Mayors for Peace held a conference in late July that resulted in an appeal to governments and civil society alike; the US national youth network Think Outside the Bomb held a disarmament summer camp in New Mexico, birthplace of the US atomic bomb; the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) launched their new video petition Million Pleas campaign; and much more. All of these initiatives and appeals have made it clear that citizens are ready for the elimination of nuclear weapons and that international negotiating bodies such as the CD are going to have to get into gear on comprehensive nuclear disarmament now.

Next meeting
The next CD meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 17 August at 10:00 AM.

15 July 2010
Another draft bites the dust
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on Thursday morning for the final plenary meeting of the second session. Statements were made by Bulgaria, Zimbabwe, Hungary, the European Union, Ukraine, Italy, the United States, Argentina, Japan, Republic of Korea, Turkey, Germany, and Pakistan.

Highlights

• After a request from the US delegation, the President asked if those delegations that were waiting for instructions from capital on the draft programme of work contained in CD/1889 could provide the CD with an update.
• Zimbabwe, Hungary, the EU, Ukraine, Italy, the United States, Argentina, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Turkey, and Germany expressed support for CD/1889.
• Ambassador Akram stated that negotiating a fissile material (cut-off) treaty (FMCT) is unacceptable to the Pakistani delegation, since it undermines Pakistan’s security interest.

CD/1889
The president of the CD, Ambassador Ganev of Bulgaria notified the Conference that he would continue consultations on the basis of CD/1889, the draft presented by Brazil, and would use the upcoming recess to do so.

After a request from the US delegation, Ambassador Ganev invited CD delegations who might have received instructions from their capitals in the period between last week and today, to share such information with the Conference. While the delegations of Zimbabwe, Hungary, the EU, Ukraine, Italy, the US, Argentina, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Turkey, and Germany expressed support for CD/1889, Ambassador Akram from Pakistan reiterated that its position on negotiating a FMCT is very clear and that such negotiations would be unacceptable to his delegation, since it undermines Pakistan’s security interest. “That position has not changed,” he stated.

Speaking on behalf of the EU, Mr. Iliopoulos from Belgium expressed disappointment that the CD had not managed to reach consensus by the end of the second session. He argued that this was hard to understand and “even harder to explain to our political leaders.” Mr. Iliopoulos assured the CD that the EU is ready and that it has been ready to work in the CD for a long time, and that the EU was concerned that its flexibility has not been answered with a more constructive attitude by some delegations.

However, despite the lack of consensus on CD/1889, Ambassador Chipaziwa of Zimbabwe argued that the rules of procedure assure both small and big states the opportunity to assure their national security interest and priorities. He stated that the consensus principle underpins the work of the CD and has worked very well in the past and continues to be useful. “Any attempt to demean or adverse the rules of procedure can only be seen as an exercise that is counter-productive.”

Notes from the gallery
As the second session of 2010 closes, the second attempt of a programme of work presented this year has failed to get the CD functioning again. Consultations will take place during the recess, but the CD delegations will be facing the same dilemma as before. The delegation of Pakistan has made it clear that it will not accept negotiations of a FMCT, and other delegations will not accept anything less than a negotiating mandate. In order to solve such incompatible views, delegations must remember that it is in everyone’s national security interest to have a functioning CD, where negotiations on multilateral disarmament can take place in order to decrease tensions, reduce military expenditures and build trust across regions and the globe. It is tempting to give up efforts for the 2010 session and simply wait for the high-level meeting in September to produce some result, but all delegations must continue to show flexibility and seek further compromises. Reaching Critical Will would especially encourage those delegations that have had difficulties with drafts and informal proposals, to make their contribution and offer constructive ways of reaching agreement during the third session.

Next session
The third and last part of the 2010 session will be held from 9 August to 24 September. The next plenary will be announced by the Secretariat in due time.

13 July 2010
The CD and the new US space policy
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on Tuesday morning under the new presidency of Bulgaria. Mr. Nikolay Mladenov, Foreign Minister of Bulgaria, delivered a statement. The CD also heard Mr. Frank Rose, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Defense Policy and Verification Operations for the United States, present President Obama’s newly released national space policy. The delegations of Russia, Algeria, Brazil, and Canada addressed comments and questions to Mr. Rose after his intervention.

Highlights

• Mr. Frank Rose highlighted the new features in the US National Space Policy, such as that the US will consider space-related arms control concepts and proposals “that meet the criteria of equitability and effective verifiability, and which enhance the national security of the United States and its allies.”
• The Foreign Minister of Bulgaria, Mr. Nikolay Mladenov, stated that Bulgaria is assuming the Presidency of the CD during a time particularly rich of developments in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation, but despite this, the CD continues to be blocked by extreme precautions and mistrust that put procedural chains on its work.

The new US space policy
The new US space policy, consisting of principles, goals, and guidelines, was released last week. Mr. Rose stated that the new policy takes into account developments that have changed the issues facing the international space community and noted that it places more emphasis on expanding international cooperation; it encourages responsible action in space; it enhances openness and pursues new transparency and confidence-building measures; and protects critical space capabilities.

With regards to the issue on the CD agenda, prevention of an arms race in outer space, the new space policy states that the US shall pursue bilateral and multilateral transparency and confidence-building measures to encourage responsible action in, and the peaceful uses of, space. It also notes that the US will consider proposals and concepts for arms control measures if they are equitable, effectively verifiable, and enhance the national security of the US and its allies. As Mr. Rose noted, this is a significant departure from the 2006 policy and such position is “consistent both with long-standing and bipartisan U.S. space policy as well as with the verification standards that the United States has applied to other arms control agreements.” Mr. Rose also took the opportunity to reaffirm that the US supports the inclusion of a “non-negotiating, or discussion, mandate in any CD program of work” on this subject.

The presentation spurred some delegations to ask questions and make comments on the new space policy. Mr. Vasiliev from the Russian delegation wondered if this new space policy would mean that the US acknowledges that current legal norms and regulations are insufficient. Mr. Rose repeated that the US had not yet seen a space arms control agreement that meet the criteria that outlined in the policy on equitable and effectively verifiable, but emphasized that the US will work with all space faring nations on very effective near-term transparency- and confidence-building measures that would increase the long-term sustainability of space.

Ambassador Jazairy from Algeria questioned if Mr. Rose’s comment on “non-negotiating” was an expressed dissent to the current draft proposal contained in CD/1889, which contains a mandate to discuss substantively the issue of PAROS, “not excluding negotiations”. However, Mr. Rose reiterated the position of the US delegation which was expressed last week, that they do indeed support the language in CD/1889.

Ambassador Macedo Soares from Brazil addressed the two criteria for arms control agreements in space mentioned in the new policy—equitability and effective verifiability—and argued that equitability was difficult to attain. Ambassador Soares noted that if one country is far-ahead of others on both level of technology and science, as well as on volume of utilization of outer space, any commitment would be an equitable burden for that country. And if equitability were pursued, leading countries would never be able to negotiate and be party of an agreement.

Ambassador Grinius from Canada drew attention to the report of the UNIDIR space conference in March 2010, “From Foundations to Negotiations”, which the Canadian delegation had submitted as an official document to the CD. Ambassador Grinius highlighted that such initiatives from UNIDIR and its supporters was a substantive contribution to enrich and educate the delegations in the CD.

Is the CD still capable to do the job?
As new president of the CD, the Bulgarian delegation was joined by its foreign minister, who delivered a statement focusing on the frustrating lack of progress in the CD. Mr. Nikolay Mladenov argued that a world free of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction is a mission above politics and diplomacy, above national ambitions and personal egos. “Nothing, no fear, no suspicion, no perception of a single country or group of states should be in position to prevent us from undertaking most effective possible steps towards the ultimate goal of nuclear disarmament,” he stated. Mr. Mladenov expressed disappointment that developments in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation are taking place in the outside world, while the CD continues to be blocked by “extreme precautions and mistrust that put procedural chains on its work” and argued that the understanding of security have changed immensely in the last 12 years, while the CD and its agenda has remained the same. Mr. Mladenov argued that we should rethink the mechanisms that the CD offers to deal with disarmament and non-proliferation issues, and asked if the CD still is capable of creating and keeping the necessary amount of trust to make delegation sit down together and negotiate. However, he still attached great importance to the work of the CD, but argued for the need of a clear and comprehensive vision on multilateral disarmament machinery.

Notes from the gallery
The changes of the US space policy are significant and a clear improvement from the previous one, developed by the Bush administration in 2006. Instead of placing a narrow emphasis on the US only, the Obama administration policy returns to language used during the Clinton presidency and focuses on the US role in the international space community. It reflects a more pragmatic approach to the challenges facing all current and future space powers and highlights international cooperation as the appropriate way to find solutions. However, placing prerequisites, such as “equitable”, on any future arms control proposals has shown to be problematic for other issues, such as a fissile material (cut-off) treaty. Such concerns are better dealt with in actual negotiations, rather than before. However, if the CD could adopt the current draft programme of work, it is clear that discussions on initiatives and norms such as transparency- and confidence-building measures could start immediately, enabling the member states to pave the way for more concrete efforts in the future. Until then, we hope to see the US and all other delegations contribute to developing acceptable proposal for arms control measures in space in order to help turn another issue “ripe” for negotiations in the CD.

Next plenary meeting
The next plenary meeting, the last of the second session, will be held on Thursday, 15 July at 10:00am.

8 July 2010
A new draft programme of work, but the same challenges remain
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on Thursday morning for a final plenary under the Brazilian presidency. Ambassador Soares of Brazil introduced a new draft programme of work. Delegates from Canada, Mexico, Pakistan, Brazil, Germany, Algeria, Netherlands, Indonesia, Belarus, United States, United Kingdom, Chile, Syria, G21, and Australia delivered statements commenting on the new draft.

Highlights

• After a month of consultations, CD President Ambassador Macedo Soares presented a draft programme of work for the Conference, contained in CD/1889.
• The draft programme of work was not adopted during the plenary meeting, but no delegation officially opposed it.
• Canada, Mexico, Germany, the Netherlands, Belarus, the United States, the United Kingdom, Chile, and Australia expressed support for the draft.
• Pakistan, Algeria, Indonesia, Syria, and G21 did not explicitly support the proposal.

CD/1889
The CD President, Ambassador Macedo Soares of Brazil, introduced a new draft programme of work to the plenary meeting. He explained that he had attempted to test formulas that could encompass the concerns for the entire CD membership and presented the draft as being developed on basis the comments of delegations received during consultations on the previous draft, CD/WP.559, submitted by Belarus in March earlier this year.

CD/1889 has some significant changes from previous attempts. In the new draft, paragraph 1 (b), which establishes a working group that shall negotiate a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons, now also says “while taking into consideration all other matters related to fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices”.

The draft also modifies paragraph 1 (c). This paragraph, just like the previous drafts, calls for a working group to discuss substantively and without limitations issues related to the prevention of an arms race in outer space. However, it now also adds “not excluding the possibility of multilateral negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament” to the mandate of this working group.

In paragraph 3 (d), the draft now adds that the Conference recognizes the principle of “increased” and undiminished security for all.

Reactions to the draft
The proposal received support from the delegations of Canada, Mexico, Germany, the Netherlands, Belarus, the United States, the United Kingdom, Chile, and Australia. However, while no delegation formally opposed the draft yet, some delegations were not ready to accept it. Ambassador Akram from Pakistan stated that the draft was different from the one that had been discussed during the informal consultations and he therefore needed instructions from capital before being able to express Pakistan’s position. The Indonesian representative called it “a good starting point” but argued that there were some points in the proposal that he wished to see different. The Syrian delegation noted that the proposal was “decreasing the difference between us” and expressed hope that more consultations and transparency would lead to the adoption of a programme of work.

Ambassador Jazairy of Algeria noted that it was unfortunate that the Conference could not yet achieve consensus on the programme or work, but argued that this should not be seen as a failure, but rather as incapacity of the Conference to address the security concerns of delegations. He also noted that it was not right to say that one issue is ripe over another, since that means prioritising the concerns of one group over another. Ambassador Jazairy instead reiterated the need for reaching agreement on issues required to provide security for states and believed that when that was done, delegations could then move into negotiation mode.

A high-level solution to broken machinery
Ambassador Camacho of Mexico focused on the machinery, arguing that the CD should be seen as a vehicle or a tool rather than a purpose in itself. However, because “this tool has been totally broken and unusable,” he argued that delegations needed to explore the different alternatives that exist in the international community, in order to achieve what everyone wishes to attain, disarmament. Ambassador Camacho stated, “For Mexico it is clear cut, 100%, that this vehicle, this tool, this machinery is no longer responding neither to the current world situation or the needs of international peace and disarmament that we are experiencing today.” Ambassador Oyarce from Chile asked whether the right conditions existed outside the CD to conduct the work they could not fulfill inside this forum.

Both these delegations referred to the scheduled high-level meeting in September. Ambassador Oyarce argued that the meeting would be an opportunity to review and take stock of what the external conditions are right now and that it is time for an “exercise of thinking and reflecting”. Ambassador Camacho argued that this meeting would be an opportunity to address the machinery. and Ambassador Jazairy of Algeria suggested that the “very short” meeting could be used to discuss how to achieve consensus on a programme or work. Ambassador Jazairy also suggested that the CD should take the opportunity to discuss different views on expected outcomes of this meeting before the summer break, as it would be useful to have consultations on how to make the most of this opportunity.

Carlos Duarte, Director of the Department of International Organizations, Ministry of External Relations of Brazil, explained that the high-level meeting is not intended to circumvent the CD, but should support its work. He further reminded delegations that the political impetus would be more effective if the CD has already agreed on a programme of work by then. The German delegation reiterated this, and hoped that the CD would be able to deliver a positive message to the meeting in New York.

Notes from the gallery
The draft presented by the Brazilian ambassador is very similar to previous drafts. Contrary to previous suggestions reportedly made during the informal consultations, the draft retains the negotiating mandate for FMCT talks. However, it adds an opening for discussions on “other matters related to fissile material,” which is most likely a reference to stockpiles of fissile material. The draft also signals a possibility of multilateral negotiations on space issues in the CD.

Despite these small changes, the draft still does not seem to be acceptable to all states, and it is unclear whether there is room for any additional changes to be made. Delegations should realize that it is not necessarily in their best interest to hold out for a “perfect” programme of work. Government representatives often say to NGOs that one “should not let the best become the enemy of the good”. This advice applies to government delegations as well. One state’s priority will not necessarily be the priority of another’s. Compromises must be made on all items of the programme in order to move forward on any of them.

Despite being unable to reach consensus, the warm words from all delegations for the hard work carried out by the Brazilian president shows that his transparent approach is appreciated. We hope that the next president, Ambassador Ganev of Bulgaria, as well as all other CD delegates, will be continue to work in a transparent and engaged way and to be willing to make compromises in order to move forward.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting will be held on Tuesday, 13 July at 11.00am, where Mr. Nikolay Mladenov, the Foreign Minister of Bulgaria will address the Conference, and Mr. Frank Rose, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Defense Policy and Verification Operations in the United States will present the new US National Space Policy.

6 July 2010
Outer space and ICNND, but no word on a programme of work
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

On Tuesday morning, the Conference on Disarmament (CD) heard statements by delegates from Colombia, Brazil, Turkey, Australia, the Group of 21 (G21), China, and Japan.

Highlights

• The G21 called for negotiations in the CD on matters related to the prevention of an arms race in outer space.
• The CD welcomed the new ambassador of Colombia, Ms. Alicia Victoria Arango Olmos, and bid farewell to Ambassador Ahmet Üzümcü of Turkey, who will assume the position as Director-General of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
• Both Colombia and Turkey’s delegations highlighted the importance of the participation of civil society in the proceedings of the CD.
• Australia and Japan announced that the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament (ICNND) held its final meeting in Vienna yesterday and highlighted the final communiqué released from the Commission.

Outer space
In a joint statement delivered by the Indian delegation, the G21 argued that the need for prevention of an arms race in outer space (PAROS) has assumed greater urgency, due to legitimate concerns that existing legal instruments are inadequate to deter further militarization of outer space or prevent its weaponization. Ambassador Rao of India said that all states with major space capabilities have a special responsibility to contribute actively to PAROS and to refrain from actions contrary to that objective and to the relevant existing treaties. He further argued that the G21 is “deeply concerned over the negative implications of the development and deployment of anti-ballistic-missile defence systems and the pursuit of advanced military technologies capable of being deployed in outer space” and called for the CD to start negotiations on this subject. The G21 also welcomed the draft treaty on Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space (PPWT), submitted by Russia and China in 2008.

China’s delegation added its support for the G21 statement on outer space. While insisting that priority in the CD should be given to nuclear disarmament, Ambassador Arango Olmos of Colombia also emphasized the need for negotiations on PAROS and the other core issues of the CD.

The ICNND concludes its work
The delegations of Australia and Japan both drew attention to the fact that the ICNND concluded its final meeting on 5 July and highlighted a communiqué from the Commission. Mr. Wilson from Australia noted that a majority of the relevant recommendations of the Commission’s report had been reflected wholly, substantially, or in part in the Review Conference’s agreed action plans and pointed out that one of the Co-Chairs of the Commission was currently in Geneva discussing plans for a Global Centre for Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament. Ambassador Suda from Japan specifically pointed out two paragraphs in this communiqué that concerned the work of the CD, where the Commission expressed its deep concern at the failure of the CD to commence work on a fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT). In the communiqué, the Commission also called upon all states to resume cooperation on a substantive CD programme of work, and, pending conclusion of an FMCT, called on all states to maintain a moratorium on the production of fissile material for weapons use.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting will be held on Thursday, 8 July at 10:00 am.

29 June 2010
High-level meeting announced
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on Tuesday morning, where statements were delivered by the Group of 21 (G21), the informal group of observer states, Syria, France, Brazil and the Director General of UNOG, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze.

Brief highlights

• The Director General of UNOG, Mr. Ordzhonikidze announced that the Secretary-General has scheduled the high-level CD meeting in New York on 24 September 2010.
• The President of the CD revealed that he has informally proposed suggestions that could open the way to agreement on a programme of work, and that the informal consultations on this will continue.
• The G21 called for renewed efforts to achieve nuclear disarmament, and proposed a list of concrete steps, including negotiation of a Nuclear Weapons Convention.
• Syria argued that Israel’s launch of Ofek 9, a spy satellite with a high-resolution camera constituted aggression and should be condemned.

High-level meeting in New York
The Director-General of UNOG, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze announced that the UN Secretary-General has decided to convene a high-level CD meeting on 24 September in New York, as this was requested by the final outcome document of the 2010 NPT Review Conference. The meeting is intended to address issues on the effectiveness of the CD and how to promote multilateral disarmament in general. Mr. Ordzhonikidze also gave further details of the meeting such as a limiting its length to half a day, that the Secretary-General will chair the meeting, and that a Chairman’s summary will be produced. The invitations would go out to all UN member states, not just CD members or states parties to the NPT. In their joint statement, the group of observer states to the CD welcomed the high-level meeting and expressed particular appreciation for Austria’s support during the 2010 NPT Review Conference for amending the outcome text to include all UN member states in this meeting, instead of limiting it to CD members only. 

Progress on the work of the Conference?
The CD President, Ambassador Macedo Soares of Brazil, explained that his informal consultations would continue and noted that he had conducted over 60 individual meetings with delegations. During these meetings, he has informally proposed suggestions for a programme of work, in order to open the way for agreement by the Conference. Ambassador Macedo Soares announced that he is continuing the consultations in order to receive reactions and comments on his proposals. The Syrian ambassador, Mr. Faysal Khabbaz-Hamoui shared his conviction that the CD members are very close in their positions and that “the matter only needs some understanding and some mutual concessions in order to reach a programme of work.” Additionally, he pointed out that insisting on old positions would not be useful and would not move the CD forward. Both the CD President and Mr. Ordzhonikidze highlighted the importance adopting and implementing a programme of work by the time of the high-level meeting in September, as this would reinforce the deliberations there and provide more impetus and support for the Conference.

In addition to the many meetings with CD delegations that Ambassador Macedo Soares has carried out as CD President, the observer states expressed their appreciation for his initiative to convene the first informal meeting between a CD President and the observer states in recent years. Ambassador Phuangketkeow from Thailand, the coordinator of this group, stated that this meeting was informative and the high level of participation showed that the observer states are ready to be more involved in with the work of the Conference.

The issues on the CD agenda
Ambassador Hamid Ali Rao of India delivered two statements of behalf of G21, one on nuclear disarmament and one on negative security assurances. In its first statement, the G21 reiterated previous statements and positions, but also proposed a list of concrete steps that would promote the goal of nuclear disarmament. Such steps consisted of reaffirmation of the unequivocal commitments of the nuclear weapons states, elimination of the role of nuclear weapons in security doctrines, de-alerting and decreasing operational readiness of nuclear weapons, negotiations of legally binding negative security assurances, negotiations of a convention on the prohibition of the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons and negotiations of a Nuclear Weapons Convention. Ambassador Danon from France made a short comment where he regretted that this list of concrete steps by G21 had not once mentioned the negotiation of a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT).

The Syrian ambassador, Mr. Faysal Khabbaz-Hamoui, highlighted the Israeli launch of Ofek 9, a spy satellite with the ability to take high-resolution images of sensitive areas. The Syrian ambassador argued that it was a serious and aggressive escalation and that it showed a “definite desire” by Israel to proceed with an arms race. Ambassador Khabbaz-Hamoui further stated that such act was worthy of condemnation and that it was more important than ever to address the core issues of disarmament, including the prevention of an arms race in outer space, the militarization of outer space and the prevention of the utilization of space for launching acts of aggression or spying.

Notes from the gallery
One month after the NPT Review Conference’s call on the Secretary-General, the details about the high-level meeting in New York were announced. While a half-day meeting in New York will probably not be enough to solve the CD’s problems, it is an opportunity to raise awareness about the situation in Geneva and provide some fresh impetus to the Conference. If delegations would go to New York, not only for the high-level meeting but also for the First Committee of the General Assembly, with an adopted and implemented programme of work, it would send a signal to the international community that the CD still has a central role in multilateral disarmament. While the President’s suggestions for a programme of work have not yet been officially tabled, today’s comments on nuclear disarmament, NSAs, FMCT and outer space show that the diversions of priorities amongst delegations remain. So as the Brazilian ambassador is making a considerable effort to reach consensus, we hope that all delegations will show similar commitment and demonstrate enough flexibility for the CD to be able to start some form of substantive work on all four core items.

With only two more weeks of the second session, even an implemented programme of work would not be able to proceed much before it is time to wrap up and conclude the annual report to the GA. But through adopting and implementing a compromise, perhaps delegations can prepare the ground for real substantive progress in 2011, and thereby finally making the CD a relevant actor in multilateral disarmament again.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting will be held on Tuesday 6 July at 10:00 am.

22 June 2010
Nothing new from the CD
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met briefly on Tuesday morning. President of the CD, Ambassador Macedo Soares of Brazil, announced that he is still in the process of consulting all delegations individually on the possibility of adopting a programme of work. Such programme of work would preferably be adopted during his presidency but if not possible, during the subsequent one. While the President didn’t have any specific progress to report on, he stated that he was pleased with the conversations he had already carried out. No other delegation took the floor.

Informal meetings
While waiting for the bilateral consultations to produce results, the informal meetings on all agenda items are continuing. Tuesday and Wednesday will consist of discussions on agenda item 1 and 2, cessation of the nuclear arms race and prevention of nuclear war and will mainly involve talks about a fissile materials cut-off treaty (FMCT). The rest of the week will be devoted to agenda items 5, 6 and 7, which includes topics like new types of weapons of mass destruction, comprehensive programme of disarmament and transparency in armaments. However, as members of civil society are not allowed to participate in any of these meetings, Reaching Critical Will is unable to report and comment on the substantive discussions taken place.

Next plenary meeting
The next plenary meeting will be held on Tuesday, 29 June at 10.00.

15 June 2010
A new multilateral order in an old Cold War fora?
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on Tuesday, 15 June, where the Minister of External Relations of Brazil, Mr. Celso Amorim, delivered a statement on the occasion of the start of the Brazilian presidency of the CD. The delegations of Colombia on behalf of the Latin American Members and Observers of the CD, Iraq, Iran, Chile, Egypt, and Mexico also addressed the meeting.

Brief highlights

• The Brazilian Minister of External Affairs pointed out that nuclear weapons have no role in the peaceful, democratic, and prosperous world we all want to build and that the Cold War logic of the ability of mutual destruction must be left behind.
• Mr. Amorim also highlighted the nuclear cooperation deal signed between Turkey, Brazil, and Iran, arguing that despite the fact that the deal was based on proposals from the Vienna Group and acknowledged by many as worth pursuing, it has still not been given a chance to bear fruit.
• The CD welcomed three new ambassadors from Chile, Iraq, and Iran.
• The incoming CD President, Ambassador Soares of Brazil, noted that he would continue to work for the adoption of a programme of work in plenary meetings of the CD and announced that he would continue consultations with all delegations on this matter.

A new kind of multilateralism for nuclear disarmament
The Brazilian Minister of External Affairs, Mr. Celso Amorim, argued that the recent economic crisis has lead to an emerging consensus that international relations must be carried out through democratic decisions, with the participation of a broad and representative group of people. He suggested that the CD could spearhead a profound change by allowing for effective participation of developing countries and non-nuclear weapon states in matters like nuclear disarmament, pointing out that global governance is being rebuilt and that the world cannot be run by clubs of self-appointed decision-makers. Mr. Amorim also noted that the unfortunate identification of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council with the five nuclear weapon states recognized by the NPT renders decisions on such matters the object of a kind of “market reserve”.

Both Mr. Amorim and the new ambassador of Iran, Mr. Seyed Sajjadi, pointed out that the Cold War is over and that a change of mentality regarding nuclear weapons must take place. Ambassador Sajjadi argued that the international community cannot wait forever to witness the total elimination of nuclear weapons and Mr. Amorim argued that the world cannot achieve sustained security as long as proliferation is spurred by protracted action on nuclear disarmament and by continued modernization of nuclear arsenals. While welcoming promises of quantitative reductions in arsenals by nuclear weapon states, Mr. Amorim said he did not consider such steps to be enough and argued that cuts are being offset by qualitative improvement in nuclear forces, by the modernization of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems and by the roles ascribed for nuclear weapons in defence doctrines. Furthermore, Ambassador Sajjadi argued that modernization and deterrence policies in the field of nuclear weapons are of more concern than ever for the international community. He stated that Iran would resolutely follow the cause of nuclear disarmament particularly in the framework of the CD and requested that a programme of work enable the CD to commence negotiations on nuclear disarmament.

The Tehran Declaration
A week after the new round of sanctions against Iran were adopted by the UN Security Council, the Brazilian Minister of External Relations took the opportunity to comment on the Tehran Declaration and the reasons that inspired “two developing countries, non-permanent members of the Security Council, to dare deal with an issue of such relevance in the realm of international peace.” Mr. Amorim argued that his country, together with Turkey, aimed to find a formula that would ensure Iran’s right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy while providing assurances that its nuclear programme was for peaceful uses only. He noted that the deal was based on a proposal originally put forward by the Vienna Group, “taking into account the parameters that were repeatedly indicated to use as key to a confidence-building agreement.” Mr. Amorim stated that it was difficult for him to understand why this deal has not been given a chance to bear fruit and noted that whatever effects the new sanctions will have, “when the parties decide to go back to the negotiating table, they will face an even steeper challenge.” The Iranian ambassador did not comment on the new sanctions or the Tehran Declaration.

The work ahead of the CD
The incoming CD president, Ambassador Soares of Brazil, argued that the next step for the CD is still to adopt its programme of work for 2010. He explained that while proceeding with the schedule of informal meetings on all agenda items, he intended for the CD to address the matter of programme of work in plenary meetings and noted that he would carry out consultations with all delegations. Both the Egyptian and Mexican delegation took the floor to show support for the new CD president and ensured their support for his approach. Delegates of Iran, Iraq, Chile, and the Latin American member states and observers of the CD all noted the importance of the CD to resume its work. Iran’s ambassador called for negotiations to commence on all agenda items and Iraq’s delegation stated that they wished to see progress on all four core issues. Ambassador Oyarce of Chile also argued that civil society today has an integral part in the way modern multilateral fora works and said that the CD could not ignore this and should increase cooperation with civil society.

The Latin American member states and observers of the CD stated that they support any testing of mechanisms and alternatives for reaching consensus of a programme of work that would lead to conclusions of new instruments of disarmament and non-proliferation.

Notes from the gallery
As the informal discussions on all agenda items are going on in closed meetings, the members of the CD have an opportunity to continue exploring options and alternatives for adopting a programme of work in the plenary meetings. Open and transparent discussions on concrete proposals have been shown to be a more efficient approach to progress than holding meetings behind closed doors. While the informal meetings on issues like a fissile materials (cut-off) treaty are reportedly useful, not being able to draw any conclusions or carry out any reporting will hinder any discussions to formally move forward. Meanwhile, the prospect for achieving a programme of work has not seemed to have improved at this time. While the FM(C)T has been argued to be ripe for negotiations for a long time, it might be time to consider if the continued drive for such negotiations is worth the price the CD is paying right now. If an FM(C)T does not include existing stocks, and simply formalizes current moratoria on production, will its benefits be enough to justify the long stalemate and wasted resources in this body? If the CD is to “spearhead a profound change” as the Brazilian minister suggested, it will need to seriously consider not just its methods of work and agenda items but also its role and concept in building the new system of global governance described by Mr. Amorim.

Next plenary meeting
The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 22 June at 10.00.

11 June 2010
Still waiting for action, the CD’s resources continue depleting
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) held a short meeting on Friday morning to hear a statement from the Ukrainian Foreign Minister, Mr. Kostyantyn Gryshchenko, as well as the farewell speech from the Norwegian Deputy Representative, Ms. Hilde Skorpen, and a brief statement from the outgoing CD President, Ambassador Van Meewen of Belgium.

Brief highlights

• The Foreign Minister of Ukraine said he considers the CD one of the world’s most important multilateral forums and that it is crucially important to achieve consensus on the 2010 programme of work as soon as possible. The Foreign Minister also shared Ukraine’s position on the core issues of the CD.
• Ms. Hilde Skorpen from Norway made her final statement in the CD and took the opportunity to argue that the Conference should revisit the practice of regional groups.
• Outgoing President, Ambassador Van Meewen from Belgium noted that the agreement on a detailed schedule of activities should allow the CD to continue its work in a positive and constructive way, and attributed this outcome to the success of the 2010 NPT Review Conference.

Ukraine’s views on the CD agenda
Mr. Gryshchenko, Foreign Minister of Ukraine, highlighted his government’s commitment to get rid of all the stocks of highly enriched uranium and stated that this sent a clear message that Ukraine takes non-proliferation and disarmament seriously. He argued that Ukraine considered the Conference to be one of the world’s most important multilateral forums. As for making new achievements on the issues in front of the CD, he suggested that universality of the CTBT and the conclusion of a FMCT would be a tremendous step towards global nuclear disarmament. Mr. Gryshchenko also noted the need to develop a practical tool of ensuring negative security assurances, and called for the assurances outlined in UNSC resolution 984 to be reaffirmed in a multilateral legally-binding document. The Foreign Minister welcomed the draft treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space (PPWT), which was put forward by China and Russia in 2008, as a constructive initiative contributing to substantive discussions on this matter.

The state of the CD
In his final statement as outgoing president of the CD, Ambassador Van Meewen argued that after intensive discussions, he was happy to note that the CD had been able to agree on a detailed schedule of activities, and considered this important step to have been influenced from the success at the 2010 NPT Review Conference. Ambassador Van Meewen also reminded the CD of the call from the states parties of the NPT to start negotiations on a FMCT and argued that this call should not remain a dead letter.

However, in her farewell address, Ms. Hilde Skorpen of Norway said that she did not understand why an FMCT is the onlyissue considered ripe for negotiations. She stated that Norway considers nuclear disarmament to be the top priority. She also emphasized that it is vital that the humanitarian imperative is at the centre of the efforts in the CD. Recognizing that things looked pretty much the same as when she arrived in Geneva, Ms. Skorpen suggested that regional groupings might be part of the problem. She argued that sometimes states hide behind their groups. Noting that regional groupings do not exist in the rules of procedure, Ms. Skorpen suggested that the behaviour permitted by such groups prevents the issues from getting out in the open and being discussed and might prevent the CD delegations from finding compromises.

Notes from the gallery
During this week, the CD has held informal meetings on agenda items 1 and 2, mainly focusing on an FMCT. However, as many have said before, informal meetings can only take the Conference so far, and governments must really start finding ways to get the CD back to work. As the Brazilian delegation takes over the presidency next week, we hope that discussions on the programme of work continue to be discussed in a transparent way in plenary meetings, instead of in regional groups, where anonymous disagreement hinders real work.

The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom and its Reaching Critical Will project would like to send a special thank you to Ms. Hilde Skorpen and the Norwegian delegation for their strong support of our work. She will be missed and we wish her all the best in her new position. We also appreciate that Ms. Skorpen took the opportunity in today’s meeting to emphasize the vital role that NGOs play in disarmament. As she pointed out, most NGOs are dependent on voluntary contributions to continue our work. If you use Reaching Critical Will’s resources and services regularly, we would greatly welcome a contribution in order to ensure that the project and our organization continues to operate as you’ve come to expect—and to further grow and improve. Please read more about donating on our site.

Next plenary meeting
The next plenary meeting will be held on Tuesday, 15 June at 10.00, when the CD will hear from the Brazilian Minister for Foreign Affairs.

7 June 2010
The CD adopts a schedule of informal meetings
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on 7 June to discuss and adopt a working paper outlining the organization of informal debates as was discussed in the plenary last week. Ambassador Van Meeuwen, President of the CD, as well as the Group of 21, China, Algeria, Egypt, Pakistan, the United States, Brazil, the Secretary-General of the CD, Iran, and Italy delivered statements.

Brief highlights

• After the confusion last week, the CD today adopted working paper CD/WP.560, which contains the organization of informal meetings to be held on the agenda items. The paper includes a schedule for the meetings, with four meetings per agenda item, as well as the names the coordinators.
• Sweden and Algeria will coordinate four meetings each under agenda item 1 and 2, Brazil will coordinate the discussions on agenda item 3, Bangladesh will coordinate agenda item 4, Belarus will coordinate agenda item 5, Indonesia will deal with agenda item 6, and Finland will coordinate the informal meetings under agenda item 7.

WP.560
The President had circulated the draft schedule as an informal paper on Friday, 4 June, in order to accommodate the requests from some delegations expressed last week. However, the Group of 21 requested the informal paper to be submitted as an official draft proposal to the CD and argued that it should include the names of the coordinators. China supported the views of G21 and argued that the rules of procedure must be respected and without rules, the Conference would fall into chaos. The Ambassador of Pakistan argued that since the President had appointed the coordinators, they should have no role and no official status, and that the reports of the coordinators should have no status.

Ambassador Van Meeuwen of Belgium turned his letter from last Friday into a working paper and distributed to the CD. He explained that he had held further consultations since this morning on the working paper and each regional group had also held meetings to discuss the working paper and all had agreed on the coordinators for each item. The working paper was adopted at the close of the plenary.

The informal meetings on agenda item 1 and 2 started immediately in the afternoon and will continue throughout this week. The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Friday, 11 June.

3 June 2010
The NPT to ... ?
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) began the second part of its 2010 session on Thursday afternoon, 3 June. The US Assistant Secretary of State for Verification, Compliance, and Implementation, Rose Gottemoeller, and Director of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Department of Security and Disarmament, Ambassador Anatoly Antonov, briefed the CD on New START. The two chief negotiators also answered questions and heard comments from the delegations of Germany, Indonesia, Sweden, Syria, and Ireland.

During the plenary meeting that convened after the US-Russian briefing, the CD heard statements and interventions on the work of the CD from the delegations of Brazil, the Group of 21, Pakistan, Philippines, Belarus, the United States, Cuba, Syria, Algeria, and France. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Korea, and the United States also had an exchange over the situation on the Korean peninsula.

Brief highlights

• Pakistan’s ambassador argued that the FMCT is meant only to target Pakistan.
• The CD President announced that four informal meetings on agenda items 1 (cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament) and 2 (prevention of nuclear war) will be held on 7–10 June, specifically focusing on the issue of prohibiting the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons.
• The Pakistani delegation argued that the CD did not agree by consensus to these informal meetings and proposed that informal meetings should be held on all agenda items not just on fissile materials.
• The Group of 21, Algeria, Belarus, and Cuba supported this proposal.
• The US delegation said it would be happy to have informal discussions on any relevant issue.
• The meeting ended without resolving these questions, however. The first informal meeting on fissile materials will be held on Monday, 7 June but the next plenary where procedural issues would be discussed is not until Friday, 11 June.

New START
Russian Ambassador Antonov and US Assistant Secretary of State Gottemoeller gave two briefings on the details of the New START. As the CD members had the possibility to ask questions, many delegations welcomed the conclusion of this Treaty, but also expressed their interest in seeing further reductions. The two chief negotiators argued that New START establishes a baseline for further reductions and that predictability and confidence-building measures are important steps for further moves. Ambassador Antonov pointed out the imbalance of conventional weapons between the two countries as a problematic area for moving forward, but hoped that also this issue could be further discussed.

From the NPT to the CD
The delegates from Brazil and the Philippines reminded CD members of the final outcome of the 2010 NPT Review Conference, especially Action 6, Action 7, and Action 15. In these three actions, the NPT states parties agreed that the CD should start working in the context of an “agreed, comprehensive and balanced” programme of work, adding the word “agreed” to the usual phrase used to describe the desired programme of work. Brazil’s Ambassador Soares argued that all members of the CD that are parties to the NPT joined consensus on this text, and therefore those states are politically bound to seek adoption of a programme of work together with the entire membership of the CD. The Philippines representative argued that the success of the Review Conference lies in its transparent and inclusive process and suggested that perhaps the expansion of CD membership should be revisited.

Fissile materials
However, despite the calls on the CD to start negotiations on a fissile materials (cut-off) treaty (FM[C]T) by the NPT Review Conference, Ambassador Akram of Pakistan described the push for an FMCT as “artificial hype”. He argued that if one looks at obligations for non-nuclear weapon states under the NPT and the declared or informally pursued moratoria on fissile material production of the P5, it becomes clear that the FMCT is relevant only for countries outside the NPT. Ambassador Akram pointed out, “Out of those, two have special dispensations and arrangements and thus will have no impact on their nuclear weapons programmes. So the FMCT is only meant to target one country—Pakistan.”

Ambassador Danon of France responded, arguing that the FMCT would be a legal instrument with universal value. He pointed out that an FMCT would formally establish legal rules for the countries with a moratorium on production, provide an additional instrument for non-nuclear weapons in order to clarify the ambiguity of article II of the NPT, and curb production for non-NPT states. He also argued that a state that does not want to be a part of negotiations or become a party to a negotiated treaty can always chose not to.

Informal meetings in the CD
During the intersessional period, the current CD President, Ambassador Van Meeuwen of Belgium, proposed four informal meetings devoted to discussing the issue of fissile materials, in the absence of consensus on a programme of work. These meetings are scheduled to take place from 7 to 10 June. However, the Pakistani delegation raised objections, arguing that such meetings should be agreed upon the CD in accordance with the rules of procedure. Ambassador Akram said informal meetings should be convened after consultations with the CD members and with a complete schedule of proposed meetings. He explained that his delegation sent a letter to the CD President on 20 April, where it proposed informal meetings on all agenda items with a complete schedule.

The Group of 21, represented by the Egyptian delegation, suggested a similar solution. The delegations of Cuba and Belarus agreed that any informal debate should preserve a balance of the core issues and the Cuban delegation argued that such discussions must be held in a transparent way and in strict compliance with the rules of procedure. US Ambassador Kennedy said she believed that the President was acting within the rules of procedure in terms of suggesting the agenda item for informal meetings, but stated that the US delegation would be equally happy to engage in discussions on all agenda items, such as FMCT, space, security assurances, or a nuclear weapons convention. Ambassador Jazaïry from Algeria suggested that all seven agenda items should be discussed in parallel, through a timetable which future presidents of the CD would have to go along with.

As the clock turned 6:00 PM, with around 6 or 7 delegations left on the speakers list and the issue of informal meetings far from solved, the President announced that the remaining speaker would be able to continue in the next plenary meeting on Friday, 11 June, while the informal meetings on agenda items 1 and 2, chaired by representatives of member states in their personal capacity, would take place as planned on 7–10 June. Ambassador Van Meeuwen said he believed that organizing informal discussions among members of the Conference is one of the functions of the presidency. Despite a considerable attempt to get a chance to respond to this by the Ambassador of Pakistan, the President quickly closed the meeting and confusion arose among all CD members.

Notes from the gallery
From the gallery, it seemed that the conclusion of the meeting meant that the debate on rules of procedure and the strong opposition of informal meetings on FMCT will continue after the informal meetings on FMCT have already taken place. This appears to be an odd strategy in a body where procedural disagreement has been used to impede the ability to commence work for over a decade and the rules of procedure are frequently used to stall progress. While Reaching Critical Will had hoped that the CD could continue the meeting tomorrow and attempt to agree on a schedule of informal meetings covering all agenda items, it is unclear what will happen on Monday morning at the first scheduled meeting on FMCT.

A first draft of the disarmament action plan at the NPT Review Conference gave the CD until 2011 to start working. According to this draft, if work had not started in the CD by then, states parties would let the UN General Assembly determine how its work should be pursued. This language did not enjoy consensus and was removed in subsequent drafts, but it shows that patience with the CD is running out.

Next plenary meeting
The next plenary meeting was announced for Friday, 11 June at 10:00 AM. The Conference will then hear a statement by the Foreign Minister of Ukraine.

23 March 2010
Disarmament is the priority, not the Conference
Beatrice Fihn and Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met for the final plenary meeting of its first session of 2010 on Tuesday morning. The CD heard a statement from the new US ambassador to the CD, Ms. Laura Kennedy, as well as from Ambassador Grinius of Canada and from a new formal group consisting of observer states to the CD. The CD president indicated that bilateral consultations on a programme of work would continue throughout the intercessional period.

Highlights

• The new US ambassador to the CD declared that the US Nuclear Posture Review will further reduce the number and role of nuclear weapons.
• Ambassador Kennedy also argued for the necessity of commencing negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT), stating that it would reduce dangers of nuclear attacks, provide a foundation for future disarmament efforts, and promote transparency and stability.
• The Canadian ambassador argued that the CD must adjust to today’s multi-polar work and that it might require new ways forward.
• The Croatian delegation spoke on behalf of a newly formed group of 21 observer states, emphasizing the need for more transparent information to observers as well as serious consideration for expanding membership of the CD.

New US ambassador
Ambassador Laura Kennedy made her first statement to the CD this morning, declaring that the US will continue to significantly reduce their nuclear arsenal and that the forthcoming Nuclear Posture Review will reduce both numbers and the role of nuclear weapons in US national security strategy.

Urging the CD to begin negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty, Ambassador Kennedy argued, “Before reducing arms, we have to top increasing them [emphasis added].” She said that while such a treaty is no longer necessary “to halt the Cold War arms race, it would consolidate the arms control gains made since the end of the Cold War.” Noting that a verifiable FMCT will be “an important foundation” for the confidence to eliminate nuclear weapons globally, she indicated the United States’ interest in participating in substantive discussions all the CD’s core issues while we commencing negotiations on an FMCT.

Observer states organizes themselves
A group of 21 current observer states to the CD formed on 9 March, with the aim of becoming members of the CD as a medium-term goal, but also to improve their access to information regarding the work of the CD in the immediate future. Ms. Danijela Zunec Brandt from the Croatian delegation notified the CD about the creation of this group and stated that they had provided the CD president with a paper suggesting that briefings by each president of the CD and observer states should take place for the rest of the 2010 session. In their statement, the group of observer states argued that “the modalities of including or informing interested Observer States of developments in the CD by their respective regional groups vary greatly.” Ms. Zunec Brandt also noted that according to the rules of procedure, the CD should review its membership at regular intervals, and argued that the 11 years that have passed since the last expansion cannot be seen as a regular interval. The group of observer states also stated that while some might argue that there is no place for discussing the enlargement of the CD when consensus cannot be reached on a programme of work, “it might not be an accident that the stalemate in the CD coincides somewhat with the stalemate in its enlargement.”

End of the first session: ways forward
As the CD wrapped up the first part of its 2010 session, Ambassador Marius Grinius of Canada stated that it was time to take stock of where the CD stands and look to the future. He argued that the failure to act on two consensus agreements of last year, CD/1864 and A/RES/64/29, has resulted in fears that consensus on a programme of work in the CD may not be achievable any time soon. As the CD moves into a two month break now, he noted that in today’s multi-polar world, the CD still operates in “archaic regional groups,” where 65 potential vetoes can block work at any time. Ambassador Grinius argued that member states should take these two months to examine “alternative ways forward outside of this body,” noting that the most important word in the CD is “disarmament,” not the word “conference”.

The president of the CD did not discuss such new approaches, but rather stated that he was currently preparing a plan that will provide for bilateral consultations with all members of the conference, taking place as quickly as possible in Geneva and in New York during the NPT Review Conference.

Notes from the gallery
As the first session of the CD ends, it is extremely disappointing that member states cannot agree on a programme of work in the light of last year’s accomplishments. There have been some positive steps forward in the last few months, such as the decision to let WILPF read out the international women’s day statement, the decision to carry out consultations on further enhanced participation of civil society, and today’s announcement that observer states are organizing themselves to take a more active role in the work of the CD. However, such positive steps do not mean that the CD can spend another 11 years in deadlock. We agree with Ambassador Grinius of Canada that the delegations in Geneva need to consider new ways to move forward in order to make substantive progress on disarmament.

Next meeting
The second part of the CD’s 2010 session will be held between 31 May and 16 July.

16 March 2010
Back to shadow-fighting?
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met briefly on Tuesday morning to hear a short statement on the draft programme of work from the incoming CD President, Ambassador Alex Van Meeuwen of Belgium.

Ambassador Van Meeuwen made some short introductory remarks concerning the draft programme of work, CD/WP.559, which was tabled by the outgoing president last week. He announced that the draft decision on a programme of work does not enjoy consensus and that he would continue consultations between the six presidents and resume multilateral discussions in the second part of the CD’s 2010 session. Ambassador Van Meeuwen finished by reminding delegates what UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said to the CD in May 2009, that we live in an era of interdependency and that crises must be answered through multilateralism and cooperation. Ambassador Van Meeuwen argued that the CD therefore must not allow itself to put pointless and damaging obstacles in front of the noble goal of a world free of nuclear weapons.

Notes from the gallery
After a comprehensive and open debate on Thursday, the CD seems to have run out of steam this week. While further consultations indeed are needed, we hope that those countries that voiced concerns about the draft programme of work last week will submit concrete proposals that can contribute to moving the CD forward. There are only two weeks left of the first part of the CD's 2010 session. Since the next plenary meeting is not scheduled until Tuesday, 23 March, it is important that CD members make efforts to avoid returning to the usual business of silent disagreement and continued stalemate behind closed doors. The openness and transparency of the discussion last week was not only appreciated by civil society, but received widespread support from delegations. As Ambassador Van den Ijssel from the Netherlands stated last week, “after a period of shadow-fighting, it is important that we are out in the open.” In order to not move backwards and let yet another session conclude without progress, there must be a serious attempt to continue discussing specific measures to improve the draft programme of work. We hope that the CD can make an effort to achieve such improvements of CD/WP.559 and begin substantive work immediately.

Notes from the outside world
This week, we include a contribution from Christophe Barbey, coordinator at APRED, a research institute aiming at making peace by peaceful means and at promoting the non-violence of institutions of all sorts:

In this world, we think that everyone is responsible for a bit of the peace of everyone else. We are also convinced that, progressively, a global peace is the only safe way to assure a future for mankind, as well as a fair life to all its members. However, we think that at the Conference on Disarmament, as the only permanent body addressing matters of arms control, you have a special responsibility to assure this future of peace and well-being. We therefore follow you work closely and regularly and wish you progress and success.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Tuesday, 23 March at 10:00 AM.

11 March 2010
The CD debates the draft programme of work
Beatrice Fihn and Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on Thursday morning to debate the draft programme of work that the CD President, Ambassador Khvostov of Belarus, presented on Tuesday, 9 March. The CD heard comments from Brazil, the European Union, Canada, Mexico, Argentina, the Eastern European Group, Iran, Ukraine, Poland, Ireland, Russian Federation, Germany, France, United States, United Kingdom, Switzerland, New Zealand, Netherlands, India, Sweden, Italy, Republic of Korea, Hungary, China, South Africa, Syria, Sri Lanka, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, Indonesia, Colombia, Pakistan, Australia, Malaysia, Viet Nam, Japan, Austria as well as both outgoing President, Mr. Khvostov of Belarus and incoming President, Ambassador Van Meeuwen of Belgium.

Highlights

• The draft programme of work contain in CD/WP.559 received widespread support from the majority of delegations.
• Many of those delegations that supported CD/WP.559 also stated that they were ready to engage in constructive proposals made in good faith for amending the document in order for it achieve consensus.
• Pakistan’s delegation reiterated its opposition to the draft and took the opportunity to counter some of the arguments made by other delegations.

Views on CD/WP.559
In an open and transparent exchange of views, 39 delegations shared their thoughts on the draft. A majority of delegations declared their support for the proposal as it stands. The delegation of Brazil took the lead in expressing its support for CD/WP.559, and was followed by the European Union, Canada, Mexico, Argentina, Eastern European Group, Ukraine, Poland, Ireland, Russian Federation, Germany, France, the United States, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, New Zealand, Netherlands, India, Sweden, Italy, Republic of Korea, Hungary, Colombia, Turkey, Australia, Malaysia, Viet Nam, Japan, and Austria.

A smaller group of delegations from Group of 21—Syria, Iran, Sri Lanka, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, and Indonesia—while not publicly opposing the draft, argued that it could be improved. They reiterated that they prioritize nuclear disarmament and referred to the G21 statement delivered to the CD on 2 February. This statement called upon the CD to establish “an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament as soon as possible and as the highest priority” and emphasized “the necessity to start negotiations on a phased programme for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons with a specified framework of time, including a Nuclear Weapons Convention.”

Most of these delegations also called for a treaty on fissile materials to advance both disarmament and non-proliferation objectives. Ambassador Badr of Egypt argued this “would only be achieved through the inclusion of stocks.” He explained that his delegation would delegation would like to see language reflecting this position in the programme of work. The Iranian delegation agreed that a fissile material (cut-off) treaty should include past and future production and existing stocks and verification in order to “be a clear and meaningful step for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation in all its aspects.” It also suggested that the programme of work should start negotiation on all four main issues.

The Chinese delegation neither endorsed nor rejected the draft programme. Ambassador Wang commended the efforts of the CD president but agreed with those who had pointed out that differences still remain. He expressed hope for open and transparent negotiations to “bridge differences and address the concerns of each country.”

The main opposition
In his statement of 18 February, the Pakistani ambassador laid out the underlying reasons for his delegation’s opposition to a programme of work similar to CD/1864, referencing regional security issues and the US-India nuclear deal and the Nuclear Supplier’s Group exception for nuclear trade with India. Today, Ambassador Akram of Pakistan emphasized that from his delegation’s perspective, a fissile material (cut-off) treaty is only considered ripe for negotiations because it “is or will be cost free for the nuclear weapons states” that have assembled huge arsenals of nuclear weapons and do not need to produce any more fissile material.

Regarding the negotiation of other issues, Ambassador Akram noted that even though “the high and mighty of the powerful of this world have themselves acknowledged an agenda for nuclear disarmament,” they cannot seem to “agree to initiating those negotiations on nuclear disarmament in this forum, whose raison d’être is nuclear disarmament.” He argued that if the rhetoric issued outside the CD is true then the nuclear weapon states “should have no hesitancy in initiating negotiating nuclear disarmament in the Conference on Disarmament either.”

Regarding the references to Article 27 of the CD’s Rules of Procedure, which states the CD must take into account the recommendations of the UN General Assembly, Ambassador Akram argued that the CD cannot be selective in its choice of which resolutions it pays attention to—noting that the General Assembly has also recommended the CD negotiate a treaty on nuclear disarmament, negative security assurances, and the prevention of an arms race in outer space.

Comments to the opposing arguments
The US delegation stated that it sees no limit or prejudgement in the current proposal, and emphasized that CD/WP.559 does not preclude any future possibilities of negotiations on other agenda items. Ambassador Larson declared that his delegation is ready to engage on all agenda items.

Many delegations pointed out that they were ready to engage in constructive proposals for amending CD/WP.559. Ireland’s representative stated that any amendments must make an effort to achieve consensus, not to move away from it. This was echoed by Switzerland’s delegate, who argued that such proposals must “not just state national positions, but instead help to reach consensus.” Several speakers raised the fact that the proposed draft programme of work actually contains a mandate to conduct work on all agenda items. Ambassador Hellgren of Sweden pointed out that the draft does not close any doors for more ambitious work in the future, while Ambassador Hoffmann from Germany argued that the draft contains “a very elaborate and differentiated approach to many of the issues on the CD agenda” and as such leaves many options open for the future. He emphasized, “It is not only a work programme on FMCT negotiations.” Ambassador Hoffman also noted that if there is a need to flush out the language for the other agenda items, his delegation is willing to look at such proposals.

Transparency and accountability
Many delegations expressed appreciation for the transparent and open discussion today. While the draft programme still only achieves “near-consensus,” by tabling it, the CD has something concrete to work with. Ambassador Van den Ijssel from the Netherlands stated, “after a period of shadow-fighting, it is important that we are out in the open.”

It is also encouraging that this debate took place in a formal plenary meeting, and many delegations argued for the importance of conducting these discussions in a transparent way. China’s ambassador echoed others view of the need of transparent and open consultations, stating, “It helps us to bridge and address concerns of issues.” Ambassador Hoffmann from Germany said it is a good thing that Pakistan’s specific grievances are out in the open, arguing that the international community has a right to know what governments’ positions are and why they hold them.

Ambassador Hoffman also raised an important point by highlighting the fact that the general public does not seem to be aware of what is going on in the CD. He stated that “most probably the public assumes that the sheer fact of sessions taking place year-in-year-out at the Conference on Disarmament surely can only mean that serious disarmament work is going on here” and that “many would be flabbergasted to learn that since the negotiation of the CTBT the CD has basically only been discussing what it should do next and many would be surprised to really understand what complex sets of blockages, linkages and policies of pre-conditions and respective policies of denying requested clarifications were at the heart of this unsatisfactory situation.” He argued that making the public aware of the situation should be enough reason to strengthen the role and positions of NGOs in the CD.

What’s next?
The Brazilian ambassador noted that in the culture of the CD, absence of consensus is taken as inevitably leading to paralysis and as soon as one or more delegations express objections, all further efforts are suspended. Ambassador Soares reminded the CD that while the Rules of Procedure require consensus for the taking of decisions, they do not prohibit that further negotiations be conducted in order to circumvent divergences.

Ambassador Van den Ijssel of Netherlands stated, “if we cannot agree on this, we have to look elsewhere,” and declared that the CD could not waste another year. Mr. Vasiliev from the Russian Federation suggested that thematic debates should be held while the CD continues to work on a programme of work. While stating that this was an interesting idea, Ambassador Lauber from Switzerland argued that it must not distract delegations from solving the problem of a programme of work. India’s Ambassador Rao argued that discussions on the sidelines cannot be considered as negotiations and cannot be binding upon CD member states.

Notes from the gallery
While the programme of work is a procedural document, it is well known that core substantive issues are behind this decade long stalemate over its adoption. While Reaching Critical Will shares the view that a treaty on fissile materials should be a both a disarmament and non-proliferation treaty and should include existing stocks, we also recognize that continued stalemate in the CD will not lead to any improvement in international security or progress for disarmament. The CD has not negotiated anything in the last decade. Continued blockage of the programme of work will not help solve move the world any closer to nuclear disarmament.

CD/WP.559 is not a perfect document. We would be delighted to see negotiations on a nuclear weapons convention take place—the issues of fissile materials in all their aspects would be better dealt with within the framework of a nuclear weapons convention. However, we believe that the creation of structured discussions on nuclear disarmament in a formal working group as described in CD/WP.559, as well as discussions on negative security assurances, prevention of an arms race in outer space, and negotiations on a fissile material treaty, would be a significant improvement to the current stalemate in the CD. Once negotiations have started, there is no reason that delegations have to accept a treaty that does not address existing stocks. The course of negotiations will provide delegations with the opportunity to craft a strong disarmament treaty and will also provide civil society with much better opportunities to engage their governmental representatives to push on specific elements, such as stocks and verification.

Next plenary meeting
The next plenary meeting, the first under the Belgian Presidency, is not scheduled yet but will be announced shortly by the CD Secretariat.

9 March 2010
International Women?s Day and the introduction of a draft programme of work
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

During its 1077th plenary meeting, the Conference on Disarmament (CD) heard for the first time a statement read out by an NGO in a formal plenary. The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom delivered this statement on the occasion of International Women’s Day. The delegations of Croatia, the Russian Federation, and Pakistan welcomed the statement. The CD President, Ambassador Khvostov of Belarus, officially tabled a draft programme of work for the 2010 session, which the ambassador of Pakistan remarked upon.

Highlights

• The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) delivered a statement in a formal plenary meeting for the first time in the CD’s history.
• The President of the CD, Ambassador Khvostov of Belarus, tabled a draft programme of work for the CD to consider.
• Ambassador Akram of Pakistan argued that the draft programme of work did not have consensus and did not take into consideration the views of G21.
• The Russian delegation celebrated International Women’s Day by handing out flowers to all women in the room.

International Women’s Day
WILPF’s statement to the CD, read out by the project associate of Reaching Critical Will, Ms. Beatrice Fihn, emphasized women’s role in peace, security, and disarmament. The statement tied UN Security Council Resolution 1325 to the work of the CD and to nuclear disarmament in general. WILPF argued that consideration of gender issues and gender analysis is needed to reform traditional behaviours and values expressed in negotiations on nuclear weapons. The statement also questioned the efficiency of nuclear weapons to bring true security to human beings all over the world, arguing that such weapons are unable to adequately deal with the most pressing threats we face today, such as climate change, terrorism, food, water and energy shortages, and global economic disparity. Therefore, the economic, political and human resources that are put in to these weapons could be better used for efforts to combat more pressing global threats.

The delegations of Croatia, the Russian Federation, and Pakistan welcomed the statement. Ms. Danijela Zunec Brandt from Croatia agreed that UN Security Council Resolution 1325 is an important document and argued that in line with this resolution, WILPF has not only advanced the role of civil society in the CD, but equally so the role of women in the area of disarmament, peace, and security. The Russian delegation echoed its statement from last week and distributed flowers to all the women on the floor in the CD chamber.

A draft programme of work
After circulating an informal draft programme of work two weeks ago, the CD President presented a formal draft programme today. The draft is based on the informal document and establishes identical working groups as in the programme of work from the 2009 session, CD/1864. Ambassador Khvostov said, “it is not an ideal document, but it is a proposal,” and argued that it is a constructive way of reanimating the Conference and giving it new impetus. He indicated that rather than discussing the document today, he would let delegations familiarize themselves with the draft and consult with their capitals.

However, Pakistan’s Ambassador Akram took the floor, arguing that the draft proposal is mainly a copy of CD/1864 and that since this document no longer had consensus, Ambassador Akram wondered why the President had tabled such document. He further stated that the proposal is neither balanced nor comprehensive, and that it does not take into account the views and suggestions from Pakistan and G21. Such proposals have included suggestions “to establish an ad hoc committee for deeper negotiations on nuclear disarmament which is the raison d’être of the Conference,” or to “undertake substantive work on measures to reduce the risks of unintentional and accidental use of nuclear weapons, including through de-alerting and de-targeting of nuclear weapons.”

Ambassador Akram continued his critique of the draft proposal by arguing that it mixes issues of the programme of work and its implementation, which his delegation thinks should be dealt with separately. He finished his intervention by reiterating his delegation’s view that “the nuclear cooperation agreement signed by the nuclear weapons states has rendered the FMCT ineffective even before the commencement of its negotiations,” and that the CD must not be held hostage or hijacked by the FMCT issue.

Notes from the floor
It was a welcome change to be able to interact with delegations directly on the floor of the Council Chamber today. The physical distance between the floor and the gallery does have a negative impact on our opportunities to share views and opinions with the members of the CD. While the decision to let us speak today was taken without setting a precedent for the future, we hope that civil society will have more opportunities to participate directly in the work of the CD.

The draft programme of work circulated today is indeed a very similar document to CD/1864. While some delegations criticize this, it is impossible to ignore the fact that only 10 months ago, this document had consensus in the CD. While civil society shares Pakistan’s concerns about the US-India nuclear deal and subsequent Nuclear Suppliers Group exemptions for trade with India, Reaching Critical Will believes that these events make it even more important to conclude a treaty than bans the production of fissile material for weapons purposes. In a world where nuclear energy is promoted as a solution to threatening climate change, we must be aware of the link between nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. Governments and industry should refrain from promoting nuclear power as a mean to combat climate change, but in the meantime, it is crucial to conclude a comprehensive and verifiable fissile material treaty that includes a provision for existing stocks. We urge all delegations to refrain from letting the CD remain in deadlock, since continued stalemate will not further nuclear disarmament or international security in any way.

Next plenary meeting
The next plenary meeting will be held on Thursday, 11 March at 10:00 AM.

5 March 2010
The Conference hears from Foreign Minister of Kazakhstan
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on Friday morning to hear from the Foreign Minister of Kazakhstan, Mr. Kanat Saudabayev. He pointed out that Kazakhstan voluntarily renounced the world’s fourth largest nuclear arsenal and shut down the nuclear test site at Semipalatinsk, making the case that Kazakhstan’s model of disarmament could be an example for others.

Mr. Saudabayev also argued that the world must overcome the stagnation in the global disarmament process and highlighted the Washington summit on nuclear security in April and the NPT Review Conference in May as key events for a possible breakthrough. In terms of the Review Conference, he argued for the development of “clear mechanisms of putting pressure on those nuclear-weapon states that are operating outside of the framework of the NPT and to prevent withdrawal from the Treaty.”

He also brought to the Conference’s attention to the many efforts to enhance nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament that Kazakhstan has pursued, such as encouraging the entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and its initiative for 29 August to become the International Day against Nuclear Tests; institutionalization of the Central Asian Nuclear Weapons Free Zone; participating in the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism; and being party to such regimes as the Hague Code of Conduct, the Krakow Initiative, the Nuclear Suppliers Group, and the Zangger Committee.

With regards to the agenda of the CD, Mr. Saudabayev argued that the peaceful use of outer space is one of its most pressing items. Due to Kazakhstan’s involvement in international space cooperation, much due to hosting the Baikonur cosmodrome, Mr. Saudabayev argued, “outer space must remain a central concern of the Conference,” and called “for strict observance of the principle of peaceful activities in outer space.” He also supported the commencement of negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty and argued that it is time to proceed on the elaboration of international legally-binding negative security assurances.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 9 March at 10:00 AM, when the CD will hear a statement by the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom on the occasion of the International Women’s Day.

4 March 2010
Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan addresses the CD
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

On Thursday morning, the Conference on Disarmament (CD) heard a statement from Ms. Chinami Nishimura, the Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan. She talked about 2010 as a critical juncture toward the realization of a world free of nuclear weapons and argued that the CD must get down to work and fulfill its primary role as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum of the world.

Practical and concrete measures for nuclear disarmament
As the only country to ever experience atomic bombings, Ms. Nishimura referred to Japan’s moral responsibility to take the lead in the pursuit of the elimination of nuclear weapons. She outlined the measures that Japan has taken to this end, such as submitting the General Assembly resolution A/RES/64/47 on “Renewed determination towards the total elimination of nuclear weapons,” promoting the entry to force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and initiatives to universalize the IAEA Additional Protocol, and supporting disarmament and non-proliferation education in civil society.

Ms. Nishimura emphasized that in order to eliminate nuclear weapons, practical and concrete measures must be implemented. She highlighted three such steps;

• Concrete nuclear disarmament steps by all nuclear weapon states in a transparent, irreversible, and verifiable manner;
• Achieving entry into force by the CTBT; and
• The commencement and conclusion of negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty in the CD.

Ms. Nishimura also stated that Japan and Australia will pursue a package proposal of practical nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation measures for the upcoming NPT Review Conference in May. She indicated that this package will take into account the report of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Friday, 5 March at 10:00 AM, when the Conference will hear a statement of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Kazakhstan, Mr. Kanat Saudabayev.

3 March 2010
Romanian Secretary of State addresses the CD; a look at the draft programme of work
Beatrice Fihn and Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on Wednesday afternoon to hear a statement from Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Secretary of State of Romania. Also in this report, Reaching Critical Will takes a look at the draft programme of work circulated to delegations last week.

The importance of multilateralism
In his statement, Mr. Aurescu, Secretary of State of Romania, emphasized the current “positive approach” for multilateral efforts in disarmament and non-proliferation and supported the role of the CD as a major framework for nuclear issues and for its value for international peace and security. Referring to US President Obama’s “vision of a world free of weapons of mass destruction,” Mr. Aurescu argued that everyone shares the responsibility for turning this vision into reality. He suggested a number of ways to advance this agenda, including negotiating a fissile material cut-off treaty; securing entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty; engaging in “open and fruitful” debates on the prevention of an arms race in outer space; and approaching the NPT Review Conference “in a structured and balanced way”.

Mr. Aurescu also noted that a long-term success of strengthening the non-proliferation regime would require the nuclear weapon states to reduce stockpiles and their reliance on nuclear weapons in their military doctrines. Finally, the Romanian Secretary of State said that in today’s world, peace and security should be addressed from a global perspective. He argued that is a need for a multilateral security system that is based on cooperation, noting, “it is high time for the Conference on Disarmament to make a contribution towards this end.”

Draft programme of work
Last week, CD President Ambassador Khvostov of Belarus circulated a draft programme of work to the regional coordinators. The draft programme is an amalgamation of CD/1864, the 2009 programme of work, and CD/1870/Rev.2, the draft implementation framework that was not adopted last year.

As in CD/1864, the preamble specifies that the work programme “does not prejudice any past, present or future position, proposal or priority of any delegation, nor any commitment undertaken in any other multilateral fora related to disarmament.” The draft establishes working groups identical to those in CD/1864:

• discussions on “practical steps for progressive and systematic efforts to reduce nuclear weapons with the ultimate goal of their elimination, including on approaches toward potential future work of a multilateral character;”
• negotiations on a “treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, on the basis of the document CD/1299 of 24 March 1995 and the mandate contained therein;”
• discussions “without limitations” on the prevention of an arms race in outer space; and
• discussion on negative security assurances “without limitations, with a view to elaborating recommendations dealing with all aspects of this agenda item, not excluding those related to internationally legally binding instrument.”

The draft also appoint special coordinators to “seek the views of Members on the most appropriate way to deal with” the issues on:
new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons; radiological weapons;
comprehensive programme of disarmament;
transparency in armaments;

Combining CD/1864 and CD/1870/Rev.2, the new draft programme explains that the working groups and special coordinators will consider all views and not prescribe or preclude any outcome, “including the possibility of future negotiations.” The document adds that the conduct of work and decision-making, including the adoption of reports, “will comply with the Rules of Procedure of the Conference, including, inter alia, paragraph 18 thereof.” Paragraph 18 stipulates that the CD “shall conduct its work and adopt decisions by consensus.” The draft programme also adds that the CD “will aim at ensuring a balanced consideration of all agenda items while recognizing the principle of undiminished security for all.”

Notes from the gallery
So far, delegations have not commented on the draft programme of work during a formal plenary meeting. Consultations are ongoing. While we look forward to the discussion on the participation of civil society in the work of the Conference, we hope this will not distract delegations from engaging in substantive work during the first part of the CD’s 2010 session. We look forward to hearing delegation’s reactions to the programme of work currently on the table.

Notes from the world
In this report, we include a contribution from Susi Snyder of IKV Pax Christi and former Secretary General of WILPF:

The decision taken by the CD to allow the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom to present the annual International Women’s Day statement itself is a welcome one. The statement has been heard in the CD for over 25 years, read first by the Secretary General of the Conference, and then, since 2005, by the rotating CD President. In 2005, the International Women’s Day statement suggested that “increased dialogue with and participation of NGOs in all disarmament efforts will facilitate a much broader, more comprehensive understanding of security, one that can form the basis of a windfall of new security agreements and treaties. The stalemate in moving disarmament forward must be broken now.”

There has been a marked increase in the role of civil society in other security discussion fora—including the UN General Assembly, the increasing use of “Arria formula” meetings for the UN Security Council, and not least, the demonstrative impact of civil society on negotiations of the Convention on Cluster Munitions. As has been heard often this year, the CD does not operate in isolation. The actions or lack thereof that the CD takes have a global security impact. It is about time that an alternative voice is heard in the CD plenary, hopefully it will inspire action for the security of all.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Thursday, 4 March at 10:00 AM.

2 March 2010
CD makes historic decision about the International Women's Day statement
Beatrice Fihn and Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met in both the morning and the afternoon on Tuesday, 2 March. The Conference heard high-level statements from the Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs of the Republic of Korea, Mr. Hyun Cho, and the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ireland, Mr. Micheál Martin. The Conference also heard a debate on civil society involvement, leading to a historical decision taken by the members of the CD to allow the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) to read out the annual International Women’s Day statement, instead of having it read by a CD delegate.

Highlights

• After a debate started by the Norwegian delegation, the CD took a historical decision to allow civil society for the first time to address the Conference in a formal plenary meeting. The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom will read out the International Women’s Day statement on Tuesday, 9 March. The delegations of Algeria, Canada, Sweden, Austria, Ireland, Syria, Germany, Mexico, Netherlands, Pakistan, the Russian Federation, Brazil, Switzerland, and Colombia voiced their support for this decision. The US ambassador supported the decision but emphasized that this instance should be considered an exception and not create a precedent.
• Some delegations suggested that the CD should engage in a broader debate on civil society participation in the Conference. The President of the CD said that he would hold informal consultations on the future work of civil society in the CD.
• Due to the 11th anniversary of the entry into force of the Mine Ban Treaty, the Norwegian representative emphasized the success of this disarmament treaty and pointed at the lessons learned from humanitarian disarmament efforts. She also emphasized that powerful alliances can be made between governments and civil society.
• Ireland’s Minister for Foreign Affairs indicated his country’s commitment to work on translating rhetoric into reality at the NPT Review Conference by working for genuine progress on the UN Secretary-General’s five-point plan and for commitments to concrete steps to implement the Treaty and previous NPT decisions.
• The Republic of Korea's Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs also urged firm commitments from the NPT Review Conference.

A historical decision
Since 1984, WILPF has linked 8 March—International Women’s Day—with disarmament, peace, and security issues. Each year, a statement has been read into the record of the CD, providing the only official oral contribution from NGOs to this body. For many years, there has been a broad cross-regional support for this statement to be delivered by its authors and today, the CD agreed on this by consensus. The Norwegian representative, Ms. Hilde Skorpen, who argued that the CD could learn from other humanitarian disarmament processes, such as the Mine Ban Treaty and the recent Convention on Cluster Munitions, took the lead on promoting this issue in this morning’s plenary. She referred to UN Security Council Resolution 1325, which stresses the importance of women’s equal and full participation in decision making in peace and security issues, arguing that having WILPF deliver its own statement would be a small step of showing that the CD is implementing this body of international law.

The Norwegian call received broad support from delegations from Algeria, Canada, Sweden, Austria, Ireland, Syria, Germany, Mexico, Netherlands, Pakistan, Russia, Brazil, Switzerland, and Colombia as well as from the Secretary-General of the CD, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze. The ensuing discussion touched not only upon the specific statement on International Women’s Day, but also related to increased participation of civil society in general. Ambassador Jazaïry from Algeria pointed out that countries that advocate for NGO participation in the Human Rights Council are the same as those that oppose NGO participation in the CD. He argued, “if we trust in civil society, then we should be able to give civil society a right to express itself in both forums.”

However, after several delegations had voiced their support for WILPF to read its statement, Ambassador Gary Larson of the United States said that while his delegation agrees with the need for more transparency and openness of the CD, it wants to look closer at the issue of civil society before being able to take a decision. The Secretary-General of the CD, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze, agreed there is a need for a discussion on civil society participation, but that the CD should allow WILPF to read out its own statement, without setting precedence for the future. Ambassador Jazaïry echoed this, asking the Conference to take a decision “without setting a precedence” to allow the International Women’s Day statement to be read out by WILPF. Ambassador Khvostov posed the question to the floor, and no member state had any objection. The CD will therefore allow a representative of WILPF to read out the International Women’s Day statement from the floor on 9 March. The CD president also stated that he would hold further informal consultations on the future participation of civil society on the work of the CD.

NPT Review Conference
While CD is getting close to the end of the first session, many states are looking towards the NPT Review Conference in May. Both Mr. Hyun Cho, the Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs of the Republic of Korea, and the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ireland, Mr. Micheál Martin, welcomed the promising signs for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament and urged states to adopt concrete measures on nuclear disarmament.

Mr. Cho said that the Review Conference should send a clear message to the world that, despite all the challenges, the Non-Proliferation Treaty was a robust cornerstone of the global disarmament and non-proliferation regime. He likewise urged the CD to demonstrate that it is a “valuable element” within the disarmament machinery as well. He noted that his country supports the 2009 programme of work for the CD, including an early commencement of negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty as a “tool for mutual trust and transparency.”

Mr. Martin recognized that a successful Review Conference would rhetoric to be translated into reality. He argued, “The 2010 outcome should make it crystal clear that we are on an irreversible path to achieve the aims set out so clearly over forty years ago.” He pointed to Ireland’s previous and current work in this regard, noting that “The potential for destruction of our planet creates the imperative for a nuclear-weapons-free world.”

Humanitarian disarmament
Yesterday marked the 11th year since the entry into force of the Mine Ban Treaty. Ms. Hilde Skorpen of Norway took the opportunity to emphasize the achievement of this Treaty, but also to note the remaining challenges. Ms. Skorpen argued that the Treaty has established new global norms as well as strengthened international humanitarian law, and that work on the Mine Ban Treaty and the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) show that alliances between governments and civil society can achieve concrete results. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ireland, Mr. Martin, also reflected on the relevance of humanitarian law and the Geneva conventions and their fundamental importance for security, disarmament, development, and human rights. He noted the recent ratification of the last needed state in order to bring the CCM into force and looked forward to the first meeting of states parties to the Convention later this year. He noted that the Irish government is “devoting attention to the overarching concept of armed violence and its impact on human security, sustainable development and implementation of the Millennium Development Goals.” In this context, he also mentioned his country’s commitment to the fourth Biennial Meeting of States on the UN Programme of Action on small arms and light weapons in June and on the process of negotiating an Arms Trade Treaty.

Ambassador Jazaïry of Algeria argued that cluster munitions are not the same as landmines and that the CD should look at the reasons why the CCM has not generated as much traction as the Mine Ban Treaty. In his view, one of these reasons is that the CCM gives “advanced countries” the opportunity to substitute such banned weapons with others. Ambassador Strohal of Austria noted that while the CCM only has 30 ratifications so far, over 100 states have signed the Convention. Ambassador Hoffmann of Germany and Mr. Vasiliev of Russia said they would welcome such discussion on the issues raised by Ambassador Jaizary, though Mr. Vasiliev urged such discussion to take place during thematic debates.

The nuclear issue in the Korean Peninsula and Iran
During his statement, Mr. Hyun Cho of the Republic of Korea argued that the peaceful resolution of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) nuclear issue remained vital to securing peace and security in the Northeast Asian region. Mr. Cho urged its neighbour to return to the Six Party Talks as the most appropriate framework for resolving this issue. Mr. Martin of Ireland also highlighted the DPRK and Iran in the context of challenges to the NPT, arguing that these situations “must be tackled seriously” and that the issue of withdrawal from the NPT must be addressed at the 2010 NPT Review Conference.

The two statements resulted in responses from the representative from DPRK, who rejected the content of the South Korean statement, arguing that Mr. Cho had “distorted reality and the truth” and that the matter in question should be dealt with between the DPRK and the US. In response to the Irish statement, the representative of DPRK argued instead that his country’s withdrawal from the NPT was a legitimate defensive measure in order to protect its interest and security. Iran’s representative responded to Mr. Martin’s statement to say that Iran’s nuclear programme is in accordance with the NPT.

Notes from the gallery
Reaching Critical Will would like to express our sincere appreciation for the decision taken in the CD this morning to allow our organization, WILPF, to deliver its own International Women’s Day Statement. We also support informal consultations on further civil society engagement. WILPF has always believed that civil society can add value to the ongoing deliberations in the CD and today such belief was shared with all delegations as well. To some, this might not seem to be a decision of great significance, but WILPF has been working for the right to read our own statement for many years and we are excited to finally get to address the CD in a formal plenary meeting. The open and quick way this decision was taken should be an inspiration for the future. The delegations showed today that the CD clearly is capable to take decisions by consensus, despite potential different views on details. By focusing on a common objective, in this case increased openness and transparency, the CD can reach agreements on procedural issues, leading to the start of substantive negotiations.

We would like to send a special thank you to all delegations that voiced their support for this decision today. We would also thank especially Ms. Hilde Skorpen from Norway, Ambassador Idris Jazaïry from Algeria, and the Secretary-General of the CD, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze who all made particular efforts in order to reach this decision.

Next plenary meeting
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Wednesday 3 March at 15:00. The CD will hear a statement by Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Secretary of State of Romania.

25 February 2010
Sustainability through collectivity
Beatrice Fihn and Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

On Thursday, 25 February, the Conference on Disarmament heard (CD) statements from Brazil and Nigeria on the work of the CD. The President of the CD, Ambassador Khvostov from Belarus, updated the Conference on the current consultations on a draft programme of work.

Highlights

• The CD President announced that he had circulated a “trial for the programme of work” to regional coordinators. The document works of the basis of previous consensus-based documents such as CD/1864, A/RES/64/29, A/RES/64/64, and other proposals in the CD from this year. He indicated that this has been circulated to regional coordinators and that consultations on this draft would continue.
• Ambassador Soares from Brazil provided some counter-arguments for why the CD should begin work on a fissile material treaty, what that treaty should look like, and how the current world order needs to be improved through efforts for collective security rather than individual security.
• Ambassador Uhomoibhi of Nigeria made his final speech in the CD, where he stated that in order to achieve nuclear disarmament, immediate steps towards that goal must be taken. He argued that the initiative of Nigeria, together with Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden and Switzerland in their UN General Assembly resolution on de-alerting nuclear weapons is such a step.

A draft programme of work
The President of the CD, Ambassador Khvostov announced that while there was still no consensus on a programme of work for 2010, he has circulated a document containing a “trial” for a programme of work, based on previous consensus based documents, such as the adopted programme of work in 2009, CD/1864, the two consensus resolutions from the General Assembly, A/RES/64/29 (on a fissile material treaty) and A/RES/64/64, as well as a number of proposals from this year that have not yet received consensus. Ambassador Khvostov hoped that delegations would be able to respond to this circulated document and that it could constitute a basis for the development of the programme of work of the CD.

Working for nuclear disarmament
Last week, the CD heard a suggestion from the Pakistani delegation that the CD begin negotiations on nuclear disarmament instead of a fissile material treaty. Today, Ambassador Soares of Brazil argued that while nuclear disarmament is the ultimate goal, achieving it “requires a gradual approach.” Acknowledging the importance of all the issues on the CD’s agenda, he said that those other items cannot “base the refusal to deal with fissile material.”

In his farewell speech, Ambassador Uhomoibhi of Nigeria also argued that in order to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons, incremental success must be achieved. The Nigerian ambassador highlighted his delegation’s initiative in the UN General Assembly in 2008, a resolution on “decreasing the operational readiness of nuclear weapons systems” together with Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden and Switzerland. Ambassador Uhomoibhi stated that de-alerting nuclear weapons is a practical mean of minimizing dangers posed by such weapons.

The broader context
Ambassador Soares pointed out that while “national security” has been raised as an objection to begin negotiations on a fissile materials treaty, it is in fact the non-nuclear weapons states that “suffer from acute asymmetry in terms of national security.” While geopolitical situations may raise additional security concerns, “these situations cannot justify the development of weapons of mass destruction as well as disregard for the principles and norms of International Law and oblivion to the conduct of civilized international relations.” He argued that while the international community should not be indifferent to the security concerns of any individual country, “an international system restricted to individual concerns is not sustainable.”

Echoing the Norwegian delegation’s comments from last Thursday, Ambassador Soares also argued that disarmament is “not the domain of those sole States that possess or intend to acquire weapons of mass destruction,” but that “every government has the responsibility before its people to pursue international conditions best suitable to their well-being.” He specified, such conditions do not include war, threats, and coercion.

On a fissile material treaty
He argued that a fissile materials must include both a ban on future production and regulation of existing fissile material, both of which must be subject to verification. He argued that the issues surrounding both the ban and regulation are so complex that trying to solve them through a negotiating mandate “would preclude the very negotiation.”

Notes from the gallery
The ambassador of Brazil touched upon many of the issues in the Pakistani statement from last week and it’s useful to hear this kind of debate being held openly in plenary meetings. As Ambassador Soares said, “it is necessary to explore different viewpoints, to openly and bona fide respond to arguments instead of simply repeating national positions.”

While national security concerns are legitimate problems, regional insecurity cannot justify another unproductive year of the CD let alone constant stalemate in international discussions on nuclear disarmament-related issues. The CD has been deadlocked for so many years because of different priorities and perceptions of “national security threats” of major nuclear powers. The CD cannot passively sit around for another decade to wait for “security” to emerge. It must take action and contribute to improve global and regional conditions. The CD has an opportunity to use its role as a multilateral body in order to promote and enhance global security. The news from the CD president about circulating a document on a potential programme of work is encouraging. By emphasizing recent consensus documents, it shows that common ground between member states does exist and that the CD can build upon this in order to resume work.

Notes from the world
We continue to encourage members of civil society to get involved in the work of the CD, in this report we include a contribution from Chuck Baynton of the Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice:

The Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice thanks Reaching Critical Will for extending an invitation to comment as we monitor events at the Conference on Disarmament.

What we see that matters most is completely invisible on examination of any particular session’s squabbles over procedure, but appears in sharp focus when we step back to view the last dozen years. In that time, the Conference has contributed precisely nothing to disarmament. If any contribution emerges in the next several years, it will represent a radical departure from a stable and entrenched pattern. However, no evidence suggests an institutional capacity for radical change.

Governments are properly instruments of the well-being of people. Though it is a perversion to turn that principle on its head, an utterly conventional intervention in this Conference does so, invoking national interest to frustrate what human interest requires: disarmament.

Next week’s meetings
Next week will see a large number of high-level speakers in the Conference. The schedule is as follow:

• Tuesday, 2 March at 10:00: Hyun Cho, Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs of the Republic of Korea;
• Tuesday, 2 March at 15:00: Micheál Martin, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ireland;
• Wednesday, 3 March, at 15:00: Bogdan Aurescu, Secretary of State of Romania;
• Thursday, 4 March at 10:00: Chinami Nishimura, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan; and
• Friday, 5 March at 10:00: Kanat Saudabayev, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Kazakhstan.

18 February 2010
Enhancing collective security through action
Beatrice Fihn and Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

During the Conference on Disarmament (CD)’s Thursday morning plenary meeting, Ambassador Akram of Pakistan made a comprehensive statement explaining the reasoning behind his government’s position on a programme of work for the CD as well as on a treaty banning the production of fissile materials. This statement sparked a debate, resulting in replies from the delegations of Norway, India, Japan, Pakistan again, Germany, and Belarus, as well as the Secretary-General of the CD, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze, Pakistan a third time, and Ordzhonikidze again. In addition, the new Australian ambassador, Mr. Peter Woolcott, delivered a statement on his delegation’s positions on the CD’s agenda items.

Highlights

• Pakistan’s Ambassador Akram explained his government’s opposition (rooted in its regional security concerns) to the negotiation of a fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT) that would only stop the future production of fissile materials. He indicated that the CD would need to clarify the question of existing stocks before negotiations can begin. He also suggested that if there is no agreement on this issue, the CD could get to work by beginning negotiations on one of its other core issues.
• The ambassadors from Japan and Germany argued that an FMCT would be both a disarmament and non-proliferation measure.
• Germany’s Ambassador Hoffman also argued that there is no need to have the objectives of the treaty clarified before negotiations begin and that the FMCT seems to be the next logical step toward nuclear disarmament and thus should be negotiated now, rather than one of the other core issues.
• India’s Ambassador Rao objected to references to India’s record of nuclear proliferation in Ambassador Akram’s statement.
• The Secretary-General of the CD, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze, once again reminded delegations that a programme of work is just a piece of paper and that its adoption will not hamper the strategic security concerns of any country.
• Norway’s deputy permanent representative announced that the 30th ratification needed for entry into force of the Convention on Cluster Munitions had been achieved and the treaty will enter into force on 1 August 2010. Norway’s representative highlighted some lessons from the Oslo process leading to this Convention that are applicable to the current situation in the CD and argued that the world cannot it to nuclear-armed states alone to decide when the time would be ripe to start a nuclear disarmament process.

Pakistan’s opposition to a fissile material cut-off treaty
Five weeks into the first part of the CD’s 2010 session, Ambassador Zamir Akram of Pakistan offered a comprehensive rationale for his delegation’s reluctance to commence negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT) without a specific reference to the inclusion of existing stocks. He placed this reluctance in the context of the history of nuclear proliferation in South Asia and the subsequent security issues this has raised for his country. He argued that the transfer of fissile material to India via the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) exemption on nuclear trade with India (which allows India to use more of its indigenous fissile materials for nuclear weapon production), coupled with the existing asymmetries between the Indian and Pakistani stockpiles of fissile materials and his delegation’s perception that the current proposal for an FMCT is intended only to stop future production of such materials, makes the negotiation of this treaty contrary to Pakistan’s security interests.

Implications for the possibility of substantive work in the CD
Responding to ongoing criticism that Pakistan is blocking negotiations from commencing in the CD, Ambassador Akram pointed out that those advocating for an FMCT have already shaken the foundations of the non-proliferation regime by granting the NSG waiver to India—violating their own national and international commitments, including those made under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in the process. He argued that in this context, these states’ “exhortations” in favour of protecting the non-proliferation regime through an FMCT “ring hollow”. He further argued that an FMCT as currently envisaged would be cost-free to the nuclear-armed states that have already declared moratoriums on the production of fissile materials, and that in terms of the three “de facto” nuclear weapon states, Israel has a special status and India has been given a waiver. In Pakistan’s view, this leaves Pakistan to bear to cost of an FMCT alone.

Ambassador Akram emphasized that before negotiations can begin on a treaty on fissile materials, CD member states must clarify whether they are negotiating an FMCT, which will just stop future production, or a fissile material treaty (FMT), which will also reduce existing stocks. Pakistan’s government is unwilling to engage in negotiations on an FMCT, which they see as strictly a non-proliferation and not a disarmament measure.

However, Ambassador Akram argued that there is no reason for an impasse in the CD even if there is no consensus on beginning negotiations on an FMCT. He suggested that the CD begin negotiations on nuclear disarmament instead.

Responses
In response to Ambassador Akram’s statement, Japan’s Ambassador Suda argued that an FMCT would “limit the total volume of nuclear arsenals of the world and enable a further reduction of the total nuclear arsenals in the world,” and should therefore be considered both a disarmament and non-proliferation step. Ambassador Hoffman of Germany agreed with this assessment.

Ambassador Hoffman also expressed confusion about why the Pakistani government will not let negotiations begin, arguing that “it would not be the first time in history that negotiations start with positions that are very far apart from one another” and where the objectives of the negotiations are not clearly laid out in advance. He also articulated the two pivotal practical and political questions at hand: “How much can this body do at the same time” (practical) and “What is right for this negotiation?” (political). He argued there is “a certain intrinsic logic” to proceeding with a treaty on fissile materials, following the NPT and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze, the Secretary-General of the CD, intervened in the discussion to argue that: a) all states have security concerns vis-à-vis each other on other issues but that these states show flexibility; and b) it is hard to imagine that a programme of work would hamper the strategic stability of any statement, for it is just a document for further discussion. He pointed out that “if you do not try, you will never succeed” and urged all member states to demonstrate flexibility in order to fulfil the CD’s mandate.

Ambassador Akram replied to Mr. Ordzhonikidze, arguing once again that the FMCT is not the only item on the CD’s agenda. He asked why the Conference does not ask the countries that are blocking progress on those items to show flexibility.

Alternatives to the impasse
Ambassador Akram of Pakistan stated that his delegation was not isolated in the CD, but instead that a large number of delegations do in fact recognize Pakistan’s position as legitimate and justified. He also emphasized that there is a broad agreement within the CD that a treaty banning the production of fissile material should be a disarmament measure rather than a non-proliferation arrangement. However, Ambassador Akram clarified, the Pakistani delegation is “ready to stand in splendid isolation if we have to” and “any attempt to take the FMCT out of the CD, will be an empty initiative.”

The Norwegian deputy permanent representative, Ms. Hilde Skorpen, who took the floor on the occasion of the 30th ratification needed for the entry into force of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, suggested that relevant lessons could be drawn from the negotiation of that treaty. Acknowledging the belief of some states that consensus is vital when it comes to nuclear disarmament, Ms. Skorpen argued that “it could could be possible to develop norms against the use of nuclear weapons and even to outlaw them without a consensus decision and that such norms will eventually be applied globally.” She insisted, “We cannot leave it to the nuclear states alone to decide when it is time for them do away with these weapons. The destructive power of these weapons would affect us all if put to use and their threat would continue to affect us all. Therefore, nuclear disarmament is everybody’s business.” Further, she noted that the CD is “failing to include relevant stakeholders such as civil society representatives,” and is “thus cheating [itself] from their experience and knowledge.”

The new Australian ambassador, Mr. Woolcott, noted that for too long, the CD has been “negotiating about whether to negotiate, how to negotiate, when to negotiate. Some call it sleepwalking.” He argued that to break the impasse and fulfill its mandate, CD member states need to “work together, practically and with a clear focus.”

Notes from the gallery
Reaching Critical Will agrees that the NSG waiver granted to India constituted another blow to an already beleaguered NPT and global non-proliferation regime and that it is damaging to nuclear disarmament efforts. Our forthcoming publication, Beyond arms control: challenges and choices for nuclear disarmament, includes a chapter on the US-India nuclear deal and the subsequent NSG waiver. A sneak preview of this chapter is already available on DisarmamentActivist.org.

However, this situation does not justify another unproductive year of the CD. Instead, it reinforces the need for finding shared objectives and pursuing negotiations that lead to real and effective nuclear disarmament in order to strengthen our common security. Such security will be found in reducing the role of nuclear weapons in military doctrines, reducing fissile material stocks, reducing the number of nuclear warheads. It will not be found by maintaining any size of arsenal for nuclear “deterrence”. The states that possess nuclear weapons do not appear to feel any more secure than those that belong to one of the world’s several nuclear weapon free zones.

It is worth reminding the delegates in the CD of what has been argued since the invention of nuclear weapons and was most recently stated in the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament’s report:

Nuclear weapons are the most inhumane weapons ever conceived, inherently indiscriminate in those they kill and maim, and with an impact deadly for decades. Their use by anyone at any time, whether by accident, miscalculation or design, would be catastrophic. They are the only weapons ever invented that have the capacity to wholly destroy life on this planet, and the arsenals we now possess—combining their blast, radiation and potential “nuclear winter” effects—are able to do so many times over.

As Ms. Skorpen from Norway said, it cannot be left up to the nuclear-armed states alone to decide when they are ready to start disarming. Therefore, the scope of a future FMCT must not be determined by nuclear-armed states only. A programme of work might be just a paper, but this paper would give the world an opportunity to engage in negotiations on nuclear weapons for the first time since the conclusion of the CTBT. All states and civil society have a responsibility to make sure that the issue of existing stocks is on the table once negotiations start, but to make that possible, the CD must adopt of a programme of work.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday, 25 February at 10:00 AM.

16 February 2010
Negotiations: a tool of political will
Beatrice Fihn and Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

On Tuesday, 16 February, the First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belarus, Mr. Igor Petrishenko, addressed the Conference on Disarmament (CD). The CD also heard statements by the new CD President, Ambassador Mikhail Khvostov of Belarus about the programme of work, and by Ambassador Akio Suda of Japan, who thanked the outgoing president and welcomed Ambassador Khostov.

Highlights

• The First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belarus reaffirmed his country’s commitment to achieving a nuclear weapon free world and argued that nuclear powers should take new measures to stop further modernization of nuclear weapons and to decrease reliance on nuclear weapons in their military doctrines.
• The incoming CD president, Ambassador Mikhail Khvostov of Belarus, made a brief introductory comment outlining his approach to reaching consensus on a programme of work.
• In order to remind the CD that the world is indeed watching it, Reaching Critical Will invites members of civil society and academic institutions to contribute to the CD Report with their views on the discussions. In this report, Mr. Dan Plesch, Director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the School of Oriental and African Studies of London University shares some of his thoughts on today’s plenary meeting.

Programme of work
Ambassador Mikhail Khvostov of Belarus took over the presidency of the CD today and made a short statement about the ongoing negotiations of a programme of work. While saying that last Thursday’s informal consultation led to food for thought, he explained that due to the “differing views on what the basis for work of the Conference might be,” bilateral consultations and meetings with regional groups had been initiated in order to find potential acceptable amendments on a programme of work. He indicated that he remains “optimistic in thinking that the patience that we are showing at this stage will be rewarded and that we will be in a position to come up with a compromise basis that will enable us to move forward in substantive work.”

Political will
In his address to the CD, the First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belarus, Mr. Igor Petrishenko, described political will as “a precondition of all future decisions in the field of disarmament,” and negotiations as “a tool of the political will”. Highlighting the “lost” decade for disarmament caused in part by “reversive” tendencies that “seriously damaged the existing system of international relations,” including rising global military expenditure, Mr. Petrishenko called for efforts to improve existing mechanisms and legal tools rather than belittling their value or blocking their initiatives.

In this regard, he called on the CD to “enhance positive momentum” in its activities; manifest its members’ political will; to adopt a programme of work based on CD/1864; and to begin negotiating a fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT) without delay. He argued that an FMCT will create favourable conditions for the international community “to set a total ban of nuclear weapons as a realistic medium term goal.”

Pointing out that Belarus “voluntarily renounced an opportunity” to possess nuclear weapons and completed the withdrawal of such weapons from its territory in 1996, Mr. Petrishenko welcomed efforts by the United States and Russia to agree to a follow-on treaty to the Strategic Arms Reductions Treaty (START). However, he also expressed hope that the conclusion of such treaty would be followed with further reduction of US and Russian nuclear arsenals. He suggested that nuclear weapon states could also: decrease the number of nuclear warheads and delivery means; stop further modernization nuclear weapons; renounce their reliance on nuclear weapons in their military doctrines; and seriously dedicate themselves to the idea of a nuclear weapon free world.

Notes from the gallery
Reaching Critical Will welcomes Mr. Petrishenko’s call for nuclear weapon states to not only reduce the numbers of their nuclear weapons but also to cease all plans to modernize their arsenals and to renounce their reliance on nuclear weapons in security doctrines. If nuclear weapons are to be eliminated, those who possess them should no longer invest in nuclear weapon production, design, or infrastructure.

While CD delegates are still unable to adopt a programme of work and commence negotiations, civil society continues trying to move the disarmament debate forward. There might not be many representatives from civil society up in the gallery, but we must not forget that the world is actually still watching and that we still expect the CD to get down to work and negotiate disarmament treaties.

Since many members of civil society cannot take part in the regular plenary meetings, Reaching Critical Will would like to give nuclear disarmament advocates the opportunity to share their views on the CD, its lack of progress, and its current agenda items in a new section of the CD Report, “Notes from the world”. Please email Beatrice Finh at beatrice[at]reachingcriticalwill.org if you would like to participate.

Notes from the world
This week, a group of students from the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at London University are visiting the different institutions within the United Nations, and their Director, Mr. Dan Plesch, took the time to attend the CD plenary meeting and discuss how his work on disarmament relates to this multilateral negotiating body.

Dan Plesch (dp27[at]soas.ac.uk), Director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the School of Oriental and African Studies, London University, writes:

The speech of Belarus’ Deputy Foreign Minister was a refreshing reminder of the experiences of a state that has suffered terribly in war and gone to participate in a wide range of disarmament achievements. At least for a visitor from London University, passing through Geneva with a group of Masters students on study tour. I took the opportunity to discuss a new idea for disarmament, SCRAP (strategic concept for regulation of arms possession and proliferation), designed to globalize existing disarmament agreements. For some delegates, visibly frustrated at the logjam in the talk, SCRAP has come a breath of fresh air, but whether it will fade away as deceptive breeze on a hot and humid day, or will gather strength with the spring remains to be seen. You can find more information about SCRAP and other issues that the students work on, such as a Middle East Weapons of Mass Destruction Free Zone project on the website of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday, 18 February at 10:00 AM.

11 February 2010
?I?m sorry Mr. Secretary-General, nothing is going on?
Beatrice Fihn and Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) met on Thursday morning for the last plenary meeting under the presidency of Bangladesh. Ambassador Abdul Hannan delivered a short outgoing statement before finishing his presidency. The CD also heard statements by the new ambassador of South Africa, Mr. Jerry Matjila; Ambassador Jazaïry of Algeria; the incoming CD president, Ambassador Mikhail Khvostov of Belarus; Pakistan’s Ambassador Akram; and Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze, the Secretary-General of the CD and Director-General of the UN Office at Geneva.

Highlights

• Ambassador Jerry Matjila of South Africa expressed hope that the CD would resume its role as a negotiating body in 2010, a year that according to him presents a real opportunity for progress and for restoring confidence.­
• The Secretary-General of the CD and the Director-General of the UN Office at Geneva, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze, pointed out that the CD has not moved forward during these four weeks and that instead, so far the CD had in fact moved backwards. He called for reflection on the squandered resources and relevance of the CD.

“Not even zero—it is minus”
Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze, the Secretary-General of the CD and Director-General of the UN Office at Geneva, expressed UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s “great disappointment” with the efforts of the CD. Mr. Ordzhonikidze argued that after last year’s adoption of a programme of work, the inability to get an agreement on a similar basic document this year was “not even zero—it is minus”. He pointed out that while the CD is a body outside the UN system, “enormous” resources from the UN budget are still used to convene these meetings. He hoped that member states would take the time to reflect on that over the weekend, because the situation is “becoming intolerable” not just in the CD, but also in international relations at large.

Mr. Ordzhonikidze also argued that a programme of work is simply a basic document—it is not a finalization of any treaty. He emphasized that progress is not up to the president of the CD; it is up to all members of the Conference. He shared a conversation he had with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, who had asked what was going on in the CD. Mr. Ordzhonikidze explained that he was forced to answer, “I’m sorry, Mr. Secretary-General. Nothing. Nothing is going on.”

In his first statement to the CD, Ambassador Jerry Matjila of South Africa lamented that the lack of progress in disarmament over the past decade not only hindered international peace and security but also undermined international confidence in multilateral disarmament machinery. He expressed hope that the CD would demonstrate flexibility and concern with all member’s security interests in order to resume its role as a negotiating body in 2010.

From the outgoing president
The outgoing CD president made a brief statement on the work of the CD so far and showed appreciation for the two high-level speeches made by the foreign minister of Bangladesh and the deputy foreign minister of Italy. Ambassador Hannan of Bangladesh thanked all delegations for their cooperation and support. Ambassador Jazaïry of Algeria expressed his and many other delegations’ appreciation for “the outstanding way” Ambassador Hannan carried out his mandate. Ambassador Akram of Pakistan also expressed appreciation, saying that the president had done an excellent job during this difficult time for the CD, especially by responding with enthusiasm to follow a particular course of action.

Ambassador Mikhail Khvostov from Belarus will take over the CD presidency next week. In a short comment, he stated that his delegation would continue the close cooperation in a spirit of transparency with the other five presidents of the 2010 session in order to get the CD back to work. He added that they would do so on the basis of last year’s work and a number of consensus resolutions from the General Assembly. Ambassador Khvostov also announced that his deputy minister of foreign affairs will attend the CD on Tuesday, 16 February to deliver a statement on nuclear disarmament.

Notes from the gallery
While Reaching Critical Will would like to join the delegations in thanking outgoing president for his work during these first weeks, especially his successful way of moving past the initial disagreement on the annual agenda, we still must not forget the lack of substantive progress in the CD. We join the Secretary-General of the CD and the Secretary-General of the UN in their disappointment with the inability of the CD to adopt a programme of work. It is worth to repeat Mr. Ordzhonikidze’s argument that a programme of work is a basic document, not a conclusion of a treaty. We urge all member states of the CD, together with all other countries, to remember their shared interests and common views—for example, that in the UN General Assembly this year they unanimously agreed on a resolution encouraging the commencement of work on a fissile material (cut-off) treaty. There is agreement in the international community regarding the commencement of negotiations on a treaty banning the production of fissile material for weapons purposes and delegates in the CD should not continue to prevent such agreement from moving into formal negotiations. Time is moving fast and the CD must start working, or it will, as Mr. Ordzhonikidze stated, lose its relevance.

Next plenary meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 16 February 2010, at 10:00 AM. The deputy foreign minister of Belarus will attend the meeting.

9 February 2010
More talk about the NPT than the CD
Beatrice Fihn and Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

On Tuesday afternoon, the deputy foreign minister of Italy, Mr. Vincenzo Scotti, addressed the Conference on Disarmament (CD). The CD also heard a statement by Ambassador Faysal Hamoui of the Syrian Arab Republic on a nuclear weapon free zone in the Middle East and on the CD’s programme of work. The CD President, Ambassador Abdul Hannan of Bangladesh, gave a short update on the status of informal consultations on a programme of work.

Highlights

• The CD President announced that informal consultations needed to continue on a draft programme of work.
• The deputy foreign minister of Italy laid out his government’s expectations for the NPT Review Conference in May and argued that the CD’s 2010 programme of work should be “in line” with last year’s programme, CD/1864.
• The Syrian ambassador spoke about the importance of pursuing a nuclear weapon free zone in the Middle East and called upon the international community to urge all states in the region to join the NPT. He argued CD/1864 would need updating in order to be acceptable to all member states this year.

Programme of work
The CD President made a brief announcement about the informal consultations on a programme of work for the 2010 session. He stated that more time was needed and that the informal consultations would continue Thursday.

The Italian deputy foreign minister expressed hope for an adoption by the CD of a programme of work based on CD/1864 and argued that details related to the mandate for a fissile material (cut-off) treaty should be dealt with during the course of negotiations. In contrast, the Syrian ambassador argued that CD/1864 does not address the concerns of all CD members, since it does not give a clear answer to the issues of verification mechanism and existing stocks related to a fissile materials (cut-off) treaty or give “concrete treatment” to the other three core issues. He said that simply cloning CD/1864 would not acquire consensus; however, he suggested the Conference “partially build” on that document and “introduce new necessary elements to it.”

The importance of nuclear disarmament
Last week, Ireland’s new permanent representative to the CD, Ambassador Gerard Corr, called for nuclear weapons to be “outlawed by the international community.” Arguing that as long as any state has nuclear weapons, others will want them, Ambassador Corr said, “the only way to deal with the threat to humanity posed by nuclear weapons ... is to eliminate them.”

Both the Irish ambassador last week and the Syrian ambassador today pointed to the potential use of nuclear weapons as a catastrophic possibility. Ambassador Corr emphasized his delegation’s commitment to “practical steps to prevent their further proliferation and avoid nuclear war.” He cited entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, negotiation of a fissile material (cut-off) treaty, and negative security assurances as some such steps. He also argued that the existence and experience of nuclear weapons is proof “of the difficulty of undoing developments in the creation and deployment of weapons,” which provides a strong argument “for the adoption of a preventative approach where possible,” such as in the case of preventing an arms race in outer space. Ambassador Hamoui of the Syrian Arab Republic likewise highlighted the CD’s core issues as important for advancing the nuclear disarmament and global security agenda.

Expectations for the NPT Review Conference
Italy’s Deputy Foreign Minister Scotti argued that the outcome of the NPT Review Conference in May must include an adequate reflection of such momentum. He called for an outcome that sets “realistic goals of equal priority” for each of the “three pillars” of the Treaty and highlighted three complex issues that need “new ideas and initiatives” to succeed: practical disarmament steps; objectives and mechanisms for dealing with the 1995 resolution on the Middle East; and strengthening the Treaty’s mechanism for dealing with issues such as compliance, withdrawal, and implementation. He also said that a successful Review Conference must include promotion of mutual confidence among all states parties, and in particular between Western countries and the members of the Non-Aligned Movement.

Ambassador Hamoui of the Syrian Arab Republic also pointed at the importance of adequately dealing with the issue of the Middle East, arguing that this region has not received enough international attention and that as long as nuclear weapons exist there, the risk of use or threat of use will remain present. Ambassador Hamoui reaffirmed his government’s commitment to the 1995 resolution on the Middle East and called on the international community to urge all states in the region to join the NPT.

Notes from the gallery
As the CD moves in to its fourth week without a draft proposal of work, Reaching Critical Will hopes that the informal consultations taking place later this week will prove to be successful. Many delegations in the CD have urged all member states to show the highest level of flexibility and strong commitments to breaking the impasse. We agree with such statements but would also like to emphasize that a programme of work has never been a goal in itself and it would not be an efficient use of the CD’s time to once again spend the two first sessions negotiating a programme of work, leaving very little time for resumption of substantive work. A programme of work must be adopted sooner rather than later. If the CD is not ready to do that, it must find other ways to start talking about substance. The scheduled thematic debates on all agenda issues that were introduced in the 2006 session of the CD could be seen as a useful exercise to repeat, giving the Conference a chance to move past procedural issues and start to find common ground on the different substantive issues. This would also encourage confidence-building among member states.

Reaching Critical Will also encourages engaged civil society members to take a more active part in influencing their national governments role in the CD, by providing them with information about the Conference, the substantive issues, and the importance of moving forward. Government contact information is available on the RCW website.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday, 11 February at 10:00 AM.

2 February 2010
Discussions on programme of work are ongoing
Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

During its third plenary meeting of 2010, the Conference on Disarmament (CD) heard statements from the Group of 21, Morocco, the Russian Federation, Ireland, Colombia, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Italy, and Bangladesh. Delegates voiced their support for concrete steps toward nuclear disarmament and civil society participation in the CD. The Conference also welcomed two new ambassadors, Ambassador Gerard Corr from Ireland and Ambassador Kshenuka Seneviratne from Sri Lanka.

Highlights

• The CD president declared that despite extensive consultation, he was not yet ready to submit a draft proposal for a programme of work for the 2010 session.
• The Group of 21’s representative emphasized the necessity of beginning negotiations toward complete nuclear disarmament, referring to both a Nuclear Weapons Convention and nuclear weapon states’ disarmament obligations as stated by the International Court of Justice.
• Russia’s ambassador talked about the need for multilateral disarmament efforts and discussed its own obligations and measures.
• The new ambassador of Ireland and the representative of Colombia vocally supported enhanced engagement with civil society.
  Italy’s delegation announced that their deputy foreign minister, Mr. Vincenzo Scotti, will address the CD on Tuesday, 9 February.

Programme of work
The CD president, Ambassador Abdul Hannan from Bangladesh, took the floor at the end of the plenary meeting to report on the current status of negotiations around a programme of work for the 2010 session. He explained that consultations have been going on since the adoption of the agenda. He reported that some delegates have called for a programme of work to be based on CD/1864, last year’s programme, while others have objected this plan. Therefore, he is not ready to put forward a draft proposal at this time. However, Ambassador Hannan proposed an informal meeting on Thursday, 4 February, where delegations would have an opportunity to exchange views and positions on draft proposals in a transparent manner.

Calling for disarmament
The Group of 21 made a joint statement though Mr. Ri Jang Gon from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, in which the Group reaffirmed that total nuclear disarmament remains its priority in the CD. Mr. Gon referred to the Final Document from the 2009 Sharm El Sheikh Summmit, where the Non-Aligned Movement emphasized the necessity of commencing negotiations “on a phased programme for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons with a specified framework of time, including a Nuclear Weapons Convention.” Mr. Gon pointed out that the same Final Document also highlighted the unanimous conclusion of the International Court of Justice that nuclear weapon states have an obligation to pursue disarmament in good faith. Therefore, he explained, the Group of 21 calls upon the CD to agree on a balanced and comprehensive programme of work that establishes an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament.

Also addressing nuclear disarmament issues, Ambassador Valery Loschinin of the Russian Federation argued that Russia is taking concrete steps in line with its obligations under Article VI of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) by finalizing the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. Ambassador Loschinin also noted and welcomed other initiatives on disarmament, such as the Hoover Initiative, the Global Zero campaign, and the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (ICNND) report, arguing that such initiatives are of “undisputed interest”. Ambassador Loschinin declared that Russia is ready for discussions on nuclear disarmament issues and supported an early adoption of a programme of work for the CD similar to CD/1864.

Ambassador Desra Percaya from Indonesia also welcomed the report of the ICNND and took note of its emphasis on the inhumanity and indiscriminate nature of nuclear weapons. The Indonesian ambassador pointed out that the nuclear weapons currently in existence are capable of destroying our entire planet. He explained that his delegation continues to strive for complete disarmament and recommended that all states in possession of such weapons reassess their nuclear doctrines and policies.

Expectations for the NPT
With the CD still being unable to commence substantive work, some delegates took the opportunity to discuss expectations for the 2010 NPT Review Conference. In the view of the Russian delegation, the main task of the Review Conference is to work out harmonious and implementable recommendations, based on a regulated balance of the three “pillars” of the NPT—nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation, and “peaceful uses” of nuclear energy. Morocco’s delegation noted that the Review Conference would be an opportunity to remobilize international efforts for strengthening the NPT regime. The representative of Colombia also emphasized the need to consolidate the “momentum for disarmament” that has been building the past year and stated that the Review Conference would be one of the most important challenges of 2010. The Indonesian delegation voiced its expectations for concrete results in the outcome document.

Continued calls for increased participation of civil society
As the new Irish Ambassador, Mr. Gerard Corr, took the floor, he joined his predecessor’s support for engagement with civil society. He highlighted last year’s informal meeting of the CD where NGOs made statements on issues related to the agenda items of the CD. Ambassador Corr expressed hope that this positive experience could be repeated and used as grounds for enhanced interaction between delegations and civil society in the CD. The delegation of Colombia took the opportunity to express the importance it attaches to constant participation of civil society, emphasizing that such expertise and views can contribute to the work of the conference.

Notes from the gallery
It is encouraging that some states continue to emphasize the goal of complete nuclear disarmament and see a Nuclear Weapons Convention as a way forward. Adopting a programme of work and the set up of a working group on nuclear disarmament would be a step in the right direction. WILPF encourages all CD member states and others to include references to a Nuclear Weapons Convention or negotiations for nuclear disarmament in their statements and working papers to the CD over the next few months and to the NPT Review Conference in May.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting will be held on Thursday, 4 February at 10:00 AM.

26 January 2010
CD adopts its agenda, discusses importance of a programme of work
Beatrice Fihn and Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) opened its second plenary meeting of 2010 with statements from the Foreign Minister of Bangladesh, Dr. Dipu Moni, and the UN High Representative of the Office for Disarmament Affairs, Mr. Sergio Duarte. After these high-level addresses, the Conference adopted its agenda without any amendments. Delegations of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Japan, United States, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Algeria, Turkey, South Africa, Switzerland, Australia, Pakistan, Tunisia, and Brazil delivered interventions on matters related to the work of the CD and the upcoming nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference.

Highlights

• The CD adopted its agenda without any amendments.
• Many delegations shared their views on a programme of work for the 2010 session, urging for last year’s programme to be used as basis for moving forward.
• A few delegations highlighted the calls upon the CD to commence negotiations on a fissile materials cut-off treaty (FMCT) by UN Security Council Resolution 1887 (2009), UN General Assembly Resolution 64/29 (2009), and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s five point plan for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation as indication that support for such negotiations exists outside of the CD.
• The US delegation reiterated its support for the work of the CD in the context of being mindful of its obligations under Article VI of the NPT.
• Some speakers reiterated their support for a more comprehensive involvement of civil society in the work of the CD.

The CD agenda
After the Conference’s failure last week to adopt its annual agenda, the CD president carried out consultations and informal meetings on the issue. In today’s plenary, the Conference adopted an agenda that contained the same items as previous years. CD president Ambassador Abdul Hannan from Bangladesh clarified that according to the CD Rules of Procedure, especially Article 27 and 30, each member of the CD is entitled to raise any subject relevant to the work of the CD and to present it views on any matter that it may consider relevant.

Expressing his support for this clarification, Ambassador Akram of Pakistan noted that his delegation would use this right under the Rules of Procedure to take up relevant issues at an appropriate time. He also expressed regret that some other delegations viewed the position of Pakistan as an obstacle to the work of the CD, arguing that his delegation never intended to block the agenda and that it is keen to move beyond this issue and agree on a programme of work.

Achieving consensus on a programme of work
Many delegations noted the significant accomplishment of the CD last year, when member states reached consensus over a programme of work, contained in CD/1864. As last week, some delegations—including those from the Australia, Japan, South Africa, Switzerland, and the United States—argued that a programme of work should be based on last year’s document.

Ambassador Jazaïry of Algeria, who was president when CD/1864 was adopted last year, pointed out that while consensus was achieved on that document then, the CD needed a new decision in 2010. Ambassador Jazaïry argued that a balanced programme achieved success in 2009 and that the CD could reach an agreement this year, too, by establishing a similar balance. The South African delegation noted that while last year’s decisions cannot automatically be transferred to this year’s session, “past decisions represent important stepping stones that allow us to make steady progress.... We can therefore not act as if the decision last year on a programme of work has not bearing on our work for 2010.”

A broader disarmament debate
With four months left before the NPT Review Conference, delegates in the CD are beginning to speak out on their expectations for this important event and to conceptualize it in a broader disarmament context relevant to the CD’s work. US Ambassador Larson reiterated his government’s support for the work of the CD in the context of being mindful of its obligations under Article VI of the NPT. Turkey’s Ambassador Üzümcü noted that commencement in the CD of negotiations on an FMCT is among the 13 practical steps unanimously adopted at the 2000 NPT Review Conference.

Arguing that the international community needs to “move beyond the narrow national security paradigm that dominated the Cold War era,” the South African delegation emphasized that the NPT Review Conference needs to “give concrete expression and real content to the vision espoused by world leaders that has given hope for a new era of increased cooperation, peace and prosperity within a strengthened multilateral system.” The Libyan delegation argued that peace and security cannot be achieved through nuclear weapons and urged for resources spent on these weapons to be dedicated instead to development and meeting the Millennium Development Goals.

Civil society participation
Following on last week’s discussion about the role of civil society participation in the CD, the Swiss ambassador expressed regret that non-governmental actors were not allowed to participate and play a constructive role in the Conference. He argued that the discussions in the CD would only benefit from a more direct engagement with civil society. In addition, Mr. Duarte pointed out civil society’s role in moving the disarmament agenda forward and the Algerian ambassador also noted the important role of non-governmental actors.

Notes from the gallery
It is encouraging that the agenda was adopted after a series of consultations among delegates and that discussions on a programme of work are taking place. However, it is important to remember that these procedural issues are not the end goal of the CD. The goal is to conclude negotiations on its core issues. As many delegations pointed out today, the CD needs to dive into to substantive issues as quickly as possible during its 2010 session in order to progress.

Over the past few years, member states have submitted many substantial proposals as official documents of the CD, such as draft treaties and working papers. The Conference should spend as much as time as possible discussing these proposals, finding common ground, and identifying areas where progress can be made. After more than a decade without engaging in substantive work, the CD needs to take more than procedural steps. As the South African delegation emphasized today, “What is at stake is not only the continued relevance and credibility of the Conference on Disarmament, but our collective security interests in an increasingly interconnected world marked by mutual vulnerabilities and threats.” With all the opportunities for forward movement in 2010, the CD must exercise its position as the premier multilateral arms control and disarmament negotiating forum. It must, as the Bangladeshi Foreign Minister urged, “press on with energy, dedication and perseverance. We cannot give up hope, because that would be like giving up hope on the future of humankind.”

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 2 February 2010 at 10:00 AM.

19 January 2010
CD opens its 2010 session without adopting agenda
Ray Acheson and Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

The Conference on Disarmament (CD) began its 2010 session today with Ambassador Abdul Hannan of Bangladesh as the first president of the year. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon delivered a short statement through a video link and the Director-General of the UN Office at Geneva and CD Secretary-General Sergei Ordzhonikidze also delivered a few remarks. He was followed by statements and some interactions by delegates from Pakistan, Canada, Brazil, Japan, India, Argentina, Mexico, the European Union, the Eastern European Group, Austria, China, Indonesia, and the United Kingdom, which focused on the CD’s agenda—which was not adopted today, in a surprising break from previous years—and its programme of work.

Highlights

• Pakistan’s delegation proposed the inclusion of two new items on the annual CD agenda, which means a decision on its adoption has been postponed. The agenda is usually adopted smoothly on the first day of a new session.
• Most delegations voiced support for CD/1864, the programme of work adopted in May 2009, and encouraged the CD to build upon that proposal this year.
• Many delegations spoke out against the CD’s restricted access, arguing that all plenary meetings of the CD, whether informal or formal, should be open for civil society and observers.

An agenda?
The CD’s agenda is typically adopted on the first day of each session without comment. However, at today’s plenary, Pakistan’s Ambassador Zamir Akram urged the CD to take its time adopting its agenda, arguing that it “should not be treated as a mere formality”. He suggested that the agenda be expanded to include two new items: conventional arms control at regional and sub-regional levels, based on General Assembly resolution A/64/421; and missiles in all their aspects.2

This request seemed to come as a surprise for most delegations. Responding to Pakistan’s intervention, Canada’s delegation warned that amending the agenda could open up a potential Pandora’s box, since other delegations might want to add or remove additional items. The Secretary-General of the CD, Sergei Ordzhonikidze, argued that while the agenda has never been an ideal document, it contains a wide range of issues that are broad enough to include questions related to nuclear, conventional, or missile issues. Mr. Ordzhonikidze suggested that the CD adopt the agenda and give Pakistan the opportunity to raise the two suggested items under the existing list, in accordance with the rules of procedure. Japan’s delegation voiced support for Mr. Ordzhonikidze’s suggestion and for the current agenda. Brazil’s delegation argued that it is more important for the Conference to adopt a programme of work and start negotiations, and that amending the agenda is not necessary for either.

Ambassador Akram responded to these suggestions, arguing that the CD should not act in a vacuum or keep its agenda frozen in time, but that it should react to developments in the real world. In turn, the Indian delegation argued that the agenda has continued relevancy, noting that most of its items, which are still unfulfilled, reflect the priorities of a large number of countries. The Indian delegation also specifically argued against including the item on subregional arms control issues, emphasizing the CD’s global focus and the UN Disarmament Commission’s guidelines on regional disarmament.

CD president Ambassador Hannan noted that the Conference needs time to consider Pakistan’s proposal and announced that an informal meeting will convene on Thursday, 21 January to discuss the matter further.

A programme of work?
Moving on from discussions about the agenda, many delegations pointed to the 2009 programme of work, CD/1864, as a good basis for moving forward with this year’s substantive work. The delegations of Canada, Argentina, the European Union, Mexico, and Austria expressed their support for this document and their willingness to begin negotiations and discussions on its basis. The Chinese delegation noted the challenges the CD faces, arguing that if all parties respected the concerns of others, and held open and transparent discussions, these difficulties can be overcome.

Civil society
As usual, when the CD discussed the adoption of the agenda and granting observer status to non-member states, the formal plenary meeting was adjourned. During this informal section of the meeting, all NGO representatives and observers are obliged to leave the gallery and wait outside. Today, once the formal plenary meeting reconvened, Canada’s delegation proposed that NGO and observers be allowed to sit in on all plenary meetings, whether they are formal or informal. Both the Austrian and Indonesian delegations showed their support for the Canadian proposal, emphasizing the important role that civil society can play in the work of the Conference. The Indonesian delegation pointed out that the CD needs to encourage participation from civil society, while Austria’s ambassador pointed to the increased participation of NGOs during the CD’s 2009 session as one contributing factor to the successful adoption of a programme of work.

Notes from the gallery
After last year’s successful adoption of a programme of work but frustrating inability to implement it before the end of the year, it is disappointing that the CD could not agree on the agenda today. The Pakistani delegation’s suggestion of including missiles and regional arms control in the agenda are clearly related to its broader security concerns in South Asia. At the end of December 2009, India’s army chief and chairman of its chiefs of staff revealed that the Indian military has been working on a new doctrine and seeks major new capabilities that would allow it to mobilize and deploy for war quickly, project its military power further, and develop ballistic missile “defences” and space-based capabilities.3 However, some Conference participants see the Pakistani delegation’s suggestion as a stalling tactic designed to prevent the CD from moving on to important matters like adopting a new programme of work for the year and beginning negotiations on a fissile materials treaty—which also has implications for Pakistan’s regional security concerns.

WILPF urges all member states to work together to overcome this new and unexpected obstacle. It will be important to ensure that all member’s concerns are respectfully taken into account while avoiding any further degradation of the CD’s ability to conduct substantive work. As Mexico’s delegation noted today, we need to restore the credibility and the relevance of the CD, not further undermine it. 2010 is a critical year for the CD to demonstrate that it is a place where disarmament can be successfully negotiated in a multilateral framework.

WILPF did see some encouraging signs during today’s plenary meeting. Austrian Ambassador Strohal’s suggestion of engaging in thematic discussions on the core issues could be a way of creating a better atmosphere and identifying common ground for future negotiations. WILPF also welcomes the continued support for increased civil society participation in the work of the CD. We would also like to thank the UK delegation for its warm words acknowledging the departure of WILPF Secretary-General Susi Snyder. We are sure that the delegations in the CD will miss her just as much as the staff at Reaching Critical Will.

Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 26 January 2010 at 10:00 AM. The foreign minister of Bangladesh will address the meeting.

Notes
1. Resolution A/64/42 requests the CD to consider formulations of principles that can serve as a framework for regional agreements on conventional arms control.
2. Ambassador Akram argued that given the the growing competition in missile technology, the “international arms control architecture is incomplete without such regime”.
3. See Zia Mian, “A Path for Peace in South Asia,” Huffington Post, 7 January 2010, for more information.

777 UN Plaza - 6th Floor - New York, NY - 10017 - Ph: 212.682.1265 - Fax: 212.286.8211 - info@reachingcriticalwill.org
This site was created by Kache Productions ©2008