CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT ADOPTS ANNUAL REPORT, CONCLUDES 2004 SESSION
Minute of Silence Observed in Memory of Victims of Hostage Takers in Beslan

The Conference on Disarmament today adopted its annual report and concluded its 2004 session after hearing statements from the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Chile, Algeria, Germany, the United States, Italy and France.

A minute of silence was observed for the victims of the hostage takers in Beslan, Russian Federation. The Russian Federation thanked the Conference for the condolences expressed for the victims, adding that it was vitally important to fight international terrorism which could only be combated collectively by the international community.

The President of the Conference, Ambassador Mya Than of Myanmar, paid tribute to the delegates who were bidding farewell to the Conference - David Broucher of the United Kingdom, Christian Faessler of Switzerland and Mohamed Salah Dembri of Algeria.

The United Kingdom said preventing further proliferation of nuclear weapons must remain the highest priority. The greatest contribution the non-nuclear weapon States could make to nuclear disarmament was to continue to renounce nuclear weapons and to make sure their partners did the same. It was also important to pursue a Fissile Missile Cut-Off Treaty.

Also concerning an FMCT, Germany thanked the United States for finishing its review of the issue and said the country considered such a treaty a logical next step for multilateral nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.

Switzerland agreed that an FMCT should be pursued and stressed that the Conference must agree as a matter of priority on its programme of work. The “Five Ambassadors” proposal was a reasonable method to allow for this.

Algeria echoed the need for the Conference to adopt its programme of work, saying the “A5 proposal” was a significant breakthrough bringing together all the energies of the Conference and bore the seeds for its very survival. The differences which remained lay in the means to achieving the goals and not the goals themselves, he added.

In his concluding remarks, the President of the Conference said despite all of its efforts, the programme of work still remained elusive. Nevertheless, progress had been made in certain areas. Among the achievements made was an enhancement and engagement of cooperation with civil society. He added that the positions of Member States to the Conference to reach a common ground and to reach consensus on a Programme of Work should be taken into account and that positive thinking and high professionalism was also a matter of priority.

The 2005 session of the Conference on Disarmament will start on 24 January 2005.

Statements

MYA THAN (Myanmar), President of the Conference, said that in the past few days, everyone had followed the tragic evolution of the hostage taking in the Russian Federation, realizing with horror that it had left more than 330 victims, including many children and parents. Terrorist acts against civilians must be condemned by the Conference and should not go unpunished. On behalf of the Conference, he extended the deepest condolences to the bereaved families. A minute of silence was held in memory of the victims.

LEONID SKOTNIKOV (Russian Federation) thanked the Conference for the expressed condolences, saying that the last weeks had been particularly trying times for all Russians. Mr. Skotnikov recalled the words of President Putin in which he stressed that Russians were dealing with acts of intimidation as well as with direct acts of terrorism which claimed the lives of Russian citizens. The Russian authorities were concerned about how to augment people’s security in the country. It was vitally important to fight international terrorism, which could only be combated collectively by the international community.

DAVID BROUCHER (United Kingdom) said in a farewell statement that the Conference was an “effective barometer” of the international situation and was at a low point because that situation was now deeply clouded. The common objective of the Conference was a world in which international peace and security could be maintained at much lower levels of armament, and consequently at lower levels of risk and cost. In the United States, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and France, doctrines based on the presumption of nuclear use had declined and so had the numbers of deployed weapons. Mr. Broucher said preventing further proliferation must remain the highest priority. The greatest contribution the non-nuclear weapon States could make to nuclear disarmament was to continue to renounce nuclear weapons and to make sure their partners did the same. Moreover, the greatest contribution the existing nuclear States could make was to refrain from testing, manufacturing fissile material and go on reducing their arsenals, where they had not done so already, to the minimum level.

The goal of nuclear disarmament remained a very real and pressing concern for a large number of counties. Existing nuclear weapons States had reduced their arsenals and were continuing to do so, yet proliferation continued, Mr. Broucher added. Despite the end of the Cold War, the danger of regional confrontation remained. Progress towards nuclear disarmament should remain a priority, and an urgent one. States parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) had the responsibility to fulfil their obligations under the NPT and States which had developed nuclear weapons outside of the NPT should also pursue disarmament objectives. A next step, Mr. Broucher said, was an agreement to arrest the creation of new fissile material for nuclear weapons. Together with the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) this would create the platform on which further progress could be built.

MYA THAN (Myanmar), President of the Conference, paid tribute to the delegates who were bidding farewell to Conference - David Broucher if the United Kingdom, Christian Faessler of Switzerland and Mohamed Salah Dembri of Algeria. After paying tribute to Mr. Broucher, the President honoured Mr. Dembri whose contributions to the Conference had been invaluable. Among other things, he submitted the “A5 proposal” in 2002, which had enjoyed the broad support of the members of the Conference. His efforts aimed at fostering consensus would be remembered. Mr. Faessler, he said, had represented his Government with distinction in diplomatic skills and would be remembered as a strong advocate of the Conference.

CHRISTIAN FAESSLER (Switzerland) said there was not much room for optimism when one looked at the situation of international disarmament. The growing dangers of nuclear proliferation, the fears of an arms race in outer space and increasing acts of terrorism had added to the threats which existed on a global scale. Switzerland was convinced that if the international community was to ensure global peace and security, legally binding instruments had to enter into force to put an end to proliferation, among other things.

International peace and security were more fragile than ever before, Mr. Faessler said. However, it would be unfair to say that multilateral efforts towards international disarmament were not showing results. One example of progress made was the work being undertaken to implement the Ottawa Convention. On the other hand, negotiations on a work programme, a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) and negotiations on an arms race in outer space had all been held “hostage” by members of the Conference. A matter of priority was for the Conference to agree on its programme of work. The “Five Ambassadors” proposal was a reasonable method to allow for this. In that regard, he appealed to all States to accept the proposal and to make any possible suggestions for amendment. Moreover, an FMCT should be pursued.

The Swiss Government fully supported the informal meetings which were held this year and which had the benefit of provoking dialogue and furthering the will of reaching a consensus in the Conference. The Conference, Mr. Faessler said, must continue its work to look into the “new” subjects. Also welcomed was the commitment of increased cooperation between the Conference and civil society. In general, there was a need to make better use of the presence of the many non-governmental organizations focusing on disarmament matters; the synergy they provided the Conference with was of significant value.

In conclusion, Mr. Faessler said the members of the Conference must learn the right lessons, overcome the mutual distrust and re-double their efforts for it to get back to its calling as the sole multinational body for disarmament and non-proliferation.

JUAN MARTABIT (Chile) noted that national security could not exist in isolation. His country had been firm in its commitments to disarmament and security. Security in its conventional form was an inadequate concept which could not fully meet the security needs of individuals. Chile was conducting a policy to support the creation of rules to address the problems of insecurity. The risk of armed conflicts in Latin America had been reduced and existing conflicts had been solved by peaceful means. In this context, Mr. Martabit noted his country’s accession to the “Mendoza Commitment”, also subscribed to in 1991 by Argentina and Brazil, as a way to prohibit weapons of mass destruction and to allow for cooperation, integration and development in disarmament in the region. Moreover, Chile had totally eliminated all of its landmine stocks and production well before the deadline imposed by the Ottawa Convention and had always supported the multilateral efforts made by the United Nations in the area of disarmament. Chile had also adhered to The Hague Code of Conduct against the Proliferation of Ballistic Missiles and encouraged other States to do so.

Mr. Martabit regretted that it had not been possible to overcome the stalemate which had existed in the Conference for eight years and which raised legitimate questions on its future. Chile supported the “A5 proposal” which it felt could serve as a basis for overcoming the stalemate. The most important thing to note was the wish to build a safer world; for this to happen, concessions must be made. In order for international security and peace to be realized all nuclear arsenals must be eliminated. The real threat to international peace, he added, was the lack of resources in many developing countries to deal with their own problems, such as poverty and disease.

The Chilean representative called on Member States to support the A5 proposal. In doing so, he said it should be understood that its implementation must be dealt with consecutively and not simultaneously; that nothing should be agreed until all was agreed; and for countries which had expressed reservations to the Conference’s work programme to present realistic proposals in order to re-launch the Conference on Disarmament.

MOHAMED SALAH DEMBRI (Algeria) said Member States of the Conference needed to show their commitment to the subjects being discussed and to agree to what was at stake for disarmament in general. The debates which took place in the Conference demonstrated how dissatisfied it was because it failed to take on board the aspirations of all the societies represented within. Mr. Dembri referred to several obstacles which stood in the way of international peace and security, among them the increase in weapons of mass destruction; the weakening of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT); the whittling away of multilateralism; the emergence of new nuclear weapons States; the upsurge in military expenditure; the increase in the arms race in outer space and the new forms of international terrorism.

No Member State of the Conference could deny that nuclear disarmament was a common objective and no Member State had declared hostility to the achievement of that objective, Mr. Dembri said. The differences which remained lay in the means to achieving the goals and not the goals themselves. No Member State had been sidelined in any negotiation process and thus the strength of the Conference was confirmed. Moreover, it was essential for the Conference to respond to the many signals sent to it to address key issues of disarmament and to in turn send back a signal to inform the international community that it was committed to the goals of international disarmament.

Mr. Dembri affirmed that the need for efficiency should be expressed by an Ad Hoc Committee with a negotiating mandate as a rational and bold way to proceed; anything to be negotiated in the Conference was urgent in itself. Furthermore, recognizing such priorities would put order into the work programme, putting nuclear disarmament at the centre of concern. The elimination of nuclear weapons was in the best interest of both nuclear weapons States and non-nuclear weapon States. Civil society also had something to say on this subject since the results would benefit all of humanity.

Algeria felt the “A5 proposal” was a significant breakthrough which brought together all the energies of the Conference and bore the seeds for its very survival. There was a need to adopt a balanced work programme based on appropriate mandates. The response to all the challenges posed before the Conference called for a commitment to dialogue and progress and these questions could only be handled in a multilateral forum.

SABINE TAUFMANN (Germany) recalling that the Conference was tasked to undertake a comprehensive programme on disarmament, reiterated her country’s support for the “A5 proposal”, which, she said, contained the concerns expressed by members of the Conference on several occasions. The only feasible way to get out of a stalemate was adoption of this proposal.

Concerning the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT), Ms. Taufmann thanked the United States for finishing its review of the issue and said her country considered such a treaty a logical next step for multilateral nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation; continued progress to nuclear disarmament was indispensable and an FMCT should be the next step on the disarmament agenda. Moreover, reaching an agreement on this issue would be useful in order to bring it to the attention of the participants at the Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty next year.

Recalling the events of 11 September 2001, Ms. Taufmann said the events demonstrated that new means of terrorism were now available and that efforts should be enhanced to keep weapons out of the hands of terrorists. A universal approach was the only way to deal with this issue and the Conference had a key role to play in this undertaking. Security assurances were important first steps. Germany recognized that positive security assurances could serve as a viable deterrent. Moreover, Germany considered the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee to deal with the arms race in outer space as an important step and welcomed any measures to create relevant commitments to build an enforcing instrument.

JACKIE SANDERS (United States) referred to the role her country played on reviewing the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) as well as on the ban on the sale and export of persistent landmines and said the United States had been gratified by the results of the steps taken thus far. Moreover, the United States believed that an FMCT represented the best hope for concrete action which would ultimately save lives and planned to continue to consult with delegations on these two subjects.

CARLO TREZZA (Italy) referred to the invitations sent by his delegation one month ago inviting colleagues to a seminar on cooperative threat reduction which was relevant to the work of the Conference in that it dealt with eliminating weapons of mass destruction. He encouraged all members of the Conference to attend the seminar which would take place in Geneva on 28 September 2004.

FRANCOIS RIVASSEAU (France) announced that the Centre for Security Policy in Geneva had confirmed the holding, in October 2004, of a new seminar on the issue of domestic security and protection of critical civilian infrastructures. The French and Swiss delegations to the Conference would organize a working meeting to express the results of the seminar.

MYA THAN (Myanmar), President of the Conference, while noting the closure of the 2004 session of the Conference on Disarmament, said despite all of its efforts, the programme of work still remained elusive. Nevertheless, progress had been made in certain areas. Among the achievements made was an enhancement and engagement of cooperation with civil society. The priority of the Conference had been to reach an agreement on its programme of work. During the inter-sessional period he said he would continue to interact with Member States, adding that it was his impression that the general feeling among Conference members was that no efforts should be spared to achieve its aims.

In conclusion, Mr. Than said the positions of Member States to the Conference to reach a common ground and to reach consensus on a programme of work should be taken into account and that positive thinking and high professionalism was also a matter of priority.

* *** *

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