|
CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT
OPENS FIRST PART OF 2005 SESSION
UN Secretary-General Says Disarmament is
Critical for Conflict Prevention, Peace-Building and Realizing the
Millennium Goals
27 January 2005
The Conference on Disarmament this morning held the first plenary
of the first part of its 2005 session and heard the message of United
Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan which was delivered by Under-Secretary-General
Sergei Ordzhonikidze, the Secretary-General of the Conference on
Disarmament and the Director-General of the United Nations Office
at Geneva.
In his message, the Secretary-General said the Conference on Disarmament
opened its current session with renewed hopes of overcoming the
impasse that had impeded its work for so long. He noted that disarmament
was critical for conflict prevention, peace-building and the realization
of the Millennium Development Goals. Disarmament matters also figured
prominently in the report of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges
and Change, and would be a major part of discussions among Member
States in the months ahead leading up to September's summit-level
review of the Millennium Declaration. He called upon the Members
of the Conference to seriously consider the Panel's recommendations.
The President of the Conference, Ambassador Chris Sanders of the
Netherlands, stressed that if the present problems persisted, the
Conference might well lose its relevance and follow in the footsteps
of the United Nations Disarmament Commission. He wanted the Member
States to think about whose interests would be damaged if this were
to happen. He said that he would make his ultimate efforts to get
the Conference back to real work and would try to see if there was
any chance of overcoming existing difficulties in the interest of
those who felt that the Conference on Disarmament was of interest
to their security.
On behalf of the Conference, the President expressed his condolences
to the Governments and peoples affected by the earthquake and tsunami
in the Indian Ocean on 26 December. At his request, the Conference
observed a minute of silence in memory of the victims of the catastrophe.
Sri Lanka, India and Indonesia thanked the Conference for the condolences
addressed to their countries and for the solidarity expressed by
the international community to help the victims.
The Russian Federation and Kenya took the floor this morning to
speak about landmines, and Peru and France spoke about the 2005
session of the Conference. Poland and Germany addressed the issue
of the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi death
camps.
At the end of the meeting, the Conference decided to accept requests
by 33 States to participate in the 2005 session of the Conference
as observers. The States are Azerbaijan, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus,
Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Holy
See, Iceland, Jordan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malta, Oman, Philippines, Portugal,
Qatar, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Serbia and Montenegro, Singapore,
Slovenia, Thailand, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and
Uruguay.
Before the decision was taken, Turkey said that it accepted document
CD/WP.537 concerning the participation of the non-member States
as observers within the framework of letters addressed by Turkey
to the Secretary-General of the Conference CD/1438 and CD/1738.
The next public plenary of the Conference will be held at 10 a.m.
on Tuesday, 1 February. It will be followed by a private plenary.
Statements
CHRIS SANDERS (the Netherlands), President of the Conference, said
that a month ago, two massive earthquakes and aftershocks which
followed had triggered a tsunami, provoking an unprecedented disaster.
According to the data available, the total death toll so far was
160,000 according to data received by the General Assembly, but
the figure of those who perished was likely to rise. Tens of thousands
were still missing, hundreds of thousands had lost their homes and
a million had been displaced. The tsunami had also impacted heavily
on the national economies of the countries it affected and had cost
thousands of millions of dollars in damages. Roads, homes, schools
and hospitals had been swept away or extensively damaged. This catastrophe
had triggered an unprecedented worldwide response. On behalf of
the Conference on Disarmament and on his own behalf, he presented
his most sincere condolences to peoples and governments of the affected
countries. He invited the Conference to observe a minute of silence
in commemoration of the victims of the tsunami disaster.
Ambassador Sanders said that he would only give a brief statement
as the Conference who soon hear the message of the UN Secretary-General
which he fully shared. He would refrain from giving a detailed analysis
of the situation. If the present problems of the Conference persisted,
the Conference might well lose its relevance and follow in the footsteps
of the United Nations Disarmament Commission. He wanted the Member
States to think of whose interests would be damaged if this were
to happen.
Ambassador Sanders said he wanted to be pragmatic and would make
his ultimate efforts to get the Conference back to real work. He
had so far consulted with 52 members, and would continue to consult
with the remaining Member States next week. His time had been too
limited to meet them all before he had circulated his non-paper
last week which gave his initial preliminary findings from his consultations.
The non paper was only a factual summary of what he felt and understood
was the case according to the delegations he had spoken to. Next
Tuesday, he hoped to discuss with Member States the substantive
part of this non-paper and anyone wanting to rectify any information
in it could do so. Today, the conference would concentrate on two
issues, the agenda and observers.
In summary, Ambassador Sanders said that he would use these four
weeks to his utmost and would try to see if there was any chance
of overcoming existing difficulties in the interest of those who
felt that the Conference on Disarmament was of interest to their
security. That was the fundamental question which the Conference
had to face.
SERGEI ORDZHONIKIDZE, Under-Secretary General, the Director-General
of the United Nations Office at Geneva and the Secretary-General
of the Conference on Disarmament, delivering the statement of KOFI
ANNAN, the United Nations Secretary-General, said that the Secretary-General
had sent his greetings to the Conference on Disarmament as it opened
its 2005 session. Mr. Annan said the Conference on Disarmament opened
its current session with renewed hopes of overcoming the impasse
that had impeded its work for so long. After many years of debate
on its programme of work, the Conference had engaged itself, albeit
informally, in a substantive discussion of issues on its agenda.
He noted that the Conference had also addressed other issues relevant
to the current international security environment, including ways
to strengthen compliance with arms control and disarmament agreements,
and the threat of weapons of mass destruction and their means of
delivery falling into the hands of terrorists.
Mr. Ordzhonikidze said that the Secretary-General had said he had
been encouraged to see the strong political support given to the
Conference by foreign ministers who addressed it last year. Such
high-level statements could create political impetus towards reinvigorating
the Conference, and he urged the Conference to continue this practice.
The Conference might also benefit from establishing closer contacts
with other international arms control and disarmament agencies and
organizations, and inviting the heads of such bodies to speak on
issues of mutual interest.
The Secretary-General underlined that the Conference still faced
the demanding task of finding ways to move forward. Disarmament
was critical for conflict prevention, peace-building and the realization
of the Millennium Development Goals. Disarmament matters also figured
prominently in the report of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges
and Change, and would be a major part of discussions among Member
States in the months ahead leading up to September's summit-level
review of the Millennium Declaration. He called upon the Members
of the Conference to seriously consider the Panel's recommendations.
Mr. Annan said that with so much at stake, he urge the Conference
Members to do their utmost to enable the Conference to play its
envisaged role, and to place its accumulated knowledge and experience
fully at the service of the world's people.
ENRIQUE ROMAN-MORAY, the Deputy Secretary-General of the Conference
on Disarmament, said the Conference in 2005 had at its disposal
10 fully serviced meetings per week, including interpretation in
all the official languages of the United Nations. However, the budget
recently adopted by the General Assembly put some constraints on
the capacity of conference services. This affected, among other
things, unscheduled meetings, meetings outside of normal working
hours, and the publication of documents.
MR. ORDZHONIKIDZE said that the information just relayed by Ambassador
Roman- Moray was based on the relevant resolutions of the General
Assembly which had been adopted by the Member States. He hoped that
all the measures would be respected.
LEONID SKOTNIKOV (the Russian Federation) joined in the words of
condolences expressed concerning the countries affected by the tsunami.
The tsunami had been a horrible tragedy in light of which the international
community had displayed remarkable solidarity. He hoped that the
same sort of solidarity and interaction was expressed to resolve
other problems facing mankind, including problems facing security
and bringing about disarmament.
Ambassador Skotnikov said that he would like to inform the Conference
that on 7 December 2004, the President of the Russian Federation
had signed into law the Bill on Ratification by the Russian Federation
of the Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Conventional Weapons.
Thus Russia had shown its full commitment to the solution of the
"landmine" problem. Russia regarded the Protocol as an
effective mechanism with a proper balance of military interests
and humanitarian concerns with respect to various types of landmines.
The Protocol did not lose its unique value after the signing of
the Ottawa Convention. In fact it was still an important legal instrument
which regulated relations of States and non-state actors in the
area that covered handling of not only anti-personnel landmines
but other types of mines as well. Russia was interested in the full
materialization of the Protocol's potential.
Even prior to its ratification, the Russian Federation had fully
complied with all the provisions of the Amended Protocol II, Ambassador
Skotnikov said. The Russian Federation shared the concern of the
international community about irresponsible use of anti-personnel
mines and the ratification of the Amended Protocol II proved that.
A mine-free world remained Russia's goal. The Russian Federation
also supported in principle the idea of joining the Convention on
the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer
of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction, but that could
only be done when Russia found itself capable of fulfilling its
obligations.
In conclusion, Ambassador Skotnikov said he had listened carefully
to the statement of the President and the message of the Secretary-General
and he shared the views of the Secretary-General regarding how disarmament
was critical for conflict prevention, peace-building and the realization
of the Millennium Development Goals. Last year, Member States had
been able to revitalize somewhat the atmosphere in the Conference.
Member States had to proceed to the main goal, which was launching
substantive work. The Russian Federation was prepared to make efforts
to get the Conference moving so that it could finally get down to
work in accordance to its mandate. The Five Ambassadors proposal
was a good basis for a compromise, and it was open to improvements.
He appealed to all Member States to study the proposal.
ELIZABETH ASTETE RODRIGUEZ (Peru) said she had listened to the
message of the Secretary-General on the importance of strengthening
efforts to ensure that the Conference on Disarmament could resume
its substantive work and contribute to international peace and security.
The Conference, which had been unable to reach agreement over the
past eight years, needed to find a formula that would address the
security concerns of all its Member States. This did not mean that
the key to success meant that all the concerns of all States should
be reflected. After all, negotiations were the foundation of the
work of the Conference, and negotiations required all to express
good will and flexibility.
The Peruvian Representative said that it should be born in mind
that according to United Nations estimates, the world in 2002 had
spent $ 839 billion on armaments, and that in order to provide basic
social services to the world, $ 40 billion over 10 years would be
required - which was less that half of what was spent annually on
arms. While outlining Peru's efforts towards disarmament at the
regional level, she noted that Peru had been the first Latin American
country to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Peru supported
all initiatives which would help achieve the main goal of a world
free of nuclear weapons. She noted that the General Assembly had
mentioned in a resolution the decreasing commitment to the 13 specific
steps towards nuclear disarmament which had been developed by the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference in 2000.
In conclusion, she said that Peru was aware that the international
system had changed since the Conference had been founded. However,
the traditional issues on the agenda of the Conference were still
extremely relevant to the international community and must remain
so. Peru was convinced that the Conference should be able to adapt
to deal with the current issues which were of interest to the international
community. It must find a balance in order to meet
the security concerns of the Member States. The Conference must
follow the steps of the First Committee and improve its work in
order to ensure that it became once again relevant to international
disarmament and security.
PHILIP OWADE (Kenya), reading out a statement on behalf of Ambassador
AMINA MOHAMED, said that she had wished to make a few remarks on
the Nairobi Summit on a Mine-Free World which Kenya had had the
honour and privilege to host in Nairobi from 29 November to 3 December
2004. She was grateful to everyone who had attended the conference.
The Nairobi Summit would no doubt go down in the annals of history
as a landmark conference in the path towards the total elimination
of the menace of landmines and unparalleled assistance to mine victims.
For the first time since 1997, the international community had gathered
at a high political level to examine the humanitarian problems caused
by anti-personnel mines and the steps being taken to address them.
The Summit had made a significant step in the direction of universalization.
Positive signs of growing acceptance of the Convention had come
from other States that were still outside it, including China, Indonesia
and Somalia.
After outlining the commitments which the States parties had adopted
in the Nairobi Plan of Action 2005 to 2009, Mr. Owade said Ms. Mohamed's
statement had noted that the Nairobi Summit had sent a strong and
resolute message to those who were still outside the treaty that
the international community could no longer tolerate those weapons
which killed and maimed innocent civilians. She congratulated Croatia
for offering to host the next meeting of States parties from 28
November to 2 December 2005.
FRANCOIS RIVASSEAU (France) noted that in 2004, modest efforts
had been made to try to revitalize the Conference. Last year, when
France and a number of countries had raised the question of "new
issues", they had asked that in additional to the conventional
issues, the Conference could look at other relevant subjects relating
to disarmament and security. The group had wanted the Conference
to engage in thinking about how to respond to the threats facing
the world today and the security expectations. As a result, informal
sessions had been held and had discussed "new additional issues".
In its 2004 report, the Conference had recognized the importance
of new issues which were pertinent in the new security environment
and the First Committee had welcomed this step in a resolution adopted
by consensus.
Ambassador Rivasseau said that the Conference now was resuming
its work with the ambition to work even more concretely than last
year. The first step would be to agree on the programme of work
which would not prevent the Conference from discussing other issues,
but would reflect the priorities placed by the Conference for the
past 25 years. For eight years, the Conference had been agreeing
on is agenda and then remaining paralysed. Last year, fresh momentum
had been injected. This year, Member States should take a little
bit of time to debate the issue of the agenda again. He suggested
that a new point could simply be added on "new and additional
themes".
ZDZISLAW RAPACKI (Poland) said that the world today was commemorating
the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of the concentration
camp Auschwitz-Birkenau. Though it was but one death camp among
many, Auschwitz had become for the world a symbol of terror, genocide
and the Holocaust. It was established by the Nazis in 1940 in the
suburbs of the city of Oswiecim which, like other parts of Poland,
had been occupied by Nazi Germany during the Second World War. It
was a complex consisting of a concentration, extermination and forced-labour
camp, and 39 sub-camps. At first, only Poles were imprisoned and
killed, but then they were joined by Soviet prisoners of war, Roma
and almost 30 other nationalities. In 1942, it became the site of
one of the greatest mass murders in the history of humanity perpetrated
against European Jews by Hitler. It was estimated that among the
1.6 million people brought to Auschwitz, there were at least 1,100,000
Jews from all the countries of occupied Europe, more than 140,000
Poles, approximately 20,000 Roma from several European countries,
more than 15,0000 Soviet prisoners of war and thousands of prisoners
of other nationalities. Approximately 1.5 million persons died in
Auschwitz.
The Polish Representative said it was a different world which countries
lived in now. Nations which had fought each other 60 years ago were
now cooperating and together confronting new challenges. Whatever
the new threats to humanity, countries must learn the lesson of
Auschwitz and be brave enough to act. They should not fear to undertake
the task to make the world a more secure place for future generations.
VOLKER HEINSBERG (Germany) said he also wished to make some remarks
on the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of the death camps.
It was 60 years to the day that Auschwitz and other extermination
camps had been freed and he commemorated the millions of victims,
innocent men and women and children, Jews, Sinti, Roma, handicapped
persons, prisoners of war, and dissidents and others from around
Europe. Germany bowed its head in deep mourning. Auschwitz would
forever be a symbol of the genocide, the most horrific sign of a
system which had been blinded by hatred and which had brought untold
suffering to humanity. It was difficult to find words for the suffering
and pain which the victims had gone through. This would always be
part of the history of Germany, a denial of all civilized things.
The new democratic Germany had a historic and moral responsibility
for Auschwitz which had left an indelible sign on it.
It was Germany's responsibility to promote peaceful cooperation
and confidence-building in the new world in order to prevent another
genocide against mankind. This included working against the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction. Effective multilateralism was the
safest way to reach this goal. The Conference on Disarmament had
been given an important mandate by the United Nations. He strongly
appealed to all the Member States to undertake renewed efforts to
fulfil their responsibility.
MR. SANDERS said that the world this week was marking the sixtieth
anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz and the many other camps
that fell to the Allied Forces in the winter and spring of 1945.
The United Nations was created to save succeeding generations from
the scourge of war and to ensure that the horrors of these camps
would never re-occur. He emphasized that disarmament was crucial
to the ongoing efforts to build confidence, and eventually significantly
improve relations among States, in order to honour these commitments
of the United Nations founding fathers.
IDRISS JAZAIRY (Algeria) expressed his satisfaction at what he
hoped would be the adoption of the Conference's new agenda after
a fruitful debate which was required by the rules of procedure.
Algeria looked forward to the 2005 session at a time when international
circumstances did not make it optimistic. The world today faced
among other things increased stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction,
proliferation of weapons in outer space, and international terrorism.
Member States had a duty to react in a multilateral framework to
provide a suitable solution to this sad state of affairs.
The Algerian Representative said that on the issue of nuclear disarmament,
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was the cornerstone and
its universality must be ensured. In the NPT Review Conference,
13 steps had been spelt out to reduce nuclear arsenals to pave the
way to general disarmament. It was regrettable to note that to date,
these 13 steps remained dead letters and no progress had been made.
The risk of nuclear proliferation and the seriousness if international
terrorists obtained nuclear weapons was a serious concern. Nuclear
disarmament and non-proliferation were two aspects of the NPT which
were mutually dependant. He welcomed steps taken by certain regions
to declare them free of nuclear weapons. However, he regretted that
it was not possible for the Middle East to do so as Israel refused
to join the NPT and to open its nuclear facilities to the International
Atomic Energy Agency.
Algeria was in favour of agreeing on a binding, non-discriminatory
legal instrument to cover both the future production and the stockpiles
of fissile materials, Mr. Jazairy said. This instrument should have
multilateral verification methods. Also, the issue of the militarization
of outer space was another source of concern as it jeopardized international
peace and security. Algeria urged that outer space be reserved for
peaceful uses and called for a subsidiary body to conduct negotiations
on all issues which required multilateral solutions which took into
account the concerns of all.
In conclusion, Ambassador Jazairy said that it was a pity that
the Conference had been paralysed because of the lack of consensus
on the programme of work. The Five Ambassadors initiative had the
support of the majority of the delegations and provided the best
basis on reaching a consensus on the programme of work. The proposal
remained open to all suggestions and amendments. Algeria still supported
this proposal and hoped that the presidential consultations would
conclude with a consensus on the basis of the proposal. Disarmament
and nuclear non-proliferation were not an end in themselves, but
the ultimate goal was the preservation of mankind and human civilization.
However, he noted that a lasting solution could not be achieved
without tackling the economic situation because of extreme poverty
and marginalization. The international community should create a
more just and stable world.
DC05002E
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
|