15 August 2006

The Conference on Disarmament this morning held a general debate, hearing statements from Colombia on a comprehensive programme of work on disarmament and transparency in armaments and from Sri Lanka on efforts to create momentum in the Conference and to end its paralysis.

Colombia said that concerning the agenda item on a comprehensive programme of work on disarmament and transparency in armaments, Colombia viewed with concern the increase in military expenditure which frequently went beyond national security requirements around the world. This, among other things, generated tensions and used up tremendous resources which should be used for development. States should support all initiatives to control arms trade, particularly small arms and weapons. It was urgent to achieve a binding international agreement such as a treaty or an instrument for a moratorium on small arms and light weapons. It was clear that those weapons already existed in more than sufficient numbers and there was no reason for more to be made. These small arms and light weapons had become weapons of mass destruction.

Sri Lanka said that thanks to the P6 initiative, the Conference had established a schedule of activities which could very well form the basis for the work of the Conference in the years ahead. The challenge would be to make adjustments in the schedule wherever more time was needed, accommodating both proposals and ideas for discussions as well as the work for experts, including commencing negotiations on what the Secretary-General said was the ground-breaking instrument on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. This could of course only be done if the Conference could agree to address on an equal footing the priority security concerns of all Member States and if the Conference could maintain the constructive atmosphere that had prevailed during the year.

At the end of the meeting, Ambassador Ousmane Camara of Senegal, the President of the Conference, said the plenary would be immediately followed by open-ended consultations on the report of the Conference which would be presented to the General Assembly.

The next public plenary of the Conference will be held at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 17 August.

Statements

CLEMENCIA FORERO UCROS (Colombia) said as the Conference’s 2006 session was coming to an end, Colombia was struck by conflicting feelings: frustration that the Conference was ending its eighth consecutive year without concluding a programme of work, and moderate optimism that the exercise undertaken of a thematic debate had generated an awareness that only through showing political will could this unjustified paralysis be ended. Concerning the agenda item on a comprehensive programme of work on disarmament and transparency in armaments, Colombia viewed with concern the increase in military expenditure which frequently went beyond national security requirements around the world. This, among other things, generated tensions and used up tremendous resources which should be used for development. States should support all initiatives to control arms trade, particularly small arms and weapons. There was a need to bring about an effective implementation of the UN programme of action on trafficking in small arms and light weapons. It was also urgent to achieve a binding international agreement such as a treaty or an instrument for a moratorium on small arms and light weapons. It was clear that those weapons already existed in more than sufficient numbers and there was no reason for more to be made. As their numbers increased, their prices decreased, and they became more available to people. These small arms and light weapons had become weapons of mass destruction. Colombia hoped that the agenda item on a comprehensive programme of work on disarmament and transparency in armaments would no longer be dealt with as a minor issue in the future work of the Conference and that its status as an important traditional item on the agenda should be recognized.

Concerning the Five Ambassadors initiative, Colombia wished to make a proposal which could constitute a programme of work for the Conference. First, the Conference should establish an Ad Hoc Committee to negotiate a treaty on fissile materials, with a broadened mandate which included such issues as current production and verification. Second, in parallel, the Conference should develop a timetable of progressive deliberations on the other items on the Five Ambassadors initiative, and at the same time get political support from capitals to ensure support and agreement. The Friends of the President should continue to help. Colombia believed that the Conference could discuss all issues without ignoring any and could help to combine synergies. The year 2006 had not really been different from the previous eight years, but it had not been quite the same either. Colombia hoped that 2007 would allow the Conference to regain its relevance and importance.

SARALA FERNANDO (Sri Lanka) said this was a time of increased high-level recognition of the relevance and role of the Conference on Disarmament. The UN Secretary-General in his address to the Conference in June had referred to the “collective power” of the Conference on Disarmament to wake up the world to the dangers of the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The G8 in its St. Petersburg statement in July on non-proliferation had reiterated its commitment to the reinvigoration of relevant multilateral fora beginning with the Conference.

The Conference had to face the question of whether it could, and if so how, build on the P6 initiative for its work in 2007. There had been recommendations for radical change. Others had urged that reform be brought through small increment steps. The Friends of the President had also made some recommendations. All of this should provide food for thought as to how the Member States may together build upon the new steps laid this year by the P6 in order to embark further on what they all believed should be a new period of productivity for the Conference. Thanks to the P6 initiative, the Conference had established a schedule of activities which could very well form the basis for the work of the Conference in the years ahead. The challenge would be to make adjustments in the schedule wherever more time was needed, accommodating both proposals and ideas for discussions as well as the work for experts including commencing negotiations on what the Secretary-General said was the ground-breaking instrument on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. This could of course only be done if the Conference could agree to address on an equal footing the priority security concerns of all Member States and if the Conference could maintain the constructive atmosphere that had prevailed during the year.

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