Reaching Critical Will

Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)

Conference on Disarmament

General Assembly First Committee

UN Disarmament Commission

Special Session on Disarmament

Senior Diplomat from Republic of Korea Addresses Conference on Disarmament
Germany, Japan, Venezuela, Netherlands, Italy, Canada and Ireland also Take the Floor to Discuss Nuclear Disarmament Issues

7 March 2006

Kang Kyung-Wha, the Director-General for International Organizations at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Republic of Korea, today addressed the Conference on Disarmament as it held a general debate on nuclear disarmament and other issues.

Dr. Kang said the Republic of Korea acknowledged the significance of the progress made in the reduction of nuclear warheads thus far and the commitments for further reductions under the Moscow Treaty. But it would like to see deeper cuts in the numbers and measures to assure irreversibility to military uses. In this vein, she welcomed the information provided by some nuclear weapon States during the last four plenary meetings. Strengthening transparency not only contributed towards building confidence among nuclear weapon States, but also provided useful reference materials for non-nuclear weapon States to assess progress in nuclear disarmament.

Among the four core issues of the Conference, a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty remained the priority for the Republic of Korea, Dr. Kang said. Like many others, her country believed that negotiations on an FMCT should start immediately.

Germany, echoing similar sentiments, said the Conference had to start negotiations to prohibit the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. An FMCT would constitute a new substantial nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation measure, a proof for effective multilateralism and an essential building block of the international security system. Germany also fully supported the establishment of an appropriate subsidiary body in the Conference to deal with nuclear disarmament as called for in the Final Document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference.

Venezuela said that in order to face the challenges of nuclear disarmament, the Conference should establish an Ad Hoc Committee to address the issue of nuclear disarmament as proposed in the Five Ambassadors proposal. While Venezuela supported establishing an Ad Hoc Committee to negotiate a treaty on nuclear disarmament, it supported the Five Ambassadors proposal if it would help the Conference make progress in its work.

The Netherlands said it had noted that an across region understanding had arisen in the Conference that a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty was the next logical step towards nuclear disarmament. Of course, differing views were expressed on what this treaty should entail, and on its scope, but that should not stop the Conference from starting negotiations. Starting negotiations on an FMCT as the first step to nuclear disarmament should no longer be postponed.

Canada said the President of the Conference had outlined certain issues to discuss, like the role of nuclear weapons in security policies, strengthening transparency, the principle of irreversibility and FMCT, and he suggested that each of these themes could be assigned to a Friend of Presidents in order to take them forward in an informal mode. That way, the Conference would make better use of these individuals and better use of the time available to it.

Ireland said that like Canada, it wanted to deepen the discussion on the role of nuclear weapons in security policies, strengthening transparency, the principle of irreversibility and FMCT.

Sergei Ordzhonikidze, the Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament and Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva, supported the interesting proposals made today by Canada and Ireland and urged the Conference to think about these proposals and to have some sort of reaction to them. If accepted, those proposals could form a new atmosphere and a new step in the work of the Conference.

Italy and Japan also took the floor this morning.

Ambassador Park In-kook of the Republic of Korea, the President of the Conference, said at the last meeting, he had asked delegations to consider the issues of the role of nuclear weapons in security policies, strengthening transparency, the principle of irreversibility and a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty as indicative guidelines to make the debate more structured. The compilation of various suggests and proposals made during the debate last week was underway, and it would be distributed once it was ready.

The next plenary of the Conference will be held at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 9 March.

Statements

BERNHARD BRASACK (Germany) said the aim of Germany policy in the area of nuclear disarmament remained a world that was free of the threat of nuclear weapons. The final goal of the process of nuclear disarmament was the total elimination of nuclear weapons. Nuclear arms reductions had taken place since the end of the Cold War, namely with the ratification of the Moscow Treaty in 2002. Nevertheless, there was a continuing need for an overall reduction and more progress in reducing the arsenals in the pursuit of gradual, systematic nuclear disarmament. It was also necessary to recognize the application of the principle of irreversibility to guide all measures in the field of nuclear disarmament and arms control as a contribution to the maintenance and reinforcement of international peace, security and stability. Arms control measures should also respect the legitimate security interests of all States and promote stability at the same time. If the multilateral treaty regime was to remain credible, it must be made more effective. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) remained the cornerstone of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime and the essential foundation for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament. It was of paramount importance to maintain its authority and integrity in all its aspects. Furthermore, pursuing universal adherence to the Treaty stood for strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime and thus contributing to enhanced regional and international security and stability. Germany observed growing frustration regarding the slow progress in the field of nuclear disarmament. It also noted that the complete elimination of nuclear weapons could only be achieved by an incremental approach with the 13 practical steps for the systematic and progressive implementation of article 6 adopted by the 2000 NPT Review Conference as the performance benchmark for the disarmament process. The Conference had to start negotiations in the Conference to prohibit the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. An FMCT would constitute a new substantial nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation measure, a proof for effective multilateralism and an essential building block of the international security system. As part of the overall nuclear disarmament process, non-strategic nuclear weapons must also be reduced in a verifiable and irreversible manner on all sides. Furthermore, the entry into force of the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty at the earliest possible date was of key importance for any progress in this field. Germany fully supported the establishment of an appropriate subsidiary body in the Conference to deal with nuclear disarmament as called for in the Final Document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference. Overcoming the stalemate of the Conference would give a decisive impetus to the process of nuclear disarmament.

KANG KYUNG-WHA, Director General for International Organizations at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Republic of Korea, said nuclear disarmament was vitally important to lasting international peace and security. The Republic of Korea acknowledged the significance of the progress made in the reduction of nuclear warheads thus far and the commitments for further reductions under the Moscow Treaty. But it would like to see deeper cuts in the numbers and measures to assure irreversibility to military uses. Progress in nuclear disarmament had not matched the rapidly rising expectations of the post-Cold War era. The gap between the records of nuclear weapon States and the expectations of non-nuclear weapon States remained wide. Non-nuclear weapon States had become increasingly concerned about the role of nuclear weapons in the policies and military doctrines of some nuclear weapon States. Closing this gap was imperative in restoring trust between nuclear weapon States and non-nuclear weapon States. In this vein, Ms. Kang welcomed the information provided by some nuclear weapon States during the last four plenary meetings. They identified useful elements for further elaboration such as the role of nuclear weapons in security policy, ways to strengthen transparency, the principle of irreversibility and a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. The Republic of Korea believed the elaboration by nuclear weapon States on the role of nuclear weapons in their military doctrines would contribute towards dispelling unnecessary misgivings about their intentions. Strengthening transparency not only contributed towards building confidence among nuclear weapon States, but also provided useful reference materials for non-nuclear weapon States to assess progress in nuclear disarmament. The issue of irreversibility had assumed increasing importance among nuclear disarmament related issues in the face of the possibility of nuclear terrorism. These materials must be permanently and irreversibly disposed of. At the multilateral level as well as at the bilateral level, significant efforts were underway in this regard. Among the four core issues of the Conference, a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FCMT) remained the priority for the Republic of Korea. Like many others, it believed that negotiations on an FMCT should start immediately. What the treaty was to say should not be prejudged. The Republic of Korea also hoped that during the focused debates on FMCT in May, the delegations of the Conference would be organized along the normal structure of arms control treaties so that they might serve as a springboard for progress in the future. The international community was in a bind, where mistrust and accusations permeated at every level of multilateral disarmament fora, while unreserved cooperation involving all nations was urgently called for to effectively address the security threats of the day. Sadly, the Conference had exemplified the situation. Focused and interactive debates on issues of the Conference themselves could not produce definitive results, but they still served as stepping stones as delegations continued to search for solutions to the issues before the Conference in the years to come.

YOSHIKI MINE (Japan) thanked Dr. Kang for her statement and wished to profit from her presence today by asking her a question which had been bothering him. He wished to know what Dr. Kang thought of the formula of the Five Ambassadors proposal which dealt with the four major items before the Conference. If she had some basic views on this package, he would be pleased to hear them.

RAQUEL POITEVIEN CABRAL (Venezuela) said all delegations were aware of the position of Venezuela on the question of nuclear disarmament. Venezuela attached the highest priority to the issue of nuclear disarmament and was convinced of the need to proceed with the total elimination of nuclear weapons as the only effective means of addressing the challenges that came from their existence like proliferation and nuclear terrorism. Work needed to be stepped up to be able to have a world free of these lethal weapons. Venezuela was proud to belong to the first nuclear weapon free zone in the world. It supported the establishment of nuclear weapon free zones in other parts of the world, and urged all States to work hard to make that possible, particularly in the Middle East. Venezuela, as a State party to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty, shared the frustration of the international community at the failure of the seventh NPT Review Conference. Both instruments were indispensable to international peace and security. While Venezuela supported all efforts aimed at nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, these should not divert attention from the legitimate right of States to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. In order to face the challenges of nuclear disarmament, Venezuela urged the Conference to establish an Ad Hoc Committee to address the issue of nuclear disarmament as proposed in the Five Ambassadors proposal. While Venezuela supported establishing an Ad Hoc Committee to negotiate a treaty on nuclear disarmament, it supported the Five Ambassadors proposal if it would help the Conference progress in its work. In conclusion, Venezuela was deeply concerned at the existence of military doctrines that still believed in the use of nuclear weapons and that advocated the need to develop more and better nuclear weapons. It was also surprised that a nuclear weapon State had said it would use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear weapon State. States that had nuclear weapons should grant negative security assurances to non-nuclear weapon States through an internationally binding treaty.

JOHANNES LANDMAN (Netherlands) said last week, the Conference had had a fruitful and frank exchange over the issue of nuclear disarmament and the Netherlands was pleased by the transparency of several nuclear weapon States who outlined reductions in their nuclear arsenals. The Netherlands encouraged other nuclear weapon States who had not yet done so to do the same. The Netherlands had also noted that an across region understanding had arisen that a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty was the next logical step towards nuclear disarmament. Of course, differing views were expressed on what this treaty should entail, and on its scope, but that should not stop the Conference from starting negotiations. Starting negotiations on an FMCT as the first step to nuclear disarmament should no longer be postponed. It was time for the Conference to start negotiations again. After that, the Conference would have gained momentum and would be ready to tackle the remaining issues on the agenda. The Netherlands believed in a phased approach for nuclear disarmament, and it was ready to engage in negotiations on an FMCT.

CARLO TREZZA (Italy) said his delegation fully shared the approach outlined by the Republic of Korea and Germany in their statements today, and their focus on some specific aspects of the issue of nuclear disarmament. Both of them had mentioned the results so far, although insufficient, which took place in the field of nuclear disarmament. Also the principles of transparency and other important aspects of nuclear disarmament were commented on. Both countries had also underlined the priority that they gave to a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty and that the concept of discussions on an FMCT could be a spring board for the real negotiations. Italy welcomed these statements. It had also listened to Venezuela’s speech and appreciated it.

PAUL MEYER (Canada) said he had been struck by the calm and interest in the discussions on the theme of transparency in negotiations. When one looked at the challenge of nuclear disarmament, clearly transparency was of relevance. There was a vital role that transparency could play in confidence building, and he believed that the Conference could develop this further. He ask if delegations of nuclear weapon States could consider providing annual indications of nuclear weapons reductions since the Moscow Treaty had come into effect, and a projection of the plans for further reductions over the next five years. If the United States and Russia could agree on a final lower number of weapons, that too could serve as important progress. Canada had heard Germany speak about how the exchange of information could serve as an important confidence building measure. It recognized that there were security issues, but the exchange of information did not have to be site specific. Regarding the challenges before the Conference and how to continue to move beyond the general statements to a greater involvement with substance, further progress had to be made. The Six Friends of Presidents had been named, and they would be pleased if the Conference could give them something more substantive to do. The President of the Conference had outlined certain issues to discuss, like the role of nuclear weapons in security policies, strengthening transparency, the principle of irreversibility and FMCT, and he suggested that each of these themes could be assigned to a Friend of Presidents in order to take them forward in an informal mode. That way, the Conference would make better use of these individuals and better use of the time available to it.

MARY WHELAN (Ireland) said the President of the Conference had extrapolated the four themes of the role of nuclear weapons in security policies, strengthening transparency, the principle of irreversibility and FMCT, and like Canada, Ireland wanted to deepen the discussion on these issues; it wanted to pursue how to give them more depth in the deliberations over the next few weeks. She asked when delegations could expect the compilation document that the President had referred to, adding that Ireland looked forward to working with other delegations on the issue of transparency.

KANG KYUNG-WHA, Director General for International Organizations at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Republic of Korea, said regarding the question by Japan on the position of the Republic of Korea on the Five Ambassadors proposal, her colleagues in Geneva had expressed this position before. The Republic of Korea remained flexible in the process of building consensus on the Five Ambassadors proposal. It also believed that a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty on its own merit deserved priority.

PARK IN-KOOK (Republic of Korea), President of the Conference, said he wanted to make clear how he would use up the remaining meetings of the Conference under the Presidency of the Republic of Korea. As his predecessor had outlined, each President would have general debate meetings and focused debate meetings. During the general debate, he would allow a rolling discussion on all agenda items. The four elements which he had suggested at the last meeting were just indicative guidelines. He repeated that anyone could raise any issue. Based on that principle, he encouraged all Member States to actively participate in an interactive pattern like that reflected today.

SERGEI ORDZHONIKIDZE, Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament and Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva, said that interesting proposals had been made today by Canada and Ireland on further procedures of the Conference. It would be good for the Conference to think about these proposals and to have some sort of reaction to them. These proposals, if they were accepted, could form a new atmosphere and a new step in the work of the Conference. He believed that these proposals were quite important for the practical work of the Conference.