Statement by Mr. Peter Kolarov, Minister Plenipotentiary
On behalf of the Special Coordinator on Expansion of
the Membership of the Conference on Disarmament

30/8/01

Mr. President,

At the outset, please allow me to extend my warmest congratulations and appreciation on your assumption of the Presidency of the Conference on Disarmament and to wish you every success. Let me assure you, that you can count on my delegation's full cooperation and support.

Mr. President,

It is my pleasure to address today the Conference on Disarmament in my capacity as Special Coordinator on the expansion of the CD, thus discharging the mandate contained in decision CD/1646 dated June 14, 2001. 1 think it is worth recalling that under para.2 of its Rules of Procedure the CD is under the obligation to review at regular intervals its membership. In fact, over the past decade the Conference on Disarmament has focused on the expansion of its membership on a more or less regular basis, thus trying to find a mutually acceptable solution to the legal as well as moral "' ...dilemma, created by the existing tension between the limited membership of the Conference on the one hand and the universal scope of its task on the other" to quote Ambassador Hofer of Switzerland who served as Special Coordinator in 1998 and with whom I had the pleasure to begin my consultations. Indeed, Mr. President, I had a chance to step on the solid ground prepared by my predecessors and instead of trying anew to develop theoretically the problem of CD enlargement I could rather concentrate on the respective national positions trying to compare them so as to report to you on a possible consensus, or at least on the prevailing mood in the CD on the issue. Accordingly - and you have certainly noticed that - the options, listed in the questionnaire, circulated in mid-July to all the CD Member States, namely maintaining the status quo, limited expansion, expansion by ail 22 countries which have applied for membership and qualified universality (i.e. right to application by all UN and specialized agencies' Member States) - were not the product of my imagination. They were already discussed in the past when a limited expansion of the CD membership was agreed upon. Nevertheless, I have considered that such a pragmatic approach would be helpful for clarifying the respective national positions on a new expansion of this important body and would prepare the factual basis, required for further negotiations.

In discharging my term of service, during the past month I had bilateral consultations with andlor received replies from almost half of the CD Member States. I consider these consultations as being very helpful as they have provided me with first hand sense on our aspirations as well as on which and where are the most sensitive issues. The preliminary results of this first round have shown an overwhelming support for a considerable expansion of the membership of the Conference. In fact, more than 2/3 of the delegations that have expressed their position is favorable to the qualified universality option or the enlargement of the CD with the 22 applicant states, this latter being often considered as an interim step towards the universal membership of the

Conference. In general, most of the delegations that have expressed their support for such an enlargement argue, that in the current impasse of the CD, maintaining the system of limited membership would be a mistake and would perpetuate the legitimacy crisis of the Conference. A considerable enlargement without preconditions or the qualified universality options would democratize the CD and would pave the way for future disarmament negotiations inside the Conference rather than in ad hoc fora outside the CD framework. Along the same line and for obvious reasons most of the abovementioned delegations reject practically any selection criteria or preconditions for membership. Of course, there are also opponents to these two options. Several delegations have expressed doubt in the utility of increasing considerably the membership. Common for those Member States is the argument that the last 1999 expansion did not help overcoming the current CD deadlock.

Most of the remaining delegations seem to be favorable to a limited expansion by 5 to 15 or more new members, carried out in accordance with established objective criteria, such as date of application and balanced regional representation. Other proposed criteria would be interest and capacity to participate in the work of the Conference, contribution to the cause of disarmament, implementation of the international instruments in the disarmament field. As in the past, this option seems to be feasible, but a very complicated one as ~ and this was pointed out by most of its opponents - it implies the selection of a number of agreed criteria for membership. In fact, past experience has shown that this option requires not the application of a set of objective criteria for expansion, but a temporary, though acceptable to all CD Member States, solution of further exclusion of some of the applicant countries. It is also clear that a discussion on membership criteria may lead to an indefinite delay as it is almost impossible to accommodate all divergent views on how to identify the ideal number of participants, taking into account the concept of regional balance - (which, by the way, is considered by many as an ample example of Cold War thinking) - the date of application. the activeness, interest, contribution etc. etc., by satisfying at the same time competing political, regional geo-strategic and other claims.

Finally, the issue of enlargement remains sensitive for a few countries that are still not fully persuaded in the utility of a new expansion of the Conference, pointing out that the previous enlargement did not increase the effectiveness of the Conference. However., as it was stressed by many delegations, there is no proof of any direct correlation between the number of members negotiating and the ability to perform. On the contrary - other fora have proved to do rather well when negotiating efficiently, notwithstanding the number of their members. Against this background I have noticed a broad support for the thesis that tack of sufficient political will and not increased membership is the main reason for the current CD impasse.

Taking into account the time restraints, and bearing in mind the sensitiveness of the issue I would sum up my observations as follows:

First, as already stated, under the Rules of Procedure the membership of the Conference on Disarmament is to be reviewed at regular intervals. During my consultations no one challenged this approach. I have observed readiness and active support in my search for a mutually acceptable solution and I am really grateful for the cooperation and the understanding I have received from all CD Member States in discharging my duties.

Secondly, there is a broad majority feeling in favour of a new considerable expansion of the Conference on Disarmament. In fact I have noticed a strong determination among many delegations to reach a durable and even a definitive solution to the problem of the CD membership by adopting the appropriate option.

Thirdly, even if most delegations have shown flexibility and readiness to consult on the issue, at this stage there is still no consensus on any of the four options and I am still not in a position to propose a mutually agreed position, tolerable to all of the Member States. The Expansion of the Conference on Disarmament is a dynamic process, which, however, is also a reflection of the international security surrounding. This exercise will require further hard work and a lot of negotiating skills in search of a delicate balance between the respective national interests and our common responsibilities as the sole negotiating body with an universal task in the field of international security and disarmament.

Fourthly, as already stated, due to the limited time available as well as for other reasons beyond my control I have to confess that I was not in a position to accomplish fully my responsibilities in the way I consider appropriate. Consequently, this should be regarded only as an interim report and I would strongly recommend the continuation of this important exercise through the reappointment at the beginning of the 2002 session of the Conference of a Special Coordinator on the Expansion of the Membership of the CD. It goes without saying, Mr. President, that I am ready to provide my successor with the outcome of my experience.

Finally, Mr. President, I would like to express my gratitude to all the delegations for their valuable support. My gratitude goes also to Mr. Vladimir Petrovsky - Secretary-General of the CD and to his Deputy - Mr. Enrique Roman-Morey, as well as to Mr. Jerzy Zaleski, who provided me with excellent assistance in my work as Special Coordinator.

Thank you for your attention!