Reaching Critical Will

Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)

Conference on Disarmament

General Assembly First Committee

UN Disarmament Commission

Special Session on Disarmament

Statement by Ambassador Kuniko Inoguchi, Japan
President of the Conference on Disarmament

9 September 2003

Distinguished delegates,

Today, the Conference concludes its 2003 annual session, and my sincere appreciation goes on all delegations for their constructive attitude which facilitated the consensus adoption of the annual report. Nevertheless, as yet we have been unable to deliver the breaking news awaited by the international community. In fact, many events taking place in today’s world are on the contrary taking as backwards, away from the aim of the Conference. The current dynamics of the world are not necessarily favorable to global peace. It is, however, also true that the CD and its predecessors have made headlines many times in their history. All past accomplishments, including the BWC, the NPT and the CWC are now of fundamental importance to international peace and security. The most significant advantage of those multilateral instruments is their far-reaching impact, both in terms of universality and time frame. Without them, the global security landscape would be far more dangerous than at present and the ability of the international community to deal with various current security-related problems would be very much limited. The long distance we have covered up to now encourages us to make further tireless effort on the multilateral track, no matter how painstaking the path before us may be.

Last week, Foreign Minister Kawaguchi addressed the Conference. I appreciate her having voiced so elegantly the political will of the country of the presidency to promote disarmament and peace by various means, including multilateral instruments. I also thank Mr. Kim Traavik, State Secretary of Norway, who sent a similar message. I am convinced that such political will of member States is essential to ultimately make possible the current goal to which we are currently striving in this Conference. It is important for all States to revitalize their political interest in the promotion of multilateral disarmament. It is my hope that a greater number of foreign dignitaries from capitals will address the Conference next year.

The problem facing the Conference remains the same as one year ago- how to find a balance between different priorities in its program of work. With the support of a wide range of delegations, the Five Ambassador proposal is a realistic option to strike such a delicate balance. Encouraging signs have recently been witnessed, surrounding this proposal. These developments will indeed provide the presidency with a useful starting point for intersessional consultations.

At the same time, I would like to draw the attention of delegations to paragraph 15 (new paragraph 16) in the annual report, which refers to the discussions on the issue of the linkages and the comprehensive approach. I believe that this debate illustrates the “core” of the current impasse. As a multilateral body, the essential nature of any agreement to be reached at the Conference would be a balance between different interests. I would ask all States to consider, during the coming period for reflection, not only their own priorities but also how to balance their priorities with others’.

Another notable development from this year was, as stated in paragraph 23 (new paragraph 24) the discussions held on the so-called “new issues” that could be relevant to the current international security environment. It is a legitimate point of argument that new issues of collective interest may be identified under the new security environment, undoubtedly significantly different from the one during the Cold War period. This question deserves further discussion without decreasing attention from the traditional issues.

This year, a number of delegations have made use of plenary meetings to focus on the substance of certain subjects. Interactions took place on a limited scale, following those statements. Next year, such substantive discussions should further be encouraged because the Conference should primarily concentrate on substance. It must be recognized that, even in the absence of, and pending agreement on, a program of work, the Conference can still engage in substantive discussions that could serve the overall purpose of international peace and security. The utilization of plenary meetings, as seen this year, is one way to achieve this aim; a more systematic way may merit consideration.

During these intersessional periods, I intend to continue my consultations, in close coordination with the incoming President, on ways to resolve the current stalemate in accordance with the mandate provided by the annual report. In carrying out this task, the most valuable asset will be the accumulation of past efforts made by various ambassadors, including my predecessors, over the past few years, as well as other efforts made by various countries to seek common ground. I call for continued cooperation from all delegations in our effort to create a better, more solid ground for the Conference to conduct a meaningful session next year.

In conclusion, allow me to stress that I could not have conducted my task as President without the valuable support and assistance extended to me by the Secretariat. I thank Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze, Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament and Personal Representative of the Secretary- General of the United Nations, Mr. Enrique Roman Morcy, Deputy Secretary-General of the Conference and Mr. Jerzy Zalesky, Political Officer. On behalf of us all, I also wish to thank the interpreters for their highly professional services.

Thank you.