Thank you very much, Mr. Chairmen,
And as it is the first time I take the floor, let me offer my congratulations and give you our assurance of support.
Mr. Chairmen,
We have heard this morning about collective ownership and ambition and I would like to offer a few comments on that.
Our collective ambition is to achieve a world without nuclear weapons. The CD is an important part of taking forward the commitment of those Nuclear Weapon States that have signed the NPT, notably Article 6, and to a commitment to disarm.

We have heard that the CD is the sole negotiation forum, where all the states that possess nuclear weapons can meet together to take action collectively to achieve that noble ambition. A forum in which States’ national security interests are protected by the rule of consensus. But Mr. Chairmen, dear colleagues, we should beware of jargon. The CD is the only permanent negotiating forum. It is not the sole. There could be others, as indeed there have been others. We have seen in Geneva what happens in other fora when the rule of consensus is abused. These are facts, they are not threats.

It is, Mr. Chairmen, difficult to understand how the procedural implementation of a previous policy decision has led to this current impasse. It is of course the right of any state to remove itself from consensus. However it is not particularly helpful to make allegations about “manoeuvres” or  veiled criticisms of our Presidencies.

On the contrary, we should offer due credit to the P6 Presidencies for their work this year. This year again, the P6 platform has demonstrated its great value as a mechanism for building the new structures to address the 21st Century agenda, the interconnected and interdependent world, we live in today. It is what the Foreign Minister of the United Kingdom, David Miliband, has called it the Coalition of Consent.

Mr. Chairmen,
The UK joins others in taking particular pleasure that the price for breaking the decade long deadlock on the Programme of Work was won by a policy decision brokered and delivered by a leading nation of the Non-Aligned Movement. This is indeed only fitting in the 21st Century arms controls and disarmament agenda

As I said, Mr. President and dear Colleagues, it is the right of any country to withdraw from consensus. But it is also standard diplomatic practice that, if that country does nevertheless seek progress, that it should take responsibility for that act and itself should seek to reformulate consensus, to persuade others that the changes they seek are acceptable. It is not, I am afraid Mr. Chairmen, a practice which involves trying to establish an alliance of supporters for those changes. That is not an approach to a collective endeavour that most of us in this room would recognize, but unfortunately that is where we are.
Thank you.

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