|
CD Report 2009
The CD Report is a reporting service
from Reaching Critical Will, prepared in collaboration with
the WILPF Geneva office.
Archives
2008 |
2007 |
2006 | 2005
| 2004
| 2003
Third Part
17 September: CD concludes its
2009 session; adopts final report
15 September: Revised draft report
circulated
8 September: Geneva NGO Committee
for Disarmament delivers statement to the CD
3 September: President introduces
draft report; First Committee chair outlines objectives
2 September: Austrian Minister
addresses CD
31 August: CD unable to implement
its programme of work this year
27 August: Collective ownership,
collective ambitions
25 August: Collective security
as national security
20 August: Programme of work
still remains to be implemented
17 August: Still no consensus
12 August: Chinas Foreign
Minister addresses the CD
10 August: More delays and
rotting fruit
7 August: Decision on implementation
postponed
6 August: Atomic bombing anniversaries
and the importance of the CD
4 August: CD’s third part
opens with a new proposal for implementing the programme of
work
Second Part
2 July: The CD will take the
summer to “ripen”
30 June: No movement on implementing
the programme of work
26 June: Unripe fruit at the
Conference on Disarmament
25 June: Draft proposals for
moving forward
18 June: Concluding consultations
11 June: Principles for progress
4 June: Moving forward: Interests
and positions
29 May: CD adopts a programme
of work
28 May: Support from delegations
and NGOs for bringing the CD back to work
26 May: Programmes of work and
nuclear tests: The importance of good diplomacy
22 May: Contemplating the proposed
programme of work
19 May: A “new multilateralism”
toward a programme of work
First Part
26 March: Ways forward for
the CD and space security
19 March: Calls for multilateral
cooperation
17 March: Algerian minister
of foreign affairs calls for the elimination of nuclear weapons
12 March: Controversy over mention
of the Middle East nuclear weapon free zone
7 March: Address by Russian Foreign
Minister
5 March: International Women's
Day Statement to the CD
3 March: Multilateral disarmament
for peace, security, development, and human rights
26 February: Calling for
creative work
24 February: Russian ambassador
requests Saturday meeting
19 February: Security in
outer space and against nuclear weapons
17 February: "Security" cannot
be a precondition for negotiations
12 February: Militaristic
and humanistic conceptions of security
5 February: Shout outs for
de-alerting and civil society; examples of anti-nuclear nuclearism
3 February: "Economic death
spirals" and "national security interests"
27 January: Conference on
Armament?
22 January: Engaging civil
society for progress
20 January: Regional security
through disarmament
17 September
2009
CD concludes its 2009 session; adopts final report
On Thursday morning, the Conference on Disarmament (CD) adopted
its report
with amendments
to the General Assembly. Representatives of Japan,
Hungary, China,
the European
Union, Pakistan,
Colombia,
Algeria, Mexico, Bangladesh,
the Philippines,
Syria,
Iran,
the United
States, the Republic
of Korea, the Russian
Federation, and Austria delivered interventions, most
calling for a quick start to substantive work in 2010.
Brief highlights
- The CD adopted its report
to the General Assembly, with amendments.
- The delegations of Japan, the Netherlands, and Canada
submitted IPFM’s draft
fissile materials treaty to the CD as an official document.
- The Hungarian State Secretary noted with optimism that
capitals now have advanced warning about preparing for negotiations
in early 2010.
- Many delegations, including those of the European
Union, Bangladesh,
the Russian
Federation, and Austria, emphasized the benefit of the
P6 formulation of CD presidents working with each other
to ensure continuity throughout the year.
- A few delegations, including that of the European
Union, Algeria, and the Philippines,
called for the expansion of the CD’s membership.
- The representative
of the Philippines called on “the Secretariat,
UNIDIR, and the NGO disarmament community, as well as the
experts among the membership of the CD, to organize a series
of orientation and training sessions and seminars to this
end in the coming weeks before the start of the 2010 CD
sessions.”
- Pakistan’s
representative reiterated what his delegation sees as
“guiding principles” for next year’s work.
- Mexico’s ambassador called on the CD to seek every
means possible to transcend its difficulties, examine its
methods of work, reflect on its mandate, and reestablish
its credibility.
- The CD president noted that the adoption of the programme
of work and the character of consultations, which have become
more transparent and interactive, marked significant changes
for the CD.
- In 2010, the CD will run its first part from 18 January–26
March, its second part from 31 May–16 July, and its
third part from 9 August–24 September.
Report to General Assembly
At the beginning of the meeting, CD
president Ambassador Strohal of Austria called for consideration
of the final report, CD/WP.554/Rev.1,
along with its amendements, CD/WP.554/Rev.1/Amend.2.
The Conference adopted the report by consensus.
On behalf of the European Union, Sweden’s
Ambassador Hellgren described the report as setting the
stage for an early commencement of substantive work in 2010.
He added, “We must finally give ourselves the opportunity
to start promoting our national security interests in the
course of real substantive work.”
The Republic
of Korea’s ambassador said his delegation “was
hoping for a more forward looking annual report containing
an encouraging message to the international community on the
continuity of our work based on CD/1864.” However, he
also welcomed the “accommodating” manner in which
negotiations over the report were conducted.
Speaking as the next incoming president of the CD, Ambassador
Abdul Hannan of Bangladesh noted that the report asks
the current and incoming presidents to conduct consultations
during the intersessional period and to make recommendations
to the 2010 session. Ambassador Hannan announced that he plans
to work closely with Ambassador Strohal of Austria in this
endeavour.
Next year’s work
Hungarian State Secretary Gábor Iklódy informed
the CD that despite the disappointment of not implementing
its programme of work, the Conference has still displayed
positive momentum. He anticipates this momentum will demonstrate
that the CD is able and wished to start substantive negotiations.
He also noted that it has given capitals early warning that
in 2010 the CD will start negotiations that will require effort,
time, and experts.
The representative
of Pakistan reiterated what his delegation sees as “guiding
principles” for next year’s work, including:
- that the CD will adopt a programme of work “after
negotiations in an open and transparent manner taking into
account security interests and concerns of all of its member
states;”
- that any decision on a programme of work should be for
the current session and “without prejudice to any
past, present, or future position, proposal, document or
priority of any delegation, or any commitment undertaken
in any other multilateral for a related to disarmament;”
- that the CD, as the “sole and single negotiating
forum for arms control and disarmament treaties,”
should not preclude outcomes under any agenda item;
- that the programme of work and its implementation framework
be applied only to the yearly session and should not prejudice
any future decision the CD might take on its work programme;
and
- that all work should be carried out in accordance with
the Rules of Procedure.
Algeria’s Ambassador Jazaïry argued that limiting
a programme of work to one year contains a contradiction,
for there are certain elements in the work programme that
“clearly exceeded a one-year span.”
Colombia’s
representative argued against setting aside the work and
momentum created during the 2009 session, expressing hope
that it will be possible to “have policies converge”
next year. Syria’s
representative noted that in 2007, the CD came very close
to adopting a programme of work, but found something to be
missing that prevented it from doing so. In 2008, it came
closer to its goal but still failed. In 2009, he argued, the
CD made more than one step forward but there is still “some
little thing missing before our hopes can be met.” He
urged the Conference to “accelerate” its efforts
to fill this “gap”.
Mexico’s Ambassador Gómez-Oliver noted that
disarmament initiatives have been put forward at the international,
regional, and bilateral levels by leaders, governments, parliamentarians,
NGOs, and academics, all with a view to taking advantage of
the momentum toward a nuclear weapon free world. She noted
that the CD’s adoption of a programme of work “raised
expectations,” and that everyone is aware of the “deplorable
history” that followed. She lamented that the CD, whose
“very mandate would oblige it to be a main role player,”
is not only on the margins but is actually blocking concrete
action. She called on the CD to seek every means possible
to transcend its difficulties, examine its methods of work,
reflect on its mandate, and reestablish its credibility.
US
Ambassador Larson noted, “It is clear that members
will continue to harvest specific interests and concern about
elements of next year’s work.” He reaffirmed his
delegation’s commitment to work closely with the P6
and all members “to ensure that in 2010 the CD will
continue the path of progress over the next few weeks and
reembarqued upon this year.”
In his closing remarks, CD president Ambassador Strohal described
the emotional highs and lows of the CD’s 2009 session,
noting that no effort was spared in searching for consensus
this year. He described the adoption of the programme of work
as a moment of change and noted that there is a new willingness
from many to address nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation
in a comprehensive and ambitious and proactive manner.
Fissile materials
Japan’s
Ambassador Suda announced that his delegation, along with
those of Canada and the Netherlands, jointly submitted to
the CD a document prepared by the International
Panel on Fissile Materials, entitled A
Treaty Banning the Production of Fissile Materials for Nuclear
Weapons or Other Nuclear Explosive Devices, with article-by-article
explanations. He explained that the document is intended
to provide CD members with “useful reference materials
in the prospective negotiations of a fissile materials cut-off
treaty” and that it does not reflect the national positions
of the three states submitting it.
Landmines
Colombia’s
representative called the CD’s attention to the
Second
Review Conference of the Mine Ban Treaty, to be held in
Colombia on 29 November. In the interim, he invited all states
and NGOs to attend an event to promote the summit on Tuesday,
22 September at 7:00 PM at the International
Peace Institute in New York City.
Next CD session
In 2010, the CD will run its first part from 18 January–26
March, its second part from 31 May–16 July, and its
third part from 9 August–24 September.
Notes from the gallery
WILPF is disappointed that the CD did not manage to engage
in substantive work in 2009 despite all the positive momentum
toward that goal. Its failure to reach consensus on implementing
its programme of work reflects the deeply entrenched obstacles
in the path of abolishing nuclear weapons. These obstacles
are by no means intractable; the differences in delegate positions
and concerns are certainly not impassable.
However, with only four months until the start of the 2010
session, CD member states have some intense intersessional
consultations ahead of them to bridge the gaps between positions,
or more importantly, resolve underlying concerns. The commitment
of this year’s and next year’s P6 members to work
together during these months is encouraging.
Some of the work toward consensus, however, can only be accomplished
through the good faith relations between states in the international
community at large. The impasse in the CD is a product of
poor international relations, characterized by double-standards,
discrimination, mistrust, and regional and international power
imbalances. These issues deserve serious attention in the
intervening months and should be considered in the context
of moving toward an equitable nuclear weapon free world that
enhances human security and the security for all life on the
planet.
There will be many opportunities during these months for
educational events in preparation for the CD’s 2010
session, as requested by the Philippine’s delegate.
In particular, several non-governmental organizations and
international organizations will hold side events and seminars
during the UNGA First Committee on Disarmament and International
Security in New York. Please check out Reaching Critical Will’s
calendar
of events as October draws nearer. Several organizations
will also put out a variety of publications during this time,
so be sure to check the NGO literature table outside of Conference
Room 4 for information and analysis on all disarmament-related
issues. Finally, please do not hesitate to contact Reaching
Critical Will to discuss other opportunities for education
and engagement with disarmament issues by writing to the Project
Director at ray[at]reachingcriticalwill.org.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
15 September
2009
Revised draft report circulated
On Tuesday morning, the Conference on Disarmament (CD) met
for a brief plenary meeting to which the ambassador
of Turkey delivered a short intervention on the draft
report of the Conference. The CD
president then called for an informal meeting to discuss
the revised
version of the draft report.
Draft report
Ambassador
Ahmet Uzümcü of Turkey described the draft report
as factual and well-balanced. He noted, however, that there
may be “certain amendments that would accommodate the
concerns of certain countries.” He emphasized the importance
of maintaining the momentum in the CD and embarking “on
a different phase” early next year.
The CD president, Ambassador
Christian Strohal of Austria, indicated that a revised
version of the draft report had been circulated last Wednesday.
He expressed hope that that the CD could meet for a plenary
on Thursday to adopt the report and conclude the 2009 session.
Work of the CD
Turkey’s
Ambassador Uzümcü urged the commencement of
negotiations on a fissile
materials cut-off treaty and entry into force of the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty as a potential “catalyst”
for a successful 2010 nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference. He noted
that progress in the CD “will not only provide the much
needed impetus in the NPT regime, but will also have wider
implications for other multilateral disarmament activities
within the UN or elsewhere.”
Next meeting
The next plenary meeting will probably be Thursday, 17 September
2009 at 10:00 AM.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
8 September
2009
Geneva NGO Committee for Disarmament delivers statement
to the CD
During Tuesday’s plenary meeting, the new ambassador
of Belarus addressed the Conference on Disarmament (CD).
Canada’s
ambassador announced the release of a report on UNIDIR’s
latest space security seminar. After these two interventions,
the CD president called for an “open informal,”
during which the president of the Geneva
NGO Committee for Disarmament delivered a statement. Other
NGO representatives were allowed to remain in the gallery
but the meeting was considered off-the-record. The presentation
drew comments from representatives of Canada,
Algeria,
the Philippines,
Portugal,
Norway,
Mexico,
and Indonesia.
Brief highlights
- The president of the Geneva NGO Committee for Disarmament
delivered a statement to an “open informal”
meeting of the CD, pursuant to the 2004 decision that a
civil society representative would address the Conference
after it adopted its programme of work.
- Several delegations welcomed the NGO participation and
expressed their hope that more engagement would be possible
in the future.
- A few delegations called for orientation or training of
delegations in regards to the work of the CD and its core
issues.
Work of the CD
Ambassador
Khvostov of Belarus, who will be one of the six rotating
presidents of next year’s Conference, delivered his
first intervention. He noted that the leadership in his country
“decided to give up without any preconditions the right
to possess nuclear weapons,” which Belarus had inherited
from the Soviet Union. Ambassador Khvostov expressed his mixed
feelings about the work of the CD this year, praising its
adoption of a programme of work but noting frustration with
its inability to implement it. He argued it is the responsibility
of the Conference to implements its decisions and the relevant
resolutions of the General Assembly.
UNIDIR’s space security seminar
Ambassador
Grinius of Canada introduced the report from UNIDIR’s
space security seminar, ““Moving towards a safer
space environment”. The seminar was organised by UNIDIR
with support from the governments of the People’s Republic
of China, the Russian Federation, and Canada, as well as from
the Secure World Foundation and the Simon’s Foundation. The
report will be issued as an official CD document.
NGO Statement
Susi Snyder of the Women’s International League for
Peace and Freedom delivered the NGO statement as president
of the Geneva
NGO Committee for Disarmament. She outlined several recent
civil society contributions to the four core issues of the
CD. For example, she pointed out that two NGOs—the International
Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM) and Greenpeace International—have
submitted model fissile material treaties and that IPFM and
the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute held
seminars this year on the topic. Ms. Snyder also outlined
suggestions by civil society actors towards preventing the
weaponization of outer space, including a treaty banning space
debris-causing weapons, a treaty on common security in outer
space, and a space preservation treaty. Regarding negative
security assurances, Ms. Snyder pointed to the framework elaborated
by Dr. Rebecca Johnson of the Acronym Institute for Disarmament
Diplomacy, that the use of nuclear weapons should be declared
and codified as a crime against humanity. Finally, for nuclear
disarmament, Ms. Snyder pointed to the model
Nuclear Weapons Convention.
Reactions to the presentation
The representatives of Canada,
the Philippines,
Portugal,
Mexico,
Norway,
and Indonesia,
welcomed the NGO statement and expressed hope that similar
presentations would be allowed in the future. Algerian
Ambassador Jazaïry also welcomed the statement and
asked for a written copy. Mexican
Ambassador Oliver noted that UN Secretary-General Ban
Ki-moon is currently in Mexico City to inaugurate the annual
UN Department of Public Information-NGO conference, “For
Peace and Development: Disarm Now!”
The representatives of the Philippines,
Portugal,
and Norway
also requested that the CD Secretariat and UNIDIR consider
holding an orientation and training for delegates about the
CD and its programme of work. Deputy Representative Skorpen
of Norway noted, “this is where the NGOs really have
an important added value; to help us see issues from different
perspectives and in a broader perspective.”
Notes from the gallery
WILPF welcomes the opportunity for NGOs to participate in
today’s CD meeting and hopes that other civil society
actors will be given the opportunity to engage with the Conference
in the future. WILPF has been working at and with the United
Nations since its inception and is deeply committed to solving
the challenges facing the world today, not least of all the
challenges of disarmament and arms control. Reaching Critical
Will’s Director Ray Acheson is currently in Mexico City
to attend and address the conference
mentioned by the Mexican ambassador. Reaching Critical Will
representatives will also attend and monitor the upcoming
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Entry Into Force Conference
and the UNGA First Committee on Disarmament and International
Security. The First Committee has moved towards greater inclusiveness
and engagement with civil society, each year setting aside
time for presentations by NGOs on relevant issues.
In the interest of providing background information for both
delegations and civil society actors, Reaching Critical Will
puts out a variety of publications throughout the year. One
that might be of interest to CD delegations is Reaching Critical
Will’s Guide to the CD, which is beneficial to those
who follow many different fora in their work. The Guide is
available in both PDF and HTML. We also provide basic information
about the CD’s four core issues and more.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
3 September
2009
President introduces draft report; First Committee chair
outlines objectives
Ambassador
José Luis Cancela of Uruguay, the chairperson elect
of the UNGA
First Committee on Disarmament and International Security
for 2009, addressed the Conference on Disarmament (CD) on
Thursday morning. The new permanent representative of Bulgaria
to the UN in Geneva, Ambassador
Gancho Ganev, also addressed the Conference. Ambassador
Danon of France and the current CD president, Ambassador
Strohal of Austria, bid farewell to the deputy representative
of the United Kingdom, Fiona Patterson. Ambassador Strohal
also introduced the draft
report of the Conference.
Draft report
Ambassador
Strohal of Austria, the current CD president, announced
that the first draft
of the Conference’s report to the General Assembly
was circulated yesterday. The draft explains the CD’s
work throughout the session. It notes that consensus was not
reached on any of the proposals on the modalities for the
implementation of the programme of work but does not offer
any details in this regard. The report lists all documents
related to discussion on the modalities and on each of the
CD’s agenda items.
First Committee chair
Ambassador
Cancela explained that during his time in Geneva, he has
met with delegations of the Western Group, Eastern European
Group, European Union, Non-Aligned Movement, and the Group
of 21 and held some bilateral meetings with “interesting
delegations”.
He announced that during the First Committee, he intends
to “move forward towards the following objectives”:
1.For the First Committee to contribute to maintaining
the positive climate that has been noted in last few months,
and which provides a real forum for new understandings,
basically bearing in mind the important Review Conference
of the treaty for the non proliferation of nuclear weapons
to be carried out in 2010 in New York.
2.To increase the number of resolutions adopted by consensus
as evidence that these tendencies towards the strengthening
of multilateralism can be actually reflected in the resolutions
of the First Committee. Despite this I nevertheless do recognize
the important differences that exist on issues such as nuclear
disarmament, non proliferation and arms control.
3.The objective of the consultations I held with those delegations
accredited to Geneva was precisely that of seeking points
of convergence which will enable us to achieve the necessary
consensus and more than necessary, absolutely essential.
4.Lastly, to raise, through the bureau of investigations,
all the suggestions, recommendation and concerns I have
heard during my consultations, in order to identify possible
solutions.
Work of the CD
Ambassador
Ganev of Bulgaria explained that while preparing for his
new post, he paid close attention to the proceedings of the
CD. He said it is the Bulgarian delegation’s belief
that “successful disarmament instruments can only be
based on consensus” that “it is in the interest
of all countries to overcome their differences and engage
in this endeavor.” Bulgaria will be one of the CD presidents
in 2010.
NGO engagement
The CD president, Ambassador
Strohal of Austria, announced that the Women’s
International League for Peace and Freedom requested an
opportunity to address the Conference, in accordance with
the decision of 2004. The decision in this document states
that after the CD adopts a programme of work, it will allocate
an informal meeting per annual session to NGOs to address
the Conference. Ambassador Strohal indicated that he has consulted
with regional coordinators and has made a list of the NGOs
who are accredited to the Conference available to them. He
proposed that the regional coordinators come back to the Conference
with a final agreement “in time so that we can agree
to hold such an informal meeting immediately after adjourning
the formal plenary next Tuesday.”
Other news
Ambassador
Danon of France bid a fond farewell to Fiona Patterson
of the UK delegation, expressing his appreciation for her
work. Ambassador
Strohal likewise thanked her for her work, “her
strong and always sound and good advice, always delivered
with a smile and with a very helpful predisposition.”
Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 8 September
2009. An NGO may be allowed to address the Conference in an
informal meeting that day.
Notes from the gallery
WILPF would like to also extend its gratitude and thanks to
Ms. Fiona Patterson. Since her arrival in Geneva. before
the 2005 NPT Review Conference, she has consistently and openly
engaged in a broad range of discussions with members of civil
society. Ms. Patterson’s activities to raise the profile
of Geneva as a City of Peace and the home of disarmament will
not be forgotten. In particular, WILPF would like to thank
Ms. Patterson for her encouragement of our efforts to raise
awareness of threat perceptions in the Middle East during
our 2009 International Women’s Day Disarmament Seminar.
We wish her the best of luck in her future work, and look
forward to continuing the same level of engagement and constructive
dialogue with her replacement, Ms. Joanne Adamson. WILPF
would also like to recognize the long and dedicated service
of Mr. Jerzy Zaleski, who we understanding will soon be retiring. His
wealth of institutional knowledge and ability to meet all
challenges in the CD with a smile will be sorely missed.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
2 September
2009
Austrian Minister addresses CD
Austria’s
Federal Minister for European and International Affairs
addressed the Conference on Disarmament (CD) on Wednesday
morning. Dr. Michael Spindelegger focused on recent positive
developments in arms control and disarmament rather than on
the renewed blockage in the CD.
He welcomed UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s five-point
plan for nuclear disarmament, positive statements by US President
Obama, Russian President Medvedev, and Chinese
Foreign Minister Yang. Stating that the vision for a nuclear
weapon free world is “shared by the most important nuclear
powers,” he looked for corresponding concrete actions:
bilateral reductions and the global atmosphere in multilateral
arms control negotiations. Welcoming these, he called for
real implementation and compliance and outlined Austria’s
expectations for the future of nuclear disarmament and arms
control:
For conventional weapons, Austria’s expectations include:
Finally, Dr. Spindelegger noted that civil society actors
have been “important motors” of disarmament and
arms control processes and that Austria believes these processes
must be open and participatory to succeed.
Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Thursday, 3 September
2009 at 10:00 AM, when the Conference will hear from the chairperson
elect of the UNGA
First Committee.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
31 August
2009
CD unable to implement its programme of work this year
On Monday morning, the current
president of the Conference on Disarmament (CD) announced
that despite intensive consultations open to all interested
delegations, consensus on the implementation
framework for the programme
of work "still eludes" the Conference. Pakistan's
proposed amendments to the framework, as reported on in the
27 August CD Report, are laid out
in document CD/1873.
Reportedly a revised implementation framework was circulated
to missions, though it has not been made available publically
and apparently did not garner consensus.
Conference president Ambassador Strohal from Austria explained
that due to the lack of time remaining in the CD's 2009 session,
the presidents have turned to preparing a draft report, which
they will make available sometime during the week.
Next meetings
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, 2 September,
when the Austrian Foreign Minister will address the Conference
at 10:00 AM, and subsequently launch with Handicap International,
the International Committee of the Red Cross, and Norway a
study on assisting victims of landmines and explosive remnants
of war here in this very same room on Wednesday at 11:00 AM.
In addition, the designated chairperson of the General
Assembly First Committee on Disarmament and International
Security will address the CD on Thursday, 3 September
at 10:00 AM.
Notes from the gallery
Reaching Critical Will regrets that the CD could not reach
agreement over how to implement its programme of work this
year. We hope that this setback does not preclude sincere
efforts to prevent the production of fissile materials or
an arms race in outer space, or to advance security assurances
to non-nuclear weapon states or nuclear disarmament. To overcome
the difficulties faced this year in the CD, 2010's session
will require some truly "outside the box" thinking
and we look forward to engaging with governments toward this
end.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
27 August
2009
Collective ownership, collective ambitions
During Thursday’s plenary meeting of the Conference
on Disarmament (CD), Pakistan’s
delegation outlined its concerns with the state of play
in the Conference since the programme
of work was adopted and its main amendment to the document
for implementing the programme of work. Other delegations,
including those of Iran,
Egypt,
Cuba,
China,
Brazil,
Bangladesh,
and the United
Kingdom. Representatives of Australia
and the Secretariat
also took the floor to issue clarifications to the Pakistani
statement, which Pakistan’s
ambassador accepted. At the end of the meeting, the current
CD president, Ambassador
Strohal of Austria, invited all interested delegations
to join him in informal consultations next door. Nearly all
delegations attended.
Brief highlights
- Pakistan’s delegation emphasized the importance
of ensuring a balanced outcome for all four core issues
by adding a paragraph specifying this principle in the implementation
framework.
- Iran’s ambassador argued that Pakistan’s amendments
will be less damaging to the CD than continued deadlock
will be.
- Egypt’s ambassador argued that ensuring collective
ownership over a healthy process is important to the long-term
health of the CD itself.
- China’s ambassador said he feels the Pakistani amendment
is a “tiny issue” and would like to start substantive
work right away.
- The UK ambassador noted that the collective ambition of
the CD is a nuclear weapon free world and that the CD is
an important part of “taking forward the commitment
of those nuclear weapon states that have signed the NPT”
to disarm.
Pakistan’s position
Amassador
Akram of Pakistan explained that while his delegation
joined consensus on the programme of work, CD/1864,
it was “confronted with disappointing and alarming maneuvers
even on procedural issues on the part of some delegations.”
Specifically, his delegation was alarmed:
- by “efforts to ensure that the mandates of the Working
Groups would remain static without progressing towards negotiation
on all four core issues in the future;”
- that the rotation of chairs cannot be accepted as a principle;
- that there is no understanding on the time frame for rotation;
- that some delegations sought to bypass the rule that the
programme of work has to be negotiated at the beginning
of each year;
- that some delegations have proposed that the rule of consensus
“may have to be reconsidered if they don’t get
their way;” and
with “the implied threat that if the CD does not make
progress as defined by some delegations, it may be necessary
to take negotiations on issues such as fissile materials
out of the CD.”
Ambassador Akram argued that matters of substance and procedure
are inextricably interlinked, which means the rule of consensus
must be applied to both. He further argued that his delegation’s
demand for balance on the four core issues “is not an
extraneous negotiating link but normative, legal and substantive
correlation established freely, voluntarily and collectively.”
To this end, Ambassador Akram read out his delegation’s
amendment
to the chapeau of the implementation document, CD/1870/Rev.1,
which specifies that the CD “will ensure, without discrimination,
balanced outcomes in the consideration of all agenda items,
particularly the four core issues, while recognizing the principle
of undiminished security for all.” He said that in discussions
with some delegations, this paragraph has been met with approval,
but that this text “has not yet been formally shared
with all delegations and no effort has been made so far to
determine whether and which delegations have any objection
to this formulation.”
To this point, the preceding CD president Ambassador
Caroline Millar of Australia noted that all documents
the Pakistani delegation asked her to circulate were given
to the Secretariat to do that. “Some of those we agreed
to send to the regional coordinators for consultations in
regional groups. Also as President, I feel quite clear
in saying I made exhaustive efforts to determine whether any
or all formulations, proposed by all delegations, could achieve
consensus. Sadly that was not the case.” Speaking on
behalf of the Secretariat, Jerzy
Zaleski noted that the document
in question was received by the Secretariat on Friday,
21 August. It was given priority “and was processed
and distributed to the normal channels of the delegations
on Tuesday, August 25, 2009 at 10am. It is available in all
languages.”
Responding to a comment made by the Canadian
delegation in Tuesday’s plenary, that outcomes cannot
be predicted, Ambassador Akram went on to argue that CD/1864
“clearly outlines the possibility of negotiations on
all four core issues,” and that the CD “must ensure
outcomes that would balance the interests of all member states.”
As to the question of principles, Ambassador Akram argued
that the principles they want incorporated in CD/1870/Rev.1
are drawn directly from the final
document of the First
Special Session on Disarmament.
Reactions
Iran’s
Ambassador Alireza Moaiyeri said that since many delegations
have been pushing for a balanced approach to the four core
issues for years, it should not now come as a surprise that
some delegations want this reflected in the implementation
of the programme of work. He also argued that the Pakistani
delegation’s amendment “will not hinder in any
manner the engagement of the CD in implementing properly and
fully its programme of work.” Finally, Ambassador Moaiyeri
argued, “even if some speculation could be made about
possible interpretation and accordingly possible implication
of the suggested language in the text today, we believe
that brutal fact of continued deadlock for the case of not
reaching the decision today would have far more broad negative
implications for the CD.”
On behalf of the Egyptian delegation, Ambassador
Hisham Badr said it is important to recognize that “collective
ownership of the process is necessary for its sustainability. Such
collective ownership can be achieved by addressing the concerns
of all parties and taking into consideration the various positions.”
He noted that while the Egyptian delegation is ready to accept
CD/1870/Rev.1,
it is also ready to accept suggestions presented by other
delegations. He also argued that consensus is needed to move
the CD’s work forward “in a healthy and productive
manner,” which is important for the long-term productivity
of the Conference. Cuba’s
delegation expressed its hope that respect for the rules
of procedure, constructive dialogue, and search for consensus
“will all prevail and dominate” in the work of
the CD.
Ambassador
Wang Qun of China said he thinks the amendment read out
by Ambassador Akram is a “tiny issue” and that
it seems the presidents and the Pakastani delegation are close
to reaching a solution. Echoing the UK
representative’s statement from last week, Ambassador
Wang ended his statement with, “we would like to start
substantive work as soon as possible. Right now. Just do it.”
Ambassador
Soares of Brazil said his delegation is not in a position
to reactor to Ambassador Akram’s proposal without first
consulting with its capital, but urged the CD to hold a plenary
after consultations so that the issue could be resolved quickly.
Remarking on Ambassador Badr’s comments about “collective
ownership” of the CD’s work, Ambassador
Duncan of the United Kingdom pointed out, “[o]ur
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 VI, to a commitment to disarm.”
Furthermore, he called out the jargon of the CD being the
“sole” multilateral negotiating forum, arguing,
“[tt]he CD is the only permanent negotiating forum and
it is not the sole. There could be others, as 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.”
Ambassador Duncan noted that while it is “the right
of any state to remove itself from consensus ... it is not
particularly helpful to make allegations about maneuvers or
have veiled criticisms of our Presidencies.” And while
this right exists, he argued,
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, practice which involves
trying to establish an alliance of supporters for those
changes. That is not an approach for a collective endeavour
that most of us in this room would recognize, but unfortunately
that is where we are.
Next meeting
Agreement was not reached during informal consultations after
the plenary today. The next plenary meeting is scheduled for
Monday, 31 August 2009.
Notes from the gallery
WILPF welcomes the UK delegation’s reference to the
NPT nuclear weapon states’ commitment to disarm their
nuclear arsenals and its articulation that the work conducted
in the CD provides steps along the way to this goal. Hopefully
this perceived collective ambition of the CD will result in
a solution to the current stalemate. Most importantly, this
collective ambition, if it it truly exists, needs to manifest
not just within the CD but without, in the national security
priorities and doctrines of all states, in the decisions governments
take regarding their relationship to nuclear weapons, to militarism,
and military spending, to the theories and principles they
espouse and enact. A nuclear weapon free world is indeed the
collective ambition of most of the world’s people and
we look forward to seeing it represented by our governments
in the CD.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
25 August
2009
Collective security as national security
The new president of the Conference on Disarmament (CD),
Ambassador
Strohal of Austria, opened the plenary saying he is convinced
that progress is still possible, if the Conference proceeds
with making those decisions that are absolutely necessary
very swiftly. He noted that given the very extensive consultations
undertaken by Ambassador Millar of the Australian presidency
make it difficult to imagine that unsurmountable obstacles
still exist. Yesterday, the Pakistani’s delegation official
position on the implementation framework, CD/1870/Rev.1,
was released as an official CD document. Delegates from Chile,
Canada,
Italy,
and France
also discussed the ongoing stalemate, while those from Kazakhstan
and Algeria
spoke about nuclear weapon free zones and the Russian
delegate addressed outer space security.
Brief highlights
- In its official position on CD/1870/Rev.1, the Pakistani
delegation emphasizes the importance of equal treatment
of the four core issues and of the “principle”
of undiminished, equitable security for all member states.
- Representatives from the Chilean, Canadian, Italian, and
French delegation responded to this position, arguing in
favour of undiminished collective security and making suggestions
for continuing the work of the CD.
- The Kazakh government called for UN to declare 29 August
the “International Day of Nuclear Weapons Renunciation”.
- The Algerian delegation called on all nuclear weapon states
to accede to the protocols of the Pelindaba Treaty and for
all state signatories to ratify the Treaty.
- The Russian delegation introduced two new documents on
outer space security for consideration by the CD.
Pakistan’s position
The CD circulated the Pakistani delegation’s official
position on CD/1870/Rev.1
in an official document on 24 August. The letter is a reprinted
version of CD/1870/Rev.1, written the way the Pakistani government
would like it to be written. The differences are as follows:
In the chapeau:
- The second line reads, “Without prejudice to the
Conference’s decisions on programmes of work to be
adopted annually in accordance with the Rules of Procedure
(Article VIII);” as opposed to CD/1870/Rev.1’s
“Without prejudice to the Conference’s decisions
on programmes of work to be adopted for future calendar
years;”
- Point “b” notes that the rotation and equitable
geographic representative is based on a “principle”;
- There is an additional point: “principle of equal
and balanced allocation of time for four core issues;”
and
- Whereas CD/1870/Rev.1 says, “the Conference will
aim at ensuring a general balance in the consideration of
all agenda items consistent with CD/1864;” Pakistan’s
version says, “the Conference will ensure, without
any discrimination, equal treatment and priority to all
agenda items of the Conference, particularly the four core
issues to achieve balanced progress in terms of substantive
outcomes consistent with the principle of equal and undiminished
security for all states.”
None of the appointments for working group chairs or special
coordinators have been adjusted.
In the schedule of activities:
- The dates read from 10 to 28 August rather than from 10
August to 18 September; and
- The schedule of activities from 28 August on has been
deleted. (Reportedly based on the argument that the consideration
of the CD’s annual report is not part of the programme
of work and therefore should not be included in this document.)
In the accompanying presidential statement:
- The original language indicated that the schedule of
activities reflects the importance of “each of the
four core issues and of items 5, 6, and 7 on our programme
of work,” while Pakistan’s version says it reflects
the importance of “agenda items of the Conference,
particularly the four core issues;” and
- Rather than stating that the CD “recognises the
importance of national security issues for all member states,”
Pakistan’s version says it “recognises the principle
of equal and undiminished security interests and security
compulsions of all member states.”
National security interests and the framework for implementation
Addressing the concerns of the Pakistani government—in
particular its concern with ensuring “the principle
of equal and undiminished security interests and security
compulsions of all member states,” Ambassador
Carlos Portales of Chile argued that national security
“does not exist in isolation and cannot be invoked to
undermine or affect that of others.” He asked, “what
better way to preserve this national security than by making
this negotiating body move forward through the rule of consensus?”
Italy’s
Ambassador Manfredi argued
this is not a proper use of the consensus rule that we
all agree is the keystone of the Conference’s procedural
work. It allows every member to avail itself of an indispensable
tool, to safeguard its paramount national interest. But
here now we are not faced with paramount national interests.
When all is said and done, whatever adjectives we use to
define our national security interests or whatever formula
we use in the documents spelling out the calendar of meetings
of the CD, the results of our work will be determined only
in the negotiations of substance.
The representative
of the Canadian delegation noted that the programme
of work itself was a compromise, consensus decision. He
argued that CD/1864 did not characterize how much progress
should be achieved, or how the outcomes among the four core
issues should be balanced, because “progress and outcomes
on different issues are by their very nature, unpredictable.”
He also insisted that the framework for implementation should
“not seek to tie our hands to any specific outcomes.”
Furthermore, Mr. Gartshore from Canada pointed out that in
adopting CD/1864, the CD “opted not to use the word
‘principle’ anywhere in the text,” because
“matters of ‘principle’ and their possible
interpretations may be different among the many delegations
that sit in this chamber.” Giving a demonstration, Ambassador
Portales explained that Chile’s commitment to disarmament
is “based on the guiding principles of the indivisibility
of international security and the prevalence of collective
security over and above the individual requirements of states.”
Relevance of the CD
Noting that the CD, the “unique forum” for multilateral
disarmament negotiations, hasn’t negotiated anything
in twelve years, Chile’s
Ambassador Portales argued that is unacceptable for the
Conference to “keep a highly qualified diplomatic body,
a high level technical secretariat and a team of specialised
high interpreters to remain unproductive.” He also questioned,
if the CD continues to be unable to operate, will it not open
up “an area for other initiatives to emerge in which
this rule will not be in accordance with this conference?”
Ambassador
Manfredi of Italy also argued that this situation is “demeaning
to the prestige of the Conference and is in fact jeopardizing
its very existence. It is undermining its relevance within
the community of multilateral institutions.”
Ambassador
Eric Danon of France agreed with the Chilean and Italian
ambassadors, noting the “risks” of negotiating
treaties outside of the CD. He pointed out the importance
of the political dimension behind CD/1864, that all five recognized
nuclear weapon states had agreed to negotiate a verifiable
treaty related to nuclear weapons, and that at least one of
these five, the French delegation, wants this to be negotiated
within the CD.
Suggestions for moving forward
Ambassador
Portales said his delegation has not given up its optimism.
He suggested that the intersessional committee, led by Ambassador
Strohal for the rest of 2009, could provide a good opportunity
for working out delegation’s concerns before the start
of next year’s session. He also welcomed suggestions
of other alternatives for moving forward. Mr.
Gartshore of Canada suggested limiting the CD’s
deliberations on its report to two weeks rather than three
to give the Conference more time for substantive work during
this session.
Towards a nuclear weapon free world
The new ambassador of Kazakhstan, Ambassador
Mukhtar Tileuberdi, outlined his government’s commitment
to a nuclear weapon free world. He pointed out that his country,
which at one time had the fourth largest nuclear arsenal in
the world, renounced the weapons unilaterally. The president
of Kazakhstan recently called on the UN to declare 29 August—the
day when the Semipalatinsk nuclear testing site was finally
closed—as the “International Day of Nuclear Weapons
Renunciation”.
Algeria’s
representative welcomed the entry into force of the Pelindaba
Treaty, which makes of Africa a nuclear
weapon free zone. He noted, “the African continent
is thereby reflecting its active commitment to the global
combat in order to preserve humanity from the specter of nuclear
war, and creating a world which is free of weapons of mass
destruction.” He called upon all nuclear weapon states
to accede to the protocols prohibiting the use of nuclear
weapons against any territory within the zone. French
Ambassador Danon said his government is “very pleased
with the events surrounding Pelindaba” and is “pleased
to see the implementation of this Treaty.”
Outer space security
Ambassador
Valery Loschinin of the Russian Federation announced that
the Russian and Chinese delegations have prepared an information
document for the CD called “Basic issues and comments
on the draft agreement to prevent the placement of weapons
in space, or the use of force or threat of force against objects
in space.” The publication is based on presentations
that delegations made last year during unofficial thematic
discussions and open-ended meetings of the CD and from the
International Conference on Security and Space.
He also announced that the Russian delegation has provided
“a renewed report of the report of the United Nations
Secretary-General on measures to ensure transparency and strengthening
of confidence in outer space activities, prepared on
the basis of the resolution
63/68 of the General Assembly.” The Russian and
Chinese delegations urged the CD members to send in their
proposals on the issue of confidence-building measures in
outer space at the beginning of the General Assembly this
year. Ambassador Loschinin also argued that these documents
“will provide a good starting basis” for discussions
in working group three at the CD when it begins substantive
work.
Ambassador
Danon of France said he has looked carefully at the documents
submitted by Russia and China emphasized that the “issue
of space is of paramount importance to us and will be so in
the forthcoming weeks and months, apart from nuclear problems.”
Upcoming schedule
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Thursday, 27 August
at 10:00 AM. On Wednesday, 2 September, the Austrian Foreign
Minister will address the CD.
Notes from the gallery
WILPF welcomes the forward-thinking suggestions that several
delegations made during today’s plenary meeting, including
the Chilean ambassador’s suggestion of continued consultations
during the intersessional period. As the CD will have to adopt
not only a procedural document next year but also a programme
of work once again, it is vital that delegates come together
during the intervening months to find lasting solutions.
Perhaps the statement from the new ambassador of Kazakhstan
can provide some inspiration toward progress in this important
negotiating forum. Kazakhstan renounced nuclear weapons and
is undertaking a rehabilitation project at Semipalatinsk,
the former testing grounds. A documentary called Silent
Bombs: All for the Motherland—based on the book
The Epicentre of Peace by Nursultan Nazarbayev, the
president of Kazakhstan—looks at the long-term effects
of nuclear test explosions on the population of Semipalatinsk.
The filmmaker remarked in an interview,
“Kazakhstan’s experience reveals that the
fallout from nuclear explosions can be suffered by ten generations
or more and I hope that those who are blithe about nuclear
proliferation will now understand just what it means to allow
any nation to test and store nuclear weapons.”
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
20 August
2009
Programme of work still remains to be implemented
During the final plenary meeting of the Australian presidency,
18 delegations addressed the Conference
on Disarmament (CD). Consensus has not yet been reached
on the framework
for implementing the Conference’s programme
of work, though the atmosphere in the Council Chamber
was rather jovial. Representatives of the Netherlands,
Morocco,
Colombia,
Brazil,
Mexico,
the United
States, France,
Malaysia,
Germany,
the Russian
Federation, Japan,
Bangladesh,
the United
Kingdom, China,
Pakistan,
European
Union, Republic
of Korea, and Australia.
Most delegations thanked the current CD president, Ambassador
Millar of Australia, for her hard work and open, diligent
consultations. On behalf of the European
Union, Ambassador Magnus Hellgren of Sweden thanked her
for her “energy and tenacity in turning every possible
stone to overcome the very last procedural objections.”
Many delegations expressed puzzlement about these remaining
outstanding issues and frustration over the lack of their
resolution. Pakistan’s
Ambassador Zamir Akram explained that his delegation circulated
its proposals for the framework for implementation on 10 August
(which will reportedly be circulated as an official Conference
document). He noted that agreement has been reached on some
of the items but not on others.
In her final speech as CD president, Ambassador
Millar of Australia noted, “[t]o those unfamiliar
with the arcane workings of this chamber, this [situation]
is neither understandable nor acceptable. To those within
it, it is all too familiar and dispiriting.” While she
expressed disappointment with the Conference’s inability
to reach consensus, she noted that the door remains open to
substantive work in 2009, “however truncated and modest
that might be.”
Brief highlights
- The Brazilian ambassador articulated the collective responsibility
of the CD member states to get the Conference back to work.
- Many delegations, including those of Brazil, France,
Japan, Malaysia Mexico, the United Kindom, and the United
States questioned the motivations of those blocking consensus
and warned about the effects this will have on the CD and
other disarmament fora.
- Morocco’s ambassador emphasized the importance of
the CD’s rule of consensus.
- Morocco’s ambassador also indicated that a strong
disarmament fissile
materials treaty would provide for the conversion of
existing stockpiles; called for the implementation of the
1995
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty decision to create
a nuclear weapon free zone in the Middle East and highlighted
the importance of subjecting all nuclear installations in
the region without exception to the International Atomic
Energy Agency; and urged for work towards a treaty on negative
security assurances and the prevention
of an arms race in outer space.
- Mexico’s delegation expressed its gratitude to the
countries in Africa who ratified the Pelindaba
Treaty, bringing it into force on 15 July and making
Africa a zone free of nuclear weapons.
Work of the CD
Ambassador
Luiz Filipe de Macedo Soares of Brazil said he interprets
the Conference’s inability to adopt the framework for
implementation, CD/1870/Rev.1,
to mean “that not all member states are ready to accept
a decision on the implementation unless it includes a number
of precautions that, in the view of many, could put the CD
in a straightjacket and severely limit the prospects of it
making progress.” He argued that the decision to adopt
the programme of work itself in May was the result of a spirit
of compromise that reflected a change in international relations,
which “stemmed from a complex combination of events
and of actions and statements by political leaders.”
With this mind, Ambassador Soares emphasized that the CD has
collective responsibility, meaning that the Conference cannot
simply blame a few delegations for their difficulties but
that everyone, including those with difficulties, “must
work to understand and equate those problems.”
Mexico’s
Deputy Representative Mabel Gómez Oliver argued
that the consensus reflected in the programme of work is that
of a careful balance of interests and concerns of the 65 member
states represented in the CD. She insisted that it shows the
flexibility of all states who have made concessions in their
ideas and views about themes and strategies. She lamented
that the Conference’s failure to implement this programme
is inconsistent with the adoption of the programme itself
and with the broader momentum toward multilateralism and disarmament
outside of the CD. She also warned that the lack of progress
in the CD could have a deleterious effect on other fora.
Pointing out that the inclusion of a verification provision
in the CD’s programme of work represents a “major
evolution” in US policy, Ambassador
Garold Larson of the United States expressed disappointment
that nearly three months after the adoption of this programme
the Conference is unable to “accomplish the simple,
straight-forward, procedural task of agreeing on a schedule
of work.” He said his delegation expects that “serious
national security concerns” will be addressed during
the course of negotiations and substantive discussions but
that the “procedural faultfinding” currently going
on is costing valuable time and “has thwarted the stated
goals and aspirations of the international community to pursue
in this multilateral forum the central questions of nuclear
proliferation, arms control, and disarmament.” He said
his delegation is now left “wondering as to the motivations
of those who have blocked agreement since we reconvened in
early August.”
Likewise, France’s
Deputy Representative Sophie Moal-Makame argued that delegations
have justified questions about the genuine will of member
states to reach success in the CD. As the Conference watches
its opportunity to progress slip away, she noted that the
international community will lose confidence in its ability
to function. Mr.
Azril Abdul Aziz of Malaysia urged the CD not to “fall
back into the quagmire that beleaguered it the past 10 years.”
Japan’s
Ambassador Akio Suda warned that the CD “is now
at the cliff, close to telling the world of its inability
to implement its own agreement made by consensus.”
The UK’s
representative Joanne Adamson said she feared that the
CD is “in the process of snatching defeat from the jaws
of victory,” arguing that in May the Conference broke
new ground by having courage and taking risks, while now it
is “unpicking a consensus that was crafted through the
efforts of many people.” She emphasized the global will
reflected in the room to get on with discussions. Provoking
laughter in the room, she added, The word for victory in Greek
is Nike, the God of Victory. There is a certain producer who
has a slogan associated with what we know as Nike, and that
slogan is ‘just do it’. So with that I hope that
we can, just do it.” Following this statement, Ambassador
Wang Qun of China noted three points for moving forward:
1) Being clear about the crux of the present problem; 2) Being
clear about the CD’s objectives; and 3) On the basis
of these two points, the CD needs to figure out how to solve
the problems and reach it goals.
The new Dutch ambassador the CD, Ambassador
Paul van den IJssel, announced that he has come to Geneva
“with the ambition to continue in [the Dutch] tradition
and spirit of constructive activism,” expressing his
“hope and optimism” for the work of the Conference
and for multilateral disarmament. Ambassador
Hellmut Hoffmann of Germany noted that he remains hopeful
and was encouraged by the address by the Chinese foreign minister
last week. Russian
Ambassador Valery Loshchinin argued “hope dies last,”
expressing certainty that the Conference’s work “will
soon bear fruits,” though noting the very acute time
restraints for this year’s session.
Morocco’s
Ambassador Omar Hilale also expressed hope for the future
of the CD while emphasizing the need for strict compliance
with the rules of procedure. He reaffirmed that the rule of
consensus is the “cornerstone” of the Conference
and that its violation could endanger the CD. However, as
pointed out by other delegations, Ambassador
Millar of Australia agreed that the place to advance national
security interests is during substantive work, not through
delaying the implementation of an agreement arrived at by
consensus already.
Other news
Ambassador Christian Strohal of Austria will now take up the
presidency of the CD, the last for the 2009 session. The next
plenary meeting is not yet scheduled but will be announced
by the Secretariat at a later date.
Notes from the gallery
It was good to hear laughter in the Council Chamber today
despite the fact that the opportunity for substantive work
in 2009 is nearly gone. Hopefully the congenial atmosphere
will help toward solving the remaining difficulties. WILPF
hopes that Ambassador Strohal will have productive consultations
with the Pakistani delegation and that all of the problems
that arose this year are collectively resolved before the
CD recommences in 2010. WILPF is reminded of the Costa
Rican delegation’s statement to the CD in February
this year, wherein the country’s representative argued
that the problem with the CD is that states are approaching
disarmament from an armament or military perspective rather
than a humanist one and that only a comprehensive point of
view centered on the humanitarian side will move the Conference
forward. We urge all delegations to remember this as they
pursue their national security interests at the multilateral
level.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
17 August
2009
Still no consensus
During a brief plenary meeting Monday morning, the current
CD president, Ambassador Millar of Australia, informed the
Conference
that consensus on the framework
for implementing the programme
of work is still not possible. Ambassador Millar said
that if the situation changes, she will convene another plenary
meeting, but if it does not she will call a final meeting
under the Australian presidency on Thursday.
The Chinese
ambassador commended Ambassador Millar for her efforts,
“especially in promoting the agreement by all parties
on the programme of work and the open and transparent consultations
conducted for that purpose.” The representative of Iran
also thanked Ambassador Millar and the other CD presidents.
He noted that the Iranian delegation supports the efforts
of the CD president to bring the Conference to consensus on
the framework for implementation, CD/1870/Rev.1,
and asked her to continue with her consultations.
Other news
At the beginning of the meeting, Ambassador Millar bid farewell
to Ambassador Anton Pinter from Slovakia and wished him luck
in the future.
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Thursday, 20 August
at 10:00 AM.
The United
Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) and
the International
Panel on Fissile Materials are organizing a session on
Friday morning in the CD chamber to discuss “The
Scope and Verification of a Fissile Material (Cutoff) Treaty”.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
12 August
2009
China’s Foreign Minister addresses the CD
The Foreign
Minister of China, H.E. Yang Jiechi, addressed the Conference
on Disarmament (CD) during a plenary meeting on Wednesday
morning. He outlined China’s commitment to international
peace and security, emphasizing its “unique contribution
to the cause of nuclear disarmament.” This contribution
includes:
- not deploying nuclear weapons on foreign soil;
- not participating in any arms races;
- promoting early ratification of the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty (CTBT);
- supporting the launch of negotiations on a fissile
material cut-off treaty (FMCT) and taking an active
part in these negotiations;
- joining all treaties related to preventing the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction and putting in place “a
comprehensive system of laws and regulations compatible
with the relevant international legal regime,” and
strictly enforcing UNSC
1540; and
- calling for a peaceful resolution to the nuclear issues
on the Korean peninsula and in Iran, “with a view
to safeguarding [the] international non-proliferation regime
and maintaining regional peace and security.”
Disarmament
Minister Yang said that the Chinese government welcomes the
new momentum for “the complete prohibition and thorough
destruction of nuclear weapons and a nuclear-weapon-free world.”
He explained that the government believes that in order to
achieve these goals, nuclear disarmament must be pursued in
earnest. He specified:
- The United States and Russia should drastically reduce
their nuclear arsenals “so as to create necessary
conditions for the eventual complete and thorough nuclear
disarmament”;
- Nuclear weapon states should reduce the role of nuclear
weapons in their security doctrines, commit to no first
use, and consider China’s draft treaty on no first
use of nuclear weapons;
- The international community should negotiate and conclude
a legal instrument on negative security assurances;
- Nuclear weapon states should support the establishment
of nuclear
weapon free zone treaties and fulfill their obligations
to these zones;
- The international community should strive for the entry
into force of the CTBT and negotiation of a FMCT;
- Countries should not develop missile defence systems “that
undermine global strategic stability” or deploy weapons
in outer space; and
- As a “long-term goal,” the international community
should “conclude a convention on the complete prohibition
of nuclear weapons.”
Non-proliferation
Minister Yang also specified that to eliminate the risk of
nuclear proliferation, the international community should:
- “enhance the universality, authority, and effectiveness”
of the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty;
- strengthen the function of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and promote implementation
of the Safeguards Agreement and Additional Protocol;
- resolve proliferation issues through diplomatic means;
- eradicate the root causes of nuclear weapon proliferation;
- reject practice of double-standards; and
- strengthen the safety and security of nuclear facilities
and improve nuclear export control regimes.
Nuclear energy
Addressing the NPT’s “third pillar,” Minister
Yang said that to achieve the complete prohibition and destruction
of nuclear weapons, the international community must promote
nuclear energy, by:
- respecting NPT signatory rights to nuclear energy;
- encouraging the IAEA to play a bigger role in promoting
the “peaceful uses” of nuclear energy; and
- engage in multilateral consultations to reduce proliferation
risks, including the possibility of establishing a multilateral
nuclear fuel supply mechanism.
Outer space
Finally, Minister Yang emphasized the importance of preserving
outer space for peaceful uses and expressed hope that the
CD would soon start substantive discussions on the Russia-China
draft treaty on the prevention of the placement of weapons
in outer space.
Next meeting
At the end of the meeting, Ambassador Caroline Millar of Australia,
the current CD president, explained that no further meetings
are scheduled for this week. She said an announcement will
be made once the CD has reached consensus on the framework
for implementing its programme
of work for 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
10 August
2009
More delays and rotting fruit
In a repeat of Friday, the Conference
on Disarmament (CD) convened a plenary meeting on Monday
morning in the hopes of adopting CD/1870/Rev.1,
the combined schedule of activities and appointment of working
group chairs and special coordinators for the programme
of work. Once again, the plenary was unable to adopt the
document. At the start of the meeting,Ambassador Millar of
Australia, the current CD president, informed the Conference
that she had been notified by the Pakistani delegation this
morning that the instructions from its government were to
reopen the text. Ambassador Millar expressed puzzlement with
this request, as thought all of the issues had been worked
out during the extensive consultations. Delegates from the
European
Union, Japan, Pakistan, the United Kingdom, and Brazil
took the floor to comment on this situation.
Brief highlight
- The decision on CD/1870/Rev.1 is again postponed. The
Pakistani delegation is not satisfied with the document's
introductory language though it does not seem to oppose
any of the appointments of special coordinators or working
group chairs. It has also requested that the time devoted
to consideration of the CD's report be deleted from the
schedule.
Reactions
On behalf of the European
Union, Sweden’s Ambassador Magnus Hellgren took
the floor to express the EU’s “profound disappointment”
with the lack of development in the CD. He noted that it is
very hard to understand—and “even harder to explain
to our political leaders”—why substantive work
has not yet begun even though a programme of work was adopted
on 29 May.
Japan’s Ambassador Suda likewise lamented the signal
this stalemate is sending to the world—especially following
so closely the anniversaries of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima
and Nagasaki. He argued that the CD, which is supposed to
work by consensus, is facing the unusual situation of being
unable to implement its own consensus document. He described
this situation as endangering the Conference’s principle
of consensus by acting against the principle’s true
meaning. Returning to the metaphor introduced by the Chinese
delegation before the break, Ambassador
Suda noted that the melon the CD bought—which needed
to “ripen” over July—is now rotting.
“Clarification” and concerns
Ambassador Akram of Pakistan took the floor to clarify his
delegation’s position, saying that he had always made
it clear that the decisions related to the CD would be taken
by Pakistan’s Ministry. He expressed regret that other
delegations see only Pakistan’s delegation as having
a position that is obstructing process, which is not how his
delegation sees the situation. The Pakistani government believes
that every delegation has to work on behalf of its own national
security interests but that it is not its intention to hold
up work in the CD until the end of the session.
However, Ambassador Duncan of the United Kingdom argued that
this case is not one of obstructing progress on a policy issue
but on a practical issue. Agreeing that policy issues are
important, Ambassador Duncan noted that all CD member states
had supported the start of negotiations on a fissile material
cut-off treaty and discussions on the other three core issues.
Thus it is disappointing that this consensus policy decision
cannot be implemented because the Conference cannot implement
the necessary practical modalities.
Details
The Brazilian delegate, Ambassador Soares, sought clarification
on the details of Pakistan’s position. Ambassador Millar
explained that the concerns raised by the Pakistani delegation
related primarily to the language of the chapeau in CD/1870/Rev.1,
not to the appointment of office holders. She also reported
that the delegation has suggested deleting from the timetable
the weeks allocated to the consideration of the CD’s
report to the General Assembly. However, she also noted that
the rules
of procedure require the inclusion of all agenda items
in the programme of work, which includes consideration of
the report. Thus, Ambassador Millar plans to hold consultations
with the Pakistani delegation about these issues and hopes
for their quick resolve.
Schedule
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, 12 August
at 10:00 AM, when the Chinese Minister for Foreign Affairs,
Yang Jiechi, will address the Conference.
Notes from the gallery
As the positive momentum towards real work in the Conference
on Disarmament declines—or rots, to keep with the melon
metaphor—it is not only political leaders to whom difficult
explanations need to be made but also the people, especially
those who are represented by governments in the CD. As argued
by several ambassadors today, the policy decision to negotiate
a fissile material treaty has already been made by all CD
member states. All of these states decided, on 29 May, that
it was in their national security interest to negotiate this
treaty and to begin substantive discussions on the other three
core issues. The people are waiting for this decision to be
implemented.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
7 August
2009
Decision on implementation postponed
On Friday morning, the Conference
on Disarmament (CD) convened a plenary meeting in the
hopes of adopting CD/1870/Rev.1, the combined schedule of
activities and appointment of working group chairs and special
coordinators for the programme
of work. (See CD/1870,
the first draft, for reference.) However, the Pakistani delegation
expressed the need for more time to receive instructions from
capital, since CD/1870/Rev.1 had just been circulated yesterday.
Several delegations reportedly asked for the fourth paragraph
of the draft presidential statement, which accompanied CD/1870/Rev.1,
to be deleted. The paragraph, according to the official
press release, “referred to the need for consultations
by the President of the Conference on the programme of work
for the remainder of 2009 and by the incoming President for
2010, in advance of next year’s session.” The
CD president, Ambassador Caroline Millar of Australia, agreed
to delete the paragraph.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Monday,
10 August at 10:00 AM, when Ambassador Millar hopes the Conference
will adopt the framework of implementation for the programme
of work.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
6 August
2009
Atomic bombing anniversaries and the importance of the
CD
On the 64th anniversary of the US atomic bombing of Hiroshima,
Japan, the Conference
on Disarmament (CD) met for another plenary. Ambassador
Millar of Australia, the current CD president, noted that
the day should be a reminder to the Conference of the destruction
of nuclear weapons and the importance of resuming work on
nuclear disarmament in the CD. She also welcomed the new German
ambassador, who delivered his first address to the Conference.
The ambassador
of Japan also noted the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki and the US ambassador announced that US President
Obama will chair a high-level Security Council meeting on
nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament in September.
Brief highlights
- The CD president introduced a revised framework for the
implementation of the programme of work, CD/1870/Rev.1,
expressing hope that it could be adopted tomorrow.
- The ambassadors of Australia and Japan noted the anniversaries
of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, pointing
out the importance of the CD resuming its work.
- The new German ambassador for disarmament articulated
his delegation’s commitment to nuclear disarmament
and non-proliferation and highlighted the role of the CD.
Atomic bombs
Along with Ambassador Millar of Australia, Ambassador
Suda of Japan noted that 6 August “is a day to remember
the tragedies so that we can renew our determination to work
towards a world free of nuclear weapons through our current
and future endeavors.” He expressed encouragement with
the new initiatives and momentum around nuclear disarmament
and non-proliferation.
The new German ambassador for disarmament, Ambassador
Hellmut Hoffmann, delivered his first intervention to
the CD. He argued that the Conference’s “joint
political aim” should be to get the CD back to work,
noting, “[t]here are still some 26,000 nuclear weapons
in arsenals around the world, with thousands still on high-alert
status.” He also pointed out, “[g]enerations lived
and continue to live with the knowledge that their world could
be erased in a single flash of light. In the meantime, the
technology to build nuclear bombs has spread and continues
to spread.” Welcoming the renewed interest in nuclear
disarmament, Ambassador Hoffman argued, “the long term
future of the entire global nuclear non-proliferation and
disarmament regime will depend on the extent to which the
world community can de-legitimize nuclear weapons themselves.”
Role of the CD
Germany’s Ambassador Hoffman went on to argue that if
the CD can agree to terminate the production of fissile materials
for weapons purposes, it would be tackling one of the roots
of nuclear weapons. To take up this and the other important
matters in the CD’s programme of work, he urged all
delegations to agree to the revised draft framework for its
implementation.
New framework for implementation
Ambassador Millar of Australia introduced CD/1870/Rev.1, an
updated version of the draft decision introduced at Tuesday’s
plenary meeting. The only change is that the timetable now
provides for three weeks instead of two for the consideration
of the reports of the working groups and special coordinators,
which was requested by several delegations. She noted that
no delegation has raised any objections to the new draft and
expressed hope that it would be adopted tomorrow.
Other news
US Ambassador Garold Larson announced that US President Obama
would chair a high-level meeting of the Security Council on
nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament on 24 September.
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Friday, 7 August
at 10:00 AM.
Notes from the gallery
WILPF also remembers the atomic bombings of Japan by the United
States in 1945. In a statement marking the unfortunate anniversaries,
WILPF notes:
Despite the end of the Cold War, despite supposed “thawing
of tensions” between the major powers, and despite
the reality of an interconnected, interdependent world order,
the mythical ideal of the power of the bomb persists. It
continues to influence national security doctrines, international
relations, and multilateral negotiations, subsequently undermining
international law, human security, and our ability to build
resilience to the converging climate, peak oil, food, water,
and financial crises we face.
WILPF urges all governments and citizens to consider our
options for the future. It encourages everyone to support
and work for the elimination of nuclear weapons and for
the redirection of nuclear weapon expenditures to meet environmental,
social, health, housing, food, and economic needs. We need
to creatively build resilience into our international system
that does not rely on violence or military power but rather
promotes cooperation, ingenuity, and human security. As
a first step toward this end, WILPF calls on all nuclear
weapon possessors to cease modernizing their arsenals as
a step toward the good faith pursuit of nuclear disarmament
and a nuclear weapon free world.
The full statement is available online in HTML
and PDF.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
4 August
2009
CD’s third part opens with a new proposal for
implementing the programme of work
During the opening plenary meeting of the third part of the
Conference
on Disarmament (CD)’s 2009 session, the current
CD president, Ambassador Caroline Millar of Australia, introduced
an updated draft decision on the implementation of the Conference’s
programme
of work. Ambassador Jayan Dayatilleka of Sri Lanka delivered
his farewell statement to the Conference, and representatives
from the United
Kingdom, the Group
of 21, Brazil,
New
Zealand, the Russian Federation, Bangladesh, Indonesia
and China also delivered interventions on a variety of topics.
Brief highlights
- The current CD president introduced CD/1870, a new draft
decision on implementing the programme of work.
- Representatives of Brazil, New Zealand, Bangladesh, and
Indonesia expressed hope that the CD could find a way to
implement the programme of work and encouraged other delegations
to be flexible. The Russian ambassador expressed confidence
this would be possible.
- The UK ambassador introduced his government’s Road
to 2010 report on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament.
- The Sri Lankan ambassador delivered his farewell speech
and a representative of the Group of 21 thank him for his
work.
Implementing the programme of work
Ambassador
Luiz Filipe de Macedo Soares of Brazil argued, “[c]urrent
international conditions are favorable to discussions on the
question of nuclear disarmament,” but if the Conference
hesitates “because we are paralyzed by fear that sentiment
will continue to pervade international relations with widespread
consequences.” He warned of the dangers of losing momentum,
noting that while the result of negotiations and discussions
during the course of the Conference’s work is not in
the CD’s control, the commencement of the implementation
of the programme of work IS in its control. He urged the Conference
to complete its discussions on the implementation framework
in time to be reflected in the CD’s Report to the General
Assembly. He also encouraged the CD member states not to go
back to square one at the beginning of each CD session when
adopting a programme of work but rather to build upon its
work of the previous session.
New Zealand’s new disarmament ambassador, Ambassador
Dell Higgie, took the floor to outline some of her country’s
priorities for disarmament and arms control and to express
optimism regarding the work of the CD. She noted that CD/1864,
the programme of work adopted in May, shares its numbers with
the year 1864, when the first Geneva Convention was adopted.
She urged all delegations to “show flexibility and support
the framework to implement CD/1864.”
At the end of the meeting, the current CD president, Ambassador
Millar of Australia, introduced a new draft decision and complementary
presidential statement on the implementation of the programme
of work. She explained that after extensive consultations,
the CD presidents decided to merge CD/1866/Rev.1,
the proposed schedule of activities, and CD/1867,
the proposed working group chairs and special coordinators.
The new compilation document, CD/1870, also reportedly outlines
some basic principles that a few delegations wanted explicitly
reflected, including that the consensus rule applies to the
working groups and special coordinators; that chairs and coordinators
will be appointed with respect to principles of rotation and
equitable geographic distribution; and that the work of the
CD will strive to treat all its agenda items in a balanced
manner. The accompanying presidential statement reportedly
seeks to reflect other issues raised by delegations during
consultations, such ensuring continuity between 2009 and 2010
and respecting “national security interests of states”.
UK plans for the future
Ambassador
Duncan of the United Kingdom introduced the UK government’s
Road to 2010, a new report related to the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT). The report outlines the UK government’s
“vision for a renewed nuclear global bargain on the
key strategic challenges of the modern nuclear era.”
It provides an assessment of the challenges related to expanding
civil nuclear power, ensuring the security of nuclear material
and non-proliferation, and disarmament. The paper examines
a phased approach to both non-proliferation and multilateral
disarmament, which starts with improving transparency of current
weapon capabilities and verifiable multilateral reductions
in arsenals and ends with creating “the security conditions”
and overcoming “the technical and political challenges
of a world free from all nuclear weapons.”
Ambassador Duncan also noted that the United Kingdom will
host a Conference on Confidence-Building Measures towards
Nuclear Disarmament in London on 3–4 September 2009,
“bringing together policy officials and technical experts
from the five recognized nuclear weapon states.” In
addition, he announced that the UK is establishing a “Nuclear
Centre of Excellence” to promote the expansion and development
of “cost-effective” civil nuclear power “that
is much harder for terrorists and states with hostile intent
to divert for use in weapons programmes.”
Ambassador Duncan also explained that in the context of the
NPT, the United Kingdom will be pushing for the establishment
of a “fourth pillar” of nuclear security. He noted
that this does not entail re-opening the NPT text but rather
making sure that the subject is “placed firmly on the
international agenda” and helping the International
Atomic Energy Agency meet its funding needs and undergo
“organizational reform”.
Other news
Ambassador Dayan Jayatilleka of Sri Lanka delivered his farewell
speech to the CD, expressing regret that he would not be present
to participate in the productive work of the Conference. He
credited the change in the US administration and the ability
of the CD presidents to present “an architecture that
appeared more even handed” with bringing the CD back
to work. On behalf of the Group
of 21, Mr. Daniel Ávila Camacho of Colombia recognized
the work of Ambassador Jayatilleka as coordinator of discussions
on nuclear disarmament.
Ambassador Wang of China announced that on Wednesday, 12
August, China’s Foreign Minister would address the CD
to outline China’s positions on issues related to arms
control and non-proliferation.
The CD’s next plenary meeting is scheduled for Thursday,
6 August at 10:00 AM.
Notes from the gallery
We look forward to hearing discussions on the new proposed
framework for implementing the programme of work and join
the delegations above in encouraging the exercise of flexibility
and good faith to begin substantive work.
In reference to the nuclear power aspects of the UK’s
Road to 2010 report, WILPF would like to note that
a different vision for the future, the Model
Nuclear Weapons Convention developed by a range of civil
society groups, discourages the use of nuclear power. The
model Convention recognizes that the continued reliance on
nuclear power and its potential expansion pose a challenge
to verification of a nuclear weapon free world. The model
Convention’s accompanying book,
Securing Our Survival, notes:
With some adjustment, the very same facilities and equipment
used to produce low-enriched uranium fuel for power reactors
can produce high-enriched uranium suitable for use in a
nuclear weapon. The separation and reprocessing of plutonium
from spent reactor fuel as mixed-oxide fuel is a potentially
greater proliferation challenge, as all separate plutonium
is directly usable in nuclear weapons. All existing commercial
nuclear power reactors produce plutonium as a by-product.
The spread of these technologies increases the risk that
such facilities might be misused and nuclear material diverted
to use in weapons or into the hands of terrorists, or that
the knowledge gained from operating such facilities might
be employed in a clandestine nuclear bomb program. The spread
of nuclear technology also increase the risk of terrorist
attack on reactors and their spent fuel stores.
Verification of nuclear non-proliferation objectives historically
has been limited order to maintain the balance between rights
and obligations NPT states parties. NPT Safeguards, administered
by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), are restricted
to verifying that no nuclear material in each non-weapon
state has been diverted to weapons. The IAEA only has the
authority to comprehensively verify the presence or absence
of undeclared nuclear activities or materials in a state
if it has accepted the voluntary Additional Protocol. Enforcement
is hindered by the treaty’s institutional deficits:
the lack of a standing secretariat for the NPT and the infrequent
meetings of states parties. The UN Security Council has
increasingly filled the enforcement gap left by the lack
of compliance mechanisms, but under a traditional view its
authority is limited to cases that it has found to constitute
a threat to international peace, rather than functioning
as a reliable enforcer of global treaty regimes.
These concerns over the limits of the NPT safeguards regime
led a 2003 MIT team, examining issues related to the expansion
of nuclear power, to question the wisdom of any scenario
envisioning the growth of nuclear energy. Undoubtedly, the
only truly proliferation-proof solution would be the global
phase-out of nuclear power. The Model NWC does not mandate
such a global phase-out, but does provide some encouragement
for it through an additional protocol on nuclear energy
phase-out. This could be be assisted by the establishment
of an International Sustainable Energy Agency, which would
provide assistance to states in developing environmentally
sound energy technologies and phasing out nuclear energy.
For more, please see Securing
Our Survival, available online for download in PDF.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
2 July 2009
The CD will take the summer to “ripen”
Thursday morning’s plenary meeting marked the conclusion
of the second part of the Conference
on Disarmament (CD)’s 2009 session. Ambassador
Bernhard Brasack of Germany delivered his farewell speech
to the CD, outlining some his personal thoughts on fissile
material treaty negotiations. The delegations of the United
States, Pakistan,
the United
Kingdom, the Republic
of Korea, Colombia,
Ireland,
Turkey,
Iran,
China, Egypt, and Mexico spoke about ongoing efforts to implement
the programme of work. Kelvin Thomson, an Australian parliamentarian,
spoke about the work of the Australian Parliamentary Joint
Standing Committee on Treaties in the disarmament area. The
current CD president, Ambassador Millar of Australia, said
she would undertake intensive consultations with delegations
during the CD’s summer break to try to reach consensus
on the implementation of the programme of work.
Brief highlights
• The delegations of Colombia, Mexico, the Republic of
Korea, Turkey, and the United States reiterated their endorsements
of CD/1866/Rev.1
and CD/1867.
• The delegations of China, Egypt, Iran, and Pakistan
called for consideration of security concerns and building
a strong foundation when implementing the programme of work.
• Pakistan’s delegation suggested that CD/1866/Rev.1
and CD/1867 be merged and clearly indicate that their mandates
are limited to the CD’s 2009 session.
• In his farewell speech, Ambassador Brasack of Germany
gave the CD some personal advice on conducting fissile material
cut-off treaty negotiations.
Implementation of the programme of work
Consensus on the two draft documents for implementing the
programme of work—CD/1866/Rev.1,
the draft schedule of activities, and CD/1867,
the suggested chairs and special coordinators—has not
yet been reached. The process currently appears to be stuck
on the issue of “protecting national security interests”
through the procedural documents, as Pakistan’s delegation
urges, and building an unambiguous foundation for future work,
as China’s delegation requires.
Concerns with the proposed documents
Pakistan’s
Ambassador Zamir Akram noted that his delegation has suggested
“that the special security interests of non-nuclear
weapon states, that do not belong to a military alliance or
enjoy a security umbrella, deserve special consideration—even
in procedural matters, so that they are in a better place
to protect their interests”. He also noted that several
delegations, including his, “have made proposals and
sought clarifications on some aspects of the two draft documents
before us,” CD/1866/Rev.1 and CD/1867. He urged for
the two documents to be merged for the sake clarity and clearly
indicate that they are relevant only for the remainder of
the CD’s 2009 session.
Agreeing with the Pakistani delegation, Iran’s
representative emphasized the importance of addressing
delegations’ concerns about the two documents, arguing
that outlining the practical start to negotiations requires
common understanding of the approach. He expressed optimism
that the CD is very close to being able to implement its programme
of work. Egypt’s representative likewise argued that
the valid security concerns of all parties must be adequately
addressed to ensure consensus, which is a prerequisite for
movement.
China’s representative told the Conference that no delegation
has a right to ignore or prevent consideration of other delegations’
concerns about procedural matters. Mr. Li Yang also outlined
specific elements of China’s position on the two draft
documents, arguing for the importance of foundation. He noted
that the delegations that wished to build a solid foundation
for their work are being criticized for trying to block the
work of the CD and waste its momentum. However, he argued,
more than a month after the programme of work was adopted,
the CD still does not know the length of the chair’s
mandates, how the rotations would work, where the rolling
text would come from, or how meetings would be arranged. Mr.
Li Yang explained that the Chinese delegation has no problems
with CD/1866/Rev.1 or CD/1867, but that it is concerned that
these issues would affect its future work, in 2010.
Concerns with the delay in implementation
In contrast, Mexico’s representative appealed to all
delegations to “take advantage of the prevailing favourable
climate to give new inspiration to the CD and return its credibility.”
She warned against getting “bogged down” in procedure,
arguing that questions on procedure are not related to security
interests. US
chargé d’affaires Garold Larson noted that
the rules of procedure provide the necessary protection to
states’ national security interests during the process
of negotiations, which is why the United States supports the
adoption of CD/1866/Rev.1 and CD/1867 to implement the programme
of work.
The representatives of the Republic of Korea and Ireland expressed
disappointment that a month after the adoption of its programme
of work, the CD would be well underway with its work. Ambassador
Im Han-Taek of the Republic of Korea noted that because
of the future implications of negotiation structures, the
framework established now is very important. He said it would
be ideal if the CD could address certain delegation’s
concerns about the framework now, especially since CD/1866/Rev.1
and CD/1867 do contain some ambiguities. However, he argued,
to get the CD off the ground it might be necessary to maintain
some “constructive ambiguity” for the time being.
Mr.
James O’Shea of Ireland commented on Ambassador
Akram’s statement about affording special consideration
to non-nuclear weapons states, saying that as a non-nuclear
weapon statement, Ireland does not seek any special treatment
in procedural issues. However, Mr. O’Shea also noted,
“it is true that we, the states in this Conference that
are in a particular position from a security point of view
… hope that in the longer term there will be no distinctions
in this Conference between states with and without nuclear
weapons, that we would all have a world free of nuclear weapons
for everyone.”
The current CD president, Ambassador Millar of Australia,
said she would undertake intensive consultations with delegations
during the CD’s summer break to try to reach consensus
on the implementation of the programme of work.
Ambassador Brasack’s farewell statement
In his farewell speech, Ambassador
Brasack of Germany reminded the CD that the programme
of work is not yet action, but the promise of action.
He warned against falling back into “sleepwalking mode”
and argued that it is not just the task, but the duty
of the CD to negotiate relevant treaties. On this note, he
offered some personal, not-cleared-by-capital advice regarding
the negotiation of a fissile
materials cut-off treaty (FMCT).
FMCT negotiations
Regarding definitions of an FMCT, Ambassador Brasack said
he believes that the perspective that states have to agree
on all the underlying definitions before beginning negotiations
on scope or verification is incorrect. He argued this would
be a “dead-end” for negotiations, since “[d]efinitions
are a servant to the intended scope,” and “should
be in tune with effective verification measures.” He
suggested that definitions, scope, and verification be treated
in parallel and fine-tuned to each other throughout the course
of negotiations.
Ambassador Brasack also argued that if verification is entrusted
to the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), it would require a dramatic overhaul
of the Agency, especially in terms of its inspection system
and resources. This advice comes just as Yukiya Amano of Japan
was today chosen to be the new Director General of the IAEA.
Ambassador Brasack suggested such an overhaul “would
be possible with the acceptance of IAEA verification of fuel
cycle plants in nuclear weapon states on a voluntary basis,
as a measure of a steady phase-in.” He noted this would
alleviate “one of the unequal features of the NPT,”
wherein non-nuclear weapon states have to place all of their
nuclear facilities under safeguards while the nuclear weapon
states do not.
Ambassador Brasack also warned fissile material-producing
states against trying to “pre-cook” an FMCT by
working out a lowest common denominator arrangement behind
closed doors and then forcing it upon the rest of the CD.
He noted that this strategy led to failure in Convention
on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) negotiations on
cluster munitions and would lead to failure again in FMCT
negotiations.
He called for equal standards to be applied to all states,
arguing that pleading for unlimited verification requirements
for non-nuclear weapon states while “raising at the
same time an unlimited number of questions and concerns and
asking for manifold exemptions, as soon as the FMCT-verification
of ones own relevant nuclear installations is concerned, would
also doom the FMCT negotiations to failure.”
Specific proposals
Ambassador Brasack suggested the CD set up a Group of Scientific
and Safeguards Experts now, to consider questions of verification.
He also suggested that discussions about stocks should not
be approached “upfront in a generic way” but rather
should “be started in the context of the requirements
for an effective verification system.” Specifically,
he explained, if “an effective verification of the production
of ban required a specific tangible baseline for the cut-off,
it might be necessary to provide data on the size of the existing
stocks at least in an aggregate manner.” He also noted
the issue of existing stocks would need to be addressed when
dealing with “possible transfer bans.”
Further, Ambassador Brasack argued that an immediate binding
moratorum on fissile material production for explosive purposes
is necessary to avoid “complicating matters unnecessarily”
and delaying negotiations.
Shout-outs to civil society
In his closing remarks, Ambassador Brasack of Germany commended
the efforts of many civil society organizations, including
the Women’s
International League for Peace and Freedom, the Acronym
Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy, and the Middle
Powers Initiative, among others.
Notes from an Australian MP
Mr. Kelvin Thomson of the Australian Parliamentary Joint Committee
on Treaties, said his committee has been asked by the Prime
Minister to carry out an inquiry on nuclear non-proliferation
and disarmament and provide a report. So far, it has focused
on the need for real outcomes for the NPT
2010 Review Conference and the need to strengthen arms
control, non-proliferation, and disarmament architecture and
some of the relevant steps on the way to disarmament—inter
alia, the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty, IAEA safeguards, FMCT, and multilateral
fuel assurances.
Other business
The CD approved observer status for Thailand. The third part
of the CD’s 2009 session will meet from 3 August to
18 September.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
30 June 2009
No movement on implementing the programme of work
During Tuesday’s plenary meeting, former Australian
foreign minister Gareth Evans addressed the Conference
on Disarmament (CD). Several delegations, including those
of Japan,
China,
Philippines, Iran, and Syria commented on Mr. Evans’
presentation. Malaysia and the new incoming CD president,
Ambassador Millar of Australia, spoke about CD/1866,
the proposed schedule of activities, and CD/1867,
the proposed chairs and coordinators.
Brief highlights
• The CD president announced that CD/1866 has been updated
to reflect that the working groups and special coordinatorships
will not begin until Part Three of the CD’s 2009 session.
• The CD president also informed the Conference that
CD/1866 and CD/1867 will only hold for the 2009 session and
that in 2010 the CD will have to adopt its own programme of
work and implementation methods.
• Gareth Evans, co-chair of the International Commission
on Nuclear Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, addressed the
CD, briefly outlining the Commission’s purpose and plans.
Work of the CD
Ambassador Aziz of Malaysia encouraged current CD president,
Ambassador Caroline Millar of Australia, to continue consultations,
saying that CD/1866
and CD/1867
contain all the necessary elements for the CD to commence
substantive work. China’s
representative said China would continue “with a
constructive manner to support [the CD president’s]
work so that we can arrive at an agreement at an early date
on the organization of our work.”
Ambassador Millar explained that because the working groups
and special coordinatorships had not started their work this
week as outlined in CD/1866, that document has been replaced
by CD/1866/Rev.1. She also explained that the appointment
of chairs and special coordinators in CD/1867 is only relevant
for 2009 and that the Conference’s 2010 session would
have to take its own decisions on the programme of work and
its implementation.
Ambassador Millar encouraged all delegations to make substantive
statements at the next plenary meeting “to help guide
the forthcoming deliberations”. She expressed hope that
the next plenary would be able to adopt CD/1866/Rev.1 and
CD/1867.
Report on the ICNND
Gareth Evans, co-chair of the International
Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (ICNND),
argued that the only difficulty to getting the CD back to
work is political will. He explained that the ICNND aimed
to re-energize a high-level political debate about the interconnected
issues of disarmament. He said that the Commission would publish
a major report by the end of the year, which will include
an evaluation of the risks associated with use and proliferation
of nuclear weapons by both existing and potential nuclear
states or non-state actors. One of the ICNND’s main
messages, he explained, is that as long as any state possesses
nuclear weapons others will want them, too, and there is a
risk that they could be used.
Mr. Evans reported that the Commission is working on an action
plan with goals for 2012 and beyond, which include a successful
2010 nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference; strengthening
the NPT and the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); finding solutions to the
nuclear situations in Iran and North Korea; expanding the
scope of US-Russian bilateral reductions; bringing the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty into force; and reducing existing nuclear
weapon stocks, deployment, and operational readiness. Given
the risks associated with nuclear weapon possession, he said
there is a need for nuclear weapon states to adopt a doctrine
saying that the existence of nuclear weapons is only justified
as a means of deterrence against proliferation of such weapons.
Like the Conference on Disarmament, Mr. Evans said the ICNND
requires an “injection of political will” to sustain
its agenda over the long-term.
Ambassador
Suda of Japan described the ICNND as both augmenting negotiations
in the CD and strengthening the positive movement in nuclear
disarmament and the NPT. China’s
delegation expressed its appreciation of the ICNND, saying
it has “already conducted very forward-looking, extensive,
and comprehensive considerations on all important issues.”
He noted, however, that “for the time-being, there are
not yet political proposals put forward,” though he
hoped that the action plan Mr. Evans spoke of will meet this
goal. He noted that China will send it’s former foreign
minister to work for the Commission.
Mr. Domingo of the Philippines asked if the ICNND has a mechanism
for collaboration with interested states, or if there are
any plans for collaboration between the Commission and the
Conference on Disarmament or the General Assembly’s
First Committee. He also asked if the Commission will conduct
regional consultations with Oceania and Southeast Asia. Mr.
Evans replied that the Commission has not yet worked out
its collaboration with UN bodies but intends to pursue such
options, perhaps after it has adopted its final report. He
also said that he would look into consultations with the Pacific
region.
Iran’s
representative explained that it considers the presentation
by Gareth Evans as representative of a national view by a
delegation, since participation by any other entity in the
CD “should be decided by consensus,” as laid out
in the CD rules of procedure. He argued that Mr. Evans’
comments about Iran were not accurate and did not reflect
“realities on the ground.” However, he did agree
with Mr. Evans that the existence of nuclear weapons is a
global threat and that some states possessed such weapons
or benefited from them by a nuclear “umbrella”.
He wondered “how the Commission that was described today
by Mr. Evans will really resolve this puzzle.”
Mr.
Evans replied that all he said “was the clearly
obvious proposition that Iran is a country of concern at the
moment to the wider international community obviously because
of the unresolved issues with the Security Council resolutions.”
He noted that for those who are familiar with Mr. Evans’
personal work on this issue, he has argued against making
any assumptions about Iran’s determination to acquire
nuclear weapons but has instead argued for a negotiated outcome
to the situation. He emphasized that he was merely calling
for a resolution within the next few years in a way that everybody
is comfortable with.
Syria’s Ambassador Hamoui asked what the aim of the
ICNND’s upcoming conference in Cairo will be, and what
parties would be participating. He also asked for clarification
on the relationship between the ICNND and the IAEA—is
it complementary or competitive. Mr. Evans replied that the
Commission is still figuring out the dynamics of the key players
in the Middle East. He also said there was no competition
between the ICNND and the IAEA; in fact, the ICNND was considering
the question of the IAEA’s jurisdiction, wondering if
it should be widened and become the verifying agency under
the NPT.
Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Thursday, 2 July
at 10:00 AM.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
26 June 2009
Unripe fruit at the Conference on Disarmament
During the Friday plenary meeting of the Conference
on Disarmament (CD), the current CD president was unable
to put CD/1866
(the draft schedule of activities) or CD/1867
(the draft list of chairs and coordinators) forward for decision.
Several delegations expressed frustration with the ongoing
stalemate and the Chinese delegation explained its concerns
with the texts.
Brief highlights
• The Western
Group and the Eastern
European Group announced their support for documents CD/1866
and CD/1867.
• The delegations of Mexico,
France,
Japan,
and United
Kingdom expressed their frustration and puzzlement regarding
the stalemate over the adoption of the two procedural documents.
• China’s delegation explained its concerns with
the two documents.
• Pakistan’s
delegation said the CD is not yet ready to adopt the documents.
• In this closing remarks, the current
CD president encouraged any delegations with remaining
concerns to resolve their issues over the weekend.
• The incoming CD president, Ambassador
Millar of Australia, announced that Gareth Evans will
address the next plenary meeting.
Support
Sweden’s
representative Mr. Magnus Hellgren, speaking on behalf
of the Western Group, reiterated that the Group is “very
much ready to accept” CD/1866
and CD/1867,
which constitute an “excellent basis to now implement
our work programme.” Likewise, Ambassador
Maria Ciobanu of Romania announced that the Eastern European
Group is ready to support both documents.
Frustration and silence
Expressing her frustration that consensus on these procedural
documents has not yet been met, Mexico’s
Deputy Permanent Representative Mabel Gómez Oliver
said this is a rather difficult situation to explain to capitals
and the public. She said her delegation regrets “the
fact that we continue to postpone the commencement of our
work and we continue to bear a debt to the international community
in general.” Ambassador
John Duncan of the United Kingdom also expressed “puzzlement”
with the current situation, arguing that the documents have
been in circulation for weeks, more than enough time to get
instructions from capitals. He asked who in the room is not
in the position to answer this procedural question.
Ambassador
Roberto Garcia Moritan of Argentina, the current CD president,
also asked if there were any “fresh elements”
since yesterday’s consultations that “might enable
us to make progress.” The silence in the chamber that
met this questions indicated that the CD is “in the
same situation we found ourselves in yesterday morning,”
and the president found that there is not “sufficient
space and opportunity” for the Council to adopt either
of the documents.
Ambassador
Eric Danon of France noted, sometimes “silence is
a positive thing, some[times] silence is rather ambiguous
and there are days where silence leads you to think you are
getting towards a solution and days when silence leaves us
totally doubting everything.” In order to “get
out of this rather difficult moment,” he suggested that
the CD should seek to discover who might have problems with
the texts, as a “symbolic” step forward. Japan’s
representative agreed with the delegations of Mexico,
the United Kingdom, and France, arguing that the CD cannot
continue to schedule plenary meetings just to sit there without
saying anything.
The situation
Ambassador
Moritan noted that before this plenary, a number of regional
groups had stressed the importance of addressing the two documents
today, though from his consultations he understands that the
same stalemate facing the Conference yesterday persists today.
He explained, “I can understand the concern from Delegations
to see us take a decision straight away and nothing would
be more pleasing to me than to do so. However, it is my understanding
that the Conference on Disarmament is not yet in a position
to adopt a decision on those two documents.” Therefore,
Ambassador Moritan expressed hope that the delegations that
have asked for more time will be able to resolve their issues
quickly and encouraged delegations to take the weekend to
reflect on the situation, insisting that preserving the positive
atmosphere in the CD is an important matter.
Concerns
Arguing that perhaps the “melon is not yet ripe,”
Ambassador Wang Qun of China explained his delegation’s
concerns with CD/1866 and CD/1867. He said that CD/1867 does
not contain clear mandates for the chairs and coordinators,
such as how they would take turns or the length of their terms.
He also explained that his delegation believes a comprehensive
package is needed that clearly states how each document is
related to each other, what the process for implementing them
is, and explains that the relevance of these decisions is
limited to 2009. He argued that if these elements are not
made clear now, it is like a “time bomb integrated in
the foundation of the building.” He argued that delegations
have had less than 24 hours to consider these documents, reminding
the Conference that just because a delegation requires more
time does not necessarily mean it will reject the documents
in the end.
Ambassador Moritan agreed that the Conference has to wait
for the melon to become sweeter, and while delegations are
waiting for this to happen, it is important to keep a constructive
atmosphere. Speaking very briefly, Ambassador
Zamir Akram of Pakistan also said he agreed with the president’s
assessment that the CD is not yet ready to adopt these decisions,
but assured the Conference that once the melon was ripe, it
will have in it the taste of Ambassador Moritan’s leadership.
Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 30 June
at 10:00 AM under the presidency of Australia. Australia’s
former Foreign Minster, Gareth Evans, will address the Conference
in his capacity as co-Chair of the International Commission
on Non-proliferation and Disarmament.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
25 June 2009
Draft proposals for moving forward
During Thursday’s plenary meeting, Ambassador
Roberto Garcia Moritan of Argentina, current president
of the Conference on Disarmament (CD), released two draft
decisions: a draft calendar of activities and a draft list
of possible working group chairs and special coordinators.
However, he noted that the CD is “still not in a position
to adopt those decisions.” He expressed optimism that
the “minor outstanding details” could be resolved
within the next few days or even hours. After this announcement,
several delegations took the floor, including those of the
United
Kingdom, France,
China,
Brazil,
the United
States, the Russian
Federation, Japan,
Pakistan,
Chile,
and Australia.
Brief highlights
- The current CD president released a draft calendar of
activities, CD/1866, and a draft list of possible candidates
to chair the working groups and act as special coordinators,
CD/1867.
- The delegations of Chile, France, Japan, the Russian Federation,
the United Kingdom voiced their support for both draft decisions.
Proposed working group chairs and special coordinators
In document CD/1867, the following officials are suggested:
- Nuclear disarmament working group chair: Ambassador
Dian Triansyah Djani of Indonesia
- Fissile materials treaty working group chair: Ambassador
Jürg Streuli of Switzerland
- PAROS working group chair: Ambassador Luiz Filipe
de Macedo Soares of Brazil
- NSA working group chair: Ambassador Mykola Maimeskul
of Ukraine
- Radiological weapons coordinator: Ambassador Chitsaka
Chipaziwa of Zimbabwe
- Comprehensive programme of disarmament coordinator:
Ambassador Mabel Gómez Olivier of Mexico
- Transparency in armaments coordinator: Ambassador
Hannu Himanen of Finland
Proposed schedule of activities
The draft schedule, CD/1866, has each of the working groups
and special coordinator groups meeting once in the remaining
week of the second part of the 2009 session. During the six
weeks of the CD’s third part, 3 August–18 September,
the schedule is very balanced in its time allotment to the
four working groups, assigning four meetings to each working
group and one meeting to each special coordinator group. The
draft schedule allows for regular Tuesday and Thursday morning
plenary meetings, regional and presidential meetings, and
devotes three weeks to the consideration and adoption of the
final report.
Responses to the draft decisions
Ambassador
John Duncan of the United Kingdom reported that as long
as the final versions of the two decisions are the same as
the drafts circulated to the regional groups, his delegation
is happy to support those proposals. Ambassador
Eric Danon of France likewise announced his delegation’s
“positive stand” with respect to the draft decisions
and the Russian
Federation’s representative said that the draft
decisions, in their current form, reflect the goals of the
Conference and thus his delegation is ready to support them.
Japan’s
representative also announced that his delegation could
support the president’s proposals. He reminded the Conference
that member states are watched by “all people”
and are expected to start actual work. Ambassador
Carlos Portales of Chile noted that his delegation is
pleased with the draft decisions and is able to work with
them.
Some delegations were more equivocal about their positions.
Ambassador
Wang Qun of China said the two drafts provide a “very
good basis” for moving forward, but explained that his
delegation still needs time to study the draft decisions and
come up with comments. He also sought
clarification on the nature of CD/1866, asking if it falls
within the framework of the implementation of CD/1864,
the programme of work. The CD
president assured him that it did, explaining that CD/1864
indicates the path to be followed: the first step consists
in appointing working group chairs and special coordinators;
once the CD has adopted that decision, the schedule of activities
could be adopted.
Commenting on the draft decisions, Brazilian
Deputy Representative Nelson Antonio Tabajara de Oliveira
said the “question of time allotments is still on the
table” and will be part of continuing deliberations,
because all delegations “need to know how to pass through
this programme of work in a pace that will be satisfactory
to everyone.” Ambassador
Garold Larson, Chargé d’Affaires of the United
States, said his delegation looks forward to carrying
the programme of work forward “with vigor and purpose
as soon as possible” and looks forward to an early adoption
of the draft decisions.
Pakistan’s
Ambassador Zamir Akram described the draft decisions as
being based on two key principles: equitable geographic distribution
and balanced allocation of time for all four working groups.
He said that his delegation will continue to constructively
engage in the consultation process to reach consensus as early
as possible. He also noted that the application of principle
of rotation, though not applicable at this moment in time
because of the small amount of time remaining in the CD’s
2009 session, will remain valid in future deliberations.
Australian
Ambassador Caroline Millar noted that CD/1864,
the programme of work, was adopted with relief, which behooves
the Conference to move forward on these draft decisions. She
noted that the proposals are well known to everyone and urged
all delegations to seek positions on the drafts from their
capitols as soon as possible so that the CD can move forward
with its work.
After work has commenced
The current CD president, Ambassador
Roberto Garcia Moritan of Argentina, also noted that once
the CD has begun work it will need to give thought to the
issues of “continuity and predictability as well as
the organizational capacity to prepare for our work in the
appropriate time in the case of negotiations and in terms
of the mandates of the discussions.” He expressed “hope
that in the weeks to come we will be able to find the formula
to address this matter within the provision of our Conference
rules and procedures.”
Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Friday, 26 June
2009 at 10:00 AM.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
18 June 2009
Concluding consultations
At the Conference
on Disarmament (CD) plenary meeting on 18 June, a representative
spoke on behalf of all the Latin
American member and observer states to the CD (Argentina,
Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru, Venezuela,
Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Uruguay and the Dominican
Republic). She expressed these delegations’ support
and cooperation in implementing the CD’s programme of
work, CD/1863.
Ambassador
Roberto Garcia Moritan of Argentina, the current CD president,
announced that he is “concluding relevant consultations”
on the implementation of CD/1863. He thanked all delegations,
especially the regional group coordinators, and apologized
for the many meetings they have had to attend over this issue.
He did not indicate when he would the Conference would take
a decision on a timetable, chairs, or coordinators. He did
not indicate when he would the Conference would take a decision
on a timetable, chairs, or coordinators.
Ambassador Moritan also announced that the next plenary will
meet on Tuesday, 23 June at 3:00 PM to hear from Mr. Bernard
Kouchner, Minister of Foreign and European Affairs of the
Republic of France. He noted that this will be the first high-level
dignitary to address the Conference since it adopted its programme
of work, and expressed hope that others would follow suit.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
11 June 2009
Principles for progress
At the morning Conference
on Disarmament (CD) plenary, several delegations outlined
their priorities and ideas for implementing the programme
of work, CD/1863. Representatives from Iran,
Colombia,
Malaysia,
Mexico,
Pakistan,
Indonesia,
China, the United Kingdom, and the Philippines took the floor.
Brief highlights
• Iran’s delegation argued that an FMCT must be
both a disarmament and non-proliferation measure and should
include existing stocks.
• Pakistan’s delegation argued that the working
group chairs “should not be from P-5, non-NPT states
or countries in a military alliance or countries enjoying
nuclear protection.”
• The delegations of China, Iran, Malaysia, Pakistan,
and the United Kingdom emphasized the importance of following
the rules of procedure throughout the CD’s undertakings.
• The UK delegation highlighted the importance of three
principles: trust, good faith, and balance.
• The delegation of the Philippines added a fourth principle,
of inclusivity, arguing for observer states to be afforded
the same rights in the working groups and special coordinator
groups.
• The delegates of Colombia and Indonesia spoke on civil
society participation.
FCMT
Iran’s
Ambassador Moaiyeri emphasized that an FMCT should not
merely be an instrument for non-proliferation, but “should
be a clear and meaningful step for nuclear disarmament and
non-proliferation in all its aspects.” He argued that
the treaty’s scope should include existing stocks and
future production.
Other core issues
Ambassador Moaiyeri also called on the CD to “vigorously
pursue its deliberations with the view to start negotiations
on legally binding instruments on the four core issues.”
He reiterated that his delegation’s first priority is
nuclear disarmament and called for the negotiation of a time-bound,
phased framework for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons,
including the prohibition of their possession, development,
stockpiling, and use.
Work of the CD
The current CD president is still engaged in consultations
regarding the appointment of working group chairs and special
coordinators and the schedule of meetings. While awaiting
specific proposals from the P6, several delegations outlined
their considerations for implementing the programme of work.
The Iranian delegation called for the observation of the rules
of procedure, balanced allotment of time for the working groups
and special coordinators, equitable geographical distribution
and rotations, and the avoidance of parallel meetings. Other
delegations echoed these positions, some with slight variations.
Chairs and coordinators
Colombia’s
representative also called for balanced geographical criteria
for appointing chairs of working groups and special coordinators,
suggesting the CD keep in mind formulas used in previous years.
The representative
of Malaysia likewise suggested that the tasks should be
carefully distributed among the various regional groups, with
an eye to ensuring continuity in the CD’s work. Mexico’s
delegation suggested the same distribution as last year
be used: four posts to the Group of 21, two to the Western
Group, 1 to the Eastern European Group (as reportedly contained
in the president’s “proposal 421”). Pakistan’s
delegate noted that the Group of 21 is “in the process
of consultations” on this issue.
Pakistan’s
representative also argued that since neutrality “is
the key factor in reaching consensus on nomination of Chairs
and Special Coordinators,” the chairs “should
not be from P-5, non-NPT states or countries in a military
alliance or countries enjoying nuclear protection.”
Regarding terms of the chairs, the Pakistani delegation suggested
that chairs could rotate in synchronicity with the CD presidents.
The UK delegation agreed with the emphasis placed on balance,
and urged the CD to harness the talent in the CD chamber across
the regional groups, composed of “experienced colleagues
who have earned the confidence of the Conference.” He
urged these individuals to step forward to help move the work
of the CD along. The representative of the Philippines echoed
this comment, and also suggested that some of this talent
could come from “colleague backbenchers from CD observer
states.” He urged the principle of inclusivity be honoured
by ensuring that observer states are ipso facto given the
same rights and privileges in the working groups and the groups
of the special coordinators. He argued that observer states,
by virtue of having been accepted into regular sessions, should
be allowed to participate in the rest of the CD’s work
as well.
Meeting schedule
The Colombian delegation called for balance in the allocation
of time, “at least to the four main topics, with the
nuance that further ahead we should be flexible bearing in
mind that the dynamics of the meetings … will determine
that allocation of time.” The Malaysian delegation called
for a balanced schedule for the four working groups and urged
consideration be given to the possibility of participation
of experts from capitals. Mexico’s delegation said it
would “prefer time allocation to allow all items to
be taken up with necessary flexibility.” Pakistan’s
delegation called for balanced time for the four working groups
and that “sufficient time” should be allocated
to the three special coordinators “to explore the way
forward through consultations.”
Colombia’s delegate further urged that the CD should
initially avoid holding simultaneous meetings, to enable delegations
to cover most of them. Further ahead, he noted, programming
of meetings will become difficult, bearing in mind the many
commitments that member states have in other fora. Indonesia’s
delegation likewise noted the importance of avoiding “conflicting
meetings” and of providing adequate time for consultations,
coordination, and preparation.
In terms of establishing sub-groups within the working groups,
Pakistan’s delegation suggested that the working groups
should have debates and exchanges of ideas to determine the
necessity and number of each sub-group.
Rules of procedure
Pakistan’s delegation emphasized the importance of consensus
in carrying forward all of the CD’s work, including
the appointment of chairs and coordinators, allocation of
time, and preparation and adoption of working group reports.
The Chinese and Malaysian delegations urged the CD to follow
the rules of procedure in all its undertakings. The UK ambassador
noted that following the rules of procedure, which “are
what they are and they are well known,” is a measure
of good faith. He urged delegates not to try to set new conditions
and to “avoid the trap of identifying new obstacles,”
encouraging them instead to “look for new solutions.”
Beginning and continuing work
The Mexican delegation said it believes the working groups
and special coordinators should begin work now, and plenary
meetings “can serve for those groups to report on progress
and delegation can comment on issues, with the understanding
that matters of substance will be resolved as they come up.”
Mexico’s representative also stressed the importance
of continuing any work that starts during 2009 into 2010 “so
that we don’t find ourselves at the beginning of the
next session paralyzed because we don’t have a programme
of work.” Pakistan’s delegation reminded the Conference
that the CD “cannot afford to have mere discussions
without any outcome,” noting that CD/1863 “is
a package with a clear objective to work on four core issues
with a view to negotiate legally binding instruments.”
To this end, the Pakistan delegation suggested that the CD
should make an assessment at the end of its 2009 session to
determine the programme of work for next year.
Civil society participation
The Colombian delegation reminded the Conference that it needs
to consider other subjects, such as the participation of civil
society. The ambassador from Indonesia also noted, “one
informal meeting should be allocated to relevant NGOs to address
the CD,” as decided in 2004. He also noted that the
participation of “independent experts” could also
help enable the CD’s work.
Notes from the gallery
WILPF is encouraged to see delegations talking about the importance
of principles such as trust, good faith, balance, and inclusivity.
We also see Pakistan’s proposal regarding the neutrality
of the working group chairs as part of these principles. In
a body that maintains as its goal the negotiation of legally-binding
disarmament and arms control treaties, in an international
political and military climate of unease, distrust, and inequality,
it is greatly important that the individuals at the helm of
the CD’s work represent governments that have demonstrated
their commitment to disarmament, peace, and equitable international
security. This is essential for ensuring the principles of
trust, good faith, balance, and inclusivity. The idea of limiting
the chairs to those states that do not possess or “benefit
from the protection of” nuclear weapons or from military
alliances deserves sincere consideration.
Next meeting
The next plenary meeting will be announced at a later date.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
4 June 2009
Moving forward: Interests and positions
During the Conference on Disarmament (CD) morning plenary,
the delegations of the United
States, Argentina,
Ecuador,
Pakistan,
Peru, Brazil, Turkey, Japan,
and Algeria gave suggestions to facilitate the quick and smooth
realisation of the newly-adopted programme of work, CD/1863.
After the plenary, the Conference broke for ten minutes and
then began an informal meeting.
Brief highlights
- The US delegation urged the CD “pledge” to
adopt a programme of work each year until negotiations on
a fissile materials cut-off treaty are completed.
- Japan, Pakistan, and Peru made specific suggestions on
how to the CD’s work could unfold now that a programme
of work has been adopted.
- Pakistan elaborated its position on fissile material
treaty negotiations.
Work of the CD
Ambassador Moritan of Argentina, the new president of
the CD, reminded the Conference that adoption of the programme
of work is only the first step, and that member states need
to focus on reaching agreement on additional decisions “in
order to make CD/1683 a reality.” Ecuador’s
Ambassador Montalvo expressed his delegation’s commitment
to providing “full support to ensure that the work resumed
in the future will be carried forward in decisive, balanced,
and transparent fashion.”
Rose
Gottemoeller, Acting Under Secretary of State for Arms Control
and International Security for the United States, urged
all CD delegations to ensure that “until the FMCT is
completed ... the CD not return to deadlock, to pledge themselves
to passing in the beginning of each year a Program of Work
authorizing the resumption of focused negotiations on an FMCT
and discussion of related disarmament issues.”
Ambassador
Akram of Pakistan suggested that at the end of the 2009
session, the CD should assess the progress made and the “willingness
to work on four core issues,” to help “chart out
an appropriate future programme of work.” Ambassador
Akram also argued that each of the four working groups and
three coordinated discussions should be allotted equal time.
He suggested that parallel meetings should not be planned,
so that delegation’s can present their views on all
issues, and that “sufficient space should be available
to the delegations to substantively participate in the deliberations.”
He also emphasized the importance of equitable geographic
representation and the Rules of Procedure.
Peru’s representative said
his delegation is in favour of keeping traditional regional
and country balance and of giving the bureaus for each working
group an annual term, to ensure the greatest possible continuity
in the CD’s work. Japan’s
representative urged the Conference to sort out organizational
matters for next year before the end of the current session,
and suggested that such decisions could be reflected in this
year’s report, perhaps in the form of recommendations.
He noted that this is consistent with past practice and the
Rules of Procedure and argued that having a “fair projection”
of the timetable for work next year will help delegation’s
make their plans.
Fissile materials treaty
Ms. Gottemoeller read out US President Obama’s message
to the CD regarding its adoption of a programme of work. In
his message, President Obama reiterated that a “verified
[fissile materials] cut off treaty is an essential element
of my vision for a world free of nuclear weapons.”
Ambassador
Akram reiterated that the issue of including existing
stocks of fissile materials in fissile material treaty negotiations
“has assumed greater significance for Pakistan in the
light of the nuclear cooperation arrangements in our neighbourhood.”
He argued that a treaty that “would merely legalize
national moratoria of nuclear-weapon-states and freeze the
asymmetries will undermine the international community’s
vision of a nuclear weapons free world as well as Pakistan’s
national security.”
Just as last week India’s
delegation said it would “not accept obligations
not in keeping with or prejudicial to our national security
interests or which hinder our strategic programme,”
this week Pakistan’s delegation said it will also “not
accept any framework which is prejudicial to its national
security interest or undermines strategic stability in South
Asia.”
Notes from the gallery
The statements of position on fissile material negotiations
by both India and Pakistan demonstrate the possibility of
sharing interests despite maintaining opposing positions.
As we noted in the civil society presentations last week,
the guide to negotiations Getting to Yes explains the
importance of not bargaining over positions, as positions
are not negotiable, but rather focusing on interests, which
define the problem. The authors argue that shared and compatible
interests often lie behind opposed positions, and that successful
negotiation requires creative open-mindedness in order to
explore or propose new options that might satisfy all parties’
needs, based on these shared interests. We hope such creative
open-mindedness can be employed to ensure the commencement
and the conclusion of substantive work in the Conference on
Disarmament.
Other business
The CD granted observer status to Honduras. The next plenary
meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 9 June 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
29 May 2009
CD adopts a programme of work
On Friday, 29 May, the Conference
on Disarmament (CD) adopted a programme of work for the
first time in ten years. Before the decision was called, a
few delegations spoke about the proposed programme of work,
CD/1863,
including Ukraine, Iran, Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea, and Morocco. The current president of the CD, Ambassador
Jazaïry of Algeria, took the floor to see if there were
any objections to its adoption—there were none, so the
gavel came down and the room burst into applause. After the
adoption, a great number of delegations delivered interventions,
voicing their support for the programme of work. Two, India
and Pakistan, elaborated their positions on negotiating a
fissile materials treaty.
Brief highlights
- The CD adopted CD/1863
as its programme of work.
- Delegates from the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea and Morocco
said they would not block consensus on the proposed programme
of work and Ukraine’s
delegation voiced its support for CD/1863.
- Iran’s
delegation announced it had just now received instructions
from capital.
- After the programme was adopted, the delegations of India
and Pakistan
gave details on their positions on FMCT negotiations.
- The delegations of Argentina, Australia, Austria, Chile,
China, Egypt, France, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Mexico,
Portugal, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation,
South Africa, Spain, Sweden, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia,
the United Kingdom, and the United States welcomed the adoption
of the programme.
The road to adoption
Ambassador Jazaïry of Algeria, current president
of the CD, explained that the six presidents (P6) of the 2009
session were inspired by the “new momentum” for
disarmament, expressed in US President Obama’s Prague
speech, the announcements of further US-Russian bilateral
nuclear reductions, etc. After consultations with member states,
they reached the conclusion that: they had the “historic
responsibility” to not pass up the opportunity to relaunch
the work of the CD and that they had to go beyond pre-established
positions “and allow ourselves to be guided only by
the manifest community of our shared interest in this matter;”
that the programme of work should be tackled in a comprehensive
and balanced manner; and that consensus should be sought “part
and parcel of a process refining previous efforts to overcome”
the stumbling blocks of recent years.
Intercessional consultations
on a draft programme by all members of the P6 were met with
expressions at support in a variety of fora outside the UN
system, so the presidents decided to introduce their proposal
to the CD on 19 May. Ambassador Jazaïry argued,
the programme is not perfect but “is a compromise which
provides a delicate balance” and “in no way establishes
a hierarchy in terms of priority,” but rather establishes
a basis of compromise to launch negotiations.
He then asked if there
was any objection to the adoption of CD/1863
by consensus. There was none.
“Spirit of cooperation”
Speaking for the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) before the programme
of work was adopted, Mr. An Myong Hun explained that while
his country will continue to strengthen its “national
deterrence” as long as pressure and sanctions are placed
upon it, it is the DPRK’s “constant policy to
achieve total nuclear disarmament.” In that spirit,
he announced, his government decided to support CD/1863.
Moroccan
Ambassador Hilal, also speaking before the adoption of
CD/1863, argued that the document is “out of phase”
with the new momentum for disarmament measures and with the
G21’s principle position in favour of a balanced programme
of work that sets up working groups with negotiating mandates
for all four core issues on the CD’s agenda. Ambassador
Hilal argued that the recent DPRK nuclear test is a challenge
to nuclear non-proliferation and “should incite the
international community without delay to engage in good faith
negotiations for nuclear disarmament.” He also complained
that the current president of the CD did not respond to a
request for a meeting with the Moroccan delegation, which
did not want to negotiate with the informal P6 structure.
However, since the president had just met with his delegation
for bilateral consultations, they decided not to oppose consensus
on CD/1863.
Moving forward
After the CD adopted the programme of work, a number of delegations
took the floor to welcome the document or elaborate their
positions. Most expressed gratitude to Ambassador
Jazaïry and the six presidents and looked forward
to commencing work in the near future. All
delegations expressed their interest in beginning the modality
discussions necessary to start substantive work, including
establishing working group chairs and special coordinators.
In his closing statement, Ambassador
Jazaïry expressed his hope that the spirit of partnership
demonstrated in the CD would transcend borders, regions, continents
and would permeate the other institutions meeting in Geneva,
so that multilateralism can not only survive, but thrive.
He paid tribute to all of the previous initiatives and efforts
to break the deadlock in the CD, describing them as the foundation
for CD/1863, and thanked the Algerian president for his efforts
to mobilize the Algerian foreign ministry to work on this
issue.
FMCT negotiations
Ambassador Rao of India expressed its support for a working
group to negotiate a fissile materials cut-off treaty (FMCT),
specifying that the scope of negotiations “would”
focus only on future production of fissile materials. However,
he explained, India will “not accept obligations not
in keeping with or prejudicial to our national security interests
or which hinder our strategic programme, our R&D as well
as the three-stage nuclear programme.” He also argued,
“[t]he treaty should not place an undue burden on military
non-proscribed activities.” Further, India considers
nuclear weapons to be “an integral part of our national
security and will remain so pending the global elimination
of all nuclear weapons on a universal, non-discriminatory
basis.” Ambassador Rao also expressed his delegation’s
disappointment that the CD “could not decide on launching
negotiations on nuclear disarmament.”
Welcoming the adoption of CD/1863,
Ambassador
Zamir Khan of Pakistan explained that verification provisions
and stocks must be included in an FMCT if Pakistan is to implement
the treaty. He noted that these elements have become “vital”
for this delegation because of nuclear cooperation agreements
made in its “neighbourhood” that do not include
adequate safeguards, which have the potential to increase
stocks of fissile materials for weapon purposes.
Notes from the gallery
CD/1863 is the first programme of work to be adopted by the
CD since 1999. WILPF heartily welcomes its adoption and the
commitment of the CD to resume working on substantive issues,
including negotiations on a fissile materials treaty. This
balanced programme offered a realistic compromise to this
forum and we are very relieved that the CD has seized this
opportunity. Moving forward, we look forward to engaging with
the CD on the basis of the decision taken at the 956th meeting
of the CD in 2004, which specifies, “After the CD adopts
a programme of work, it will allocate one informal plenary
meeting per annual session to NGOs to address the Conference.”
Next meeting
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday,
4 June. It will be the first meeting of this year’s
session under the presidency of Argentina.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
28 May 2009
Support from delegations and NGOs for bringing the CD
back to work
During the Conference
on Disarmament (CD)’s morning plenary on 28 May,
several more delegations announced their support for the proposed
programme of work, CD/1863, including Belarus,
Bulgaria,
India,
Iraq,
Ireland,
Italy,
and Mexico.
During an afternoon informal meeting, non-governmental organizations
were invited, in what current CD president Ambassador Jazaïry
of Algeria described as an “interesting experiment,”
to deliver presentations to the CD.
Brief highlights
- The delegations of Belarus, Bulgaria, India, Iraq, Ireland,
Italy, and Mexico expressed their support for CD/1863.
- NGO representatives delivered presentations to an informal
meeting.
Support for CD/1863
India’s Ambassador Rao announced that his delegation
“will not stand in the way of the adoption” of
CD/1863, though he specified that they “reserve the
right to make remarks on substantive elements of the Programme
of work after its formal adoption by the Conference.”
He expressed disappointment that the CD has not yet launched
negotiations on nuclear disarmament and encouraged the Conference
to “explore all possible avenues to make progress so
as to respond meaningfully to growing international opinion
in favour of a vision of a world free of nuclear weapons.”
The delegations of Belarus, Bulgaria,
Iraq, Ireland, Italy, and Mexico also voiced their support
for CD/1863, commending the positive environment and the work
of the CD presidents since 2006. Mr.
James O’Shea of Ireland noted that if each member
state was tasked with drafting a programme of work, there
would be 65 different proposals on the table. Nevertheless,
his delegation and those of CD/1863’s other supporters
argued that it is a balanced compromise.
Bulgaria’s
representative explained that his delegation is supporting
CD/1863 both as a gesture of political good will—having
supported every major initiative to break the CD deadlock—and
on the basis of the proposal’s merit. Iraq’s
representative noted that even though her delegation was
unable to consult with any of the six presidents on the draft,
it supports CD/1863. Current CD president Ambassador Jazaïry
thanked her for her this “expression of confidence.”
The representative
of Belarus noted that while every state has its own understanding
of national security, CD/1863 is a common denominator. Furthermore,
he argued, no state will be deprived of the right to set their
priorities during future work of the CD. Quoting UN
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, he asserted that differences
are no excuse for paralysis.
Fissile materials treaty
Ambassador Manfredi of Italy argued that a fissile materials
cut-off treaty (FMCT) is the “natural complement”
to the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty being negotiated
by the United States and the Russian Federation “and
to the renewed efforts to achieve the formal entry into force
of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.”
Reiterating its previous position,
Ambassador
Rao of India noted that his delegation is “willing
to conclude a universal, non-discriminatory and internationally
verifiable treaty banning the future production of fissile
material for nuclear weapons and other nuclear explosive devices.”
Notes from the podium
For the first time, the CD hosted an informal NGO panel, with
speakers from WILPF, the Acronym Institute for Disarmament
Diplomacy, the Secure World Foundation, and the Geneva Centre
for Security Policy. An informative, interactive discussion
followed each presentation with a wide variety of delegates
participating. While the current CD president Ambassador Jazaïry
noted that this would not constitute a precedent, some of
the attending delegations said they hoped it would be a precedent.
NGOs would certainly welcome future opportunities to engage
with the CD in its work.
Part of the WILPF statement was
prepared by Ray Acheson of Reaching Critical Will and can
be found online in PDF
and HTML.
It was delivered on Ray’s behalf by Susi Snyder, Secretary
General of WILPF, who also spoke specifically on issues of
verification, fissile materials, and negative security assurances.
Her statement can also be found online in PDF
and HTML.
Next meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Friday, 29 May 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
26 May 2009
Programmes of work and nuclear tests: The importance
of good diplomacy
At the Conference
on Disarmament (CD)’s 26 May plenary meeting, 25
delegations took the floor to discuss either or both the proposed
programme of work and the Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea’s nuclear test of 25 May. In addition, the
president of the CD and several other delegations bid farewell
to Ambassadors Sumio Tarui of Japan and Johannes Landman of
the Netherlands.
Brief highlights
- The ambassador of the Netherlands announced that the
government has decided to “abolish” its dedicated
CD ambassador.
- The delegations of the Australia,
Canada,
Colombia,
Egypt, France, Germany, Hungary,
Japan,
Nigeria, Norway, the Republic
of Korea, the Russian Federation, Slovakia,
the Syrian
Arab Republic, Turkey,
the United Kingdom, the United
States, and Venezuela
voiced their support for CD/1863,
the proposed programme of work.
- The delegation of India announced it is waiting instructions
from its capital on CD/1863.
- Japan
suggested ways the Conference could ensure the programme
of work is carried over to subsequent CD sessions.
- The delegations of Argentina
and Brazil, Japan,
New
Zealand, and the Republic
of Korea condemned the Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea’s nuclear test of 25 May. The delegations
of Australia,
Canada,
China,
Hungary,
Norway, and Venezuela
also expressed concern about the test.
Support for CD/1863
Ambassador Hamoui of the Syrian Arab Republic noted the
“increased desire for dialogue, engagement, and negotiations”
related to nuclear weapons. Welcoming this development, he
announced his delegation’s support for CD/1863. Likewise,
Canada’s
Ambassador Grinius said the CD needs to seize the opportunity
afforded by recent developments and the positive atmosphere
by adopting the proposed programme of work. Ambassador
Hernandez of Venezuela also noted the “new momentum”
in the CD and said CD/1863 contains the necessary elements
for adoption. Ambassador
Millar of Australia welcomed the improved international
atmosphere and noted consensus on CD/1863 is very close. The
French ambassador, Eric Danon, welcomed the growing consensus
around CD/1863 and urged all delegations to join this consensus.
Turkey’s
Ambassador Üzümcü described CD/1863 as
“the culmination of the combined efforts of all CD members,
which gained momentum in recent years to overcome the 12 year
old deadlock.” He encouraged the CD members to “aim
at bridging our differences,” to “focus on the
commonalities,” and to demonstrate flexibility “not
only for reaching consensus on CD 1863, but for the course
of action that should follow it, as well.”Ambassador
Pinter of Slovakia likewise urged member states to join
consensus on this “well crafted compromise,” noting
that the “stakes are extremely high, not only for the
Conference on Disarmament itself but for the whole process
of making the world a safer place.” Encouraging adoption
of CD/1863, Germany’s Ambassador Brasack argued that
investing energy into substantial issues served the international
community better than spending time debating logistical and
administrative issues.
Support with criticism
Ambassador Badr of Egypt noted that CD/1863 included the positive
elements of past drafts while managing to avoid their stumbling
blocks. He noted, however, that complete and nuclear disarmament
and the establishment of a nuclear weapon free zone in the
Middle East remain priorities for his delegation. Colombia’s
delegation also said that while the proposal did not reflect
all of its priorities, it was a balanced draft and its adoption
is essential. Nigeria’s delegation said that while it
supports CD/1863, the proposal is not a “silver bullet”
and does not adequately reflect Nigeria’s priority,
negative security assurances.
While announcing its support
for CD/1863, the Ambassador Loshinin of the Russian Federation
said his delegation would have preferred clearer language
on the negotiation of a treaty regarding the prevention of
an arms race in outer space. However, with a view to compromise,
the Russian delegation would not object to the draft.
The programme of work and
an FCMT
Speaking on his last day at the CD, Ambassador Sumio Tarui
of Japan cautioned that negotiating a verifiable fissile materials
cut-off treaty (FMCT), as called for in CD/1863, “may
indeed present difficult technical issues.” However,
he noted that the Japanese delegation submitted a working
paper in 2006 suggesting possible ways to verify an FMCT.
Ambassador Tarui announced his delegation’s acceptance
of CD/1863 and urged other member states to support it. However,
he argued that while “Japan is ready to start negotiations
anytime,” the conclusion of FMCT negotiations within
the 2009 session “cannot be considered realistic.”
He suggested the Conference “agree this year to a negotiating
mandate and a work schedule for the sessions from next year
and beyond.” To this end, he argued that the CD’s
rules of procedure would allow for the Conference to make
a “consensus decision to carry over this year’s
agreement on a programme of work into the next until negotiations
are concluded,” or to “include in the annual report
the Conference’s intention or strong expectation”
to carry it over.
Ambassador
Larson, Chargé d’Affaires of the US delegation
to the CD, agreed that the negotiation of an FMCT will
not be easy. However, he affirmed that CD/1863 contains the
“means by which those negotiations can begin.”
He also noted that while the US delegation supported (and
even preferred) CD/1840, it recognizes that CD/1863 “reflects
the considerable effort exerted by the P6 to produce an evolved
and finely balanced document which now has the solid prospect
of achieving full consensus.” He announced that the
United States is ready to join consensus on the text.
Next steps for CD/1863
The current president of the CD, Ambassador Jazaïry
of Algeria, said that if support for the proposed programme
of work continued to grow, he hoped the Conference could move
to an “early” decision the text. Ambassador Jazaïry
noted that he and the other presidents have met with several
regional groups and would meet with China tomorrow afternoon,
concluding the regional consultations. Any states would be
welcome to meet with the P6 or the president after that. He
said that all delegations except two, which are still
awaiting guidance from their capitals, had expressed support
“one way or another” for CD/1863.
Responses to the DPRK nuclear
test
Ambassador Im of the Republic of Korea called on the international
community to “send a clear and strong message to the
DPRK for its blatant violation of the UN Security Council
Resolution,” explaining that it will stay in close communication
with the members of the Six Party Talks “to ensure that
appropriate measures are taken by the UN Security Council.”
He also urged the DPRK “to abandon its nuclear weapons
and all nuclear programs, immediately return to the NPT regime
and faithfully comply with international norms as a responsible
member of the international community.”
Ambassador
Tarui of Japan argued that a “nuclear test
by the DPRK ... constitutes a grave threat to the security
of Japan, seriously undermines the peace and security of North
East Asia and the world, and is totally unacceptable.”
Canada’s
Ambassador Grinius also described the test as a “threat
to international security” and New
Zealand’s delegation said it was “a deeply
provocative act that risks destabilizing the Korean peninsula
and the wider region.” Norway’s representative
warned that the nuclear test could undermine efforts toward
nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.
Russia’s
Ambassador Loshinin noted that the Russian Ministry
of Foreign Affairs had made a special statement concerning
the DPRK nuclear test, which noted that such actions were
a violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1817 and a “serious
blow to international effort to strengthen the Non-Proliferation
Treaty and undermined agreements under the Comprehensive Test
Ban Treaty on the prohibition of such tests.” Ambassador
Loshinin called for a resolution to the issue through the
Six Party Talks. China’s
ambassador, Wang Qun, likewise expressed hope that everyone
involved would remain calm and seek a peaceful solution through
dialogue.
On behalf of the governments
of Brazil
and Argentina, Ambassador Soares of Brazil “vehemently”
condemned the test and said they expect the DPRK to “rejoin,
as soon as possible, and as a non-nuclear weapon State, to
the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)”
and to resume Six Party Talks. They also called on the DPRK
to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and to “strictly
comply with the moratorium on nuclear tests,” and called
on all parties “to abstain from acts that may worsen
tensions in regional and global contexts.”
In response to these statements,
the representative of the DPRK argued that the UN Security
Council had infringed upon its sovereignty and right to economic
development through its Resolution 1718. He echoed the government’s
statement that the second nuclear test was a measure of self-defence
and said that as long as sanctions are applied against the
country, the government would continue to take “necessary
corresponding measures to defend its sovereignty”. Further,
he noted that the statements made against the nuclear test
in the CD could affect his delegation’s decision regarding
CD/1863. The current president of the CD, Ambassador Jazaïry
of Algeria, reminded the Conference that the actions by the
UN Security Council should not have any impact on the business
of the CD.
Netherlands removing its post
of disarmament ambassador
In his farewell speech to the CD, Ambassador Landman of the
Netherlands announced that his government, in an effort to
save money, has decided to reduce its staff by half and “abolish”
its dedicated ambassador to the CD. The Netherlands will still
participate in CD meetings but will no longer have an ambassador
to the Conference.
Speaking in his personal capacity,
Ambassador Landman noted that despite the changes at the global
level and the efforts of the CD presidents over the past few
years, the Conference continues to ponder rather than to decide.
He also noted that the CD has lost the expertise and personnel
to tackle the issues at hand, and that obstacles still remained
to moving forward, such as establishing rules around the programme
of work and choosing a chairperson. Remarking on the nature
of negotiations, Ambassador Landman warned about the difficulties
ahead. He cautioned that the world of “twitter and tweets,”
of news headlines, snappy soundbites, and instant satisfaction,
is ill-suited to the long-term, technical nature of arms control
and disarmament negotiations. He also warned against leaving
such negotiations to “blundering amateurism” or
to military officials, noting that diplomacy “ends war”
and requires the ability to balance national security interests
with empathy and understanding of others’ positions—“as
we are all citizens of one world, the survival of which we
are all here to defend.”
Notes
from the gallery
Among the many interventions today, a few themes merit attention.
First, regarding the DPRK’s nuclear test, WILPF joins
many of the member states expressing deep concern over the
test. However, WILPF remains equally concerned about previous
nuclear tests of other states and
their continued possession of nuclear weapons. In its formal
response to the test, WILPF called on all states outside
of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) to ratify it without
delay or conditions and called on all states
possessing nuclear weapons to immediately shut down their
nuclear test facilities and to acknowledge and compensate
the victims of their testing programmes.
In
this statement, WILPF also noted that if
the CTBT were in force, the Treaty would give greater legitimacy
to international responses. Its member states could adopt
sanctions against the DPRK for violating international law.
Currently, the task of coordinating an international response
falls to the UN Security Council, a body not entitled to enforce
international norms per se, but an unrepresentative political
body dominated by the interests of its five permanent, veto-wielding
members: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the
United States, two of whom (China and the US) have yet to
ratify the CTBT themselves.
Regarding
support for CD/1863, WILPF agrees with the majority perspective
that the CD must seize the opportunity afforded by positive
rhetoric on disarmament throughout the international community
and the balanced nature of the proposed programme of work.
We note that the following delegations have voiced their support
for CD/1863 in plenary meetings: Algeria, Australia, Brazil,
Canada, Colombia, Egypt, France, Germany, Hungary, Indonesia,
Japan, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Poland, the Republic of Korea,
the Russian Federation, Slovakia, South Africa, Switzerland,
the Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Turkey, the United Kingdom,
the United States, and Venezuela. Today, Ambassador Jazaïry
indicated that only two delegations are still awaiting instructions
from capital. We encourage all delegations to publicly announce
their support for CD/1863 to help maintain the momentum in
its favour.
Finally,
WILPF bids farewell to Ambassadors Tarui and Landman, thanking
them in particular for their continued support of civil society
involvement in the work of the CD and other disarmament fora.
We recognize how frustrating it must be to have worked so
hard to achieve a programme of work, only to leave just as
it comes closer than ever to adoption. We hope those remaining
to carry forward the work will have the confidence and trust
in each other that Ambassador Landman and Norway’s deputy
representative Hilde Skorpen spoke of in their statements
to reach a successful conclusion of the CD’s future
work.
We
also regret that the government of the Netherlands has decided
to downgrade its level of participation in disarmament and
arms control at this critical juncture. Dutch representatives
to the CD have played an instrumental role in this body and
it will be a great loss of institutional memory both for the
government and for the CD to not have its adept representatives
participating in this work or to have the government's flexible
and far-seeing policies applied to help move the work along
as in the past.
Next
meeting
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Thursday, 28 May
at 10:00 AM. On Thursday afternoon, an informal plenary will
be held, at which a few NGO representatives will be delivering
statements.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
22 May 2009
Contemplating the proposed programme of work
On Friday morning at the Conference
on Disarmament (CD), Ambassador Idriss Jazaïry noted
that consensus has not yet been reached on the proposed programme
of work, CD/1863,
though he has just started to consult about it with regional
groups and does not expect “immediate” agreement.
The delegations of Brazil,
the Czech Republic on
behalf of the European Union, Tunisia,
Indonesia, Poland,
Pakistan, South
Africa, Senegal,
and Peru expressed
their views on CD/1863. Israel’s
delegation expressed its concern that it had not had a response
to its 25 March request for a meeting with the current CD
President, Ambassador Jazaïry.
Brief highlights
- Pakistan announced its support for CD/1863.
- A number of other delegations, including those of Brazil,
Indonesia, Peru, Poland, South Africa, and Tunisia, offered
their support for CD/1863.
- The European Union expressed hope that CD/1863 would bring
the CD back to work.
- Israel argued it had not received a a response to its
25 March request for a meeting with the current CD President;
the CD president explained that the P6 division of labour
had assigned the Australian CD president to consult with
Israel (among other states) this year.
Views on CD/1863
On behalf of the Pakistani delegation—the most vocal
opposition to the previous proposal, CD/1840—
Ambassador Zamir Khan
formally announced his delegation’s support for “the
initiation of work” on the basis of CD/1863.
For the past two years, Pakistan has been considered the key
holdout from adopting a programme of work in the CD. This
endorsement is expected to pave the way for the long-awaited
commencement of negotiations on a fissile materials treaty
and the resumption of meaningful work by the CD.
Six other delegations offered their support for CD/1863.
Ambassador
Luiz Filipe de Macedo Soares of Brazil offered his support
for CD/1863, noting that while it is not a perfect reflection
of his delegation’s interests, it affords the opportunity
to pursue more specific goals in the working groups it establishes.
Ambassador
Samir Labidi of Tunisia gave his delegation’s full
support for CD/1863, as did Mr.
Elmer Schialer of Peru and Ambassador
Dian Triansyah Djani of Indonesia. Ambassador Djani emphasized
the importance of pursuing non-proliferation together with
disarmament, arguing that the longer nuclear weapons exist,
the longer the world is exposed to risks of their proliferation
and use.
Ambassador
Zdzislaw Rapacki of Poland, who served as one of the six
CD presidents in 2006—the first year the presidents
started working cohesively as a team—noted “with
satisfaction that this unique form of cooperation was carried
out throughout all these years,” and that it “proved
to be effective in building the atmosphere of confidence among
the members of the CD and in creating an opportunity for the
exchange of substantive views.” On behalf of his delegation,
he welcomed CD/1863.
Mr. Joahann Kellerman
of South Africa described CD/1863 as a “product
of compromise” that deserves the support of all member
states, while Ambassador
Babacar Carols Mbaye of Senegal described it as “balanced
and realistic.” Ambassador Mbaye specifically welcomed
CD/1863’s establishment of a working group to exchange
views on practical disarmament measures with the goal of completely
eliminating nuclear weapons.
Through its representative, Tomas
Husk of the Czech Republic, the European Union did not
directly endorse CD/1863 but expressed hope that the CD would
“respond positively” to the proposal and that
it would bring the CD back to substantive work.
Speaking on behalf of Israel,
Mr. Meir Itzchaki said that his delegation had requested a
meeting with the CD President on 25 March, but that this request
had gone unanswered. Ambassador Jazaïry of Algeria explained
that the six presidents have been sharing the task of consultations
with member states and that the CD president from Australia
was responsible for meeting with Israel.
Notes from the gallery
It was very encouraging for us to see Pakistan endorse CD/1863
this morning. Its primary demand, for the Shannon Mandate
to be used as the negotiating mandate for negotiations of
a fissile materials treaty, has been met by this proposed
programme of work. One theme that ran consistently through
the majority of interventions this morning was that of compromise
and flexibility—this is the strongest, most balanced
proposal the CD has seen in quite some time, and it will be
an exercise in political will to adopt it quickly and painlessly.
As many delegations noted, there is a window of opportunity,
afforded by feelings of optimism about the changing political
landscape. The Brazilian ambassador noted, “the current
political atmosphere is not exempt of threats and many disturbances,”
but it is currently open “to progress and understanding.”
CD member states should seize the opportunity while it lasts.
The winds could swiftly change.
Next meeting
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Tuesday,
26 May 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
19 May 2009
A “new multilateralism” toward a programme
of work
During the first plenary meeting of the second part of the
Conference
on Disarmament’s 2009 session, UN
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon addressed the Conference,
as did Swiss
Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey and Algerian
Foreign Minister Mourad Medelci. In addition, the current
president of the CD, Ambassador Idriss Jazaïry, formally
submitted CD/1863,
a new proposed programme of work on behalf of the six presidents.
Brief highlights
- CD/1863,
the new proposed programme of work, differs substantially
from the 2008 and 2007 proposals. It establishes working
groups on the four core issues and special coordinators
on the other three agenda items. It calls, inter alia,
for negotiation of a fissile materials treaty on the basis
of the 1995
Shannon Mandate, for recommendations for dealing with
negative security assurances, and for an “exchange
of views and information on practical steps for progressive
and systematic efforts to reduce nuclear weapons with the
ultimate goal of their elimination, including on approaches
toward potential future work of multilateral character.”
- Three high-level speakers, including UN Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon and the Swiss and Algerian foreign ministers,
urged the CD to rapidly adopt CD/1863 as its programme of
work for the year. Current CD president Ambassador Jazaïry
expressed hope that the programme would extend beyond the
current year.
Cooperation is consensus
Citing the “refreshingly positive tone” of the
recently concluded nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory
Committee and the recent announcements of the US and Russian
presidents to begin talks on a new nuclear arms control treaty,
UN
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged a “new multilateralism.”
He explained, “We live in an age of interdependence,”
and argued that the answers to the multiplicity of global
crises—food, energy, climate, economic—“lie
in a new multilateralism.... where cooperation replaces confrontation,
where creativity replaces stalemate.” He emphasized
that any bilateral efforts “must feed into a broader
multilateral framework” in order to ensure the process
for disarmament is “sustainable and lasting”.
He also called for “bold action” to accelerate
disarmament to “liberate resources that we need to combat
climate change, address food insecurity and achieve the Millennium
Development Goals,” stressing that the world expects
the CD to “channel” positive signals for disarmament
and multilateralism “into a coherent global strategy.”
Swiss
Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey agreed with the UN
Secretary-General that this is a time of hope for the CD,
attributing it to an “alignment of geopolitical stars”.
She noted that the six presidents this year have played a
crucial role in advancing the work of the Conference with
their proposed programme of work and urged the CD to rapidly
adopt CD/1863. Noting that true international security can
only be the product of mutual confidence between partners
working together for disarmament, Algerian
Foreign Minister Mourad Medelci said that the adoption
of the programme of work would be the product of such efforts
by CD member states.
CD/1863
Described by the UN Secretary-General as a “document
that can achieve consensus and that addresses all substantive
and procedural issues,” CD/1863
differs substantially from the other recent iterations of
a proposed programme work, CD/1840
(2008) and L.1
+ CRP.5
(2007). CD/1863 establishes working groups, rather than special
coordinators, on each of the four core issues. The goals and
substance of each of the working groups is also quite different
from that laid out under the coordinators.
While CD/1840 called for “substantive discussions on
nuclear disarmament and the prevention of nuclear war,”
CD/1863 specifies that working group one will “exchange
views and information on practical steps for progressive and
systematic efforts to reduce nuclear weapons with the ultimate
goal of their elimination, including on approaches toward
potential future work of multilateral character.”
In CD/1863, working group two “shall negotiate a treaty
banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons
or other explosive devices, on the basis of the document
CD/1299
of 24 March 1995 and the mandate contained wherein.”
[Emphasis mine]
Working group three is charged with discussing “substantively,
without limitations, all issues related to the prevention
of an arms race in outer space,” adding only “without
limitations” to CD/1840’s instructions.
The fourth working group also calls for substantive discussions,
“without limitation,” on the issue of negative
security assurances “with a view to elaborating
recommendations dealing with all aspects of this agenda item,
not excluding those related to an international legally binding
instrument.” Compare this to CD/1840, which simply called
for “substantive discussions dealing with appropriate
arrangements” related to this issue.
CD/1863 goes on to call for special coordinators on other
items on the CD’s agenda, including “new types
of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons;
radiological weapons;” “comprehensive programme
of disarmament;” and “transparency in armaments,”
with instructions to “seek the views of its member states
on the most appropriate way to deal with the questions related
to [these] items” (a qualification not provided in CD/1840).
The four working groups and three special coordinators are
instructed to “take into consideration all relevant
views and proposals past, present and future” and to
present reports on their work before the end of the current
session.
Notes from the gallery
Coming merely a few days after the qualified
success of the third
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee
for the 2010 review cycle, the introduction of a more balanced
programme of work for the CD not only maintains the positive
spirit but increases its momentum. The call for fissile material
treaty negotiations on the basis of the Shannon Mandate, while
effectively winding back the clock almost fifteen years, is
a substantial step forward from other recent attempts to formulate
a programme of work. In addition, the significantly enhanced
mandates for discussions on nuclear disarmament and negative
security assurances are progressively forward-looking and
will surely go a long way to alleviating non-nuclear weapon
states’ concerns about the imbalanced nature of previous
proposed programmes of work.
Consensus is near. Current president Ambassador Jazaïry
noted that consultations are still ongoing, but the majority
of delegations seem to assume that CD/1863 will be adopted
very soon. After twelve years without substantive work and
ten years without even a programme of work, the adoption of
this document cannot come a moment too soon. Ambassador Jazaïry
expressed hope that, if adopted, CD/1863 would extend beyond
the current year, providing a framework for future negotiations.
This is particularly important since most CD member states
do not currently have the capacity at their Geneva missions
to engage in negotiations. It would likely take until the
beginning of the CD’s 2010 session before working group
two could seriously get to work. Hopefully, the Conference
will not have to worry about developing a new programme of
work at that time but can rely on CD/1863 to carry forward
the momentum.
Other business
The CD granted observer status for the 2009 session to Lebanon.
The next CD plenary meeting is scheduled for Friday, 22 May
2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
26 March
2009
Ways forward for the CD and space security
During the final plenary meeting of the first part of the
Conference
on Disarmament (CD)’s 2009 session, Ambassador
Jürg Streuli of Switzerland delivered remarks to
mark the Ottawa
Convention’s tenth anniversary. Ambassador
Petko Draganov of Bulgaria delivered his farewell statement
to the CD, upon which the current
CD president commented. Canada’s Ambassador Marius
Grinius introduced a UNIDIR
paper on getting the CD back to work and another on preventing
an arms race in outer space.
Brief highlights
Anti-personnel landmines
Ambassador
Jürg Streuli of Switzerland noted that the Ottawa
Convention (Mine Ban Treaty) celebrated its tenth anniversary
of entry into force three weeks ago. While praising the Convention’s
progress in stockpile destruction, mine clearance, and victim
assistance, Ambassador Streuli lamented that 39 states are
not yet party to the Convention and noted that mine clearance
and destruction still pose challenges to the Convention’s
full implementation. However, he also observed that the Convention
has helped establish a global norm against the use and production
of anti-personnel landmines, even for those states who have
not signed or ratified the Convention. Ambassador Streuli
also argued that the adoption of the Convention “marked
a shift in the international community’s approach to
human security and arms control, demonstrating its willingness
and ability to work alongside civil society outside of any
established forum.
Work of the CD
During his farewell speech to the CD—the second of his
career—Ambassador
Petko Draganov of Bulgaria optimistically said, the last
three years “have been a source of encouragement and
a sign of hope for a better future, despite the difficult
political context.” However, he argued, “the basic
problems we face cannot be resolved here, as they are political
by nature ... no matter how inventive or imaginative we get
in the exercise of devising the perfectly balanced program
of work, at the end of the day we are not the big decision
makers in this chamber.”
Military spending and the economic crisis
Describing the “difficult political context,”
Ambassador Draganov cited statistics that global military
expenditure is growing at a higher rate than global economic
growth. He expressed hope, however, that he economic crisis
“will be seized as an opportunity to sober up.”
In response to Ambassador Draganov’s statistic about
military spending, the current president of the CD, Ambassador
Ambassador Idriss Jazairy of Algeria, suggested, “perhaps
as economic growth is now going in the other direction, military
expenditure will be reduced at a rate higher than the reduction
in economic growth.”
UNIDIR paper on getting the CD back on track
Ambassador
Marius Grinius of Canada explained that last month, the
UN Institute
for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) chaired a series of
informal meetings with a diverse group of CD delegates and
civil society representatives. He introduced a paper called
“Getting
the Conference on Disarmament Back to Substantive Work: Food
for Thought,” which he hopes will “promote
understanding and dialogue among CD members, and help the
CD find its way progressively and positively through the current
impasse and to a resumption of its substantive work.”
Relevance of the CD
The paper notes that while “barren periods of the kind
currently being experienced by the CD are not unprecedented
in the security arena,” some Permanent Missions in Geneva
argue the CD is losing its value and may be “acting
as an obstacle to the emergence of alternative efforts toward
nuclear disarmament goals.” Many, however, consider
the CD’s past successes indicative of its future potential—though
the paper notes that since the CD’s establishment, several
disarmament treaties have been negotiated outside of it. The
paper asks if it would be possible to “remove any of
the current crop of issues from the CD for negotiation elsewhere,
but assumes that the nuclear weapon states would “almost
certainly not participate.” In terms of current membership,
the paper argues that while many states call for expansion
of the CD, very few accuse the CD of being unbalanced—though
if an Arms Trade Treaty is to be negotiated in the Conference,
“it could be claimed that this forum does not include
among its Members the most affected states.”
Four core issues
The paper also asks if a “less complex question”
than the current four core issues should be taken up in the
CD to build confidence in its ability to work, though it says
“no issue in recent years has been articulated as a
CD proposal.” Regarding the issue of a fissile materials
cut-off treaty specifically, the paper asserts, “It
cannot be taken for granted that a fissile material mandate
that includes the negotiation of a verification mechanism
will be sufficient on its own to break the deadlock,”
as other members “can be expected” to link progress
on the fissile materials issue to progress on another issue—which,
the paper assesses, could be used to prolong the stalemate.
Programme of work
The paper considers whether or not a “less complicated
vehicle” could carry the CD forward and questions the
assumption that the programme of work “must contain
mandates of the kind found in proposals tabled since the Shannon
Mandate.” The paper points to Rule 28 of the CD’s
rules
of procedure, which requires the programme of work to
include only a schedule of its activities based on its agenda.
“Deepening those activities” is to be determined
by members’ subsequent decisions, not the programme
itself. The paper suggests a schedule-focused programme might
“help with the management of divergence” on other
fronts, such as linkages and mandates, by offering “the
opportunity through individual mandates to remove explicit,
written linkages.”
Rule of consensus
Visiting the issue of decision-making—blocking consensus—the
paper examines the possibility of developing “a new,
less restrictive, community of practice or ‘culture’.”
It quotes the Blix
Commission’s recommendation that the CD adopt its
programme of work by two-thirds majority and Jozef Goldblat’s
argument—echoed by many civil society and diplomatic
representatives—that there is “no risk in adopting
veto-free procedures, because no conference or organization
can impose treaty obligations on sovereign states through
voting.” This view, the paper contends, is countered
by states who feel nervous about being subject to pressure
by other states and NGOs to go with the flow—making
a “relaxation” of the rule on consensus unlikely.
However, the paper notes that states could voice reservations
rather than objections in order to not block consensus.
Engagement with civil society
Regarding the involvement of civil society, the paper describes
the annual reading by the CD president of a statement composed
by the Women’s
International League for Peace and Freedom as “patronizing
and demeaning to women and to the Conference itself.”
It argues, “the issue has become symbolic of the need
for a broad change in policy toward greater civil society
participation.” The paper also questions if the 2004
decision, that NGOs be allowed to deliver presentations once
a year after a programme of work has been adopted, is still
tenable given that a programme has still not been adopted,
and questions the rationale for the CD being more exclusive
than the NPT, BTWC, and CCW meetings. The paper recommends
the six presidents or appointed “friend” determine
the formality of the level of engagement with civil society;
determine the regularity of engagement; decide whether the
International Women’s Day address is to be treated separately
from the practice of broader engagement with NGOs; and settling
on a formula for receiving statements from NGOs.
Regional groups
The paper notes many states feel regional groups weaken or
even circumscribe presidential authority, as presidents “filter
any potentially contentious issue through the regional groups,”
while dynamics within and among the groups themselves have
“compounded” the difficulties of reaching consensus.
The paper suggested informal or cross-regional groups to develop
cooperative approaches and broker compromises among the key
players.
Overall recommendations
In order to move the work of the CD forward, the paper suggests
that the Conference:
- Hold a discussion about the “ripeness” of
the four core issues to identify elements of each issue
that would be central to any negotiation or “substantive
discussion,” and identify potential sources for helping
to deepen understanding of these elements.
- Determine whether a basis for future work can be laid
through means other than a programme of work or depart from
the current practice of developing a programme of work that
seeks to include mandates.
Preventing an arms race in outer space
Ambassador
Grinius of Canada also delivered a statement on preventing
an arms race in outer space, in which he introduced a working
paper on “The
Merits of Certain Draft Transparency and Confidence Building
Measures and Treaty Proposals for Space Security.”
The paper questions whether states should, as they did when
developing the Outer
Space Treaty, start with a code of conduct to build transparency
and confidence or launch directly into negotiations of a new
treaty. It notes:
Canada’s goals for space security can be found in
the juxtaposition of the right of safe passage of space
objects for peaceful purposes with the right of self-defence
in the Outer Space Treaty and the UN Charter, informed by
the technological prowess that now permits conventional
weapons to successfully engage objects in outer space.
The paper argues that in the new rules, “security guarantees
should presage safe passage guarantees for space objects,”
encouraging readers to consider, “Should the world’s
first space-based weapon be granted safe passage or freedom
from harmful interference in outer space?”
Russian-Chinese draft treaty
Specifically referencing the Russian-Chinese draft treaty
on preventing the placement of weapons in outer space, Canada’s
paper notes that the draft treaty’s prohibition of force
against outer space objects and its ban on weapons in outer
space would not necessarily have prohibited the anti-satellite
weapon test by China against its own satellite in 2007. Another
reason the anti-satellite weapon tests would not be prohibited
under this text is because the draft treaty does not ban development
or testing of space weapons, only their use.
EU draft Code of Conduct
Canada’s paper notes that the European Union drafted
this Code
“within the context of the prior US Administration’s
reluctance to enter into any legally-binding instrument that
would constrain America’s freedom of action in outer
space,” and also accommodates the US anti-satellite
test in 2008 that the US government and this Canadian working
paper argue was “undertaken for the protection of public
safety.”
The paper highlights two issues with the draft Code’s
exemption for safety considerations and for activities which
are undertaken to “minimise outer space debris”.
One issue is that “a national security prerogative is
not an expressly authorised reason for the production of space
debris,” and some states “might not accept this
restriction on their national security” if another state
deploys space weapons. The second issue is “that it
allows for a proliferation path for anti-satellite weapons
that ought to be closed when judged against other possible
or viable proposals for a more robust security guarantee.”
Another way forward
The paper argues, “a better security guarantee than
both the EU’s draft Code of Conduct and the Chinese-Russian
draft PPWT, would be for the international community to agree
or accede to a ban or a pledge such as:
State [Parties]/[Signatories] to the [Treaty]/[Code of
Conduct] [shall]/[should] not test or use a weapon against
any satellite so as to damage or destroy it.
The paper notes that such an undertaking “would again
need to be done in conjunction with a prohibition on the placement
of weapons in outer space, lest we inadvertently provide a
sanctuary for space-based weapons,” and argues that
a prohibition “on the test or use of any satellite itself
as a weapon capable of inflicting damage or destruction on
any other object, would address the residual threat of a benign
dual-use satellite serving as a weapon. Taken together, these
three rules would prohibit armed conflict in outer space based
on the application of physical force.”
The paper argues that this alternative approach would avoid
the struggle to define a space weapon, a satellite, or outer
space, “since the effects of the weapon are included
within the proposed prohibitions, a satellite is a object
that orbits round the Earth or other celestial body, and the
prohibition on the placement of any weapon in outer space
can be modelled on the language of Article IV of the Outer
Space Treaty.” It also suggests, “the definition
of test could also be modelled on the following: where ‘test’
means ‘to flight or field test in a manner observable
to the national or multinational technical means of [verification]/[compliance
monitoring] available to a State [Party]/[Signatory]’.”
This proposal, according to the Canadian paper, “would
also obtain a concomitant safety guarantee preventing the
production of space debris, ” while both limiting the
possibilities for testing devices as anti-satellite weapons
and keeping open the door to develop “self-defence measures
against the future prospect of space-based weapons.”
CD business
This was the last plenary meeting of the CD before the Disarmament
Commission in April and the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee in May.
The CD’s 2009 session will resume on 19 May 2009 at
10:00 AM in Geneva.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
19 March
2009
Calls for multilateral cooperation
Representatives from Nigeria
and the United
Kingdom addressed the Conference on Disarmament (CD),
the former on adopting a programme of work and the latter
to highlight a speech
made by the UK Prime Minister on 17 March.
Brief highlights
- Nigeria called for compromise in reaching agreement on
a programme of work.
- The United Kingdom announced preparation of a “Road
to 2010 Plan,” Trident missile reductions, and a “recognised
nuclear weapon state” conference.
Work of the CD
Mr.
Angbara Awanen of Nigeria articulated his delegation’s
desire for the adoption of a programme of work and commencement
of negotiations on a fissile materials cut-off treaty, saying,
“We must now break the cycle of hope, missed opportunities
and despair that have characterized our work over the past
several years by listening to each other and working together
to reach agreement on a programme of work.” He argued
for cooperation, noting, “It is obvious that progress,
any progress at all, would require members to give as much
as they expect to take from others,” and called on all
delegations to “look at the bigger picture, which is
a safe and more secure world.”
In his closing remarks, current CD president Idriss Jazaïry
of Algeria quoted Goethe, saying that god had given us the
nuts but he did not crack them open for us and noting that
it would be good if the CD could crack its nut open and start
its substantial work as soon as possible.
UK Prime Minister’s speech
Ambassador
John Duncan of the United Kingdom directed the Conference’s
attention toward a speech
delivered by UK Prime Minister Gordan Brown on 17 March regarding
the nuclear fuel cycle. In this speech, Prime Minister Brown
expressed his “ultimate ambition of a world free from
nuclear weapons,” but also his conviction that, “[w]ith
each step we must aim to build confidence, confidence that
action to prevent proliferation is working and that states
with weapons are making strides to live up to their commitments.
” He said that in the coming months, the United Kingdom
“will work with other countries to set out a Road to
2010 Plan with detailed proposals on civil nuclear power,
on disarmament and non-proliferation, on fissile material
security and a role in the development of the International
Atomic Energy Authority.” He also announced that his
government will “host a Recognised Nuclear Weapon State
Conference on nuclear disarmament issues and on confidence
building measures, including the verification of disarmament”
and pledged a doubling of the United Kingdom’s contribution
to the IAEA’s
nuclear security fund.
In his speech, Prime Minister Brown argued, “we are
not asking non-nuclear weapon states to refrain from proliferation
while nuclear weapon states amass new weapons; we are asking
them not to proliferate while nuclear weapon states take the
steps to reduce their own arsenals in line with the Non-Proliferation
Treaty’s requirements.” To this end, he announced
the government has assessed they can meet their “requirement”
of “effective deterrence” with 12 rather than
the 16 Trident missiles currently on the UK’s submarines—however,
he did not mention whether or not the government would reconsider
its decision
to build replacement submarines.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday,
26 March 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
17 March
2009
Algerian minister of foreign affairs calls for the elimination
of nuclear weapons
Mourad
Medelci, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Algeria,
addressed the Conference on Disarmament (CD). Representatives
of Tunisia,
the Syrian
Arab Republic, Indonesia,
Egypt, and Brazil welcomed his statement and the incoming
president of the Conference, Ambassador Idriss Jazairy of
Algeria. The Ukrainian ambassador spoke on the importance
of nuclear disarmament and outer space security and the Polish
ambassador reported on a related conference held in Warsaw
in November 2008.
Brief highlights
Calls for nuclear disarmament
Speaking during the first plenary meeting of his country’s
CD presidency, Algeria’s
Minister for Foreign Affairs Mourad Medelci argued that
the “nuclear menace” persists, given the existing
27,000 nuclear warheads and the inclusion of use of such weapons
in security doctrines. He expressed hope that the 2010 nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference would experience
“tangible results” on all three pillars—disarmament,
non-proliferation, and nuclear energy—and the creation
of a nuclear weapon free zone in the Middle East, which would
help promote the peace process and should not be subordinated
to it.
Minister Medelci also argued that non-nuclear weapon states
have a right to insist that the nuclear weapon states engage
in negotiations for the elimination of nuclear weapons, as
called for by the UN General Assembly, the Non-Aligned Movement,
and the Group of 21. He also noted that while bilateral reductions
between the United States and Russia are welcome, such measures
would have more impact if they were accompanied by a process
of multilateral discussions.
Ukrainian
Ambassador Mykola Maimeskul welcomed UN Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon’s five-point
proposal for nuclear disarmament, which includes support
for a Nuclear
Weapons Convention. He also welcomed the European Union
proposals on disarmament and “input” from civil
society groups, saying that all these “developments
mean that the fresh wind of change in the field of global
disarmament has already opened new windows of opportunities,
destined to upgrade current system of international security
architecture and bring back consensus spirit in this Chamber.”
He also noted, “progress on nuclear disarmament is essential
to win the struggle against proliferation.”
In this vein, the Ukrainian ambassador and Algerian minister
expressed support for negotiating a fissile
materials cut-off treaty, the possibility of which has,
according to Minister Medelci, “become promising given
the political will expressed by certain key partners for accepting
verification measures.”
Outer space security
The Ukrainian
ambassador welcomed the Russian-Chinese
draft treaty on preventing the placement of weapons in
outer space and the EU draft
Code of Conduct on Outer Space Activities. He also explained
that Ukraine provides transparency on its space activities
through the Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile
Proliferation.
Report from Warsaw conference
Ambassador
Andrzej Misztal of Poland presented a report
from the Warsaw Reflection Group’s conference on nuclear
disarmament and non-proliferation, “Arms
Control Revisited: Non-proliferation and Denuclearization,”
which took place 20–21 November 2008. Ambassador Misztal
explained the conference “joined the mainstream of ongoing
discussion” of these topics—the mainstream being
the Hoover Institute, the International
Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament,
the Luxembourg
Forum, the Global Zero Initiative, and the Oslo
Conference. The Warsaw conference explored the history
of nuclear disarmament, including the denuclearization of
Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan and the report welcomed talk
between the United States and Russia regarding a new strategic
arms reduction agreement by the end of 2009, saying it will
positively impact the 2010 nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference.
Other business
The CD agreed to a request from Tajikistan to participate
in the 2009 session of the Conference as an observer.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday,
19 March 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
12 March
2009
Controversy over mention of the Middle East nuclear
weapon free zone
Germany’s
Commissioner for Disarmament and Arms Control addressed
the Conference on Disarmament (CD), speaking on opportunities
for arms control. The Egyptian
and Algerian
ambassadors spoke on the establishment of a Middle East Nuclear
Weapon Free Zone, to which Israel’s
representative objected. The ambassador
of Turkey spoke about the “four core issues”
of the CD as well as terrorism and conventional weapons and
China’s
ambassador supported the call for a Middle East Nuclear
Weapon Free Zone. The Group
of 21 thanked current CD president, Ambassador
Chitsaka Chipaziwa of Zimbabwe, who then delivered his
final statement as president. Algeria is scheduled to assume
the next presidency.
Brief highlights
- Germany and Turkey called for a balance of the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty’s “three pillars”:
disarmament, non-proliferation, and “peaceful uses”
of nuclear technology.
- Egypt and Algeria called for serious efforts to be made
at the next nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference
to operationalize the 1995
resolution on the Middle East.
- Israel objected to the mention of an NPT resolution within
the context of the CD.
- China voiced support for the establishment of a nuclear
weapon free zone in the Middle East.
- Turkey called for further reductions in nuclear forces
and in their operational status.
- Turkey voiced support for space
security measures; the establishment of nuclear
weapon free zones, including in the Middle East; negative
security assurances; measures against nuclear and conventional
terrorism; an Arms
Trade Treaty; and other conventional arms agreements.
Opportunities for arms control
The Federal
Government Commissioner for Disarmament and Arms Control of
Germany, Ambassador Klaus-Peter Gottwald, outlined the
following “opportunities to prove the seriousness of
our commitment” to “multilateral arms control
and disarmament”:
- Reaffirm the fundamental bargain underlying the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) (i.e., the balance of
disarmament, non-proliferation, and “peaceful uses”
of nuclear technology);
- Further develop initiatives for multilateral nuclear fuel
assurances, including Germany’s 2007 proposal for
a Multilateral
Enrichment Sanctuary Project;
- Support, “or at least not stand in the way of,”
the adoption of a programme of work in the CD;
- Begin negotiations on a fissile
materials cut-off treaty (FMCT) without preconditions;
- Establish, within the CD, a Group of Scientific Experts
to examine technical aspects—such as scope and verification—of
an FMCT;
- Increase security, transparency, and control over existing
weapon purpose-fissile material stocks.
Agreeing with the importance of balancing the NPT’s
“three pillars,” Ambassador
Ahmet Üzümcü of Turkey advocated for a
“gradual and a realistic approach towards the fulfillment
of Article VI goals.” To this end, he welcomed the “reduction”
in the role “attributed to nuclear weapons in security
and defense policies” and encouraged similar reductions
in nuclear forces and their operational status. He also encouraged
CD member states to support negotiations of an FMCT, arguing
that the negotiation of an FMCT and entry into force of the
Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty “could play a catalyst role for
a successful outcome at the NPT Review Conference.”
Middle East Nuclear Weapon Free Zone
Ambassador
Hisham Badr of Egypt emphasized the importance of clearly
highlighting his delegation’s “full expectation
that the upcoming [nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty] Preparatory Committee will witness
a healthy and dynamic handling of practical ways and means
to operationalize the 1995
Resolution on the Middle East.” Arguing that the
NPT’s credibility and viability “continues to
be undermined as long as any of the elements of the 1995
Package remain unimplemented,” Ambassador Badr noted
that the many agreements and texts on this issue
contribute to creating a solid, unambiguous and mutually
reinforcing framework that makes the establishment of such
a zone a global imperative, and collectively highlight that
lack of progress in this matter perpetuates a situation
that constitutes a direct threat to regional and international
peace and security, increasing the potential for a regional
nuclear arms race.
The Egyptian delegation to the 2008 NPT PrepCom submitted
a working
paper on this issue, which included a non-exhaustive list
of concrete measures aimed at operationalizing the 1995 Middle
East resolution. Ambassador Badr encouraged other delegations
to submit feedback on these ideas.
Ambassador
Idriss Jazairy of Algeria also expressed his delegation’s
concern with “the absence of any progress towards making
the Middle East region a nuclear weapon free zone.”
He argued that double standards and a “deafening silence”
have been applied to the region, and that non-proliferation
efforts would have more credibility if they were applied without
discrimination or favouritism. He also argued that linking
the elimination of nuclear weapons in the region to the overall
Middle East peace process “undermines the proliferation
system” since the only country in the region that possesses
nuclear weapons is also “the one that is occupying Arab
territories.”
China’s
Ambassador Wang Qun agreed that it “is quite urgent
to establish the mechanism to prevent nuclear proliferation
in the Middle East,” and expressed hope “that
relevant UN resolutions will be effectively implemented”
and “that at the upcoming third session of the Preparatory
Committee for the NPT Review Conference, all parties will
try to seek acceptable methods to implement the resolutions
on the Middle East Free zone in the Middle East as adopted
at the 1995 and 2000 NPT Review Conferences.”
Israel’s
Counsellor Meir Itzchaki took the floor to object to the
references to the NPT resolution on the Middle East in the
context of the CD, noting that Israel is not a member of the
NPT. He argued, “the establishment of the nuclear weapon
free zones are to be based on arrangements freely arrived
at by the states in the region concerned,” and that
other such zones have been established “while conditions
in the regions allowed that and [when a] significant reduction
in threats has been prevalent.” He insisted that bringing
this issue to the CD “is actually in contradiction to
the concept of arrangements freely arrived at.” In implied
reference to Algeria’s impending assumption of the CD
presidency, Mr. Itzchaki also said, “We expect ... P6
members to also fulfill their presidency in a professional
and impartial way, not allowing politics to stand in the way
[of] maintaining the credibility of the presidency of the
CD.”
Outer space security
Ambassador
Üzümcü of Turkey noted his delegation “in
principle” supports proposal for strengthening the existing
legal framework for preventing
an arms race in outer space and is interested in both
the Russian-Chinese
draft treaty and “the idea that [transparency and
confidence-building measures] may serve as a precursor to
a legally binding instrument.”
Conventional weapons
Turkey’s
ambassador highlighted the relationship between small
arms and terrorism and called for a “comprehensive approach”
including manufacture, seizure, destruction, information-sharing,
and transparency to prevent illicit trafficking. Turkey also
voiced support for an Arms
Trade Treaty, the Mine
Ban Treaty, and negotiations on a cluster munitions protocol
in the framework of the Convention
on Certain Conventional Weapons. He also emphasized the
importance to the UN General Assembly resolutions on transparency
in armaments.
“Wise men” vs. “peaceniks”: an
unfortunate debate
Ambassador
Gottwald of Germany noted the articles on a “nuclear
free world” of the American and German “wise men,”
who, he explained, “are not suspicious of being ‘peaceniks’
but politicians with a realistic political approach,”
suggesting that non-politicians, or people who have not exercised
political decision-making power of “war and peace,”
are neither realistic nor wise. This perspective is especially
unfortunate as the majority of CD members have been vocally
supportive of the inclusion of civil society experts in CD
debates—“peaceniks” who have dedicated their
lives to the very issues on the table at the CD. As author
Darwin Bond-Graham notes in one
of several critiques of the “wise men,” “George
Shultz, William Perry, Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn have not
built their careers off of making peace and pursuing disarmament.
In fact, quite the opposite.”
Other business
The CD accepted the request of Armenia and Iceland to participate
in the Conference as observers.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Tuesday,
17 March. The Foreign Minister of Algeria is scheduled to
address the Conference.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
7 March 2009
Address by Russian Foreign Minister
On Saturday, 7 March, a plenary meeting of the Conference
on Disarmament (CD) convened to accommodate Russian
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s schedule. Minister
Lavrov commented on the relationship between the financial
crisis and disarmament; relations with the United States and
next steps for bilateral reductions; measures for “strategic
stability”; the proposed anti-missile system in Eastern
Europe; and preventing an arms race in outer space.
Economic demilitarization
Minister Lavrov argued that the current financial and economic
crises “constrict the resource base for disarmament
and conversion programs,” though he also acknowledged
“that under globalization the crisis cannot be overcome
through military preparations or war as happened in 1930-s.
Regretfully, the Cold War has ‘institutionalized’
militarization in the field of international relations.”
Many academics and activists argue that the financial crisis
not only demonstrates beyond a doubt the need for conversion,
disarmament, and demilitarization, but also provides an opportunity
for such progress. At a recent conference in Washington, DC,
“Security Without Empire,” Bruce Gagnon of the
Global
Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space argued
that the conversion of military industries is essential to
reducing military expenditures, and that popular support for
conversion is essential for government action. US
Congressman Barney Frank, in calling for a 25% reduction
of the US military budget, has argued that the US government
has “for too long indulged the implicit notion that
military spending is somehow irrelevant to reducing the deficit
and have resisted applying to military spending the standards
of efficiency that are applied to other programs. If we do
not reduce the military budget, either we accustom ourselves
to unending and increasing budget deficits, or we do severe
harm to our ability to improve the quality of our lives through
sensible public policy.”
US-Russian nuclear reductions
Minister Lavrov recognized Russia’s “special responsibility”
as a nuclear weapon state and permanent member of the UN Security
Council to effectively work toward nuclear disarmament. He
welcomed the “resetting” of US-Russian relations
as discussed with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and
emphasized the importance of a follow-on to the Strategic
Arms Reduction Treaty (START). He also read a statement
by Russian President Medvedev, calling for a legally-binding
instrument that limits warheads, strategic delivery vehicles,
and the legality of deploying such arms outside of national
territories.
Measures for “strategic stability”
Arguing that the elimination of nuclear weapons “can
only be achieved through strengthened strategic stability
and strict adherence to the principle of equal security of
all,” Minister Lavrov urged the following steps:
- Advancement of nuclear disarmament by all nuclear weapon
states, “with their ‘gradual’ engagement
in efforts already being undertaken by Russia and U.S.”;
- Preventing of the weaponization of outer space;
- Preventing of operational deployment of strategic offensive
weapons equipped with conventional warheads (building “compensatory
potential”);
- Ensuring states do not possess a “nuclear upload
potential”;
- Preventing attempt to use NPT membership to implement
military nuclear programs; and
- Ensuring verifiable cessation of conventional capabilities
“coupled with efforts to resolve other international
issues, including settlement of regional conflicts.”
Minister Lavrov also called for strengthening of the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty at the next Review Conference
in 2010; entry into force of the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty; and ratification of the International
Atomic Energy Agency Additional Protocol by all countries
. He welcomed the entry into force of the Central Asian nuclear
weapon free zone and urged for the development of such
a zone in the Middle East. He also called for development
of multilateral approaches to the nuclear fuel cycle, urging,
“joint work should be carried out to develop global
nuclear energy infrastructure through the establishment of
multilateral centers for the provision of nuclear fuel cycle
services” and citing the establishment of the International
Uranium Enrichment Center in partnership with Kazakhstan.
Noting that the European Union has now made a similar call,
Minister Lavrov reiterated the importance of developing an
international agreement on the elimination of intermediate-
and short-range ballistic missiles. He also said the Russian
delegation to the CD is prepared to start negotiations on
a fissile
materials cut-off treaty.
Anti-missile system in Europe
Minister Lavrov further argued that unilateral anti-ballistic
missile systems undermine efforts toward nuclear disarmament
by eroding strategic stability and global parity. He proposed
a “constructive alternative to unilateral plans in this
crucial area”—a “package proposal”
to “unite efforts of all States interested in counteracting
potential missile threats.”
Despite arguing that the proposed US anti-missile system
in Europe is based on unfounded fears of missile attacks by
Iran—noting that Iran does not possess intercontinental
ballistic missiles or nuclear weapons—the Russian government
has for several years been inviting NATO and the United States
to cooperate with it on an anti-missile system to “protect”
both Europe and Russia. In March 2007, Russia’s
ambassador to NATO urged, “Since Iranian missiles
and the nuclear weapons of the ‘rogue states’
rank among our common threats, let us gather together and
assess them, and let us build an antimissile system jointly.”
While this suggestion was largely ignored by the former US
administration, on Friday, 6 March 2009, US
Secretary of State Clinton indicated that there may be
an “opportunity” for Russia and the United States
to “cooperate on missile defense.”
Weaponization of outer space
Minister Lavrov argued that preventing an arms race in outer
space is in everyone’s interest, noting that it will
help make “the strategic situation predictable and preserving
integrity of orbital assets” and that it is easier to
prevent the weaponization of space than to get rid of new
weapon stockpiles afterwards.
Unfortunately, given the incredible amounts of money spent
on space weapon technology and the “opportunities”
the contracts for such technology provides for weapon
profiteers, it will in fact be very difficult to prevent
its development.
Minister Lavrov announced that the Russian and Chinese CD
delegations will soon introduce a document summing up and
responding to the comments they received on their drafty
treaty on preventing the placement of weapons in outer space.
For a list of comments on the treaty delivered in plenary
meetings of the CD, please see Reaching
Critical Will’s fact sheet on the draft treaty.
Notes from the gallery
For the first time in a long time, the CD chamber was packed
with press. Before delivering his official statement, Minister
Lavrov had to shoo away photographers standing in the middle
of the room, saying, “We’re here for disarmament,
not publicity.” Last year, Minister Lavrov’s CD
address received much less media attention. We hope the increased
publicity will result in increased interest in, and scrutiny
of, the CD by media and the public.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday,
12 March 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
5 March 2009
International Women's Day Statement to the CD
The Democratic
Republic of the Congo’s Vice Minister of Interior and
Security delivered a statement to the Conference on Disarmament
(CD) on the relationship between security and disarmament.
Egypt’s ambassador delivered two statements, one on
the prevention of an arms race in outer space and the other
on negative security assurances. The current president of
the Conference read out the International
Women’s Day Statement to the CD, after which representatives
of Norway,
Mexico,
South
Africa, and the Syrian
Arab Republic advocated for a representative of civil
society to be allowed to read the statement next year.
Brief highlights
- The Democratic Republic of Congo announced it will soon
sign the Convention
on Cluster Munitions.
- Egypt called for legally-binding instruments to prevent
an arms race in outer space and to ensure security
assurances for non-nuclear weapon states against the
threat or use of nuclear weapons.
- The CD president read out the International
Women’s Day Statement to the CD, which called
for three tracks to peace in the Middle East: political,
disarmament, and human security.
- Norway, Mexico, South Africa, and the Syrian Arab Republic
lamented that a representative of WILPF was not allowed
to deliver the statement and urged for debate on the issue
of civil society participation in the CD.
Disarmament, security, and multilateralism
Zephyrin Mungongo, Vice Minister of Interior and Security
of the Democratic
Republic of the Congo, argued that enhancing international
security through comprehensive disarmament remains is a major
concern for the international community. He noted that conflicts
have diminished the practice of cooperation and negotiation,
pointing out the irony that the only way to reduce the use
of weapons of mass destruction is through multilateral bans
on such weapons.
Conventional weapons
Mr. Mungongo also argued that his country has made headway
in implementing the UN
Programme of Action on small arms and light weapons and
at “protecting” its people from anti-personnel
landmines. He also indicated his government would soon sign
the Convention
on Cluster Munitions. The representatives from Norway
and Mexico
welcomed this announcement.
Prevention of an arms race in outer space
Ambassador Hisham Badr of Egypt argued that the Outer Space
Treaty is insufficient to guard against the weaponization
of outer space and emphasized the importance of negotiating
a new legally-binding and integrated mechanism on outer space.
He described transparency and confidence-building measures
as complementary but argued a legally-binding instrument is
necessary. Ambassador Badr welcomed the Russian-Chinese
draft treaty on the placement of weapons in outer space
introduced to the CD last year.
Negative security assurances
In a second statement, Ambassador Badr called for the negotiation
of a legally-binding instrument that protects non-nuclear
weapons states against the threat or use of nuclear weapons.
Noting that there is still no treaty on the elimination of
nuclear weapons, he argued that steps going beyond nuclear
weapon free zones have to be considered to recognize the right
of non-nuclear weapon states not to be attacked or threatened
by the use of nuclear weapons.
International Women’s Day Statement to the CD
Ambassador Chitsaka Chipaziwa of Zimbabwe, current president
of the CD, read out the International
Women’s Day Statement to the Conference on Disarmament
on behalf of the coalition of women’s organizations
that prepared the statement after their seminar
on 4 March. This year’s seminar, “Getting
To Peace in the Middle East—Changing Threat Perceptions,”
was co-sponsored by the Women’s
International League for Peace and Freedom, the Geneva
NGO Working Group on Peace, and Femmes
Africa Solidarité. As the statement noted, the
seminar was composed of a panel discussion on increasing understanding
about the culture of fear that is pervasive in the Middle
East and an NGO strategy session, “where women and men
from more than 30 countries came together to discuss ways
to address and change this culture of fear to create a sustainable
culture of peace, not to create another roadmap for peace,
but how to begin walking down that road.”
The statement emphasized that three parallel tracks are necessary
for the consolidation of peace in the area: the political
track, including the Arab Peace Initiative; the disarmament
track, including the 1995
nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty Review Conference Resolution;
and a human security track, “along which the governments
of the region demonstrate their ability to cope with their
internal problems and satisfy the needs and hopes of their
peoples.” The statement explains,
Without this third track, other states will not be confident
that a particular country will remain true to its commitments.
In an area that has known so many decades of wars and bitter
enmities, confidence that a new situation has come to stay
can build only slowly, through the passage of time and the
demonstrated ability to solve the problems that history
has bequeathed. It will be impossible to maintain
and implement this third track—towards shared human
security—without the full and active engagement of
civil society, and particularly women.
Participation of civil society
Norwegian
Deputy Representative Hilde Skorpen congratulated the
Women’s
International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) on
its seminar, its “tireless efforts at promoting peace
and disarmament,” and for being present at the CD’s
plenary meetings year after year. She also expressed hope
that a representative from WILPF will have the opportunity
to deliver the statement next year.
Mexico’s
Ambassador Mabel Gómez Oliver, argued, “it
would have been more appropriate to have had a representative
of [WILPF] directly addressing the Conference on Disarmament.
In fact, we regret that in the context of the constructive
and positive spirit in which we started our work this year,
we were not capable of finding some formula that would have
allowed the Women’s International League for Peace and
Freedom to address this room formally and directly.”
She went on to note, “it is incomprehensible that a
body that is even more exclusive, such as the Security Council,
has shown greater flexibility and has had a regular interaction
with representatives of civil society, whereas this conference
continues to reject—I won’t say dialogue with
civil society—but just listening to them speaking in
their own voice.” She further argued that not only does
civil society add value to intergovernmental deliberations
but that “civil society has the legitimate right to
express its views, its proposals, its concerns and even any
disagreements that it might have with governments on the issues
before us.”
Counsellor
Johan Kellerman of South Africa echoed this perspective,
saying, it “is most regrettable and unfortunate that
yet once again this Conference has not been able to reach
consensus on allowing this particular NGO to address the Conference
themselves.” He called for the CD to set aside time
to debate and discuss the issue of broader civil society participation
in the work of the Conference, “with a view to resolve
it sooner rather than later.”
Syria’s
Second Secretary Abdulmaola Al Nuqari agreed “that
it is regrettable the Conference on Disarmament has yet not
been able to settle this matter” and noted the openness
of WILPF and its “courage in raising questions which
could really lead to a true philosophy of disarmament.”
He offered encouragement to WILPF in its work and expressed
“much hope that next year we will be able to listen
to them presenting their own statement here in the Conference
on Disarmament and also listen to other NGOs as well.”
In other business, the CD this morning granted observer status
to Angola.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Saturday,
7 March, when it is scheduled to hear from the Foreign Minister
of the Russian Federation, Sergey Lavrov.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
3 March 2009
Multilateral disarmament for peace, security, development,
and human rights
Chile’s
Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs delivered the country’s
first high-level presentation to the Conference on Disarmament
(CD), speaking about the necessary steps to nuclear disarmament
and the problems of the CD’s methods of work. The Under-Secretary
of State for Foreign Affairs of Italy spoke about Italy’s
priorities for the CD and the representative for the European
Union delivered a statement on the fissile materials-cut
off treaty. Though last week the president of the CD indicated
that high-level representatives of Iran and Japan would also
be addressing the Conference today, neither attended the meeting.
Brief highlights
- Chile argued, “there are no good proliferators versus
bad proliferators. Any proliferation is negative and all
nuclear weapons generate unacceptable risk for the international
security.”
- Chile called for security at lower levels of armaments.
- Chile and Italy called for entry into force of the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty and negotiation of a fissile
materials cut-off treaty (FMCT). They also emphasized
the importance of the upcoming nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee in 2009
and Review Conference in 2010.
- Italy welcomed movement on US-Russian nuclear reductions
and called for the CD to give attention to the issue of
negative
security assurances.
- Italy’s representative noted his government will
“actively support in every way current efforts to
reach a wider-ranging, legally binding agreement on cluster
munitions in the framework of the Convention
on Certain Conventional Weapons, acceptable to those
countries not able to sign the Oslo
Treaty.”
- The European Union called for the start of negotiations
without preconditions of an FMCT.
Disarmament and security
Chile’s
Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, Alberto van Klaveren,
argued that multilateral disarmament is a necessary response
to the economic, food, climate, and energy crises. He noted,
“peace and security, development and human rights are
the pillars of the UN system ... nuclear disarmament is not
only the most important issue of our common agenda, but ...
it’s materialization is the keystone for achieving security
for all States at a lower military level.”
Steps to nuclear disarmament
Both the Italian and Chilean representatives called for entry
into force of the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Chile’s
Vice Minister said he “expected” US ratification
“should make way for a ‘virtuous’ circle
which would foster a speedy entry into force ... [and] offer
the legal and political confidence the CTBT is due to bring
about in international relations.”
He also argued that a fissile
materials cut-off treaty (FCMT) is the necessary next
step and that verification is “part of the very essence
of Disarmament instruments.” Italy’s
Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Vincenzo Scotti,
argued that an FMCT would make nuclear disarmament irreversible
and that “no Treaty on disarmament can endure without
a credible and workable verification mechanism.” Deputy
Representative Ivan Pintir of the Czech Republic delivered
a statement on the fissile materials-cut off treaty on behalf
of the European
Union, in which he called for the start of negotiations
without preconditions of an FMCT. He also reiterated the European
Union’s calls for moratoriums on fissile material production
and dismantlement of fissile material production capacities
related to nuclear weapons. All three representatives welcomed
recent statements by the new US administration on this subject.
Work of the CD
Chile’s
Vice Minister noted that while nuclear disarmament will
require commitment of the “great powers,” their
interests seem to be protected by the rule of consensus, which
acts as “a kind of veto, which, combined with the practice
of linkage, paralyzed the Conference impeding even the slightest
result: if this were not the case, the Ottawa and Oslo conventions
would have been negotiated in Geneva.”
He argued that it is one thing to “safeguard privileged
security interests requiring consensus in order to enter into
the final stage of a disarmament negotiation, but something
quite different to block the initiation of any negotiation
or the mere establishment of a subsidiary organ to set the
stage for such negotiation.” He thus called for enhanced
democratic procedures in the CD to reflect the reality of
indivisible security and interdependence between states, cautioning
that the Conference is “only an instrument” to
be used “to meet collective political needs,”
and is not an end in itself. He urged the CD’s expansion,
the participation of civil society, better coordination with
other disarmament machinery, and a “communication and
dissemination policy with regard to the public opinion which
is up to the mark of the present-day culture of accountability
enforceable upon any authority.”
Notes from the gallery
I continue to caution against references to the so-called
“wise men” Italy’s representative invoked
in his statement. While increased recognition that nuclear
disarmament is an attainable goal can be helpful to achieving
the elimination of nuclear weapons, the vision for a “a
world free of nuclear weapons” laid out in the writings
of Kissinger, Perry, Nunn, and Schultz is, as others have
noted,
“a pragmatic strategy to maintain US military and economic
dominance well into the 21st century,” and does not
match the “holistic goals” sought by those working
for genuine peace and justice. We encourage all those seriously
committed to peace and equity through disarmament to analyze
the words of those “wise men” in the context of
their broader political views.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday,
5 March 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
26 February
2009
Calling for creative work
The current president of the Conference
on Disarmament (CD) introduced the new representative
of Romania
to the Conference, Ambassador Maria Ciobanu, who delivered
a statement on the work of the CD. The current president,
Ambassador
Chitsaka Chipaziwa of Zimbabwe, then gave an outline of
the CD’s schedule for the rest of the week and next
and bid farewell to the Deputy Secretary-General of the CD,
Mr.
Tim Caughley, who is retiring at the end of this week.
Japan's
ambassador echoed the president's farewell to Mr. Caughley.
Brief highlights
- Romania expressed support for CD/1840,
last year’s proposed programme of work.
- The CD president announced that high-level representatives
from Chile, Iran, Italy, and Japan will deliver statements
on Tuesday, 3 March.
- Deputy Secretary-General Tim Caughley, in his farewell
address, said he hopes he is the gallery when a programme
of work is adopted.
Work of the CD
Ambassador
Ciobanu of Romania suggested that coming up with creative
solutions to the deadlock in the CD is not just a responsibility
of the rotating presidents but of the entire membership. She
noted that the CD is “very sensitive to international
security evolutions and to the political climate between key
actors of the global stage,” and expressed regret that
these actors did not “take advantage of the new flavour
of high level interests shared by many countries last spring.”
CD’s schedule
Ambassador
Chitsaka Chipaziwa of Zimbabwe outlined the CD’s
schedule for the week, noting that on Thursday afternoon the
Conference would meet for an informal debate on agenda item
4, while on Friday, 27 February the informal debate on agenda
item 6 will take place in the morning and the informal debate
on agenda item 3 in the afternoon. He also noted that on Tuesday,
3 March, the Conference will hear interventions from high-level
representatives of Chile, Iran, and Italy in the morning and
from Japan in the afternoon. An informal discussion on agenda
item 6 will meet after the morning plenary and the informal
on agenda item 7 will be postponed until the morning of Thursday,
5 March, after that day’s plenary.
Farewell (and thanks!) to Tim Caughley
Ambassador
Chipaziwa then explained that the CD’s Deputy Secretary-General,
Tim Caughley, has reached the mandatory retirement age of
the UN. After a round of applause, Mr.
Caughley expressed disappointment to be leaving at a point
when in the margins of the Conference there is an “inclination
to perhaps talk less about the phrase ‘programme of
work’ and more about the word ‘work’.”
He explained,
I sense there is a wish now to lay some real firm foundations
for negotiations that will inevitably follow. I don’t
mean by commenting on the programme of work to diminish
procedural framework in which this conference unnecessarily
must operate, but I mention it because one needs to keep
the procedure in context, given the very grave, serious
and important issues that are on this conferences’
agenda.
Ambassador
Sumio Tarui of Japan thanked Mr. Caughley for his efforts
and expressed pleasure that he would be staying in Geneva.
Notes from the gallery
The Women’s
International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) extends
our own deepest thanks to Tim Caughley for all his efforts
to work with civil society and to promote disarmament. Mr.
Caughley spoke at the most recent WILPF
Seminar held in Geneva in November 2008. Today, as WILPF’s
Secretary General sat in the gallery, thinking about next
week’s global commemorations of International
Women’s Day, she noted that only nine of CD representatives
on the floor were women. Mr. Caughley hopes that he will be
in the gallery the day a programme of work is adopted—hopefully,
he will also be there the day that women from civil society
get to read their own statement to the CD on International
Women’s Day.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
24 February
2009
Russian ambassador requests Saturday meeting
A brief plenary meeting of the Conference
on Disarmament (CD) met today, at which Ambassador
Valery Loschinin of the Russian Federation asked the current
president and the CD Secretary-General if it is possible to
organise a plenary meeting on Saturday, 7 March to hear an
address from the Russian Foreign Minister. The minister's
schedule only allows him to address the Conference on Saturday
morning. Sergei
Ordzhonikidze, Secretary-General of the CD and Director-General
of the United Nations Office at Geneva, agreed to make the
necessary arrangements and said that the Secretariat would
inform delegations of the timing and the venue of the plenary.
He also emphasized that it would not cost the CD any additional
money, since the Conference has not used its whole budget
for several years, suggesting there is money available for
the CD to try new and innovative things this year.
The next plenary meeting is scheduled to be held on Thursday,
26 February 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
19 February
2009
Security in outer space and against nuclear weapons
During the eighth plenary meeting of the Conference
on Disarmament (CD), the US
Chargé d’Affaires commented on the US-Russian
satellite collision. The Group of 21 delivered statements
on preventing
an arms race in outer space and on negative
security assurances and the Iranian
ambassador spoke on all four core issues of the CD’s
agenda.
Brief highlights
Outer space security
US
Chargé d’Affaires Garold N. Larson explained
that the US and Russian governments are in communication regarding
the collision between the “privately owned Iridium communications
satellite, and the inactive Russian Cosmos satellite.”
He argued that the incident “underscores the increasingly
congested space environment” and urged “international
cooperation between governments and industry.”
On behalf of the Group
of 21, Bangladesh’s Chargé d’Affaires
Mr. Md. Mustafizur Rahman expressed concern with “the
negative implications of the development and deployment of
anti-ballistic missile defense systems and the pursuit of
advanced military technologies capable of being deployed in
outer space which have, inter alia, contributed to the further
erosion of an international climate conducive to the promotion
of disarmament and strengthening of international security.”
He also noted that while multilateral agreements “provide
the mechanism” for consultation and cooperation, existing
legal instruments regarding outer space security “are
inadequate to deter further militarization of space, or prevent
its weaponization” or to prevent
an arms race in outer space (PAROS). Mr. Rahman thus urged,
on behalf of the Group, for the CD to start negotiations on
PAROS. The Group also acknowledges that inclusive measures
for transparency and confidence-building “could be important
complimentary measures.”
Both the Group of 21 and Ambassador
Alireza Moaiyeri of Iran welcomed the Russian-Chinese
draft
treaty on the prevention of the placement of weapons in
outer space of 2008 and Iran’s ambassador argued that
all efforts should be taken “in order to secure the
use of outer space for the well-being and prosperity of all
nations around the world.”
Negative security assurances
The Group
of 21’s representative emphasized “the right
of non-nuclear weapon States not to be attacked or threatened
with the use of nuclear weapons.” He also expressed
the Group’s concern that strategic defence doctrines
“not only set out rationales for the use or threat of
use of nuclear weapons, but also maintain unjustifiable concepts
on international security based on promoting and developing
military alliance’s nuclear deterrence policies.”
Mr. Rahman noted the Group’s support for nuclear
weapon free zones, including in the Middle East, noting,
however, that the Group does not agree that negative security
assurances should only be granted to members of nuclear weapon
free zones or that current security assurance declarations
are adequate.
Iran’s
ambassador also argued for legally-binding negative security
assurances to be given to non-nuclear weapon states. Both
the Group of 21 and Iran’s delegations called for the
establishment of an ad hoc committee on negative security
assurances in the CD.
Nuclear disarmament
The delegations of the Group of 21 and Iran both emphasized
the importance of the complete elimination of nuclear weapons.
Iran’s
Ambassador Moaiyeri argued there is “no other issue
more urgent than nuclear disarmament to be negotiated in the
CD,” as nuclear weapons pose “the most serious
threat to the security of all States.” He expressed
hope for a “positive change” in nuclear disarmament
in order to have a successful 2010 Non-Proliferation
Treaty Review Conference.
Fissile materials cut-off treaty (FMCT)
Iran’s
ambassador advocated for an FMCT that is “comprehensive,
non discriminatory an[d] internationally and effectively verifiable”
and that includes “[p]ast production and existing stocks
as well as the future production of fissile material for nuclear
weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.” He noted
that any negotiations should work from the 1995
Shannon Mandate.
Work of the CD
Iran’s
Ambassador Moaiyeri argued that CD/1840,
the 2008 proposed programme of work, did not enjoy consensus
because it lacked balance between the four core issues on
the CD’s agenda
Notes from the gallery
The plenary was held in Room VII again today and civil society
participants sat on the floor level with the diplomats, again
without problem.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday,
26 February 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
17 February
2009
"Security" cannot be a precondition for negotiations
During the seventh plenary meeting of the Conference
on Disarmament (CD), Norwegian
Deputy Defence Minister Mr. Bath Eide delivered a statement
on the work of the CD and Norway's commitment to nuclear disarmament.
Ambassadors from New
Zealand and the United
Kingdom welcomed his statement, after which the new president
of the CD, Ambassador
Chitsaka Chipaziwa of Zimbabwe, delivered his opening
remarks. Egypt's ambassador delivered two statements, one
on nuclear
disarmament and the second on the fissile
materials cut-off treaty.
Brief highlights
- Norway's deputy defence minister encouraged the CD to
engage with civil society representatives and to consider
nuclear weapons in the context of broader international
security issues.
- New Zealand agreed that civil society has a "huge
contribution" to make to the work of the CD.
- Norway, the United Kingdom, and Egypt outlined several
steps to nuclear disarmament endorsed by their governments.
- Egypt called for the Shannon
Mandate to be used as the negotiating mandate for a
fissile
materials cut-off treaty.
- Egypt called for the implementation of the 1995
NPT resolution on the Middle East and Egypt and Zimbabwe
voiced support for nuclear
weapon free zones.
Work of the CD
Norwegian
Deputy Defence Minister Mr. Bath Eide stressed what he
views as "encouraging new signals and initiatives"
toward disarmament, including US President Obama and Russian
President Medvedev's positions on key issues of international
security and arms control and recent European articulation
of the "complete elimination of nuclear arsenals."
He argued, "these developments have created an atmosphere
we haven't had for many years," and urged the CD to make
"full use of the possibilities."
To this end, Minister Eide advocated for increased engagement
with civil society, which can "contribute with innovative
approaches and ... help mobilize the political will that is
necessary to move forward." He referenced civil society
involvement in the processes leading to the Mine Ban Treaty
and the Convention on Cluster Munitions, arguing that while
nuclear weapons are "of a different category" from
cluster munitions and landmines, "there are parallels
and lessons to be learned from the humanitarian disarmament
approach, which could benefit our work on disarmament and
non-proliferation." In particular, he insisted on the
need for non-governmental representatives to "remind
us that we are starting in the wrong end when we make a benign
security environment a precondition for negotiations."
[Emphasis mine] Ambassador
Don Mackay of New Zealand echoed Minister Eide's call
for civil society participation, noting that civil society
"has a huge contribution to make to debate and to progress
in this area as in others."
Minister Eide also noted that the Ottawa and Oslo processes
were open to all states, while the CD, which is mandated to
negotiate global legally-binding obligations, excludes the
majority of states from participating. He argued that the
CD "can" have a crucial role to play in disarmament,
"but only if we, the Governments, want it to." The
current president of the CD, Ambassador
Chitsaka Chipaziwa of Zimbabwe, agreed that it is up to
CD member states to end the deadlock. He expressed belief
that the organization of work and the informal debates will
be useful to this end.
Measures for disarmament
Minister Eide also called for improving verification mechanisms
for all aspects of nuclear activities, entry into force of
the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty, and the full implementation of a verifiable
fissile
materials cut-off treaty. He advocated for nuclear weapons
to be considered comprehensively, in the context of "the
broader agenda of international security policy" including
climate change, disease, global financial crisis, and humanitarian
and development challenges, arguing, "we cannot afford
the staggering costs that the nuclear weapons option entails."
New
Zealand's Ambassador Mackay welcomed Minister Eide's attempt
to place the CD in a broader security context, noting that
diplomats can "get very focused on the narrow prisms
that we operate through."
Ambassador
John Duncan of the United Kingdom likewise welcomed the
minister's statement, noting that the "world has changed"
to consist of "interconnected States" and that the
UK government is attempting to "articulate a vision for
the future, not only a political dimension to that, but the
practical steps that will be required to achieve that vision."
Demonstrating the differing views on "practical steps,"
Ambassador
Hisham Badr of Egypt suggested that UN General Assembly
resolutions on decreasing
the operational status of nuclear weapon systems and on
reducing
nuclear danger—neither of which the UK government
supports—are important steps "that could practically
enhance confidence and transparency measures while working
towards realizing our goal of a Nuclear Weapons Free World."
Ambassador Badr also directly quoted Article
VI of the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), arguing that it clearly
lays out states' obligations "in clear and unambiguous
language."
Fissile materials cut-off treaty (FMCT)
Egypt's
Ambassador Badr noted that most member states "have
at one stage or another, and in one formula or another, supported
negotiating an FMCT."
He advocated that it "would not be wise to waste such
a rare convergence of opinion." He suggested that the
"path of least resistance" is to adhere to the process
contained in the 1995
Shannon Mandate while at the same time not precluding
any delegation from raising for consideration the issue of
existing stockpiles.
Nuclear fuel cycle
Norway's
Minister Eide argued that strengthening the NPT's provisions
on "peaceful uses" of nuclear energy is necessary
to ensure "energy access and energy security" and
called for the development of a "proliferation proof"
system through multilateral approaches to the fuel cycle.
Nuclear weapon free zones
Ambassador
Chipaziwa of Zimbabwe noted that it is his "cherished
goal" that Africa "remain a nuclear-free zone for
all time" and Egyptian
Ambassador Badr reaffirmed his government's support for
the creation of nuclear
weapon free zones. Ambassador Badr also emphasized the
importance of implementing the 1995
NPT resolution on the Middle East.
Notes from the floor
Today's meeting was held in Room VII rather than the usual
CD chamber. The room's gallery was void of seats and headsets
so the three civil society representatives in attendance sat
quietly and discretely on the main floor with the delegates.
This seemed to cause no problem and the delegates, who are
used to NGO representatives sitting on the main floor during
meetings of the UN General Assembly First Committee and the
NPT Preparatory Committees and Review Conferences, did not
appear to mind. In fact, after the meeting was over, several
delegates engaged in informal interaction with the NGO representatives.
WILPF appreciated this unplanned opportunity to demonstrate
the possibilities for future civil society representation
at the CD and encourages CD member states to reflect on this
experience in their considerations around this issue.
WILPF further notes that in today's meeting there was a good
deal of emphasis on the responsibility of CD member states
to break the impasse in the CD. While agreeing that the governments
represented at the CD are primarily responsible for moving
forward with negotiations of relevant treaties, WILPF urges
all states—and civil society within all states—to
apply the necessary pressure and provide the necessary arguments
for progress. Many delegates have stressed the interconnectedness
of states; WILPF encourages them to remember this, and their
responsibilities to their populations, when they represent
their countries at the CD.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday,
19 February 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
12 February
2009
Militaristic and humanistic conceptions of security
During the sixth plenary of the Conference
on Disarmament (CD), representatives from the Group
of 21, the European
Union, Brazil,
Pakistan,
Costa
Rica, Austria,
and Venezuela
delivered statements on nuclear disarmament, outer space security,
nuclear energy, and the work of the CD.
Brief highlights
- The Group of 21 reaffirmed its readiness to start negotiations
on a phased programme for the elimination of nuclear weapons
within a timebound framework, including a nuclear weapons
convention.
- The Group of 21 also called for: nuclear weapon states'
reaffirmation of their unequivocal commitment to eliminate
nuclear weapons; elimination of the role for nuclear weapons
in security doctrines; decreasing operational readiness
of nuclear weapon systems; legally-binding negative security
assurances; universal adherence to the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty; a convention on the prohibition of
the use of nuclear weapons; a convention on stockpiling
nuclear weapons; implementation of the resolution
on the Middle East from the 1995
NPT Review and Extension Conference; and fulfillment
of Article VI of the NPT.
- The European Union emphasized "an arms race in outer
space must be prevented" and announced that the Council
of Europe approved a draft
text of a Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities.
- Brazil eloquently argued that the obstacles the CD faces
"are not of an institutional nature" and emphasized
the importance of agreeing to negotiations without preconditions.
- Pakistan reiterated its willingness to negotiate a fissile
materials treaty on the basis of the Shannon Mandate.
It also criticized the various nuclear cooperation agreements
with India, arguing they have made the issues of verification
and stocks "vital for Pakistan in any negotiations
negotiations on an FMT."
- Austria spoke on the importance of the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty, a verifiable fissile materials cut-off
treaty, and multilateralization of the nuclear fuel cycle.
Nuclear disarmament and related steps
On behalf of the Group
of 21, Ambassador Idriss Jazaïry of Algeria emphasized
the importance and the obligation of nuclear disarmament.
He argued that the implications of statements by nuclear weapon
state officials and scholars on "visions for a nuclear
weapon free world ... need to be further investigated,"
but expressed hope "that they will lead to new opportunities
to make serious progress," including in the CD. Ambassador
Jazaïry also acknowledged nuclear weapon state "arms
limitation" efforts but also underlined "the importance
of effective step-by-step implementation of concrete measures
in order to achieve a nuclear weapon free world."
Most interventions highlighted varying conceptions of steps
to a nuclear weapon free world, though Brazil's ambassador
emphasized that all steps are related. The delegates from
the Group
of 21, Brazil,
and Pakistan
outlined the need for negative security assurances, de-alerting,
a fissile
materials treaty, and others. The European
Union reiterated elements from its Statement on Strengthening
International Security submitted to the UNGA and the
CD as official documents, including negotiating a fissile
materials cut-off treaty, universal ratification of the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), US-Russian nuclear weapon reductions
and a post-START
arrangement, attention to tactical nuclear weapons, transparency
and confidence-building measures, and a treaty banning short-
and intermediate-range ground-to-ground missiles.
The Austrian
ambassador expressed hope that the "new US administration's
positive attitude towards the CTBT will act as further boost
to accelerate" its entry into force. He also noted the
importance of negotiating a verifiable fissile materials cut-off
treaty and outlined some measures for including existing stocks,
such as placing any fissile materials for civil purposes under
IAEA control; obliging all states that possess nuclear weapons
to "apply the the highest security standards to curb
the proliferation risk" and enhance transparency around
their military stockpiles.
Disarmament and security
The Group of 21's delegation highlighted the importance of
the resolution
on the Middle East of the 1995
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review and Extension Conference,
especially "in the wake of the recent military escalation
in the Gaza Strip." Ambassador Jazaïry noted, global
and regional approaches to nuclear disarmament and confidence-building
measures "complement each other and should, wherever
possible, be pursued simultaneously to promote regional and
international peace and security."
Ambassador Luiz Filipe de Macedo Soares of Brazil
argued against the conception of "equal security among
states," which he described as being "at the heart
of the mutual assured destruction, one of the many sad features
of the Cold War." Noting that the "right not to
be aggressed or threatened must be assured" to all states,
he emphasized, "the sense of insecurity is a fertile
soil not only for the reluctance to disarm but also for the
ambition to acquire nuclear weapons. The malaise of insecurity
can be remedied by weapons in the way that vitamins are supposed
to strengthen ones resistance to disease. Taking further that
image, nuclear weapons are like anabolic androgenic steroids
which are outlawed in the world of sports."
Ambassador Zamir Akram of Pakistan
opposed this argument, asserting, "It is an accepted
fact that states represented here will only participate in
negotiations that will promote and protect their national
security. It follows that we must pursue objectives that ensure
equal security for all."
Costa
Rica's representative, Counsellor Carlos Garbanzo, outlined
a different conception of equal security for all when he reminded
the Conference that Costa Rica is the only state to achieve
the ultimate objective of the CD: total disarmament. He explained
that the money the country has saved by not having a military
has been used to enhance political and social stability. The
problem with the CD, he noted, is that states are approaching
disarmament from an armament or military perspective rather
than a humanist one and argued that only a comprehensive point
of view centered on the humanitarian side will move the Conference
forward. He also reminded the Conference that disarmament
is not a topic exclusive to those countries that have weapons;
it effects any country and any population that might suffer
negative effects of use of any weapons. To this end, he called
for increased fostering of international initiatives such
as the Arms
Trade Treaty, Oslo
Process on cluster munitions, model
Nuclear Weapon Convention, the UN
Security Council 1540 Committee, etc. and for a reduction
in military expenditures.
Work of the CD
In the Brazilian
delegation's view, "The way out of this dilemma involving
security and nuclear weapons is to face with determination
the moral and political obligation to sit at the negotiating
table." Based on "recent informal exchanges,"
Ambassador Soares said he anticipates that the barriers preventing
the effective functioning of the CD are about to be lifted
and therefore the Conference must prepare "to engage
in meaningful negotiations." The key to this, according
to Ambassador Soares, is to "refrain from placing our
preferences or intentions regarding this or that aspect of
the possible instrument [ie. a fissile materials cut-off treaty]
as conditions for accepting the negotiation," because
if participants adopt that course, "we can be sure that
no negotiation will ever take place."
Emphasizing Brazil's own rejection of the "all or nothing"
position, Ambassador Soares noted that while his delegation
welcomes reductions in nuclear weapon arsenals, "no one
can expect that we celebrate such not so transparent unilateral
measures especially in view of the persistence of technical
improvements and alertness." However, Pakistan's
Ambassador Akram argued that every item on the CD's agenda
is equally ripe for negotiation and that "any proposal
on the CD's programme of work must maintain this delicate
balance."
Acknowledging the "sustained silent toiling" of
some non-governmental organizations on issues of disarmament,
Costa Rica's counsellor argued for opening the CD to civil
society, insisting that international disarmament will have
to be a dialogue.
Outer space security
Czech Deputy Representative Ivan Pintir, speaking on behalf
of the European
Union, highlighted the importance of all past treaties
and agreements on outer space security, welcomed the Russian
and Chinese draft treaty on preventing the placement of weapons
in outer space (though repeated its criticisms of 28
February 2008), and expressed appreciation for discussions
on preventing an arms race in outer space in the CD so far.
Ambassador Pintir also announced that on 8 December 2008,
the Council of the European Union "approved an initial
draft text of the Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities,"
which the EU has been working on for over a year. The draft
text is not intended to be a legally-binding document nor
does it seek to replace other initiatives. It's main purpose
is to strengthen existing UN treaties and principles on space
security and to codify new best practices, including measures
of notification and consultation. It does not include "any
provision concerning the specific question of non-placement
of weapons in outer space," nor does it oppose any initiatives
dealing with this issue but rather insists "on the importance
to 'take all measures in order to prevent space from becoming
an area of conflict'."
The draft code can be downloaded from
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/08/st17/st17175.en08.pdf
Pakistan's
Ambassador Akram argued that outer space must not be weaponized
or colonized, for this would have "serious ramifications
for all military and defence doctrines." Ambassador Christian
Strohal of Austria said codes of conduct "significantly
contribute to enhancing security of outer space activities
or to curbing proliferation risks. He also called on all subscribing
states to the Hague
Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation
to respect their obligations and encourage others to subscribe.
Nuclear energy
While welcoming international cooperation around the development
of nuclear energy, Pakistan's ambassador criticized the adoption
of associated "discriminatory policies or double standards"
as "counter-productive and self-defeating". Austrian
Ambassador Christian Strohal emphasized the importance of
designing a multilateral framework to restrict elements of
the nuclear fuel cycle.
Conventional weapons
Pakistan's ambassador also announced that his country ratified
Protocol V (explosive remnants of war) of the Convention
on Certain Conventional Weapons on 19 January 2009.
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 17 February
2009. It will be the first under the 2009 presidency of Zimbabwe.
The Norwegian Deputy Defence Minister Mr. Bath Eide is scheduled
to give a statement.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
5 February
2009
Shout outs for de-alerting and civil society; examples
of anti-nuclear nuclearism
The permanent representatives to the Conference
on Disarmament (CD) from Malaysia
and the United
Kingdom delivered statements at the fifth plenary meeting.
The ambassador of Malaysia spoke on de-alerting nuclear weapons,
moving forward in the CD, and engaging with civil society.
The UK ambassador announced the release of a public
information paper on UK nuclear weapon policy.
Brief highlights
- Malaysia said the 2008 proposed programme of work, CD/1840,
"falls short" of being balanced and comprehensive
but hopes it can bring the CD back to substantive work through
continued consultations and possibly amendments to its text.
- Malaysia reiterated that it "strongly endorses"
the "positive disarmament step" of decreasing
the operational readiness of nuclear weapon systems.
- Malaysia called for greater engagement with civil society.
- The United Kingdom announced the release of a public
information
paper on UK nuclear weapon policy.
Engaging civil society
Concerning moving forward the work of the CD, Ambassador Datuk
Othman Hashim of Malaysia
urged "that continued efforts be made to accommodate
[states' "legitimate"] concerns to arrive at a consensus,
based on the Rules of Procedure." However, he also noted
the necessity of examining the CD's methodology of work, in
particular, its relation with civil society. Ambassador Hashim
called upon the CD to "open its doors and engage with
non-governmental organizations and civil societies,"
arguing it would "benefit from the valuable insights,
views, data and research that civil societies have" and
suggesting it "may be the the greatly needed impetus
that the CD needs to move forward."
De-alerting nuclear weapon systems
Pointing to its co-sponsorship of the General Assembly resolution
on "Decreasing
the operational readiness of nuclear weapons," Ambassador
Hashim of Malaysia
argued, "de-alerting represents a renewed effort to highlight
a practical disarmament aspect which is implementable that
could help reduce the risk of nuclear war and enhance the
security of all states" and would also "further
promote the implementation of negotiated arms control treaties"
and impact policies of nuclear weapon use.
Incidentally, in the information
paper that UK
Ambassador John Duncan announced during the meeting, a small
section on operational status of nuclear weapons argues that
while in particular the United Kingdom, France, and the United
States have made "substantial moves" to de-alert
and/or de-target their nuclear weapons, further efforts, "to
the extent that the US and Russia could agree on mutual steps
in this direction ... could help to build confidence."
UK policy paper on "disarmament"
On 4 February 2009, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office
released a public information paper, "Lifting
the nuclear shadow: Creating the conditions for abolishing
nuclear weapons" (pdf). Ambassador Duncan of the
United
Kingdom explained that the paper does not change any formal
statements made by him or other UK ambassadors to the CD but
is rather a "compendium" of UK policies on nuclear
weapons, "expressed in simple language."
The paper outlines three conditions and six steps that are
"potentially attainable" within the next few years
toward "a global ban on all nuclear weapons," including:
- Preventing nuclear weapon proliferation by "securing
agreement among all the Non-Proliferation Treaty states
that the way forward must include tougher measures to prevent
proliferation and tighten security" and by "working
with the International
Atomic Energy Agency to help states which want to develop
a civil nuclear energy industry to do so in ways which are
safe and secure and which minimise the risks of nuclear
weapons spreading."
- Aiming for "minimal arsenals" and an "international
legal framework which puts tight, verified constraints on
nuclear weapons" through US-Russian negotiations
and agreements on further nuclear weapon reductions, bringing
the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty into force, and starting negotiations
"without preconditions" on a fissile
materials cut-off treaty.
- Finding solutions to the challenges of moving from
small numbers of nuclear weapons to zero in ways which enhance
security by "exploring the many complex political,
military, technical and institutional issues" through
a "strategic dialogue among the five Nuclear Weapon
States (and, in due course, others)."
Notes from the gallery
The key phrase in the information paper is that the UK government
has issued "a call to accelerate disarmament to prevent
proliferation to new states and to ultimately achieve a world
that is free from nuclear weapons" [emphasis mine].
In their Foreign
Policy in Focus article on the phenomenon of "anti-nuclear
nuclearism"—the concept of the nuclear powers'
quest for sustained hegemony masquerading as non-proliferation
masquerading as disarmament—Darwin BondGraham and Will
Parrish note that this type of position emphasizes "disarmament"
steps and conditions "entirely for what it means for
the rest of the world — securing nuclear materials and
preventing other states from going nuclear or further developing
their existing arsenals." Current nuclear weapon states'
"responsibility to disarm remains in the distant future,
unaddressed as a present imperative."
Indeed, the UK information paper has sections on "stopping
proliferation" in Iran, North Korea, and Syria, on "tightening
controls" on nuclear materials and technology, on "strengthening
international commitment to preventing proliferation,"
on "managing the growth in nuclear power" and finally,
on "reducing arsenals" and "going to zero".
In the "reducing arsenals" section, the paper argues,
"Significant reductions in the nuclear arsenals of the
US and Russia should be achievable without necessarily raising
fundamental security issues." BondGraham has argued that
whereas nuclear weapons once offered prestige and privilege
in the international community they are now seen by government
elites as as a drain on national resources, political capital,
and other forms of military power.
The UK paper also asserts, "A global ban [on nuclear
weapons] will not be successfully achieved and sustained without
removing or at least significantly improving the political
tensions which have led states to maintain their nuclear weapons."
In this regard, the UK government argues, the nuclear weapon
states have to ensure that elimination of nuclear weapons
does not spark an arms race in chemical, biological, or conventional
weapons—therefore, the international community needs
"effective international controls on other weapons before
a global ban on nuclear weapons could be agreed" [emphasis
mine].
One suggestion for preventing arms races the UK paper does
not make is that of reducing global and regional military
expenditure. The Costa Rican government, in its concept
paper on Article
26 of the UN Charter circulated before the open
debate in the Security Council last fall, suggested the
establishment of regional commitments to maintaining collectively
agreed levels of military spending.
Regarding the possibility of starting negotiations in the
near future on a Nuclear Weapons Convention, the UK information
paper asserts:
most of the states with nuclear weapons, including the UK,
while accepting that some form of such an agreement is likely
to be necessary in due course to establish the final ban,
consider that it would be premature and potentially counter-productive
to focus efforts on it now when the many other conditions
necessary to enable a ban have yet to be put in place. Words
alone will not rid the world of nuclear weapons.
However, the paper contains several points on how to "transition
securely from low numbers to zero," which include "fierce
verification requirements." WILPF notes that the United
Kingdom has utilized some of their nuclear weapon establishment
to conduct an intensive verification study, which was launched
in 2005. Since they, it has also undertaken a joint study
with a Norway and the non-governmental organization VERTIC
on the technical aspects of verifying the dismantlement of
nuclear weapons.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday,
12 February 2009. According to the CD's organizational
framework, informal debates on agenda items will begin
next week and plenary meetings are henceforth only scheduled
for Thursdays.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
3 February
2009
"Economic death spirals" and "national security
interests"
During the fourth plenary meeting of the Conference
on Disarmament (CD), the foreign minister of Bangladesh
delivered a statement outlining her country's views on the
CD's core issues and on military spending. The current president
of the Conference announced the presidential appointments
for coordinators on each substantive item on the agenda. Representatives
of India,
Iran,
and Pakistan
delivered interventions on the work of the CD while those
of Georgia
and Russia
criticized each other's statements.
Brief highlights
- The president of the CD announced the appointment of
seven coordinators to facilitate informal discussions on
each substantive agenda item (see below for details).
- Bangladesh expressed support for the negotiation of an
effectively verifiable fissile
materials cut-off treaty (FMCT) that includes existing
stocks, an international instrument preventing
the weaponization of outer space, and a legally-binding
framework for providing negative
security assurances to non-nuclear weapon states.
- India reiterated its call for a nuclear weapons convention
and fulfillment of the Rajiv
Gandhi Action Plan of 1988, pointing to its 2007 CD
working paper on nuclear disarmament, CD/1816.
- India suggested the CD consider the appointment of a
special coordinator toward establishing an ad hoc committee
on nuclear disarmament and called for an ad hoc committee
to negotiate a verifiable FMCT banning the future production
of fissile materials and another to negotiate "an appropriate
arrangement" on negative security assurances.
- India called for further consideration of the Russian-Chinese
draft
treaty to prevent the weaponization of outer space and
of a universal and non-discriminatory regime to govern the
possession and use of missiles.
- Bangladesh called for a reduction of military spending
and a diversion of such expenditure to development efforts.
Work of the CD
The current president of the CD, Ambassador Le Hoai Trang
of Viet Nam, announced that member states and regional coordinators
did not express any "principal opposition" to the
appointment of coordinators to facilitate informal discussions
on each substantive agenda item. He explained that the coordinators
will organize and chair deliberations "in a comprehensive
manner, without preconditions" and "without prejudice
to any future decisions of the Conference on its programme
of work." The presidents appointed representatives of
Chile, Italy, Senegal, Canada, Bulgaria, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia
to the following items:
- Ambassador Portales of Chile for agenda items 1 (cessation
of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament) and 2
(prevention of nuclear war, including all related matters),
with a general focus on nuclear disarmament;
- Ambassador Manfredi of Italy for agenda items 1 and 2,
with a general focus on the prohibition of the production
of fissile material for nuclear weapons and other nuclear
explosive devices;
- Ambassador Grinius of Canada for agenda item 3 (prevention
of an arms race in outer space);
- Ambassador Mbaye of Senegal for agenda item 4 (effective
international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon
states against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons);
- Ambassador Draganov of Bulgaria for agenda item 5 (new
types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of
such weapons; radiological weapons);
- Ambassador Jayatilleka of Sri Lanka for agenda item 6
(comprehensive programme of disarmament); and
- Ambassador Puja of Indonesia for agenda item 7 (transparency
in armaments).
Pakistan's
Ambassador Zamir Akram indicated that his delegation will
not oppose the appointment of these coordinators, though he
reiterated the need to differentiate between the role of coordinators,
who facilitate informal discussions, and the role of subsidiary
bodies, which conduct formal negotiations in the context of
a programme of work. He emphasized his delegation's understanding
that the coordinators will work informally under the authority
of the CD president and that their reports will have no status
except as CD documents.
The representative of Iran
pointed to document CD/WP.553 (will be posted on Reaching
Critical Will's website once obtained) on the organizational
framework for the CD's 2009 session, which references the
Six Presidents arrangement (P6) alongside other regional groupings.
Iran's representative argued that while it appreciates the
P6's efforts, the P6 does not constitute a formal "group"
in the CD and WP.553 should not be construed as giving any
formal status to the P6.
Two delegations actually addressed issues on the CD's agenda.
Dr. Dipu Moni, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bangladesh,
explained her delegation's interest in negotiating an effectively
verifiable fissile
materials cut-off treaty (FMCT) that includes existing
stockpiles, "without which any such treaty would be incomplete."
She also urged the CD to work toward "adopting an international
instrument for averting the weaponization
of space," developing a legally-binding agreement
on negative
security assurances, and to "see what can be done
to bring global voices for disarmament into this august chamber."
Ambassador Hamid Ali Rao of India
echoed some of these calls, urging for the negotiation of
a nuclear weapons convention, an "appropriate" negative
security assurances agreement, space security measures, and
a verifiable FMCT—though for the latter, he added, "It
is obvious that the treaty would have to meet India's national
security interests" and emphasized that the treaty would
need to ban the future production of fissile material. He
also argued that the CD's rules of procedure are not to blame
for the ongoing stalemate, perhaps suggesting the Conference
should focus exclusively on reconciling national security
interests rather than altering its methods of work. However,
this task has to date proved insurmountable, especially regarding
the negotiation of an FMCT. For example, India's "national
security interest" of negotiating an FMCT that only address
future production of fissile materials is in direct contrast
with Pakistan's "national security interest" of
negotiating an FMCT that includes existing stocks.
More comments on military spending and security
Responding to Russian Ambassador Loshchinin's statement
of 27 January, Ambassador Giorgio Gorgiladze of Georgia
refuted the accusation that Georgia has increased its military
spending and arms acquisitions "in the context of an
unresolved conflict." He also noted that in 2008, the
CD Secretary General asked
the Russian and Georgian delegations to stop using the Conference
as a soapbox for "political propaganda". Protesting
Ambassador Gorgiladze's statement, the Russian
representative argued that the Russian statement of 27
January only urged the CD to deal with questions within its
purview.
Turning to questions within the CD's purview, Bangladesh's
foreign minister noted that military spending currently "corresponds
to $202 for each person in the world," arguing, "At
a time when the global financial crisis threatens to roll
back the development gains, pushing millions below the poverty
line and making MDG attainment extremely difficult, such mindless
expenditure must be reversed. Resources need to be freed to
address pressing development challenges." She went on
to urge "all countries, especially the major armament
producing and procuring countries, to recognize that we can
ill afford to continue such spending when our people are hungry,
without basic needs and vulnerable to disease, climate change
and natural disasters."
Notes from the gallery
As Bangladesh's foreign minister articulated, "We know
that armaments are not part of a solution that we seek towards
attaining a secure and peaceful world." WILPF does imagine
the "number of schools we could have constructed, or
the early warning systems we could have set up, or the the
quantum of renewable energy we could have generated, if some
of the money could be diverted to worthy causes." And
WILPF protests what Tom Engelhardt called the "economic
death spiral at the Pentagon"—the attempts
of the "deadly organization of boys with toys" to
argue that cutting military spending during the financial
crisis will mean unemployment for hundreds of thousands of
people. While the related article by Chalmers Johnson, printed
by Engelhardt's TomDispatch.com,
focuses on the "ideology, delusion, and propaganda"
of the US military, the idea that increased military spending
translates directly into increased security is a flawed perception
upheld by many governments. WILPF encourages all CD member
state representatives and their civil societies to read about
the intersections of military spending and the current financial
crisis:
Chalmers Johnson, "The
Looming Crisis at the Pentagon," TomDispatch, 2
February 2009.
Robert Pollin and Heidi Garrett-Peltier, "The
U.S. Employment Effects of Military and Domestic Spending
Priorities," University of Massachusetts, Amherst,
October 2007. (pdf)
William Hartung and Christopher Preble, "Defense
Doesn't Need Stimulus," The Washington Times, 28
January 2009.
Winslow T. Wheeler, "Save
the Economy by Cutting the Defense Budget," CounterPunch,
27 January 2009.
The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Thursday,
5 February 2009.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching
Critical Will of WILPF
27 January
2009
Conference on Armament?
During the Conference
on Disarmament (CD)'s third plenary meeting, representatives
from Nepal
and the Republic
of Korea delivered statements on the importance of multilateral
disarmament, after which the current president indicated the
meeting would switch to informal mode in order to approve
Georgia's request for observer status. Georgia's request was
approved, though the meeting remained in formal mode, causing
some confusion. The representative of the Russian
Federation delivered an intervention on this decision
immediately following the approval.
Brief highlights
- The current CD president indicated discussions are ongoing
regarding arrangements for substantive discussions on all
issues on the CD's agenda, some form of which have been
conducted for the last several years.
- Nepal drew connections between disarmament and development
and urged progress on multilateral disarmament in the 2009
CD session.
- The Republic of Korea expressed support for the 2008
proposed programme of work, CD/1840.
- Russia criticized the granting of CD observer status
to Georgia.
Conference on Armament?
After inquiring whether the meeting was in formal or informal
mode and learning from the president that the formal meeting
had not been suspended, Russian
Ambassador Loshchinin argued that Georgia should not have
been granted observer status to the CD. He argued that last
year Georgia "did not really contribute to the discussions
of the agenda, except perhaps its attempts to use the Conference
for false accusations and attempt |
