CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT PRESIDENT CALLS FOR PLENARY MEETINGS ON EACH OF FOUR SUBJECT MATTERS FROM AGENDA

Ambassador Wegger Strommen of Norway, the new President of the Conference on Disarmament, said he intended to convene four formal plenary meetings during his four-week tenure to consider each of the four subject matters from the Conference on Disarmament's agenda identified in the "food for thought" paper submitted at the beginning of the session by the then President, Ambassador Chris Sanders of the Netherlands.

Without prejudice to any order of priority between themselves or their priority in relation to other issues, Ambassador Strommen encouraged delegations wishing to make statements during those four meetings to do so in the following order: matters related to nuclear disarmament at the meeting on 23 June; fissile material cut-off on 28 June, outer space on 30 June and security assurances on 7 July. As was customary, delegations were invited to make statements on questions related to security and disarmament, including the so-called "new issues", he added.

France, Japan, the United States, Switzerland, Ireland, Italy, Mexico, Brazil, the Netherlands and Algeria reacted to the proposal, which received broad support.

The final aim remained the adoption of a programme of work for the Conference, according to many countries. Stressing that any country could take up at any time the "new issues", some countries recalled that consideration on the question of critical and sensitive infrastructures had already begun.

The next plenary meeting of the Conference will be held on Thursday 23 June at 10 a.m.

Summary of statements

Mr. WEGGER STROMMEN, President of the Conference on Disarmament, said that terrorists had demonstrated their willingness to use any method and any opportunity to kill innocent civilians anywhere in the world. At a time when terrorists were seeking access to nuclear material and weapons of mass destruction, when non-state actors were trading in nuclear material and other components that might threaten peace and stability, when the world was witnessing for the first time defection from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), when doubt had been cast on about compliance with the NPT's provisions by States parties, when the process of disarmament was too slow and not sufficiently transparent, we were faced with an extraordinary paradox since the gap between real threats and the active pursuit of solutions had widened. Obviously, some progress had been made, he continued, but at the multilateral arena, we had become paralysed. Turning to the Conference on Disarmament, M. Strommen added that we might soon celebrate a decade without agreement on a programme of work for the Conference.

Mr. Strommen said that while it might not be hard to explain that different Governments had different security priorities, it was harder to explain that those priorities were held hostage to each other to the extent that the result was deadlock and impasse. We kept telling each other that "the CD must solve its problems" he stated, but the Conference on Disarmament had no problems to solve. The Conference on Disarmament was a conference room, a secretariat and a number of Government envoys; it was a potential tool. "We must stop believing that the impasse of the CD can be resolved by clever procedural drafting exercises among ourselves", he stressed. The passivity in that chamber merely reflected the lack of political will in a number of capitals to negotiate treaty law, in conformity with the mandate of the Conference in matters of disarmament. He would spare no effort to conduct any kind of consultations that delegations would wish to have on a possible programme of work. He nevertheless stressed his hope that consultations could be based upon even the slightest modifications of existing instruction and positions on outstanding issues.

Meanwhile, Mr. Strommen said he intended to convene four formal plenary meetings, which would take place on 23, 28 and 30 June as well as on 7 July. As was customary, delegations were invited to make statements on questions related to security and disarmament, including the so-called "new issues". He encouraged delegations wishing to make statements on the four subject matters from the Conference on Disarmament's agenda identified in the "food for thought" paper, without prejudice to any order of priority between them or their priority in relation to other issues, to do so in the following order: matters related to nuclear disarmament at the meeting on 23 June; fissile material cut-off on 28 June, outer space on 30 June and security assurances in 7 July. Delegations could make statements following the order of the adopted agenda of the Conference on Disarmament if they preferred.

Mr. FRANÇOIS RIVASSEAU (France) congratulated the new President of the Conference on his accession to that position at a time when it was crucial to jumpstart efforts to agree on a programme of work. France supported the efforts of the President and wished to recall the common position expressed by the European Union (EU) at the recently concluded NPT Review Conference at New York. The EU had deplored the impasse witnessed at the Review Conference and France had proposed a subsidiary organ to consider the question of the NPT. The EU would endeavour to forge a consensus on a programme of work, he added. Mr. Rivasseau stressed that the notion of "new issues" had been discussed for two years now with more than half the members of the Conference and that France, together with Switzerland, had considered the usefulness for the Conference to turn its attention to the question of critical or sensitive civilian infrastructures. Further exchanges of views on these subjects had been carried out during informal meetings held at the beginning of this year. In the French Ambassador's opinion, reflection on these issues should be actively pursued in order to facilitate the adoption of a work programme for the Conference which would meet the needs and address the priorities of all concerned. It was in this constructive spirit that the French delegation intended to acknowledge the President's invitation regarding the next four plenary meetings of the Conference.

Mr. YOSHIKI MINE (Japan) said he was in favour of the President's initiative asking the Conference on Disarmament to engage in tackling fundamental questions. He called on all Member States to do their utmost to show flexibility towards reaching a consensus on a programme of work. He said that countries should bear in mind their responsibility to the international community to put the Conference on Disarmament's work back on track.

Mr. THOMAS CYNKIN (United States) recalled that the Conference had agreed on an agenda allowing all delegations to make statements at any time on "new issues". Flexibility was important and healthy, he stressed. He wished to know under which item on the agenda the four issues suggested by the President would fall.

Mr. JÜRG STREULI (Switzerland) assured the President of the Conference on Disarmament of his country's collaboration and found his opening remarks realistic. Switzerland continued to work with France on matters concerning sensitive infrastructure.

Ms. MARY WHELAN (Ireland) said her country supported all initiatives leading to a consensus. She was in favour of the "Five Ambassador" initiative and the "Food-for-Thought" paper. She also supported the idea of starting discussions on issues informally discussed last year.

Mr. CARLO TREZZA (Italy) took note of the President's proposal and said that his country would participate in the four official plenary sessions proposed by the President. He hoped that discussions would lead to a coming together of positions and the adoption of a programme of work.

Mr. LUIS ALFONSO DE ALBA (Mexico) stressed that political will and flexibility were necessary for progress to be made. Mexico therefore supported the President's proposal to the Conference. His country would participate actively in the four official plenary sessions. It was imperative to forge ahead with negotiations with or without a programme of work, he stated.

Mr. CARLOS ANTONIO DA ROCHA PARANHOS (Brazil) emphasized that passivity at the Conference merely reflected the lack of political will. He invited the President of the body to perform his work so as to narrow diverging views. Official proposals had come forth and delegations should now react. They should concentrate on the main questions and discuss "new issues" without prejudice to the consideration of those questions, the most important of which was the adoption of the programme of work.

Mr. CHRIS SANDERS (Netherlands) responded to a question raised by the United States concerning the agenda item under which the four subject matters to be debated in plenary session would fall. He said that the "food-for-thought" paper had clearly addressed such issues. The Conference on Disarmament could take up any question at any time, he added.

Mr. IDRIS JAZAIRY (Algeria) added his support to the President's proposal aimed at enlarging debate on different questions in the two coming weeks. He reiterated Algeria's support for the Five Ambassador initiative as being equally relevant as the "Food-for-Thought "paper.

For use of the information media; not an official record

DC05021e