CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT CONCLUDES THEMATIC DEBATE ON A FISSILE MATERIAL CUT-OFF TREATY

The Conference on Disarmament this afternoon concluded its thematic discussion on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT).

Ambassador Doru-Romalus Costea of Romania, the outgoing President of the Conference, said it was worth building on the momentum the Conference had reached so far. Important ideas and proposals had been launched last week and the first reactions to them should be further elaborated. That exercise was not an aim in itself, but rather a way to find starting points for the Conference’s ultimate common goal: the re-launching of the substantive activity of the Conference. He urged delegations to continue to be engaged in debates and to work together on solving the pending issues before the Conference, FMCT being widely recognized as one of them.

Many speakers praised the outgoing President for the particularly well focused and structured debates that had been held on an FMCT. A speaker noted that it had helped to clarify positions and perceptions. Another said that, despite all the differences of opinion that had been expressed regarding an FMCT, members seemed to agree that all were susceptible to finding their resolution in the course of negotiations. All the speakers seemed to agree with one speaker’s assessment that last week’s activity offered a glimmer of hope that the Conference might be back on the right track to productive negotiations.

Speakers also welcomed the United States initiative to submit a draft treaty and the respective mandate for an ad hoc committee to negotiate such an instrument, which one speaker said was “a constructive sign”.

Pending entry into force of an FMCT, a speaker called on all States to declare and uphold a moratorium on the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

At the beginning of the meeting, the President of the Conference said that the Conference had learned with sadness of the passing away today of Dr. Lee Jong-wook, the Director-General of the World Health Organization. Dr. Lee had worked for WHO for 23 years, and was the first South Korean to head a United Nations agency. On behalf of the Conference and on his own behalf, he extended sincere condolences to the Republic of Korea and to Dr. Lee’s family. Most speakers echoed the sentiments and condolences.

Han Jae-Young of the Republic of Korea expressed his appreciation for the condolences of the Conference and said that he would relay them to the family of Dr. Lee.

Taking the floor this afternoon were representatives of the Russian Federation, Peru, Colombia, Canada, Austria, on behalf of the European Union, China, Japan, Switzerland and Morocco.

The next plenary of the Conference will be held on Thursday, 1 June, at 10 a.m.

Statements

VALERY LOSHCHININ (Russian Federation) said that the Conference had had a good and structured debate on the issue of a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT). The United States had submitted a proposal on an FMCT. He hoped that the debate would allow a better understanding of the problems that were impeding the Conference from advancing its work. The next thematic debate of the Conference would deal with the prevention of an arms race in outer space. Four working papers had been submitted by the delegations of China and Russia to be circulated as official documents. The last one had been devoted to measures of transparency and confidence building within the context of the prevention of an armed race in outer space.

DIEGO BELEVAN (Peru) said that the international system was still in a transitional phase and that had particular repercussions for weapons of mass destruction, which were a particular challenge to peace as well as being a destabilizing factor. One of the most relevant actions would be the prompt start to negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT). In that connection the structured debate on issues relating to an FMCT last week were of particular importance. It helped to clarify positions and perceptions. He wanted to underscore the relevance of the statement made by Mr. Rademaker of the United States, as well as the submission of a draft treaty and the respective mandate for an ad hoc committee to negotiate such an instrument. Peru felt that the package of four core issues had seemed to cause an impasse in the Conference; given the situation, all members should reconsider the approach under consideration.

Mr. Belevan underscored that, while he appreciated the United States initiative on the issue, any international instrument must of necessity have a verification instrument. Stockpiles of fissile material should also be dealt with within the context of the negotiations. It was inconceivable that they would not treat this issue to avoid the possibility of diverting nuclear fissile material in the future.

RAFAEL QUINTERO CUBIDES (Colombia) said Colombia still favoured the start of negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. The future treaty should be an integral instrument of nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation. It should be based on three pillars: it should be non-discriminatory; effectively monitored; and should guarantee the use of nuclear power for peaceful purposes. If the proposal of the United States was accompanied by a willingness to discuss the issues of prevention of an arms race in outer space and negative security assurances, a decisive step would have been made to overcome the stalemate in the Conference.

PAUL MEYER (Canada) noted the utility of the way last week’s discussions on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) had been structured. The week went just about as well as they could have hoped. Of course, they should not minimize the differences that remained. There were contrasting perspectives on what an FMCT should cover, and even on how members should refer to such a treaty. The question of verification had also been identified as an area in which members did not enjoy a consensus approach. But despite all the differences of opinion that had been expressed, members seemed to agree that all were susceptible to finding their resolution in the course of negotiations. Once they got down to negotiating an FMCT, last week’s discussions would provide a solid base to build on. The question was how to get from where they were today to where they wanted to go tomorrow. It was long past time the Conference woke up and got back to productive negotiations. Last week’s activity offered a glimmer of hope that the Conference might be back on the right track.

MARKUS REITERER (Austria), speaking on behalf of the European Union and the acceding countries Bulgaria and Romania, called again for the immediate commencement of negotiations as well as an early conclusion of a non-discriminatory, universally applicable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, without pre-conditions, and bearing in mind the special coordinator’s report and the mandate for an ad hoc committee contained therein. Pending entry into force of a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT), the European Union called on all States to declare and uphold a moratorium on the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices and welcomed the action of those four States that had decreed such moratoria.

The European Union welcomed the rich discussions that had taken place last week on an FMCT, the large participation by Member States in the deliberations, and the fact that no objection was raised to the principle of negotiating an FMCT. The European Union noted that the FMCT-mandate proposed by the United States was broadly in line with the Union’s position. The European Union warmly welcomed the decision of the Conference to invite the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to participate in their deliberations and looked forward to profit from the profound expertise the IAEA possessed in the area.

CHENG JINGYE (China) said the Conference’s debate last week on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty had been useful and he hoped that it would contribute to the rapid adoption of a programme of work of the Conference. China and the Russian Federation had already submitted three working papers on the prohibition of the production of fissile materials for the purpose of nuclear weapons. A fourth working paper had also been submitted on prevention of an arms race in outer space and they had asked that it be circulated as an official document. The fourth paper focused on transparency and capacity building with regard to the peaceful use of outer space. The text would provide material for the delegations and would contribute to a constructive dialogue on the issue.

YOSHIKI MINE (Japan) said that, first, he would like to express his appreciation for the excellent handling of last week’s structured, focused discussions on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. So far, it had been one of the prominent achievements of the P6 initiative. Last week’s session had seen many valuable proposals put forward, in particular the United States proposal on the draft treaty for a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT). Although the draft treaty needed to be examined in detail in each capital, he welcomed the proposal on the draft treaty and mandate and nomination of a new ambassador to the Conference, Christina Rocca, as a positive step forward for the United States. He also noted that Mr. Rademaker had suggested that the United States was open to discussions on other traditional items, namely, nuclear disarmament, prevention of an arms race in outer space and negative security assurances, while negotiations took place on an FMCT, and he called on other States to demonstrate flexibility to allow the immediate commencement of negotiations on an FMCT.

JURG STREULI (Switzerland) said last week’s debate in the Conference on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) had been constructive. During the debate, Switzerland had distributed a working paper on the verification regime. An ad hoc committee should be set up to start the negotiations on an FMCT. Switzerland welcomed the initiatives of the United States presented on 18 May on the issue. Although the proposal on the treaty presented by the United States still had to be considered by Member States’ capitals, the proposal on the mandate was essential because of its openness concerning the consensus of the mandate. What remained was a little creativeness in order to agree on a programme of work for the Conference.

MOHAMMED LOULICHKI (Morocco) said that, at a time when the Presidency of the session was about to end, he expressed the appreciation of Morocco for the very rational way in which the President had led their discussions, in particular on a Fissile Material Treaty (FMT). The draft text on an FMT presented by the United States would be carefully studied by the competent Moroccan authorities. Morocco noted that the fact that the United States had taken that initiative and that they had expressed their willingness to negotiation a treaty was in itself a constructive sign. The Conference was in need of that kind of initiative to break the stalemate that had persisted in it for nine years. Morocco was sure that very many positive initiatives would follow the United States one that would help them in achieving all the objectives for which the Conference was established.

DORU-ROMALUS COSTEA, (Romania), Outgoing President of the Conference, speaking at the end of Romania’s Presidency, said that the 2006 session of the Conference would be remembered as the 2006 Presidents (P6) year, and the Romanian Presidency would be associated with the structured debate on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. Making a focused assessment of last week’s meetings, he said that due to the frequency of the meetings, he thought the Conference had come closer to the normal rhythm of work such a body should have. Due to the structure and nature of the debates the Conference had turned to the normal mixture of political and technical components that it needed in conducting its activities. He also said that due to the participation of experts, as well as owing to several working papers that were introduced as documents of the body, the Conference had acknowledged the high level of expertise that deliberations and decisions needed to rely on.

While going ahead according to the P6 timetable, he though it was worth building on the momentum the Conference had reached. Eleven more years should not be wasted until the Conference revisited a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. Important ideas and proposal were launched last week. The first reactions to them should be further elaborated. That exercise was not an aim in itself, but rather a way to find starting points for the Conference’s ultimate common goal: the re-launching of the substantive activity of the Conference. The delegates were encouraged by the consensus-building messages, according to which the FMCT negotiations should constitute a priority of the Conference, while recalling that priorities were not mutually exclusive. He urged delegations to continue to be engaged in debates and to work together on solving the pending issues before the Conference, FMCT being widely recognized as one of them.

For use of the information media; not an official record

DC06028E