CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT CONSIDERS DRAFT PROGRAMME OF WORK

The Conference on Disarmament today heard a statement from its President outlining the schedule for the week’s work and presenting a draft programme of work, to be considered for adoption on Thursday, 29 January.

President of the Conference on Disarmament, Jorge Lomonaco of Mexico, incited delegates to be creative and constructive in overcoming artificial limitations that had been building for more than a decade; to distinguish between rules, traditions and mythology, and to create the incentives for the much needed political will that was essential for the Conference to fulfil its mandate and contribute to the construction of a safer world. The President presented a draft programme of work which would allow the mandate of the Conference to be fulfilled but which would require compromise from everyone. Everybody was aware of the urgent need to start negotiations, he said, recalling Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s message that the Conference would be judged on one sole criterion: its ability to conclude disarmament treaties.

In a discussion about the draft programme of work, delegations said it presented positive points as it addressed in a comprehensive manner all of the points on the agenda and was based on the principle of balanced negotiation. The challenges to peace and security were greater than ever and disarmament tools, particularly nuclear, were of vital importance, noted delegates.

Speaking in the discussion on the draft programme of work were Algeria, India, Belarus, the Czech Republic, Switzerland, Brazil, United Kingdom, Chile, Sweden, Russia, Republic of Korea, and Pakistan.

The following delegations took the floor to deliver general statements: Hungary, Slovakia, Colombia, New Zealand, Ecuador, Australia, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Switzerland and Turkey.

The Conference approved requests by Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cyprus, Ghana and Kuwait to participate in the 2015 session of the Conference as an Observer States.

The next public meeting of the Conference on Disarmament will be held at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 28 January, in which the Member States will have an opportunity to exchange views on issues of concern, including on the Humanitarian Impact of nuclear weapon, a nuclear weapons convention and the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty.

Discussion on the draft Programme of Work

JORGE LOMONACO, (Mexico), President of the Conference on Disarmament, proposed the Conference meet in public today and Thursday, 29 January to focus on the elaboration and eventual adoption of a Programme of Work. It would meet on Wednesday 28 January to discuss specific topics. The President also proposed the Conference on Disarmament adopt the requests for observer status submitted by Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cyprus, Ghana and Kuwait.

Mexico would make every effort to see the adoption of a programme of work for the 2015 session of the Conference on Disarmament, said the President, and to do so convened, during the inter-sessional period, meetings with members, observers and civil society. The President invited delegates to be creative, constructive and assist him to overcome artificial limitations that had been building for more than a decade. He asked delegates to distinguish between rules, traditions and mythology, and to create incentives for the much needed political will that was essential for the Conference to fulfil its mandate and contribute to a safer world. States had expressed their desire to resume substantive work, and the majority felt recent efforts were not enough for the Conference was to preserve its nature and relevance, he said. Everybody was aware of the urgent need to start negotiations. He recalled Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s message that the effectiveness of the Conference would be judged on one sole criterion: the ability to conclude disarmament treaties.

The President presented a draft programme of work based on the agenda adopted by the Conference on 20 January 2015. Compromise was required in order to commence negotiations, he said, and although not all negotiations became agreement that should not prevent negotiations from taking place. The President requested the delegates to carefully consider the proposed draft with an open mind, given most Member States believed that the Conference on Disarmament must contribute to the peace and security of the twenty-first century by fulfilling its mandate.

Algeria thanked the President for his efforts and said that the draft programme of work presented positive points because it addressed in a comprehensive manner all of the points on the agenda of the Conference and was based on the principle of balanced negotiation. Concerning the order of items for negotiation, Algeria suggested that nuclear disarmament be the priority.

India welcomed the focus on early agreement of the programme of work for the 2015 session and expressed the appreciation for the emphasis placed on conducting active consultations, which was consistent with the rules of procedure, the nature of this forum, and the best possible use of time for the Conference to meet the expectations of the international community, namely the negotiations and conclusions of instruments of disarmament agenda. India welcomed the reference in the draft to starting substantive work on nuclear disarmament, which was a priority area for India. The rule of consensus was of primordial importance for India and it should apply in all phases of negotiations, including in the establishment of subsidiary bodies, or the Presidential reports presented to the Conference.

Belarus thanked the President for the very ambitious document and said that the draft did not contradict the existing positions of Belarus for the forthcoming session. Belarus would not impede consensus on the adoption of the document as an official programme of work.

Czech Republic, speaking on behalf of the informal group of Observer States to the Conference on Disarmament, said that the issue of expansion should be included in the debate and take place in a formal setting. The draft document did not contain a specific heading of expansion, and the issue needed further consideration.

JORGE LOMONACO, President of the Conference on Disarmament, said that the issue of expansion was not part of the agenda and programme of work, but Mexico would fully support any attempt to expand the membership of the Conference on Disarmament, which should be part of a separate action by the Conference.

Switzerland thanked the President for his determination and the manner in which he had mobilized the Conference at the start of the session. The establishment of the programme of work was a collective responsibility and in his 2015 message to the Conference on Disarmament, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon highlighted two fundamental points, which were worth remembering. The challenges to peace and security were greater than ever and the disarmament tools, particularly nuclear, were of vital importance. If the Conference really failed to tackle that issue, other bodies would do so in its place. The Conference shouldered a global responsibility and was duty-bound to show pragmatism to allow it to finally start producing responses to the challenges, by adopting the programme of work. Progress in one area of negotiations should not be linked to progress on other topics, said Switzerland, and noted the need to return to the atmosphere of work that prevailed before 1996.

Brazil said that the draft was a substantial contribution to breaking the long-lasting situation in the Conference; it was a comprehensive effort and issues were taken on as a whole; countries were here to negotiate and not necessarily to draft an instrument. Brazil was in favour of considering within the programme of work the question of expansion of participation in the Conference on Disarmament.

JORGE LOMONACO, President of the Conference on Disarmament, said that the issue of the approach to the programme of work would also be subject to negotiations. As for expansion and the relationship with other United Nations bodies, the President said that the Conference could decide to add any other questions to its agenda.

United Kingdom said that the draft placed considerable responsibility on the succeeding Presidencies of the 2015 Session and asked whether it was a draft produced by the P6 (the 6 Presidents of the Annual Session).

JORGE LOMONACO, President of the Conference on Disarmament, said that the draft programme was not a P6 but a Mexican draft, which was in accordance with the Rules of Procedure.

Chile supported the Czech Republic with regard to enlarging the membership of the Conference, and thanked the President for the early submission of the draft programme of work.

Sweden commended the President and the delegation of Mexico for their hard work and the draft programme of work presented today, and said that it was a bold and ambitious proposal which was well crafted and with attention to detail. Sweden was in favour of all efforts that could lead to resumption of substantive work in the Conference, i.e. negotiations and hoped that the document would enable that.

Russia welcomed the approach to move to the negotiation of those items of the agenda which were ready for negotiation and that all items of the agenda were put on the same footing, which would allow negotiations to resume. Russia wondered whether delegations were ready to conduct parallel negotiations on all agenda items, because that would require significant resources.

JORGE LOMONACO, President of the Conference on Disarmament, said Mexico had studied previous working methods of the Conference, and that predecessors had negotiated both in parallel and subsequent, which was the aim of the draft.

Republic of Korea said that there were items on which the Conference could already start the negotiations, and that the focus on those items that were ripe for negotiations such as FMCT would be more practical.

JORGE LOMONACO, President of the Conference on Disarmament, said that in the old days, there were no priorities, and since the Conference had decided to work on four priority areas it had been unable to adopt programme of work. All issues on the agenda were ripe for negotiation, while their successful conclusion was a different matter. He asked delegates to consider the maturity not at beginning but at the end of negotiation.

Pakistan asked how the President wished to proceed with the adoption of the draft programme of work.

JORGE LOMONACO, President of the Conference on Disarmament, said the rite of passage of the adoption of programme of work used to take minutes, not years, and would happen during the morning of the first session of the year; it used to be a simple action. The delegates should keep that in mind and recall the mandate of the Conference and the need for efficiency. This draft programme of work was not perfect, he said, and it could never be perfect because it was impossible to make everyone happy. The question to be posed to capitals was whether they could live with it: that was the question that invited flexibility. The President said he allowed delegates 48 hours to seek instructions from their capitals and to hold consultations. The draft programme of work would be put up for adoption on Thursday, 29 January and the President hoped it would find consensus.


Statements

Hungary said another year had passed during which in spite of repeated calls from the United Nations Secretary-General, the United Nations First Committee and the international community at large, including the civil society, the Conference on Disarmament had failed to fulfil its mandated role in the disarmament machinery. The situation was becoming absurd and “something had to give” if the body was to remain relevant. Hungary was ready for active engagement, no matter what format, with the aim of agreeing on and adopting a programme of work. It stressed that the commitment of Observer States deserved to be recognized through the enlargement of the Conference.

Slovakia said effective multilateralism was crucial in the field of disarmament and that the Conference was a key element of the global disarmament machinery. A continued impasse of the body was unacceptable and unsustainable; the Conference should resume its work without any further delay. Slovakia highlighted positive contributions from last year’s Working Group which allowed for some discussions on core issues. Later in the year, Slovakia would scrutinize the Non-Proliferation Treaty to strengthen it. There was a need to focus on a framework of mutually reinforcing, legally binding instruments to advance a world free of nuclear weapons. The total elimination of nuclear arsenals could not be achieved without proper engagement of nuclear weapon states.

Colombia expressed the support for the methodology of the President in reactivating the work of the Conference on Disarmament.

New Zealand said that the strength of the Conference continued to lie in its collegial atmosphere and extraordinary expertise but they had sadly served very little useful purpose. The Conference persistently failed to do what it had been set up to do: negotiate disarmament treaties. New Zealand said a regime for the abolition of nuclear weapons remained of fundamental significance to most, if not all, the non-nuclear States who had signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and the unfinished business of abolishing nuclear weapons was the essential item. The Conference suffered from a significant handicap in terms of its legitimacy of process, which was a reflection of its limited membership, which excluded significant number of countries which wanted to take part in its deliberations, and its antiquated rules of procedure with regard to civil society participation.

Ecuador said that the Conference must start negotiating disarmament treaties and hoped that 2015 would be more active in the substantive areas. Ecuador profoundly respected international law as a basis for peaceful coexistence and robustly supported international humanitarian law and international human rights law. The profound conviction to the benefits of the rights to peace moved Ecuador’s participation in all relevant fora and to shoulder its responsibilities seriously. Ecuador called on all Member States to break the deadlock and resume the negotiations.

Australia said the impasse in the Conference was a consequence of political realities outside the chamber but that should not be an excuse for inaction. There was no doubt that the future of the Conference on Disarmament hung in the balance and there was a need to think hard about what could be done to mobilize it constructively over the next year or so. Members should continue to press for a meaningful programme of work, advance in a meaningful way the core agenda items and prepare the Conference for negotiations. One priority agenda item that offered possibility for progress was the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty, which was the next logical step in the nuclear disarmament process. Fissile material was the raw material for nuclear weapons and stopping its production was fundamental to nuclear arms control.

Democratic People's Republic of Korea welcomed all constructive proposals that contributed to the work of the Conference on Disarmament. The Conference had the primary responsibility to negotiate and conclude multilateral treaties that removed threat of nuclear weapons. Multilateralism held the key to collective security and the Conference played a central role in this regard. It was regrettable that no tangible result had been achieved in almost twenty years, not only because of lack of political will but because of double-standards in the world’s fora. Nuclear disarmament was the prime issue to consider in the area of disarmament, said Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and expressed hope that the Conference would adopt a balanced programme of work with taking into account security of States and in accordance with the rules of procedure, particularly the rule of consensus.

Switzerland highlighted the importance of the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) and welcomed the appointment of its new Director who had to lead it through the challenges of institutional transition and dwindling resources . Switzerland called on other countries to make voluntary contribution to the fund to stabilize and institutionalize UNIDIR.

Turkey said that the mains substantive issue was to put the Conference back to work and welcome the President’s position on the implementation of Article 28 of the Rules of Procedure.

Closing Remarks

JORGE LOMONACO, (Mexico), President of the Conference on Disarmament, announced that on Wednesday 28 January the Conference would hold a plenary session in which Member States will have an opportunity to exchange views on issues of concern, including the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons and on the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty.


For use of the information media; not an official record

DC15/003E