Conference on Disarmament hears statements on extension of New Start Treaty and discusses its revised draft programme of work for 2021

The Conference on Disarmament this morning heard statements by the United States, the Russian Federation and more than 20 countries on the extension of the New START Treaty, and then discussed the Presidency’s revised draft package on the 2021 programme of work of the Conference.

The United States said that the United States and the Russian Federation had extended the New START Treaty, which was manifestly in the security interest of the United States, its allies, and the global community. Its verification regime allowed both parties to monitor each other’s compliance, giving them confidence that their respective forces remained within the Treaty’s limits, and provided them with insight in each other’s nuclear forces and operations.

The Russian Federation said the renewal for a five-year period of the New START Treaty of 2010 had seen a balanced approach marked by understanding by the leadership of the two nuclear powers on the importance of responsibility in maintaining strategic stability, preserving peace, and strengthening international security and safety. The Russian Federation and the United States had halted the degradation of the arms control and disarmament treaties system.

The following delegations took the floor to support the renewal of the New START Treaty: Kazakhstan, Spain, Japan, Hungary, Canada, Portugal on behalf of the European Union, United Kingdom, Turkey, Argentina, Israel, Australia, Belarus, Austria, Cuba, Germany, Netherlands, China, South Africa, France, Switzerland, and the Republic of Korea.

Speaking on the revised draft package on the programme of work were the United States, Kazakhstan, Spain, Japan, Hungary, Syria, Canada, United Kingdom, Turkey, Argentina, Australia, Belarus, Austria, Cuba, Germany, Netherlands, China, Iran, Ukraine, South Africa, Pakistan, France, Switzerland and the Republic of Korea.

Speaking in right of reply were the United States and the Russian Federation.

The Conference on Disarmament will next meet at 3 p.m. this afternoon to resume its discussion on the revised draft package.

Statements on the New START Treaty

United States said that the United States and the Russian Federation had extended the New START Treaty, which was manifestly in the security interest of the United States, its allies, and the global community. Its verification regime allowed both parties to monitor each other’s compliance, giving them confidence that their respective forces remained within the Treaty’s limits, and provided them with insight in each other’s nuclear forces and operations.  The United States was in compliance of its New START obligations and had consistently assessed that Russia was too since 2011.  The United States would engage with Russia on strategic stability discussions to explore a range of arms control issues, including limits on all Russian and American nuclear weapons and other emerging strategic stability issues. The United States looked forward to a furthering of this track record, and encouraged the Conference to take to heart the lessons learned through the implementation of the Treaty as it considered compliance and verification issues.  The United States would also seek to engage China on nuclear arms control and hoped that it would take part in that effort, and called on those present to encourage China to do so.

Russian Federation said the renewal for a five-year period of the New START Treaty of 2010 had seen a balanced approach marked by understanding by the leadership of the two nuclear powers on the importance of responsibility in maintaining strategic stability, preserving peace, and strengthening international security and safety.  Within this agreement were unique mechanisms for removing mutual concerns and verifying the implementation of obligations. The most important thing was that it established reasonable parity in strategic offensive weapons without undermining the military capability and security of both countries. For the past three years the Russian Federation had been pragmatic and optimistic, and reviewed positively the decision by the United States administration to respond to the Russian initiative to renew the treaty without any additional conditions. With this measure, the Russian Federation and the United States had halted the degradation of the arms control and disarmament treaties system. This renewal met the required levels of trust, predictability and transparency to foster a constructive bilateral dialogue, as well as a new “security equation” based on a balanced consideration of both countries’ interests in the area of security.  This contributed to maintaining strategic stability.

The following delegations took the floor to support the renewal of the New START Treaty: Kazakhstan, Spain, Japan, Hungary, Canada, Portugal on behalf of the European Union, United Kingdom, Turkey, Argentina, Israel, Australia, Belarus, Austria, Cuba, Germany, the Netherlands, China, South Africa, France, Switzerland, and the Republic of Korea.

Several speakers welcomed the five-year extension, which they viewed as an inflection point, which halted the degradation of arms control treaties.  They expressed hope that it would lead to broader arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation efforts involving more countries and covering a broader range of weapons.  The renewal of the New START Treaty was a demonstration of the political will that would be required for the Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

Speaking on behalf of the European Union, Portugal recalled the obligations for all nuclear weapon States arising from article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and said that the two nuclear weapon States with the largest arsenals held a special responsibility in the area of nuclear disarmament and arms control. 

China said that the United States and the Russian Federation, as the two largest nuclear powers in the world, had the responsibility to significantly reduce their nuclear stockpiles. 

Iran said this renewal merely maintained the status quo and did not compensate the damage inflicted by the United States on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

Statements on the Revised Package

Ambassador MARC PECSTEEN of Belgium, President of the Conference on Disarmament, introducing the revised package proposal, said that in this revised version, the P6 sought to strike a delicate balance between the various comments received. He said those present were not writing a treaty — not yet.  Rather, they were trying to allow the Conference to start its work, opening the door to the meeting room, so to speak.  It was time the Conference did just that.

United States said it supported the programme of work and associated package and hoped that it could be adopted quickly. There was no time to lose in getting to substantive work.

Kazakhstan said all United Nations Member States should have the right to participate in the Conference. Given the mandate of the Conference, those present should demonstrate openness to those who wished to follow the proceedings of the forum.

Spain said putting red lines and vetoes did not serve any purpose.  The Conference should resume its negotiation mandate.

Japan expressed support for the revised package, pledged to be flexible, and urged other Member States to also be flexible.

Hungary welcomed the Presidency’s great efforts.

Syria said connecting the programme of work with procedural matters was an objectionable approach. The procedural matters were not an obstacle to any progress.  It was unnecessary for the Conference to move towards a deliberative mandate. Syria did not support the Presidential declaration on procedural aspects.

Canada said there was a delicate balance that was sought in the revised document, and the P6 believed that it had been achieved.

United Kingdom said while the package was not perfect, it should not be an impediment to resuming the Conference’s substantive work.

Turkey said the establishment of subsidiary bodies may pave the way to resuming substantive work.  While expressing support for the package, it said the enlargement of the Conference’s membership did not fall under the mandate of facilitators.

Argentina said the Conference required political will and flexibility more than ever.

Australia said the package represented a good way forward for the Conference and was pleased to support it.  Australia hoped other delegations would be flexible and show a spirit of compromise.

Belarus expressed support for the President’s efforts and hoped that the Conference would soon come to an agreement.

Austria welcomed the Presidency’s revised text.  While stronger language could have been included in paragraph 3, Austria fully supported the new proposal.

Cuba said it was vital to have a broad and comprehensive programme of work.  Cuba recommended clarifying the modalities for formal approval by the Conference of the outcome of the work of subsidiary bodies, and raised other issues related, in particular, to funding the work of the Conference in 2021.

Germany has said it would not oppose the project presented by the Belgian Presidency. 

Netherlands recalled that they had long supported a more pragmatic approach to the work of the Conference. 

China said the Presidency’s efforts built on the work of previous years. China stood ready to listen to all parties to work towards a programme of work that was acceptable to all.

Iran urged those present to avoid any attempts that would turn the Conference away from its core mandate or turn it into a deliberative body.   Iran did not subscribe to adopting the draft document as a package.  The Conference should adopt a programme of work, not a package.

Ukraine, while remaining flexible, believed all relevant issues should be reflected in the proposed package.  However, it would not stand in the way of consensus.

South Africa , reiterating that any attempt to dilute the negotiation mandate of the Conference was of great concern, asked whether the subsidiary bodies would only meet in informal settings.

Pakistan , echoing Cuba and others, said operative paragraph 7 needed further clarity, and sought further information on the way in which the Presidency planned on pursuing its work moving forward.

France said it would have preferred more ambitious language for subsidiary body 2, but realized the draft package struck a difficult balance, considering the rules of procedure.  It was therefore ready to support the Presidency.

Switzerland expressed appreciation for the general pragmatic approach of the draft package and said it could support it as it stood.

Republic of Korea assured the Presidency and the P6 of its flexibility and continued cooperation to reach consensus and begin discussions on substantive issues.

DC21.008E