CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT HEARS STATEMENTS FROM SYRIA, IRELAND, REPUBLIC OF KOREA AND THE NETHERLANDS

The Conference on Disarmament this morning heard statements from Syria, the Republic of Korea and the Netherlands on Presidential Draft Decision (CD/1840) for getting the body back to substantive work. It also heard an address by Ireland on the recently concluded Dublin Diplomatic Conference, at which the text of a Convention on Cluster Munitions was adopted.

Syria believed that Presidential Draft Decision (CD/1840) contained a number of positive points – including that it kept the door open for other proposals and that it affirmed implicitly the importance of the four core issues and the linkage between them – but felt there were still some points that should be improved, such as the balance in the mandates for the four items covered, and the fact that the document did not mention stocks and verification within the context of a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT).

The Republic of Korea believed that, although some delegations might be still unsatisfied over some issues related with the FMCT, they could discuss those issues in a serious manner once they embarked on the negotiations. The fact that there were no preconditions in document CD/1840 meant that the scope of negotiations and discussion was broad enough to leave the door open for delegations to pursue their priorities and raise any issues deemed important to them during the process.

The Netherlands said that if tomorrow they agreed on the programme of work before them, it would mean nothing more nor less than that they were allowing themselves some thorough reflection on how they would proceed in these negotiations and these three substantial discussions in practice.

Ireland briefed members on the outcome of the Dublin Diplomatic Conference on Cluster Munitions, held from 19 to 30 May 2008, which had adopted by consensus the text of the Convention on Cluster Munitions. The Convention contained a comprehensive prohibition on the use, development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention and transfer of cluster munitions, as well as on assisting encouraging or inducing anyone to engage in behaviour prohibited to a State party under the Convention.

At the end of the meeting, Ambassador John Duncan of the United Kingdom, President of the Conference, observed that this morning had been an illustration of the problems that this body faced: they had heard calls for further changes to proposals put forward; they had heard calls for movement; they had also heard a report on action that had led to a new international norm in under 18 months, which flowed directly from dissatisfaction at the existing international architecture for arms control and disarmament's ability to grapple with these issues.

According to draft decision CD/1840 by the 2008 Presidents of the Conference, the Conference would appoint Chile as Coordinator to preside over substantive discussions on nuclear disarmament and the prevention of nuclear war; appoint Japan as Coordinator to preside over negotiations, without any preconditions, on a non-discriminatory and multilateral treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, thus providing all delegations with the opportunity to actively pursue their respective positions and priorities, and to submit proposals on any issue they deem relevant in the course of negotiations; appoint Canada as Coordinator to preside over substantive discussions dealing with issues related to prevention of an arms race in outer space; appoint Senegal as Coordinator to preside over substantive discussions dealing with appropriate arrangements to assure non-nuclear weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons; and would request those Coordinators to present a report to the Conference on the progress of work before the conclusion of the session. The Conference would also decide to request the Coordinators for the agenda items previously appointed by the 2008 Presidents (i.e., new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems for such weapons, radiological weapons; comprehensive programme of disarmament; and transparency in armament) to continue their work during the current session.

Draft Decision CD/1840 builds on an earlier proposal submitted by the 2007 P-6 (CD/2007/L.1), and its related documents CRP.5 and CRP.6, combining those three texts in a single document.

The next plenary meeting of the Conference on Disarmament is scheduled to take place at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 10 June.

Statements

FAYSAL KHABBAZ HAMOUI (Syria) congratulated the six Presidents of 2008 for their excellent work in the preparation of Presidential Draft Declaration (CD/1840), and encouraged them to continue their consistent efforts to bring all the Members of the Conference on Disarmament on board, to find a satisfactory way out of the stalemate in the Conference. Syria believed the preamble to the document was a good one and contained a number of positive points: it kept the door open for other proposals; it did not preclude the outcome of discussions on any item; it affirmed that the work would be carried out under the Rules of Procedure of the Conference; it affirmed that the work would be without prejudice to future work and negotiations on its agenda items; and it affirmed implicitly, in its operative paragraph, the importance of the four core issues and the linkage between them.

On the other hand, there were still some points that should be improved in order to reach a satisfactory, balanced and acceptable agreement. On the balance in the mandates, the document insisted on having negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) and discussions on items 1 (on nuclear disarmament), 3 (on prevention of an arms race in outer space) and 4 (on negative security assurances). Also, while talking about FMCT, the document did not mention important issues, such as stocks and verification. Talking about discussion of items 1, 3 and 4, the document did not stipulate anything about the aim or the outcome of those discussions. Syria appealed to Member States to show an acceptable level of flexibility and political will. Syria believed that they would have to continue to build on this progress in order to achieve a satisfactory programme of work. Syria stood ready, as always, to participate in the discussions on the document and would do its best to reach an agreement on it.

JAMES O'SHEA (Ireland) said the Dublin Diplomatic Conference on Cluster Munitions, held from 19 to 30 May 2008, had been the culmination of a series of meetings that had begun in Oslo in February 2007. Some 132 States had attended the Diplomatic Conference, and a large number of international and intergovernmental organizations participated as observers. Following two weeks of intense work, on 30 May, the Diplomatic Conference had adopted by consensus the text of the Convention on Cluster Munitions. The Convention contained a comprehensive prohibition on the use, development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention and transfer of cluster munitions, as well as on assisting encouraging or inducing anyone to engage in behaviour prohibited to a State party under the Convention; that a State party's stockpiles of cluster munitions had to be destroyed within eight years of the Convention's entry into force for that State party; and that cluster munition remnants in areas under the jurisdiction or control of the State party were to be cleared and destroyed within 10 years of the Convention's entry into force for that State party, or within 10 years of the end of active hostilities in cases where such remnants arose after the Convention's entry into force. Any State party that had used such cluster munitions prior to the Convention's entry into force was strongly encouraged to provide assistance to facilitate the marking, clearance and destruction of such remnants. The Convention also contained comprehensive provisions on assistance by States parties to cluster munition victims in areas under their jurisdiction or control, as well as detailed provisions regarding international cooperation and assistance to States parties in the fulfilment of their obligations under the Convention.

In a video message to the Conference, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had recognized the Convention had " brought about a new international standard that will enhance the protection of civilians, strengthen human rights and improve prospects for development". It was Ireland's hope that the Convention would attract wide adherence and would have a significant impact, both in terms of addressing the risks to civilians posed by existing cluster munitions remnants and of preventing future use. At the same time, Ireland remained fully committed to pursuing efforts within the framework of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, including next month’s meeting of the Group of Governmental Experts.

CHANG DONG-HEE (Republic of Korea) said the Presidential Draft Declaration (CD/1840), distributed on 13 March, contained well-crafted elements, from which they could move forward to fulfil the mandate of the Conference on Disarmament as the sole multilateral disarmament negotiation forum. Thanks to the efforts of the six Presidents, they had a solid basis to begin negotiation on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) and to commence substantive discussions on three other core agenda items. Although a few problems had been pointed out by some delegations with regard to the process and the format of the document as well as its contents, the Republic of Korea believed they could be overcome. What counted most was their genuine will to cope with the challenges before them.

The Republic of Korea believed that document CD/1840 rightly addressed the concerns of a few delegations who had maintained reservations on the CD/2007/L.1 proposal. It had improved on L.1, importantly leaving open the possibility of future negotiations on the three other core issues. Although some delegations might be still unsatisfied over some issues related with the FMCT, the Republic of Korea believed they could discuss those issues in a serious manner once they embarked on the negotiations. The fact that there were no preconditions in document CD/1840 meant that the scope of negotiations and discussion was broad enough to leave the door open for delegations to pursue their priorities and raise any issues deemed important to them during the process. Echoing the calls of many inside and outside of this Chamber, the Republic of Korea called once again for members to reflect deeply on the historic opportunity of revitalizing the Conference and multilateral disarmament machinery and to take real action.

JOHANNES LANDMAN (Netherlands) said that when he had taken the floor for the first time in the Council Chamber in August 2006, he had asked for more light. But, amazingly, indeed something new had happened. New approaches were found allowing them, so it appeared, to make progress – a new élan in which every Member State seemed to engage in. And, at the end of that whole process, in which remarkable diplomatic perseverance and ingenuity had been spent, they had come very close to an agreement on a programme of work, dealing more or less simultaneously with four core issues clearly felt to be at the heart of the international disarmament agenda.

However, what did they see now? Momentum was slipping at an incredible pace and they were in danger today of remaining empty handed, as if nothing had happened over the past two and a half years. Twelve years of ineffectiveness; 12 years of quarrelling over a programme of work that was in essence not more than a focused agenda. What would it mean if tomorrow they agreed to the programme of work that they all knew by heart by now? It would mean nothing more nor less than that they were allowing themselves some thorough reflection on how they would proceed in these negotiations and these three substantial discussions in practice. If this step were not taken in the forthcoming days, it would not be taken at all. If that decision were not taken, Mr. Landman said he would not speak again in this forum this year. It would be of no use.

JOHN DUNCAN (United Kingdom), the President of the Conference, said this morning had been an illustration of the problems that this body faced: they had heard calls for further change to some of the proposals put forward; they had heard calls for movement; they had also heard a report on action that had led to a new international norm in under 18 months, which flowed directly from dissatisfaction at the existing international architecture for arms control and disarmament's ability to grapple with these issues. That was a helpful reflection that should occupy all their minds. For its part, the United Kingdom presidency would continue bilateral consultations to see what could be achieved in the coming weeks.


For use of the information media; not an official record

DC08032E