CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT HEARS ADDRESSES BY FOREIGN MINISTER OF BANGLADESH AND UNITED NATIONS HIGH REPRESENTATIVE FOR DISARMAMENT

The Conference on Disarmament this morning heard addresses by Dipu Moni, the Foreign Minister of Bangladesh, and Sergio de Queiroz Duarte, the United Nations High Representative for Disarmament. It also adopted its agenda for 2010 by consensus and heard statements from a dozen countries.

The Bangladeshi Foreign Minister said that hopes were running high that the Conference on Disarmament, after years of deadlock, could move ahead with its mandated task. Last year, the adoption of a programme of work had been welcomed by many, including Bangladesh. The inability of the Conference to begin negotiations subsequently had not helped the image of the Conference. Disarmament was too noble an objective to forego; they had to press on with energy and perseverance. She was happy that today the Conference would take the all-important first step of adopting the agenda, so that it could then work towards a programme of work. As the first President of the Conference for the 2010 session, Bangladesh would continue to make efforts to give a good start to its proceedings that would build the foundation for achieving tangible progress in the areas of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.

For Bangladesh, only a total elimination of nuclear weapons could provide the guarantee against the use or threat of use of such weapons. As they approached this year's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference, Bangladesh looked for an outcome that would adequately address the three pillars of the Treaty: nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear disarmament and the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Bangladesh was a strong believer in the peaceful use of nuclear energy, in particular to boost underdeveloped economies. Turning to the particular issues being addressed by the Conference, Ms. Moni stressed that the Conference should undertake renewed and vigorous efforts to develop a legally binding framework for providing negative security assurances to non-nuclear weapon States. Bangladesh also supported the conclusion of a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Such a treaty had to be non-discriminatory and effectively verifiable. Negotiations should extend to stocks, without which any such treaty might not be comprehensive. Bangladesh would like to see progress in the area of prevention of an arms race in outer space as well. Finally, noting that global military spending had gone on a dangerous upward curve – reaching $1.46 trillion in 2009 at a time when the global financial and economic crisis was threatening to roll back development gains, Ms. Moni urged all countries to take concrete disarmament steps. Resources needed to be freed to address pressing development challenges.

The United Nations High Representative for Disarmament observed that the Conference’s uniqueness rested in its responsibility to negotiate legal norms that were fully multilateral in scope. The time had surely come for the Conference to overcome past obstacles and fulfil that solemn mandate. In the First Committee of the General Assembly last October, speaker after speaker had taken note of the auspicious developments that had occurred in 2009, especially in the field of nuclear disarmament. The Russian Federation and the United States would soon conclude a bilateral strategic arms reduction treaty and, last September, the Security Council had held its first-ever summit to address nuclear disarmament issues. In addition, intergovernmental initiatives such as the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Nuclear Disarmament, and civil society projects like Global Zero, were making their own contributions to that groundswell of international interest in moving the disarmament agenda forward.

The Conference continued to have strong support throughout the United Nations, the High Representative noted, including from the Security Council and the General Assembly, which had adopted resolutions last year supporting the work of the Conference on a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. In addition, the Secretary-General supported the immediate start of negotiations in the Conference on such a treaty in his five-point Action Plan of 8 December 2009. It was Mr. Duarte’s conviction that this year the Conference would further intensify its work, agree on a programme of work promptly and launch the long-awaited negotiations.

Following the addresses by the Foreign Minister and the High Representative, the Conference adopted its 2010 agenda by consensus. The President of the Conference, speaking in connection with the adoption of the agenda, noted that there had been discussions since 19 January on the inclusion of two additional items. During the course of those discussions, it was recognized that, in accordance with the rules of procedure, every delegation had the right to table proposals and raise any subject relevant to the work of the Conference in the plenary. Many said that last year’s programme of work, CD/1864, represented the most appropriate basis for moving forward. Other speakers stressed they needed a new decision that would make them almost forget CD/1864; one that would make it possible for them to “get off the ground”.

The Conference’s agenda remains unchanged from previous years, and contains eight items: cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament; prevention of nuclear war, including all related matters; prevention of an arms race in outer space; effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons; new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons; radiological weapons; comprehensive programme of disarmament; transparency in armaments; and consideration and adoption of the annual report and any other report, as appropriate, to the General Assembly of the United Nations.

Speaking in general statements were the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Japan, the United States, Libya, Algeria, Turkey, South Africa, Switzerland, Australia, Pakistan, Tunisia and Brazil. Many delegations welcomed the adoption of the agenda and noted the imperative to begin substantive work in 2010 at the earliest possible date.

Also at the meeting, Albania, Armenia, Denmark, Nepal, Saudi Arabia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia were invited to join the work of the Conference as observers for its 2010 session.

The next public plenary of the Conference will be held on Tuesday, 2 February, at 10 a.m.


Statements

DIPU MONI, Foreign Minister of Bangladesh, said hopes were running high that the Conference on Disarmament, after years of deadlock, could move ahead with its mandated task. The political will was there to advance their work on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. Globally, there were a number of positive developments in the area of disarmament which made them optimistic that they could indeed made progress towards a nuclear-weapon-free world. Last year, the adoption of a programme of work had been welcomed by many, including Bangladesh. The inability of the Conference to begin negotiations subsequently had not helped its image. The journey towards a nuclear-weapon-free world was an uphill task; unanticipated setbacks might reverse their momentum. But disarmament was too noble an objective to forego. They had to press on with energy and perseverance. They could not give up hope; that would be like giving up hope in the future of humankind. In that connection, she was happy that today the Conference would take the all-important first step of adopting the agenda, so that it could then work towards a programme of work.

Bangladesh steadfastly supported a multilateral approach to non-proliferation and disarmament, Ms. Moni stressed. As the first President of the Conference for the 2010 session, Bangladesh would continue to make efforts to give a good start to its proceedings that would build the foundation for achieving tangible progress in the areas of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. Bangladesh attached great importance to general and complete disarmament. Its abiding commitment to international peace and security was reflected, inter alia, through its strong involvement in United Nations peacekeeping operations around the world. For Bangladesh, only a total elimination of nuclear weapons could provide the guarantee against the use or threat of use of such weapons. As they approached this year's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, Bangladesh looked for an outcome that would adequately address the three pillars of the Treaty: nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear disarmament and the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Bangladesh was a strong believer in the peaceful use of nuclear energy, in particular to boost underdeveloped economies. They acknowledged, at the same time, that peaceful pursuits would have to be undertaken in accordance with international safeguards.

Turning to the particular issues being addressed by the Conference, Ms. Moni stressed that non-nuclear States parties to the NPT had the right to receive unconditional assurances from nuclear weapon States that the latter would not use or threaten to use such weapons against them. The Conference should undertake renewed and vigorous efforts to develop a legally binding framework for providing such assurances to non-nuclear weapon States. Bangladesh also supported the conclusion of a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Such a treaty had to be non-discriminatory and effectively verifiable. Negotiations should extend to stocks, without which any such treaty might not be comprehensive. Bangladesh would like to see progress in the area of prevention of an arms race in outer space as well. Since the Cold War had ended, people had talked about a peace dividend. That had proved illusive. Since the mid-1990s, the global military spending had gone on a dangerous upward curve reaching $1.46 trillion in 2009. At a time when the global financial and economic crisis was threatening to roll back development gains and making attainment of the Millennium Development Goals extremely difficult, such mindless expenditure had to be avoided. Bangladesh therefore urged all countries, especially major armament producing and procuring countries, to take concrete disarmament steps. Resources needed to be freed to address pressing development challenges.

SERGIO DE QUEIROZ DUARTE, United Nations High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, recalled that, in his video message to the Conference last week, the Secretary-General had expressed his belief and hope – based on real opportunities for concrete action – that 2010 could be a historic year for progress in disarmament and non-proliferation. Those were sentiments that were shared throughout the international community. There was also widespread agreement that that progress should be registered in the form of legal commitments – binding obligations that advanced the rule of law in disarmament. He had long appreciated the vital need for one central arena for States to come together to negotiate legally binding norms for disarmament. Today, the Conference had that unique role to play in the United Nations disarmament machinery. Its uniqueness rested in its responsibility to negotiate legal norms that were fully multilateral in scope, and the time had surely come for the Conference to overcome past obstacles and fulfil that solemn mandate.

In the First Committee of the General Assembly last October, speaker after speaker had taken note of the auspicious developments that had occurred in 2009, especially in the field of nuclear disarmament. The Russian Federation and the United States would soon conclude a bilateral strategic arms reduction treaty, and last September, the United Nations Security Council had held its first-ever summit to address nuclear disarmament issues. In addition, intergovernmental initiatives such as the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Nuclear Disarmament, and civil society projects like Global Zero, were making their own contributions to that groundswell of international interest in moving the disarmament agenda forward. Through the relentless efforts and commitment of members, the Conference on Disarmament had made its own contribution to that momentum last year by adopting a substantive programme of work after a decade-long deadlock over procedural issues. Though the Conference was later unable to build on that progress, Mr. Duarte was confident that its resolve to start negotiations this year remained firm. Needless to say, the Conference continued to have strong support throughout the United Nations, including from the Security Council and the General Assembly, which had adopted resolutions last year supporting the work of the Conference on a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. In particular, the Secretary-General's supported the immediate start of negotiations in the Conference on such a treaty, a goal included in his five-point Action Plan of 8 December 2009. It was the High Representative’s conviction that this year the Conference would further intensify its work, agree on a programme of work promptly and launch the long-awaited negotiations.

RI JANG-GON (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) welcomed the visit today of the Foreign Minister of Bangladesh. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea would cooperate fully with the Conference President and remain constructively engaged in the work of the Conference.

The agenda of the 2010 Session of the Conference on Disarmament was then adopted by consensus.

ABDUL HANNAN (Bangladesh), President of the Conference, speaking in connection with the adoption of the agenda, noted that if there was a consensus in the Conference to deal with any issues, they could be dealt with within the agenda. The Conference would also take into consideration rules 27 and 30 of the rules of procedure of the Conference. He was very happy that the Conference had adopted the agenda. As everyone was aware, there had been discussions since 19 January on the inclusion of two additional items in the agenda. During the course of those discussions, it was recognized that, in accordance with the rules of procedure, every delegation had the right to table proposals and raise any subject relevant to the work of the Conference in the plenary.

AKIO SUDA (Japan) said that the adoption of the programme of work, contained in document CD/1864, on 29 May 2009 had been cause for understandable celebration in the Conference. Yet, they had failed to implement that first programme of work, the first in 11 years. Substantive discussion on agenda items and, most importantly, negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) had not commenced due to some concerns of a Member State. That was a perplexing situation to explain given that all the members of the Conference had agreed to CD/1864 and that the procedural documents, which had been the focus of the impasse, had simply pertained to the implementation of that decision. With the increasing momentum towards nuclear disarmament, the world had high expectations of the Conference's activities. It stood to reason that the Conference had to quickly explore a way to start substantive work. For that, Japan believed in two things: first, they should fully respect and recognize the significant progress they had made last year; second, they should reflect on what had been the shortcomings of last year, which seemed to be the lack of multidimensional dialogue between States, not only in Geneva but in capitals and other places.

Highlighting points that Japan believed important for a productive 2010 Conference session, Mr. Suda said, first, that the new programme of work should be based on the achievement of last year (i.e., CD/1864); second, the Six Presidents (P-6) needed to conduct broad, inclusive and transparent consultations to reach consensus on a programme of work while taking into due consideration the concerns and interests of Member States; third, all Member States should manifest the utmost level of flexibility to achieve consensus on a programme of work and related decisions; fourth, it should be remembered that security concerns and other interests of any Member States could be raised, discussed and negotiated once substantive work had started; and fifth, with the NPT Review Conference in May, all delegations should maintain intensive communication with their capitals on the situation in the Conference and encourage them to dialogue with each other. Through all those efforts, they had to make another historic move forward this year in a consultative and constructive manner.

GAROLD LARSON (United States) reaffirmed the full support of the United States for the Conference on Disarmament and urged the Conference to carry out promptly its role as the premier multilateral disarmament negotiating forum. In September 2009, speaking as President of the United Nations Security Council, President Obama had underscored that, "in January, we will call upon countries to begin negotiations on a treaty to end the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons". In that regard, the United States reiterated its support for the programme of work adopted by the Conference in 2009, contained in document CD/1864, which stipulated the negotiation of a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, and which the international community had welcomed by consensus through General Assembly resolution 64/64 (2009). It was imperative that they worked together here at the Conference and began substantive work in 2010 at the earliest possible date. The Conference should build directly on the foundation created by the programme of work that they had adopted by consensus in 2009. This was perhaps the most pivotal time in the Conference on Disarmament for many years. They now had the opportunity – indeed, the responsibility – to demonstrate that the adoption of a programme of work last year had not been an anomaly and that the Conference on Disarmament remained an effective instrument for maintaining peace and security.

IBRAHIM ALDREDI (Libya) said Libya wished to establish peace and security throughout the world. That could not be achieved through the building of arsenals of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction, which spread fear, terror and destruction. Resources spent on those arms by powerful countries would better be spent on development and achieving the Millennium Development Goals. To that end, Libya had made the bold step on 19 December 2003 to relinquish all claim to manufacture such weapons and it was hoped that other countries would follow suit. At the African level, and through the African Union, which Libya had the honour to lead, no effort had been spared to settle disputes peacefully. Libya was also a party to the major international disarmament instruments and had acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to the Biological Weapons Convention and to the Chemical Weapons Convention. In that vein, it was hoped that the Conference would expand its membership, which would allow the more than 24 countries, including Libya, to make a contribution to ensuring the success of international treaties regarding nuclear disarmament. Those countries had been on a waiting list for a long time. They could enrich the discussion in the Conference, with the ultimate goal of achieving international peace and security, inter alia, by ensuring the peaceful uses of outer space.

IDRISS JAZAÏRY (Algeria) welcomed the statements by Bangladesh's Foreign Minister and by the United Nations High Representative for Disarmament, which had been encouraging. There had been hopes raised by international developments in the disarmament sphere, including regarding disarmament talks between the United States and the Russian Federation, and the Conference on Disarmament should not dash those hopes. Promoting objectives relating to disarmament required the cooperation of all. It was the beauty of the Conference that there were no large or small States. They all had to work together. Strong commitment to disarmament would make it possible for them to lay a solid foundation for the international community in the area of disarmament. The agreement of May 2009 on a programme of work for the Conference was but one example of that. The year 2010 could be a historical moment, as the Secretary-General had noted in his statement. Algeria was pleased to adopt the agenda of the Conference and underscored its gratitude to all those who had made it possible for them to achieve that. The agenda adopted was quite complete and flexible enough to allow them to raise all issues they might wish in regard to disarmament. The Conference should resume its premier role in the international sphere of disarmament.

Algeria suggested that negotiations be opened in the context of a new programme of work without further ado, and without any exclusions, keeping in mind that there were mechanisms in place to ensure that the security interests of all would be taken into account. Last year they had achieved consensus on a programme of work in CD/1864. This year, they needed a new decision that would make them almost forget CD/1864; one that would make it possible for them to get off the ground. Algeria had no intention of reproducing CD/1864 in 2010. They had achieved a balanced consensus in 2009, and using the same method they could do the same in 2010.

AHMET ÜZÜMCÜ (Turkey) noted the adoption of work programme CD/1864 had been a milestone; the culmination of efforts of several years, taking into account numerous proposals tabled since 1999. However, they had not been able to translate that decision into concrete action. Turkey wished to start substantive work immediately following the adoption of the work programme. The credibility of the Conference was at stake. Moreover, the resumption of substantive work in the Conference could provide positive impetus to the global disarmament and non-proliferation agenda. That included the NPT Review Conference, which was now only a few months ahead. Needless to say, commencement in the Conference of negotiations on an FMCT was among the 13 practical steps foreseen in 2000, along with the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. The Review Conference had to revitalize and indeed build on the conclusions of 1995 and 2000. Beginning negotiations on FMCT would not only be the accomplishment of an unfulfilled NPT task, but would also act as a building block for systematic and progressive efforts towards nuclear disarmament.

Finally, Turkey welcomed the adoption of the agenda today. It was comprehensive and flexible, enabling them to address all issues in the field of arms control and disarmament. Furthermore, the statement by the President assured the membership about the possibility of dealing with any other issues, once there was consensus. Their next step had to be to agree on a programme of work. That would allow them not only to commence negotiations on an FMCT, but also to materialize parallel advances on other agenda items.

MICHIEL COMBRINK (South Africa) said South Africa remained deeply committed to the achievement of a world free of nuclear weapons and to concrete nuclear disarmament measures. That commitment was informed by their belief that nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation were inextricably linked and that simultaneous progress on both fronts was required. It was therefore encouraging to hear pronouncements by a number of world leaders recommitting to the achievement of a better, more secure world free from the threat posed by nuclear weapons. For South Africa, 2010 represented a year of high expectations. In the disarmament arena, given the renewed commitment to nuclear disarmament, it was expected that the 2010 NPT Review Conference would give concrete expression and real content to the vision espoused by world leaders that had given hope for a new era of increased cooperation, peace and prosperity within a strengthened multilateral system. In the Conference on Disarmament, they should seize the moment and build upon what had been achieved last year.

South Africa welcomed the adoption of the agenda today and would like to see a programme of work adopted promptly to enable an early resumption of substantive work. It was South Africa’s expectation that this year’s programme of work would again allow for focused attention to the priorities that confronted them in a manner that would not prejudge or set conditions for their deliberations. It also believed that adequate guarantees existed to safeguard the security interests of all members of the Conference, while allowing them to address their collective security concerns. There was a necessity for progress to offset their inaction for many years. South Africa stood ready to work with all members to do that without further delay.

JÜRG LAUBER (Switzerland) said Switzerland was keen to make progress on all four core issues. Switzerland hoped that the Conference could build on its work last year, adopting a programme of work early in 2010 and having an early start to negotiations. Document CD/1864 represented the most appropriate basis for moving forward. It was the result of yearlong negotiations. The need for progress was urgent and a joint responsibility. Conference on Disarmament members indeed bore an enormous responsibility, as a great number of States were not members of the forum. In addition, civil society was not allowed to participate and play a constructive role in their deliberations, as they did in other multilateral processes. Their discussions could only benefit from a more direct engagement with civil society.

Switzerland had been particularly pleased that the recently published report of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament stressed the inherently inhumane nature of nuclear weapon States. Switzerland valued the systematic and pragmatic approach the Commission took and fully supported its ambitious short-, medium- and long-term goals, which should be seriously considered by all Conference and NPT delegations. Particularly welcome was the phased approach of “delegitimizing” nuclear weapons, reducing their role, and eventually outlawing them. All existing efforts in that direction had to be increased. A first logical step towards that goal would be to start negotiations on an FMCT. Such a treaty was an essential pillar to complement the existing nuclear treaty regime and build a bridge between NPT and non-NPT States. It was high time to ban the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons. In addition, they needed a step-by-step reduction of the fissile material available for nuclear weapons. Safeguarding such material was a key condition for subsequent cuts in nuclear arsenals. Other areas where Switzerland was keen to see progress were in negative security assurances and prevention of an arms race in outer space.

VALERIE GREY (Australia) noted that the disarmament agenda had become more active and more engaged. They had seen real, tangible commitments to disarmament. Australia welcomed the positive negotiations between Russia and the United States aimed at reducing nuclear arsenals. It also welcomed the success of the 2009 Conference in agreeing CD/1864 on a programme of work. That programme of work had been achieved through comprehensive, extensive consultations with all members. While not underestimating the challenges of translating abstract goals into practical steps, it was committed to the Conference on Disarmament as the right place to begin work to implement the practical steps towards nuclear disarmament. Australia’s priority in this year’s Conference would be to take the practical step forward, early in 2010, to agree a programme of work enabling negotiations towards an FMCT. Australia considered that CD/1864 remained a good basis for that next step. Negotiation of an FMCT was a key practical step that the Conference could take to address both nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation.

Ms. Grey also drew attention to the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament, established by the Prime Ministers of Australia and Japan, whose recently released report restated the case for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. The report put forward ambitious, pragmatic and compelling plans of action to achieve their goal of a nuclear-weapon-free world. Australia’s co-Chair of the Commission, former Foreign Minister Gareth Evans, would launch the Commission’s report in Geneva on 1 February. The Australian Government was giving its fullest attention to the reports recommendations.

ZAMIR AKRAM (Pakistan) welcomed a number of the observations made by the Foreign Minister of Bangladesh to the Conference today, including that an FMCT had to address the issue of existing stocks. On the adoption of the agenda, Pakistan thanked the Conference President for his manner in showing that everyone's concerns and points of view could be accommodated. Pakistan had sought to include two items in the agenda, namely, on a framework for regional arms control instruments and on missiles in all their aspects. As was pointed out, Pakistan had the right under the rules of procedure to take up those issues and Pakistan would do so at an appropriate time. However, Pakistan expressed regret at the tendency of some colleagues to rush to the media and to present Pakistan’s intention as being to create an obstacle to the work in the Conference. The issues that Pakistan sought to address were ones that affected Pakistan in its region, but when it had sought to address them in regional fora they had been told that they were international issues; then, when they had brought them up here, they were told it was a regional concern. Pakistan had not intended to block adoption of the agenda. In fact, Pakistan was very keen to move beyond the agenda and towards the adoption of a programme of work.

MOHAMED BEL KEFI (Tunisia) took note of the statement of Libya, which had requested admission as a member of the Conference. The positive work over the past few years, above all the adoption of CD/1864, were elements that would encourage them to forge ahead and allow them to envisage the granting of requests of candidate members who wished to join in the constructive work of the Conference to begin on negotiations towards a world where peace and security would prevail.

LUIZ FILIPE DE MACEDO SOARES (Brazil) thanked the President for his efforts in overcoming the somewhat unexpected difficulties that they had had over the adoption of the agenda. He had succeeded in one week to conduct consultations and come to a decision. That had helped to put them on a good footing for the taking up of their substantive work. Over the years, delegations had often referred to different interests of their Governments that could not be strictly included in the agenda, and those interests had been taken into consideration. They could now proceed to promptly adopt a programme of work, under the President's guidance, hopefully quickly as they had done with the agenda.


For use of the information media; not an official record

DC10/003E