CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT HEARS STATEMENTS FROM THE UNITED STATES AND MOROCCO
The Conference on Disarmament today held a plenary meeting in which it heard statements by the United States and Morocco. The President of the Conference also took stock of the work carried out so far.
Ambassador Marius Grinius of Canada, the President of the Conference , said that he would continue consultations as they still did not have any substantive breakthrough. Concerning document CD1864, there were still mutually exclusive positions that had been taken. The document still had the most support, but it did not have 100 per cent support, based on the consensus rule. Informally, he had suggested a simplified programme of work that did not have any mandates, just said that here were the agenda items with focus on the four core issues. Again, there was certainly no 100 per cent enthusiasm for this approach.
The United States commended the organized side events concerning the prevention of an arms race in outer space and definitions on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. These were not intended to compete with the Conference but to enrich and compliment their work in the Conference. The United States looked forward to continued side events.
Morocco said it shared the feelings of regret and frustration that the Conference was not able to benefit from the global context in favour of disarmament. They needed to work collectively to restore the role of the Conference on Disarmament as the world’s sole body for multilateral negotiations on multilateral disarmament instruments. The deadlock in the Conference for the past 13 years was not preordained and they must get around it as it helped nuclear proliferation and stopped the world from concluding a convention to ban nuclear weapons.
The next plenary of the Conference will be held at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 17 February.
Statements
MARIUS GRINIUS (Canada), President of the Conference on Disarmament, taking stock of the work of the Conference towards the end of Canada’s presidency, said he would continue consultations as they still did not have any substantive breakthrough. He had consulted with all Member States of the Conference bilaterally and in regional group meetings and follow-up meetings. He had reported back to the Conference on 21 January that in the context of document CD1864, there were still mutually exclusive positions that had been taken. The document still had the most support, but it did not have 100 per cent support, based on the consensus rule. Informally, he had suggested a simplified programme of work that did not have any mandates, just said that here were the agenda items with focus on the four core issues. Again, it was essentially building on their indicative timetable which they had been insidiously following, but there was certainly no 100 per cent enthusiasm for this approach, which had worked in the mid 1990s. During the last two weeks of substantive discussions on the four core issues, he had heard many assertions indicating willingness to negotiate or discuss certain items or even to negotiate on all four items. But again, there had not been a sense of 100 per cent agreement on any particular way forward.
Ambassador Grinius said that they had used the plenary time of the last two weeks to have substantive worthwhile exchanges. He had really appreciated all colleagues who had been willing to follow suggestions in terms of their indicative timetable to have a balanced approach focused on the four core issues. On a personal note, he would suggest that these exchanges were substantive and that further such exchanges would be worthwhile, particularly if they wanted to have an interactive dialogue where members could actually ask questions on each others’ statements. That would be a worthwhile endeavour.
The President said he has seen the engagement of civil society with greater openness and transparency. He had raised this issue with all Member States. Canada, not the presidency, was planning to hold a civil society side event on 3 March and more information on this would be available later. The issue was still the question of how the Conference should engage civil society. There were precedents. The rules of procedure talked about a meeting after there was a programme of work. Before the adoption of document CD1864 there had been an opportunity to exchange views with civil society.
In the context of the membership of the Conference, paragraph two talked about the membership of the Conference to be reviewed at regular interventions. He had sought the views of Member States on where they stood on expansion of the membership of the Conference and had briefed Observer States. He would like to underline that not all Observer States wished to be members of the Conference, but certainly a group of them did. At this point they did not have the kind of consensus needed to move forward on this issue. It was within the rules of procedure and had to be looked at. This had been his stocktaking that colleagues might wish to think about and comment on. He would give his final comments at the end of Canada’s presidency of the Conference on Thursday, 17 February.
LAURA KENNEDY (United States) commended the President of the Conference for continuing consultations on the programme of work. When she had addressed the Conference on the issue of the prevention of an arms race in outer space, she had commended the organizers of the side event on this agenda item. Today she wished to commend the organizers of the side event to discuss definitions on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. She had appreciated the valuable contribution from the International Atomic Energy Agency which had provided a summary on fuel cycles. As a diplomat, she found these presentations much welcomed. She was very pleased to be joined by five experts from her capital and other colleagues had brought experts along, and she hoped that they could use the enhanced expertise in their midst and that all Conference Member States would take full advantage of this. This was not intended to compete with the Conference but to enrich and compliment their work in the Conference. As the first discussions revealed the issue of definitions alone was complex and the views of members on it were varied. She appreciated this and looked forward to continued side events.
OMAR HILALE (Morocco) said Morocco supported the President’s practice of engaging in thematic discussions and this testified to Canada’s longstanding tradition of engagement on disarmament questions. The document and mandate presented by Ambassador Shannon on the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty in 1995 continued to serve as a reference to discussions in the Conference on a treaty on fissile material.
Years were coming and going and nothing seemed to change in the Conference. Morocco shared the feelings of regret and frustration that the Conference was not able to benefit from the global context in favour of disarmament. The international environment had never before been as favourable to regional and multilateral efforts in support of disarmament. The hopes raised by the adoption in 2009 of document CD1864 and the recommendations of the high-level meeting on 24 September 2010 were already fading away. The recent ratification of the START treaty and the good intentions expressed at the high-level meeting as well as the alarm sounded by the Secretary-General to the Conference in his statement on 26 January should provide impetus for the work of the Conference. Morocco subscribed to the Secretary-General’s analysis that the continued deadlock in the Conference had unfortunate implications for the world and presented a risk of terrorists acquiring nuclear weapons. This growing feeling of insecurity put the question of disarmament at the top of the agenda of the United Nations. They needed to work collectively to restore the role of the Conference on Disarmament as the world’s sole body for multilateral negotiations on multilateral disarmament instruments. The deadlock in the Conference for the past 13 years was not preordained and they must get around this deadlock that helped nuclear proliferation and stopped the world from concluding a convention to ban nuclear weapons.
Morocco believed that it was essential to work with an integrated global approach on all aspects of disarmament. There were no magical solutions to solve this paralysis, but there was an urgent need for political will. Morocco joined the Member States of the Non-Aligned Movement in calling for the convocation of the Fourth Special Session of the General Assembly on Disarmament to discuss practical solutions to end the systemic problems of the Conference. In the meantime, Morocco called on all Member States to set aside their differences and concentrate on the essential to achieve the aim which they all wanted, a world free of nuclear weapons. They would need a balanced and integrated approach to reach this, including a treaty on fissile material which was non-discriminatory, verifiable and dealt with stockpiles; in the context of the principle of non use of nuclear weapons first, unilateral declarations were inadequate and it was essential to reach a binding treaty on negative security assurances; establishing nuclear weapon free zones, especially in the Middle East, was an essential factor in the process of non-proliferation; and prevention of an arms race in outer space was another important step towards nuclear disarmament.
Morocco was actively participating in international efforts to promote disarmament and to fight nuclear terrorism. In this context, Morocco hosted on 2 to 4 February this year a seminar organized by UNIDIR and the European Union entitled “supporting negotiations for a treaty on the trade in arms by regional discussions and sharing expertise”. The seminar had discussed the parameters and the application of a future treaty on trade in arms. It was a general conviction that a large spectrum of conventional arms, including light arms and their munitions, should be regulated by such a future instrument.
In conclusion, Mr. Hilale said that to support the international community’s efforts to fight nuclear terrorism, Morocco was organizing, in collaboration with the United Sates and Spain, an international exercise simulating the response to a malevolent act using radioactive materials from 22 to 25 March 2011 in Rabat.
For use of information media; not an official record
DC11/009E