CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT HEARS STATEMENTS BY ITS PRESIDENT, PAKISTAN AND SWITZERLAND

The Conference on Disarmament this morning heard statements by Ambassador Mukhtar Tileuberdi of Kazakhstan, the incoming President of the Conference, Pakistan and Switzerland.

Ambassador Tileuberdi said it was an honour for him and for Kazakhstan to preside the Conference on Disarmament for the next four weeks. He thanked his predecessors for the important efforts that they had each invested in carrying forward the work of the Conference. The re-establishment of the informal working group and the beginning of informal meetings under the schedule of activities were the laudable results of these efforts. During his tenure, he would do all that he could to consolidate these two processes and also explore additional avenues that would enhance the work of the Conference.

The President of the Conference said as the work of the informal working group and that of the schedule of activities was underway, they needed to figure out what their normal plenary meetings would be focusing on. He had thus initiated a series of negotiations with Member States and the P-6 to determine what the Conference should do in the plenary meetings. There seemed to be merit for the Conference to explore in-depth the series of proposals that the Acting Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament, Michael Møller, delivered in his statement. The P-6 would discuss these proposals further, so that they could have a consolidated approach. It was also his intention to devote the next plenary meeting on Tuesday, 3 June to the proposals made by the Acting Secretary-General, and he invited all delegations to exchange views and comments on these proposals.

Pakistan said it agreed with the conclusions of the Group of Governmental Experts on Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures in Outer Space that there were gaps in the existing legal regime on outer space and reiterated its call for starting negotiations on prevention of an arms race in outer space in the Conference. It was Pakistan’s view that the introduction of lethal autonomous weapons systems would be illegal, unethical, inhumane and unaccountable as well as destabilizing for international peace and security. Nuclear disarmament was the highest priority of the international community and the raison d’être of the Conference. Pakistan hoped that negotiations on a nuclear disarmament convention would be conducted in the Conference on a priority basis, with the participation of all stakeholders.

Switzerland, reacting to suggestions made by the Acting Secretary-General of the Conference, Michael Møller, said the flexibility provided by negotiating framework conventions to which substantive protocols may be subsequently added was particularly interesting, providing for setting the common objective that they would like to reach and then to move towards achieving it in a flexible and gradual manner. There was nothing in the statutes of the Conference that prevented it from negotiating politically binding instruments, and not only legally binding agreements. Switzerland was convinced that the deadlock of the Conference was primarily due to a lack of political will, and that addressing its working methods could not on its own put an end to the paralysis of the Conference.


The next public plenary of the Conference will be held at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 3 June.

Statements

Ambassador MUKHTAR TILEUBERDI of Kazakhstan, Incoming President of the Conference on Disarmament, said it was an honour for him and for Kazakhstan to preside the Conference on Disarmament for the next four weeks. He thanked his predecessors for the important efforts that they had each invested in carrying forward the work of the Conference. The re-establishment of the informal working group and the beginning of informal meetings under the schedule of activities were the laudable results of these efforts. During his tenure, he would do all that he could to consolidate these two processes and also explore additional avenues that would enhance the work of the Conference. Kazakhstan considered the Conference on Disarmament as the single standing multilateral forum in the area of disarmament, non-proliferation and arms control. From the extensive agenda of the Conference, the key issues for Kazakhstan were universal nuclear disarmament through a legally binding non-discriminatory and universal instrument; drafting and signing a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons; prevention of an arms race in outer space; and negative security assurances for non-nuclear weapon States. All these key issues were inter-related and ignoring one issue would cause difficulty in solving the others.

Kazakhstan supported the establishment and welcomed the activities of the Group of Governmental Experts on deliberating FMCT recommendations and welcomed the report delivered last week on the Group’s work. Further discussions must be intensified on the draft treaty on the prevention of an arms race in outer space. Kazakhstan believed that safety and compliance with the principle of peaceful activities in outer space should continue to be one of the central issues of the Conference on Disarmament. Kazakhstan had also supported the establishment of the Open-Ended Working Group to develop proposals for the promotion of multilateral negotiations on nuclear disarmament with the understanding that this Group would present documents to the Conference. Kazakhstan welcomed the report delivered last week on the work of this group. Setting up with neighbour countries a zone free of nuclear weapons in Central Asia, Kazakhstan warmly welcomed the signing of the Protocol to the Central Asian Nuclear Weapon Free Zone Treaty in New York on May 6. It signified a major development in the global non-proliferation efforts to provide security assurances by nuclear powers to countries without nuclear weapons. Kazakhstan had led the negotiations with the nuclear five on behalf of its Central Asian neighbours and the signing of the protocol was seen as a significant achievement of multilateral diplomacy. Kazakhstan was a consistent advocate for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.

Mr. Tileuberdi said the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons remained a cornerstone of international security. It was vital to overcome stagnation in the global disarmament process and it was extremely important to come to the 2015 Review Conference with tangible results. Kazakhstan also believed that the entry into force of the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty was one of the necessary and important conditions toward nuclear disarmament. The moratorium declared by some States possessing nuclear weapons to carry out tests was a positive step, but was not an alternative to a legally binding document. Kazakhstan had developed the ATOM project: abolish testing our mission, which aimed at informing world public opinion of well-documented catastrophic humanitarian effects of nuclear weapon tests. Kazakhstan had already made contributions to building the three main pillars of the United Nations relating to international peace and security. Kazakhstan was uniquely positioned for a non-permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council for 2017-2018. Only by building mutual trust between members of the international community and mobilizing political will would it be possible not only to find peace to the common understanding of security issues, but also to crystalize new ways to minimize risks and threats created by the presence of weapons of mass destruction or the desire to acquire them.

The work of the informal working group and that of the schedule of activities was underway. They needed to figure out what their normal plenary meetings would be focusing on. He had thus initiated a series of negotiations with Member States and the P-6 to determine what the Conference should do in the plenary meetings. There seemed to be merit for the Conference to explore in-depth the series of proposals that the Acting Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament, Michael Møller, delivered in his statement. The P-6 would discuss these proposals further, so that they could have a consolidated approach. It was also his intention to devote the next plenary meeting to the proposals made by the Acting Secretary-General, and he invited all delegations to exchange views and comments on these proposals.

PAKISTAN said that Pakistan agreed with the conclusions of the Group of Governmental Experts on Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures in Outer Space that there were gaps in the existing legal regime on outer space and the utility of transparency and confidence-building measures notwithstanding, they could not serve as a substitute to legally binding arrangements. The same held true for non-legally binding codes of conduct. It was imperative to ensure that the use of outer space was limited to peaceful purposes and it remained the common heritage of humanity. Pakistan reiterated its call for starting negotiations on prevention of an arms race in outer space in the Conference.

As regards the Convention on Conventional Weapons’ Informal Meeting of Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems, it was Pakistan’s view that the introduction of lethal autonomous weapons systems would be illegal, unethical, inhumane and unaccountable as well as destabilizing for international peace and security. Therefore, their further development and use must be pre-emptively banned. Pending the negotiations and conclusions of a legally binding Protocol, the States currently developing such weapons should place an immediate moratorium on their production and use.

Concerning the Open-Ended Working Group on taking forward multilateral disarmament negotiations, Pakistan noted that the Working Group’s report was a compilation of the different views expressed by the participants during its deliberations; however, it failed to reach a common approach for taking forward multilateral disarmament negotiations, and it was also hamstrung by the absence of the major stakeholders. Nuclear disarmament was the highest priority of the international community and the raison d’être of the Conference. Pakistan hoped that negotiations on a nuclear disarmament convention would be conducted in the Conference on a priority basis, with the participation of all stakeholders.

SWITZERLAND said last week, the Acting Secretary-General of the Conference, Michael Møller, made a number of suggestions to the Conference. Switzerland thanked him for his important contribution and wished to briefly react to the different proposals he had submitted for the consideration of the Conference. Mr. Moller suggested that the Conference consider the option of negotiating framework conventions to which substantive protocols may be subsequently added. The flexibility provided by such an approach was particularly interesting, providing for setting the common objective that they would like to reach and then to move towards achieving it in a flexible and gradual manner. This approach seemed of particular relevance tin the context of the informal discussions held last week on nuclear disarmament. The approach suggested by the Acting Secretary-General of the Conference could represent a balance between the necessity to set a clear aim and the need for flexibility in the realization of this objective. It would represent a middle way between an approach leaning on a comprehensive instrument and one leaning on building blocks. The Conference would have a key role to play in implementing such an approach, notably by negotiating the framework convention that would establish the global objective.

Switzerland noted that Mr. Møller also invited the Conference to explore the possibility of initiating negotiations on politically binding instruments, and not only on legally binding agreements. There was nothing in the statutes of the Conference that prevented it from negotiating other types of instruments and launching negotiations on instruments of a different nature. Furthering this in the framework of the informal working group would make particular sense, notably in conjunction with the proposal for the Conference to negotiate on a topic other than one of the four core issues on the agenda.

Mr. Møller had made reference to the proposal of the outgoing Secretary-General of the Conference, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, to establish a subsidiary body on the working methods of the Conference and to use the time slots of the plenary sessions to address this topic. Switzerland had already stressed its conviction that the deadlock of the Conference was primarily due to a lack of political will, and that addressing its working methods could not on its own put an end to the paralysis of the Conference. Yet it was equally clear that the Conference should be able to rely on processes that would render consensus-building easier, and not more complicated.


Finally, Mr. Møller also invited the Conference to reassess and strengthen its interaction with civil society. The current approach regarding the Conference’s dialogue with civil society, which limited this exchange to a single session where NGOs had the possibility to address the Conference, was overly conservative. It would be in the interest of the Conference to associate civil society with other phases of its work, especially when it held informal discussions of an exploratory nature.


For use of the information media; not an official record

DC14/019E