CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT CONTINUES DEBATE ON THE PREVENTION OF AN ARMS RACE IN OUTER SPACE

The Conference on Disarmament today continued its thematic debate on the issue of the prevention of an arms race in outer space.

Japan said that the various issues surrounding the debate needed to be better organized and the various terms better defined. While Conference members had heard a considerable amount on militarization, weaponization, or the distinction between those two concepts, it was unclear what was meant. Algeria said the Conference should look to the many working papers on the prevention of an arms race in outer space that had been presented to the Conference, which represented a wealth of information, as a basis for the Conference’s future discussions.

Canada introduced the summary report of the Conference on Building the Architecture for Sustainable Space Security, held in March 2006, which could provide valuable insights. Kazakhstan highlighted several recent proposals as worth pursuing, including a plan to elaborate “Rules of the Road” in outer space, increased dialogue between the Conference and other international bodies, including the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, the International Telecommunication Union, and the Secretariat of the Hague Code of Conduct, and the Chinese proposal to put on hold for a while a verification aspect of a future treaty.

Japan, reflecting on the inherent dual nature of satellites, agreed that the scope of a possible legal instrument should only deal with weaponization.

The next plenary of the Conference will be held on Tuesday, 20 June at 10 a.m., when high-level representatives, including Ministers, will make statements on behalf of their countries, after which members will begin a thematic debate on new weapons of mass destruction, including new systems of such weapons and radiological weapons.

The President of the Conference, Ambassador Valery Loshchinin of Russia, said United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan would address the Conference on Wednesday, 21 June at 11 a.m.

Statements

YOSHIKI MINE (Japan) said that for the international community the smooth maintenance of outer space for peaceful uses had become a matter of urgency. However, due to the rapid advancement in the use of satellites, there was a possibility that their efforts could lag behind the growing number of problems surrounding outer space. The salient feature running through the recent discussions in the Conference, Japan felt, was that the weaponization or militarization of outer space had been discussed in a disordered manner. Issues such as space debris, “rules of the road” for satellite operations, information sharing on the state of satellite operations, and cyber attacks on space-related data, among others, should, in future discussions, be arranged in accordance with their importance, urgency and current state of international efforts.

Conference members had heard a considerable amount on militarization, weaponization or the distinction between those two concepts, but it was unclear what was meant. Some mention had been made of “new concept weapons”. Without specific explanations, however, Japan could not help but say that those were part of science fiction. Secondly, outer space technology was often dual use and the formulation of regulations would be inherently complex. For example, the Global Position System could be used to guide a warship to its target, but in Tokyo that same system could also guide a taxi driver to his destination. Reflecting on the inherent dual nature of satellites, it had been indicated that the scope of a possible legal instrument should only deal with weaponization. Thirdly, unlike the Sea-bed Treaty and the Antarctic Treaty, which some delegations had made reference to in regard to a treaty on the prevention of an arms race in outer space, an outer space treaty needed a different type of expertise. Therefore on concepts such as weaponization or militarization, it was crucial to build up Conference deliberations by arranging and acquiring a clear understanding of the complex and sophisticated technical problems. Members should avoid discussions that would seem to prejudge the final outcome based on those abstract debates. With regard to confidence-building measures, Japan participated in exchanges of opinion, mutual visits and prior notification measures. Nonetheless, discussions on the utility of confidence-building measures based on the state of each measure were still a necessity.

HAMZA KHELIF (Algeria) said that Algeria associated itself with the statement made by the Group of 21 on 8 June. Outer space was the heritage of mankind and its use had to be reserved exclusively for peaceful purposes for the benefit of all mankind. The peaceful use of outer space had contributed to progress in remote sensing, navigation, weather forecasting, and warning against pollution, in addition to other peaceful uses. The list was long. The militarization of outer space was of great concern to Algeria, which felt that it threatened international peace and security and the strategic balance. Studies had shown that outer space could become the theatre for future international confrontations by the emplacement of weapons on celestial bodies or on the Moon. The development of anti-ballistic missile systems enhanced Algeria’s concern, and the international community had to address that issue.

The current instruments regulating the control of the celestial bodies or the Moon were inadequate, Algeria said, as they did not prohibit the placement of all types of weapons there. That made the drafting of a new document on the subject imperative. Despite the repeated requests of the General Assembly, however, the Conference on Disarmament had remained totally paralysed on this issue. A number of proposals had been put forward to study the prevention of an arms race in outer space, including the paper of Canada in 1999 (CD/1569), and the working paper presented by China, Russia, Viet Nam, Indonesia, Belarus, Zimbabwe and the Syrian Arab Republic (CD/1679), among others. Those papers represented a wealth of information on which to base the Conference’s discussions.


PAUL MEYER (Canada) recalling an earlier rich exchange on outer space security, which had taken place in the context of the Conference on Building the Architecture for Sustainable Space Security, jointly organized by the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, the Russian Federation, China, Canada and the Simons Foundation of Canada in March 2006, said that he was pleased to introduce the summary report of that Conference. It included information on a rules-based approach to space security, opening up communication channels between the Conference on Disarmament and the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, as well as the First and Fourth Committees of the United Nations General Assembly, and raising awareness about the challenges in the field, among others. One notable feature of that Conference had been the greater participation of representatives from developing countries, as well as members of civil society and other United Nations bodies. He felt that that was evidence of a quickening pace of activities in this area and that it augured well for the deliberations in the Conference.

KAIRAT ABUSSEITOV (Kazakhstan) said that Kazakhstan was directly associated with space activities – it was the home of the Baykonur space launch site and it was in the process of developing its own space programme in collaboration with its Russian counterparts. In that connection, the launch of the KazSat-1 satellite schedule for 18 June would mark a special date in Kazakhstan’s history. The potential placement of weapons in outer space would affect the common interest of all mankind to explore outer space for peaceful purposes. Following discussions in the Conference it could be stated that no county had so far objected to that idea. Nevertheless, as discussions evolved it was clear that Conference members had to work intensively to come up with an agreement on the most pressing issues. A clear definition of weapons in outer space was the most problematic issue. Legal experts would face a tremendous challenge in drawing a distinction between offensive weapons and legitimate needs.

The proposal to elaborate “Rules of the Road” in outer space to prevent incidents related to space objects deserved further in-depth study, and Kazakhstan supported the idea of dialogue with other international bodies, including the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, the International Telecommunication Union, and the Secretariat of the Hague Code of Conduct. The Chinese proposal to put on hold for a while a verification aspect of a future treaty was a pragmatic example on how to deal with the issue of the prevention of an arms race in outer space. Members should start with agreeable options and gradually generate consensus on more complicated issues. The same principle could be applied to transparency and confidence-building measures. Such measures had their own distinct value while a treaty had yet to be drafted. A good precedent was the moratorium by the Russian Federation on the placement of weapons in outer space, which had later been joined by the members of the Collective Security Treaty. Another welcome step had been the recent statements by the United Kingdom and the United States that they did not have plans to build and place weapons in orbit. Transparency and confidence-building measures could not be used as a substitute for a treaty, but they could play an instrumental role in promoting its objectives.

For use of the information media; not an official record

DC06032E