CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT HEARS STATEMENTS FROM UNDER-SECRETARY FOR MULITLATERAL AFFAIRS OF ECUADOR AND FRANCE

The Conference on Disarmament this morning heard statements from the Under-Secretary for Multilateral Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Integration of Ecuador, Emilio Izquierdo Miño, describing international efforts to take up the challenge of combating conventional weapons proliferation and the continuing efforts needed to control weapons of mass destruction, and from France, focusing on ways to combat illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, in particular an initiative targeting air transport of such weapons.

Mr. Izquierdo said that Ecuador had “a clean record” and noted the many proofs that Ecuador was living up to its commitment to disarmament and non-proliferation. In the context of the Ottawa Convention, Ecuador had destroyed 253,273 anti-personnel mines in its existing arsenals and a further 4,621 anti-personnel mines and 65 anti-tank mines implanted on the ground had been destroyed. Ecuador also firmly supported the work of the Dublin Conference, which had adopted a text of a convention on the prohibition of cluster munitions, and had been involved in the drafting and the strengthening of the Treaty of Tlatelolco (Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean), the first in that field. Ecuador was concerned, however, that many countries had not lived up to their obligations in other areas of disarmament, including with regard to weapons of mass destruction, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The lack of consensus on basic issues in the field of international peace and security were a matter of manifest concern for Ecuador, Mr. Izquierdo said. Inability to act on disarmament agendas and items and the inability to fulfil them posed a concrete obstacle to the international community's efforts to make human development possible in the less developed countries. Presidential draft decision CD/1840 provided a realistic path out of the quagmire they found themselves in. While the draft decision might have its weaknesses, at this stage flexibility would be decisive in getting the Conference on Disarmament back on track.

France spoke on the issue of small arms and light weapons, which it believed should be more amply discussed in the Conference on Disarmament. France was deeply committed on the national level to preventing traffic in small arms and light weapons. France had committed actively to the drafting and adopting of the United Nations programme of action in this area, and was also pursuing its initiatives in a number of fora: within the European Union, it had played an important role in the adoption of a code of conduct for the export of arms and a strategy to combat illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons; and within the framework of the G-8, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Wassenaar Arrangement and others, France had particularly worked against illegal air transport of such weapons. The French initiative in this area looked, first, to reinforce information exchanges between States and their control mechanisms, and to allow for better cooperation among them. Secondly, it sought a partnership with air transport companies to identify better, targeted measures. Finally, the initiative sought to put in place a guide to better practices. Air transport was an essential hub in the illegal traffic in small arms and light weapons and France hoped to cut through it.



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.

The next plenary meeting of the Conference on Disarmament is scheduled to take place at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 17 June.

Statements

EMILIO IZQUIERDO MIÑO, Under-Secretary for Multilateral Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Integration of Ecuador, reiterated the abiding concern and readiness of Ecuador to undertake disarmament negotiations. Ecuador had a clean record; it saw itself as an island of peace reached only sporadically by these issues alien to the reality of that country – and Ecuador worked hard to remain that way. Disarmament and non-proliferation were paths that they had to follow decisively. Ecuador had displayed that in living up to its obligations undertaken in its signature and ratification of the Ottawa Convention. In that regard, to date, Ecuador had destroyed 253,273 anti-personnel mines in its existing arsenals and a further 4,621 anti-personnel mines and 65 anti-tank mines implanted on the ground had been destroyed. It was a difficult task, and Ecuador required more and better international cooperation to definitively eliminate on its territory all such arms.

Ecuador had committed itself to rehabilitating its land so that it could be useful, productive and not pose a threat to the lives of civilians, Mr. Izquierdo stressed. He made that point because Ecuador was concerned that many countries had not lived up to their obligations in other areas of disarmament, including with regard to weapons of mass destruction, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). For its part, Ecuador had fulfilled its obligations contained, among others, in the NPT. Ecuador would also like to thank the Ireland for its report presented at the last plenary of the Conference on Disarmament, outlining the progress achieved in Dublin, with the adoption of a text of a convention on the prohibition of cluster munitions, a process to which Ecuador was firmly attached. Indeed, Ecuador's record in the field of disarmament was widely known. Ecuador continued to underscore the need to create and strengthen nuclear-weapon-free zones, and had taken part from the outset in the drafting and then the strengthening of the Treaty of Tlatelolco, the first in that field. Ecuador had paid particular attention to international instruments involving conventional weapons – such as the United Nations Programme of Action against the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. The proliferation of those weapons not only posed a direct threat to civilians, they were also instruments of organized transnational crime.

Mr. Izquierdo said that the Member States were fully cognizant that the circumstances in which the Conference on Disarmament had found itself in the past years had been difficult. The lack of consensus on basic issues in the field of international peace and security were a matter of manifest concern for Ecuador. Inability to act on disarmament agendas and items and the inability to fulfil them posed a concrete obstacle to the international community's efforts that sought to make possible the human development of less developed countries. Presidential draft decision CD/1840 represented a worthwhile plan that would make it possible to undertake substantive work, and the speeding up of work that was now long dormant. The elements described in that draft decision created a realistic path out of the quagmire they found themselves in. Ecuador was aware that the draft decision might have its weaknesses, but at this stage flexibility would be decisive in getting back on track. Issues such as the prevention of nuclear war, a treaty banning the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices, and the prevention of an arms race in outer space, and international agreements that effective international agreements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons, and others, had been "hanging fire" over the international community for far too long now.

JEAN-FRANÇOIS DOBELLE (France) said he had taken the floor to address the issue of small arms and light weapons, which France believed should be more amply discussed in this forum. Despite what their name might suggest, small arms and light weapons caused tremendous damage. As numerous non-governmental organizations in this area had noted, if one considered the damage wrought by the uncontrolled spread of these weapons, they were true "weapons of mass destruction". Recently, the Secretary-General had produced a report reviewing progress made on the 12 recommendations contained in his 2002 report on small arms and light weapons, which had been presented to the Security Council on 30 April 2008. The new report described the thousands of victims that had resulted from the uncontrolled spread of small arms and light weapons throughout the world, a well as the destabilization of their communities and the degradation of their resources, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

France was deeply committed on the national level to preventing traffic in small arms and light weapons. Since 2001, France had committed actively to the drafting and adopting of the United Nations programme of action in this area, which would be holding its third meeting of States Parties in July. France was also pursuing its initiatives in a number of fora: within the European Union, it had played an important role in the adoption of a code of conduct for the export of arms and a strategy to combat illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons; within the framework of the G-8, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Wassenaar Arrangement and others, France had particularly worked against illegal air transport of such weapons. The French initiative in this area looked, first, to reinforce information exchanges between States and their control mechanisms, and to allow for a better cooperation among them. Secondly, it sought a partnership with air transport companies to identify better, targeted measures. Finally, the initiative sought to put in place a guide to better practice. Air transport was an essential hub in the illegal traffic in small arms and light weapons and France hoped to cut through it.

Within the framework of the United Nations, France was also involved in a number of initiatives, including regarding the tracing and marking of small arms and light weapons, which was essential to combat their trafficking. For that reason, France and Switzerland had co-sponsored an international initiative on this subject, which had been adopted in 2005. It would have been hoped that that instrument could have had legally binding value. However, international cooperation was still far too weak in this area. Nevertheless, France welcomed that step forward, which pointed out the way to take in the future. Finally, France also supported all initiatives that sought to better control transfers, and for that reason welcomed the work of the Experts Group on an Arms Trade Treaty.


For use of the information media; not an official record


DC08033E