Conference on Disarmament Continues Thematic Discussion on Nuclear Disarmament Verification

The Conference on Disarmament this morning continued its thematic plenary discussion on item 1 of its agenda on cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament, with a focus on nuclear disarmament verification.

Speakers said that as the highest priority, the Conference should start negotiations on a phased programme for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons, including a nuclear-weapons convention prohibiting the possession, development, production, stockpiling, transfer and use of nuclear weapons, leading to a global, non-discriminatory and verifiable elimination of nuclear weapons, with a specified framework of time. Stressing that no one-size-fits-all solution existed, speakers said nuclear disarmament verification would be best addressed through the specific framework of treaties rather than in an abstract manner. In that context, clarity would be paramount for efforts on verification to be meaningful.

In concluding remarks, Jørn Osmundsen, Special Envoy for Disarmament Affairs of Norway and Chair-designate of the Group of Governmental Experts on Nuclear Disarmament Verification, said it had been a stimulating exchange of views, which he would bring back to the Group. As pointed out by several delegations, verification was not an end in itself. Verification made the disarmament process more cooperative, which in turn increased confidence, and this was no small achievement. Taking great encouragement from the debate, he thanked all those who had contributed to it.

Pavel Podvig, Senior Researcher, Weapons of Mass Destruction and Other Strategic Weapons, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, in concluding remarks, expressed appreciation for the valuable contribution of participants, saying he was happy to note universal support for nuclear disarmament verification. On the need to address verification in a specific rather than abstract manner, he pointed out that it was important for experts and scientists to explore the tools that were available, so that politicians could have a better sense of what could and could not be done.

Ambassador Yuri Borissov Sterk of Bulgaria, President of the Conference on Disarmament, thanked all those present for their participation. He said the remaining countries on the speakers’ list would take the floor at the next meeting on Tuesday, 18 May. The Conference would then start its thematic debate on article 2 of its agenda on prevention of nuclear war, including all related matters.

Speaking in the discussion were Iraq on behalf of the G21, Pakistan, France, Sri Lanka, Iran, United Kingdom, Canada, Netherlands, Egypt, India and Mexico.

Israel, Germany and Iran spoke in point of order.

The Conference started its thematic plenary discussion on nuclear disarmament verification on Tuesday, 11 May and a summary can be found here. It will conclude the debate on Tuesday, 18 May.

The next plenary of the Conference on Disarmament will be held at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 18 May when the remaining countries on the speakers’ list on nuclear disarmament verification will take the floor. The Conference will then start its thematic debate on article 2 of its agenda on prevention of nuclear war, including all related matters.

Discussion

Speakers said that as the highest priority, the Conference should start negotiations on a phased programme for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons, including a nuclear-weapons convention prohibiting the possession, development, production, stockpiling, transfer and use of nuclear weapons, leading to a global, non-discriminatory and verifiable elimination of nuclear weapons, with a specified framework of time. Stressing that no one-size-fits-all solution existed, speakers said nuclear disarmament verification would be best addressed through the specific framework of treaties rather than in an abstract manner. In that context, clarity would be paramount for efforts on verification to be meaningful.

Effective verification of nuclear disarmament was crucial in achieving "general and complete disarmament" within the meaning of article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Stressing that a full and highly intrusive verification was neither realistic nor sustainable, speakers called on all nuclear-weapon States to take an interest and invest in the work of the International Partnership for Nuclear Disarmament Verification. They noted that the Franco-German Nuclear Disarmament Verification exercise (NuDiVe) had confirmed the assumptions of the International Partnership on how to generate confidence about the dismantling of nuclear warheads.

Disarmament verification should not be an end in itself, speakers emphasised. It was important for nuclear-weapon States and non-nuclear-weapon States to work together to develop shared understanding on irreversible multilateral nuclear disarmament. Some speakers said they were displeased with the way in which this thematic debate had been organized; it was unclear that it would contribute to the Conference’s work. They regretted that some States were preventing the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. Effective verification was a core principle of disarmament. Various initiatives, such as "UKNI" between the United Kingdom and Norway, had shown that non-nuclear-weapon States had a key role to play, and those that had not done so yet should get involved.

Verification increased confidence by deterring the use of subterfuge, speakers said as they expressed solemn hope that the Conference’s work on nuclear disarmament verification would foster tangible global efforts on arms control and disarmament. Other speakers stressed the importance of the leadership of nuclear-weapon States, as well as their responsibility under article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which set forth verification as one of its priorities. Greater emphasis should be put on placing fissile material under safeguards as opposed to overseeing the actual process of dismantling the warheads that contained such material, some speakers said. While further work on nuclear disarmament verification was important and useful, it should not be at the expense of the level of commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the objective of nuclear disarmament itself by adding further artificial impediments to the implementation of the relevant obligations and commitments.

Speakers expressed their strict preference for sticking to the core issues on the Conference agenda, not only in form and name, but also in substance. Work on verification by the Group of Governmental Experts could not be a substitute for the established disarmament machinery – the Conference on Disarmament and the Disarmament Commission. The Conference was the only forum for disarmament negotiations, some speakers recalled. There were social and economic aspects to verification, not only technical; they should not be overlooked. The Group of Governmental Experts should focus on identifying verification measures that helped to build trust amongst States and ensure disarmament was taking place in a verifiable and irreversible way.

Concluding Remarks by the Keynote Speakers

JØRN OSMUNDSEN, Special Envoy for Disarmament Affairs of Norway and Chair-designate of the Group of Governmental Experts on Nuclear Disarmament Verification, said it had been a stimulating exchange of views, which he would bring back to the Group. As pointed out by several delegations, verification was not an end in itself. Verification made the disarmament process more cooperative, which in turn increased confidence, and this was no small achievement. Taking great encouragement from the debate, he thanked all those who had contributed to it.

PAVEL PODVIG, Senior Researcher, Weapons of Mass Destruction and Other Strategic Weapons, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, expressing appreciation for the valuable contribution of participants, said he was happy to note universal support for nuclear disarmament verification. On the need to address verification in a specific rather than abstract manner, he pointed out that it was important for experts and scientists to explore the tools that were available, so that politicians could have a better sense of what could and could not be done.

YURI BORISSOV STERK, President of the Conference, thanked all those present for their participation. He said the remaining countries on the speakers’ list would take the floor at the next meeting on Tuesday, 18 May. The Conference would then start its thematic debate on article 2 of its agenda on prevention of nuclear war, including all related matters.

DC21.019E