FOREIGN MINISTER OF MONGOLIA ADDRESSES CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT

The Conference on Disarmament held a plenary meeting this morning to hear an address from Gombojav Zandanshatar, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade of Mongolia, and farewell addresses from the Ambassadors of Finland and Italy. The Conference also closed the first part of its 2012 session.

Mr. Zandanshatar said that 2012 marked the twentieth anniversary of Mongolia’s declaration of its territory as a nuclear-weapon-free zone, an initiative that today enjoyed wide international support. While there had been significant progress in disarmament over recent years, the existence of nuclear weapons constituted the greatest danger to the survival of mankind. Only the total elimination of nuclear weapons would guarantee against the risk of their use. The time had come for concrete action, which must include an end to the protracted stalemate of the Conference and the start of negotiations on a Nuclear Weapons Convention and on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty. Conference membership should be expanded to all United Nations Member States.

Ambassador Giovanni Mandredi of Italy said the four decades his career spanned had witnessed numerous and deep changes. In 1974 six countries owned nuclear weapons: today there were nine. It was difficult to pretend that represented a sign of progress. Looking to the future, it was true that an initiative that may not seem acceptable for purely national interests may merit further attention when viewed in the wider context of the general good. There had never been, in recorded history, any instance of a country voluntarily disarming itself out of existence. The potential for flexibility was vaster than one would think.

Ambassador Hannu Himanen of Finland said the frustrating failure of the recent attempt to agree on a programme of work had dealt the Conference’s authority another serious blow and may lead negotiations to take place elsewhere. The Conference should look at reforming the Presidency, the interpretation of the consensus rule, and at rolling over the programme of work from year to year. Governments were not in a financial position to maintain institutions in a holding pattern, just in case something useful emerged: the burden of proof lay squarely on the Conference’s shoulders: it must redeem itself. The very existence of the Conference was threatened.

States taking the floor wished the Ambassadors of Italy and Finland well for the future, and raised issues including fulfilment of commitments to destroy all existing stocks of highly enriched uranium, the desire of the Informal Group of Observer States to become Members of the Conference, how issues of national security led States to block progress in the Conference and a report on activities at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul.

Addressing the Conference today were Mongolia, Italy, Finland, Ukraine, Croatia speaking on behalf of the Informal Group of Observer States, Switzerland, United States, Republic of Korea, Sweden and Algeria.

The next plenary meeting of the Conference will be on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 at 10 a.m.

Statements

GOMBOJAV ZANDANSHATAR, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade of Mongolia, said that 2012 marked the twentieth anniversary of Mongolia’s declaration of its territory as a nuclear-weapon-free zone, an initiative that today enjoyed wide international support. Over the past years Mongolia had sought to secure appropriate commitment of its status from the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (the P5) and nuclear-weapons-states, particularly considering its location between two nuclear-weapons states; it appreciated P5 engagement on the issue and hoped its status could soon be formalized. While there had been significant progress in disarmament over recent years, the existence of nuclear weapons constituted the greatest danger to the survival of mankind. Only the total elimination of nuclear weapons would guarantee against the risk of their use and proliferation. The time had come for concrete action, which must include an end to the protracted stalemate of the Conference and the start of negotiations on a Nuclear Weapons Convention, as well as on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty. In view of the deadlock options to take forward multilateral disarmament negotiations should be considered, including the possibility of merging the Conference on Disarmament and the United Nations Disarmament Commission into a single body. Negative security assurances were of paramount importance to a small non-nuclear-weapon state like Mongolia. As a north-east Asian country Mongolia supported the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free-zone in the region, and believed that the Six Party Talks were important to making such a zone a reality. Mongolia had sought to contribute to the Six Party Talks process and recently hosted a bilateral meeting between Japan and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea in Ulaanbaatar. Conference membership should be expanded to all United Nations Member States, and Mongolia supported more meaningful civil society participation in the Conference.

AMBASSADOR GIOVANNI MANDREDI of Italy said he was soon to retire to Rome after 38 years in the Italian Diplomatic Corps and 44 years in the service of his country. The four decades his career spanned had witnessed numerous and deep changes. The prosperity of populations had largely risen, and so had the number of countries governed by proper democratic governments. The positive effects of globalization on their daily lives could not be doubted. However, in 1974 six countries owned nuclear weapons: today there were nine. It was difficult to pretend that represented a sign of progress. While the reasons for the Conference’s 15 years of failure to undertake any new multilateral negotiations on nuclear disarmament and arms control were complex, it was indisputable that fifteen years was far too long. Looking to the future, it was true that an initiative that may not seem acceptable for purely national interests may merit further attention when viewed in the wider context of the general good. There has never been, in recorded history, any instance of a country voluntarily disarming itself out of existence. The potential for flexibility was vaster than one would think.

AMBASSADOR HANNU HIMANEN of Finland said today was his last plenary meeting of the Conference. The frustrating failure of the recent attempt to agree on a programme of work had dealt the Conference’s authority another serious blow and may lead negotiations to take place elsewhere. The very existence of the Conference was threatened. While a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty remained an unequivocal priority for Finland, it was fully prepared to proceed on all four core issues: progress on one item should not be held hostage to non-agreement on another. The Conference should look at other issues beyond its present agenda, but how could it agree on other issues when it could not agree on the present four? The Conference could become more efficient: it should look at reforming the Presidency, the interpretation of the consensus rule, and at rolling over the programme of work from year to year. Non-governmental organizations should have a substantial presence in the chamber, while rather than merging the Conference on Disarmament and the United Nations Disarmament Commission, the latter should be disbanded as it added little to the work of the First Committee and the General Assembly anyway. Governments were not in a financial position to maintain institutions in a holding pattern, just in case something useful emerged: the burden of proof lay squarely on the Conference’s shoulders: it must redeem itself.

Ukraine said it was seriously concerned and regretted the sad fact that no consensus had been found in resuming substantive work. The ultimate goal of the international community was clear: complete and irreversible nuclear disarmament as the only guarantee of protecting humanity from the deadly consequences of possible use of nuclear weapons, and securing nuclear materials from potential dangerous misuse. During the 2010 Washington Nuclear Security Summit Ukraine committed to getting rid of all existing stocks of highly enriched uranium. On March 22, 2012, Ukraine had not only secured all vulnerable nuclear materials but fully implemented its commitments, thus setting a good example of firm political will and adherence to strengthening of the non-proliferation regime. Negative Security Assurances were widely supported by the vast majority of members, and there was an urgent need to draft a legal international statement on effective arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use of threat of use of nuclear weapons.

Croatia, speaking on behalf of the Informal Group of Observer States, a universal group comprising of 38 tates from all regions of the world, 26 of which had applied for membership in the Conference, said the Group was disappointed at the inability of the current membership to adopt the Programme of Work CD/1933/Rev.1. Conference members asked the Group why they wanted to join the Conference at all in the current situation of stalemate. The answer was simple: they too believed in multilateralism, disarmament and compromise. As long as the Conference was here, the Group would do its utmost to bring it back to life. The Group strongly supported the insightful, forward-looking and action orientated remarks made by Secretary-General Tokayev a month ago. At the critical current time the Observer States’ expressed interest to join the body was an advantage to the Conference itself; it served as a much-needed confirmation of its global relevance and legitimacy, and should be born in mind when considering enlargement.

Switzerland was very frustrated by the current situation, especially events two weeks ago when the consensus on a programme of work was blocked. The Conference must consider how issues of national security led States to block progress. In Switzerland’s view negotiations did not threaten the national security interests of any State. Switzerland believed now was the right time to begin discussions on how the Conference worked and what it must do, without repeating past dialogues. Revitalization of the Conference must be seriously debated in the plenary with General Assembly resolution 66/66 at the centre of the discussion.

United States congratulated Mongolia on the twentieth anniversary of its declaration of its territory as a nuclear-weapon-free zone, and said it looked forward to continuing to work with Mongolia on the issue. The United States also thanked the Ambassadors of Italy and Finland for their sage words and wished them well in the future.

Republic of Korea informed the Conference about the outcome of the Seoul Nuclear Security Summit, which took place yesterday and today, where world leaders had held discussions on strengthening national and nuclear security, and fighting the threat of nuclear terrorism. The Republic of Korea committed to addressing nuclear security protection issues and to prevention of radiological terrorism. The minimisation of highly enriched uranium was also discussed, as well as establishment of centres of excellence to provide research and training. During the meeting it was agreed that the Netherlands would host the next Nuclear Security Summit in 2014.

Sweden said the draft Programme of Work CD/1933/Rev.1 was a well-crafted compromise, and it was deeply frustrated and disappointed that the Conference was unable to reach consensus on it, particularly in such a crucial year. Sweden did not believe that discussions on revitalizing the Conference in terms of debating procedural issues would be useful, and said they should not take the place of negotiations. It would be beneficial to hold further informal discussions on the four core issues.

Algeria also spoke of their deep disappointment that the Conference had been unable to reach consensus on the draft programme of work, but agreed with Sweden that any informal discussions on the four core issues should not just be a repeat of past debates. Algeria advocated adoption of a simplified agenda based on a timetable, and the holding of simplified negotiations on the four core issues. A clear message on the actual role of the Conference must be sent to the General Assembly during its forthcoming session.


For use of information media; not an official record

DC12/015E