CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT HEARS STATEMENTS BY RUSSIA, SRI LANKA, UNITED STATES, ITALY AND PAKISTAN AS THE PRESIDENT

The Conference on Disarmament this morning heard statements from Russia about its proposed draft international convention for the suppression of acts of chemical terrorism, Sri Lanka on the importance of nuclear disarmament, the United States on its response to the Russian proposal, Italy on how it viewed all the proposals before the Conference, and Pakistan as the President of the Conference on the results of her consultations.

Ambassador Tehmina Janjua of Pakistan, President of the Conference, said she had announced at the last plenary that she would conduct consultations on the basis of the different proposals on a programme of work currently on the table, and address the question of organizing the Conference’s work for the rest of the year. She had held consultations, which had been very useful to gain further insight and help her develop a collective understanding of the state of play in the Conference. There was a clear desire to commence substantive work in the Conference, something that Pakistan agreed on, and many had encouraged her to focus on a programme of work, again a priority for Pakistan. She had also suggested that structured informal discussions could be held in case agreeing on a programme of work proved to be elusive. There were different views on this.

Russia said that it had distributed at the Conference the draft elements of the international convention for the suppression of acts of chemical terrorism and a corresponding explanatory note. Before presenting these documents, Russia would like to note that it was, in general, satisfied by the way that the Russian initiative had been received. Intensive contacts that had taken place in March allowed Russia to take note of two aspects. First, all partners agreed that this was an extremely topical initiative. Second, no one said that the initiative had a negative effect on their national interests. The Russian initiative was aimed exclusively at giving an adequate response to the growing challenges of terrorism and at overcoming the stagnation in the Conference.

Sri Lanka noted with regret that this was the twentieth year of the current stalemate in the Conference and was deeply concerned by this situation. Sri Lanka wished to engage in any effort, which would bring the Conference back to functional status and maintain the integrity and credibility of this forum in relevance to the realities of the contemporary world. On the substantive items on the Conference’s agenda, nuclear disarmament remained the highest priority for Sri Lanka. There was an urgent need to reach an early agreement on a universal, unconditional and legally binding instrument to assure non-nuclear weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.

The United States thanked the Russian delegation for putting forth its proposal. The United States would review it carefully, but this review would take some time as this was a lengthy and complex document. In the meantime, the United States would like to state that it did not believe that the Conference on Disarmament was the appropriate place to address this issue. However, it was interested in working with Russia on the substance and they should do so through the existing mechanisms relevant to this area.

Italy noted that after many years of stalemate, the Conference now had four proposals on the table. Italy recalled that it supported the proposed programme of work by the United States because it contained a negotiating mandate on an issue that Italy considered a priority in the field of nuclear disarmament. The adoption of this programme of work with its simplified mandate on a Fissile Material Treaty would mean overcoming the historical stalemate in the Conference and moving forward on nuclear disarmament. Italy was aware that there was no full consensus on any of the four proposals. Italy appreciated the proposal by the United Kingdom. As for the Russian proposal, Italy recognized its merit as this was a very important issue, and it would study carefully the elements introduced this morning.

In concluding remarks, the President said she was sure that delegations would need time to look at the Russian proposal. She intended to hold an informal plenary meeting on Thursday, 31 March for an initial exchange of views on the proposal. She would continue her consultations during the six-week recess. In case of continued lack of consensus, they would start discussing alternatives, such as structured informal discussions. The situation would be clearer on Monday, 16 May when the Conference resumed its session. She planned to hold an informal plenary meeting on Thursday, 19 May for a thematic discussion on women and disarmament. She also said that Lassina Zerbo, Executive Secretary of the Comprehensive Test Ban Organization, would address the Conference at the plenary on Tuesday, 17 May.

Today’s plenary was the last in the first part of the 2016 session of the Conference. The second part of the session will be held from 16 May to 1 July, and the next plenary will be held at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 17 May 2016.

Statements

Ambassador TEHMINA JANJUA of Pakistan, incoming President of the Conference, said she had announced at the last plenary that she would conduct consultations on the basis of the different proposals on a programme of work currently on the table, and address the question of organizing the Conference’s work for the rest of the year. She thanked delegations for their candid exchange of views. She had held consultations with the three regional groups as well as the proponents of the various programmes of work and other delegations, and had also held open-ended informal consultations on Thursday afternoon. These consultations had been very useful to gain further insight and help her develop a collective understanding of the state of play in the Conference. There was a clear desire to commence substantive work in the Conference, something that Pakistan agreed on, and many had encouraged her to focus on a programme of work, again a priority for Pakistan. She had also suggested that structured informal discussions could be held in case agreeing on a programme of work proved to be elusive. There were different views on this.

Russia expressed condolences and strongly condemned the terrorist act in Lahore, and before that terrorist acts in Brussels and other parts of the world, which confirmed the indisputable fact that the global terrorist threat could only be countered by united efforts of the international community. The Conference could make a contribution in addressing this common problem. Today, the Russian delegation had distributed at the Conference the draft elements of the international convention for the suppression of acts of chemical terrorism and a corresponding explanatory note. Before presenting these documents, Russia would like to note that it was, in general, satisfied by the way that the Russian initiative had been received. Intensive contacts that had taken place in March allowed Russia to take note of two aspects. First, all partners agreed that this was an extremely topical initiative. Second, no one said that the initiative had a negative effect on their national interests. This made the Russian initiative different from the traditional Conference on Disarmament agenda items, each of which had its opponents. Taking this into account, Russia considered the intermediate results of discussions around its initiative as generally encouraging.

Russia said that evidently the negotiations would not start from a blank page. In the existing international law, there were elements applicable for fighting chemical terrorism, but at the same time, analysis showed that there were significant gaps in them. Several delegations had spoken in favour of widening the scope of a new arrangement to fighting the acts of not only chemical but also of biological terrorism. Russia saw no insuperable obstacles to this. The Russian initiative was aimed exclusively at giving an adequate response to the growing challenges of terrorism and at overcoming the stagnation in the Conference. Russia did not consider the draft elements of the convention as an exhaustive document. It was also not suggesting focusing the work of the Conference exclusively on the proposed convention. It was ready to consider options in the framework of a balanced programme of work, with the understanding that it should necessarily include a negotiating component.

Sri Lanka expressed its condolences to Pakistan. Sri Lanka attached great importance to the work of the Conference on Disarmament, given its unique role as the sole multilateral disarmament negotiation forum of the international community. Sri Lanka noted with regret that this was the twentieth year of the current stalemate in the Conference and was deeply concerned by this situation. The Conference was provided the right platform to negotiate, while being cognizant of different national security challenges. Failure to use this opportunity was a collective failure of all in demonstrating their commitment for disarmament efforts. This was a worrying situation for the advocates of the Conference as it raised the question of the relevance and reliability of this body. Sri Lanka wished to engage in any effort, which would bring the Conference back to functional status and maintain the integrity and credibility of this forum in relevance to the realities of the contemporary world.

On the substantive items on the Conference’s agenda, nuclear disarmament remained the highest priority for Sri Lanka. There was an urgent need to reach an early agreement on a universal, unconditional and legally binding instrument to assure non-nuclear weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. Sri Lanka also strongly supported the convening of the fourth special session of the United Nations General Assembly devoted to disarmament. Sri Lanka had noted the four proposals presented for a programme of work for this year. It saw merits in focusing on all four proposals comprehensively, to build a consensus programme of work. However, it noted the difficulty in building convergence on different ideas put forward. Sri Lanka supported any practical proposal that could re-ignite substantive work in the Conference.

United States expressed condolences to Pakistan for the attack in Lahore and thanked the Russian delegation for putting forth its proposal. The United States would review it carefully, but this review would take some time as this was a lengthy and complex document. In the meantime, the United States would like to state that it did not believe that the Conference on Disarmament was the appropriate place to address this issue. However, it was interested in working with Russia on the substance and they should do so through the existing mechanisms relevant to this area.

Italy expressed its condolences to Pakistan. Italy thanked the President for her efforts in finding common ground to ensure a shared way forward. They were all engaged in this common effort. After many years of stalemate, the Conference now had four proposals on the table. Italy recalled that it supported the proposed programme of work by the United States because it contained a negotiating mandate on an issue that Italy considered a priority in the field of nuclear disarmament. The adoption of this programme of work with its simplified mandate on a Fissile Material Treaty would mean overcoming the historical stalemate in the Conference and moving forward on nuclear disarmament. Italy did not believe that all business could be resolved in endless discussions and regretted that there was no consensus on the proposal of the United States. Italy was aware that there was no full consensus on any of the four proposals. If their aim was to find common ground, they should focus on the elements that could forward the work of the Conference. Italy appreciated the proposal by the United Kingdom. As for the Russian proposal, Italy recognized its merit as this was a very important issue, and it would study carefully the elements introduced this morning. Italy stood ready to support any constructive effort aiming at any reasonable and forward-looking agreement on a programme of work that was acceptable to all.

Ambassador TEHMINA JANJUA of Pakistan, incoming President of the Conference, said
she was sure that delegations would need time to look at the Russian proposal. She intended to hold an informal plenary meeting on Thursday, 31 March for an initial exchange of views on the proposal. She would continue her consultations during the six-week recess. In case of continued lack of consensus, they would start discussing alternatives, such as structured informal discussions. The situation would be clearer on Monday, 16 May when the Conference resumed its session. She planned to hold an informal plenary meeting on Thursday, 19 May for a thematic discussion on women and disarmament. The next public plenary will be held on Tuesday, 17 May at 10 a.m..



For use of the information media; not an official record

DC16/016E