CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT HEARS STATEMENTS BY THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA

The Conference on Disarmament, which finishes the first part of its 2010 session this week, heard addresses this morning from Laura Kennedy, the new Permanent Representative of the United States, and from Canada. Croatia also made a statement on behalf of an informal group of Observer States.

Ms. Kennedy reiterated the United States position that a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) negotiations were long overdue and should be the top negotiating priority for the Conference. An FMCT was an important step towards reducing the danger of nuclear attack, it would provide a foundation for future disarmament efforts and would also help prevent terrorists from gaining access to those materials. An FMCT would also promote transparency and stability through international verification of fissile material production. Fifteen years of inaction was enough. The United States was committed to working to make the longstanding collective ambition for a treaty to end fissile material production for weapons a reality.

Canada was concerned that some countries had drifted away from the broad acceptance of the Shannon Mandate for negotiating a treaty banning the production of fissile material, which Canada feared would render efforts towards a programme of work fruitless. It was also noted that, in today’s multi-polar world, the Conference still tried to operate along the lines of the Cold War – with 65 potential vetoes hanging over the conduct of the Conference’s work. Canada believed that they had to be ready to look for alternative ways forward outside of that body and invited each member to examine creatively new approaches to disarmament and to think outside of the box.

Croatia, speaking on behalf of an informal group on Observer States, underlined a need to improve access to information for observers and the fact that there was currently no place at the Conference to discuss the issue of the enlargement of its membership.

At the end of the meeting, Ambassador Alex Van Meeuwen of Belgium, President of the Conference, announced that the Presidency was currently preparing a plan for bilateral consultations concerning the substantive work of the Conference. Those would start as soon as possible and be ongoing during the intersessional period in Geneva, as well as in New York on the sidelines of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Review Conference.

The Second Part of the Conference’s 2010 session will be held from 31 May to 16 July 2010. The next meeting of the Conference will be scheduled sometime at the beginning of that period, at a date and time to be announced.

Statements

LAURA KENNEDY (United States) said that it was an honour for her to join the Conference today as the new Permanent Representative of the United States to the Conference on Disarmament. The United States was eager for the Conference to make active contribution to disarmament again. The Conference could and should be at the forefront, as President Obama had said earlier this month, of stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and seeking a world without them. The United States would continue to reduce significantly its nuclear arsenal. Its forthcoming Nuclear Posture Review would further reduce the number and role of nuclear weapons in the United States national security strategy.

Ms. Kennedy said the United States regretted that a small minority had blocked the implementation of last year’s programme of work. The United States agreed with the vast majority of the Members of the Conference that Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) negotiations were long overdue and should be the top negotiating priority for the body. As President Obama had made clear, confronting nuclear danger required concerted efforts on all three fronts: disarmament, non-proliferation and nuclear security. No country was immune from those dangers and all had the responsibility to work together to address them. Each of those dangers had, at its core, the availability of fissile material, the basic ingredients in nuclear weapons and other nuclear explosive devices. Therefore, an FMCT was an important step towards reducing the danger of nuclear attack. Before reducing arms, they had to stop increasing them. In some areas, nuclear stockpiles continued to grow, with the concomitant spectre of destabilizing regional nuclear arms races. An FMCT could prevent that and would promote transparency and stability through international verification of fissile material production. Such a treaty would also make an important contribution to nuclear non-proliferation. For the non-nuclear weapon States parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty it would reinforce their undertaking not to acquire nuclear weapons. For the States with nuclear weapons, it would be a tangible demonstration of their commitment to nuclear disarmament. An FMCT would also help prevent terrorists from gaining access to those materials. Fifteen years of inaction was enough. The United States was committed to working to make that longstanding collective ambition for a treaty to end fissile material production for weapons a reality.

Looking beyond the Conference on Disarmament, Ms. Kennedy noted that the United States would be seeking the consent of its Senate for ratification for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). Meanwhile, it would continue its moratorium on nuclear testing, as well as its long-standing moratorium on the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons. United States negotiators were also hard at work with their counterparts from the Russian Federation to finish the follow-on treaty to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START).

MARIUS GRINIUS (Canada) said that this week the Conference would wrap up the first part of its 2010 session and they would be almost halfway through 2010 when they next returned to this forum in June. Canada was disappointed that they had squandered two consensus agreements that had been achieved last year – decision CD/1864 (on a programme of work for 2009), and United Nations General Assembly resolution 64/29, urging the Conference to agree early in 2010 a programme of work that included the immediate commencement of negotiations on a treaty banning the production of fissile material. Worse still, in Canada’s view, some countries had drifted away from the broad acceptance of the Shannon Mandate for negotiating a treaty banning the production of fissile material. If they moved away from that agreed formula, Canada feared that efforts toward a programme of work would continue to be fruitless.

Turning to the issue of the Conference’s consensus rule, Mr. Grinius noted that the Conference on Disarmament’s rules of procedure had taken shape during the Cold War, a time of a bipolar world. Back then, the consensus rule had not been an obstacle to the Conference’s ability to fulfil its negotiating mandate. In today’s multi-polar world, however, the Conference enjoyed active participation by all of its members, but they still tried to operate the Conference along the lines of the Cold War – with 65 potential vetoes hanging over the conduct of the Conference’s work. The most important work in Conference on Disarmament was “disarmament”, not “conference”. Prospects were not good that substantive work would commence in the near future. Canada believed that they had to be ready to look for alternative ways forward outside of that body and invited each member to use the coming two months to examine creatively new approaches to disarmament and to think outside of the box.

DANIJELA ZUNEC BRANDT (Croatia), speaking on behalf of an informal group of Observer States, said that they had sent a letter to the Conference President, in which they had addressed issues linked to the Observer States and the applicant member States. There was a need to improve access to information for Observer States. The modalities of informing observers varied greatly from one regional group to the other. Further, there was currently no place at the Conference on Disarmament to discuss the enlargement of the Conference. It might not be a coincidence that the stalemate in the Conference on Disarmament coincided with the stalemate in discussing its extension.


For use of the information media; not an official record

DC10/019E