Seminar on Developments and Implications of Missile Defense

Ambassador Tanner,
Excellencies,
Colleagues,
Ladies and Gentlemen:

It is an honour to address this highly qualified group of diplomats and to participate in this Seminar. The Geneva Centre for Security Studies once again proves to be at the forefront of the major security related debates and -under the able direction of Ambassador Tanner- continues to provide us with invaluable insights on these issues.

I believe that nobody has any doubts as to the fact that missile defence is one of the key security issues of our times. States, as you know, continue to actively seek different measures to counter the special characteristics and capabilities of missiles. Contrasting points of view remain as to the implications of missile defence systems, as well as serious concerns on the part of a number of States.

Missiles, with their potential for offensive and defensive functions continue to have an important role in many States’ military doctrines and national and regional security policies. The development, testing, production, acquisition, transfer, brokering, possession, deployment and use of missiles continue to be a primary security consideration – and concern as some will add- for international peace and security.

The expansion of national missile capabilities and the related elements of military posture is –indeed- directly linked in varying ways to the perceived security scenario not only at the global, but also at the regional levels. As we know, while for some States the security scenario in their immediate regional neighbourhood is a principal determinant of their threat perception, other States respond both to global and regional security developments.

The expansion of national missiles capabilities has also obvious consequences, of which we are all aware, for disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation.

In addition, the diversity of views amongst States on most matters related to missiles poses a particular challenge for any efforts to address the issue in multilateral fora at the global level. In fact, it is not a coincidence that currently there is no legally binding multilateral instrument dealing with the issue of missiles.

It is precisely such a divergence of views that calls for a role by the United Nations in providing a structured and effective mechanism to build consensus among States, as well as to stimulate further discussions on the few existing areas of consensus. So far, and within the limited mandates it has received, the United Nations has not been deaf to such a call.

Three Panels of Governmental Experts devoted to the issue of missiles have been established within the United Nations starting in 2001. The third of such Panels completed its work in June 2008. The report of this last Panel, which was agreed by consensus among its participants, identified a number of key issues which should be taken into account in order to address, in a comprehensive manner, the issue of missiles in all its aspects.

Discussions, and consequential disagreements, on the issue of missile defence have also taken place within the context of the Conference on Disarmament. In fact, during formal as well as informal discussions on the prevention of an arms race in outer space (PAROS), serious concerns have been expressed by a number of countries with regard to the development and deployment of anti-ballistic missile defense systems and of advanced military technologies capable of being deployed in outer space.

Excellencies, it is indeed needed that the international community addresses the issue of missiles in all its aspects at the global level, and finds ways to exploit the limited areas of agreements that currently exist, with a view to possibly moving forward toward some basic common understandings.

A few months ago, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Ban-Ki Moon said in a speech that he wants to see disarmament facts on the ground not mere words floating in the air. I also like to see action, although I understand that sometimes it requires long preparations and a considerable amount of patience.

I would like, however, to recall the 2008 Secretary-General’s five points Proposal on Nuclear Disarmament, which in its fifth point called for the need to work toward the elimination of other weapons of mass destruction, and to develop new controls over missiles, space weapons, and conventional arms.

Excellencies,
This is where I stop and leave you the ground for further discussion and hopefully action, as you are -indeed -the true protagonists of this story.