GERMAN COMMISSIONER FOR DISARMAMENT AND ARMS CONTROL ADDRESSES CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT
The Conference on Disarmament this morning heard an address by the Federal Government Commissioner for Disarmament and Arms Control of Germany, Klaus-Peter Gottwald, as well as statements by Egypt, Turkey, Algeria, China, Israel and Bangladesh.
Mr. Gottwald said that it was a great pleasure for him to attend the Conference on Disarmament at this particular moment in time, when hope for a new window of opportunity for international disarmament efforts was rising throughout the world. Although the threat of nuclear weapons might be less present in minds and media today than it was during the Cold War, making progress in nuclear disarmament continued to be one of the major challenges for the international community. “We cannot afford to be passive, we need renewed efforts towards complete nuclear disarmament”, he stressed.
The current international environment seemed to be much better suited for further efforts in nuclear disarmament than previous years. Germany welcomed the support expressed by the United States Administration for the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. That new impetus was urgently needed. The preparedness of the United States and the Russian Governments to conclude a legally binding succession agreement to START I, was giving the right signal, Mr. Gottwald observed.
Turkey shared its position on the four core issues on the Conference’s agenda, and welcomed the paradigm shift in nuclear thinking. Additional reductions in nuclear forces and further lowering of their operational status would give a new impetus to current efforts.
Egypt highlighted the issue of the creation of a nuclear weapon-free zone in the Middle East, noting that several texts made the establishment of such a zone a global imperative. Lack of progress in the matter perpetuated a situation that constituted a direct threat to regional and international peace and security, increasing the potential for a regional nuclear arms race. Algeria also voiced its serious concern about the absence of progress in the efforts to make the Middle East a nuclear-weapon-free zone, pointing out that only one party in the region had not accepted and still refused to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty and to place it installations under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. China agreed that the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East would be an important step for nuclear disarmament and prevention of proliferation, as well as for world peace. Israel underscored that it had been recognized, in many documents, that the establishment of a nuclear free zone was to be reached on the basis of free consent. The conditions in the region, namely the ongoing threats addressed against the country and the fact that States were actively engaged in proliferation and support of terrorism, did not allow for such a move.
Chitsaka Chipaziwa, the President of the Conference on Disarmament, in concluding remarks at the end of his presidency, wished all success to his successor, Algeria, which would take over the Presidency of the Conference starting next week.
The Conference on Disarmament today also accepted the request of Armenia and Iceland to participate in the Conference as observers.
The next meeting of the Conference will be on Tuesday, 17 March at 10 a.m. when the Foreign Minister of Algeria is scheduled to address the Conference.
Statements
KLAUS-PETER GOTTWALD, Federal Government Commissioner for Disarmament and Arms Control of Germany, said that it was a great pleasure for him to attend the Conference on Disarmament at this particular moment in time, when hope for a new window of opportunity for international disarmament efforts was rising throughout the world. All the important disarmament work that had been carried out in the Conference should encourage members to strengthen their efforts even further in order to prove the potential of the Conference so that it was in a position to take up again its main responsibility as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum of the international community. Although the threat of nuclear weapons might be less present in minds and media today than it was during the Cold War, marking progress in nuclear disarmament continued to be one of the major challenges for the international community. “We cannot afford to be passive, we need renewed efforts towards complete nuclear disarmament”, he stressed. The military use of nuclear weapons was more and more questionable in this century’s conflicts. On the other hand, the danger of terrorists putting their hands on nuclear weapons and materials was growing and would remain one of the major threats if no steps were taken to reduce considerably the numbers of such weapons.
The current international environment seemed to be much better suited for further efforts in nuclear disarmament than previous years. Germany welcomed the support expressed by the United States Administration for the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. The commitment of the new Administration for an early ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and for further negotiated and verifiable steps towards reductions in strategic as well as non-strategic nuclear weapons were equally highly welcome, Mr. Gottwald felt. Such steps helped prepare the ground for a policy approach directed at nuclear disarmament worldwide. That new impetus was urgently needed.
This year offered a number of opportunities to prove the seriousness of the Conference’s commitment, Mr. Gottwald noted. The Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference 2010 was a key target date. The Treaty regime and the international community as a whole could not afford another failure as in 2005. It was important to recall and reaffirm the fundamental bargain underlying the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and making it the cornerstone of nuclear arms control and disarmament: the interdependent and mutually reinforcing relationship between the three pillars of the NPT, i.e. the obligations for non-proliferation and for nuclear disarmament as well as the right for the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
The preparedness of the United States and the Russian Government to conclude a legally binding succession agreement to START I, as was demonstrated last week in Geneva by their Foreign Ministers, was giving the right signal. In addition, it was also important to further develop existing initiatives for multilateral nuclear fuel assurances. Germany had proposed in 2007 a multilateral enrichment facility under the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency. This proposal could accommodate both the legitimate concerns of NPT members interested in the peaceful use of nuclear energy regarding the nuclear fuel supply, as well as proliferation concerns, Mr. Gottwald said.
The Conference should not again let a year pass without proving the Conference on Disarmament’s right to existence, said Mr. Gottwald. Germany was convinced, that over the course of the past two years, the Conference had made progress in bringing them closer to agreeing on a programme of work. Germany was ready to continue to be flexible in order to overcome the deadlock and urged all Members to join support for the adoption of a programme of work. Such a programme of work was not an end in itself but just a tool that should enable the Conference to fulfil its functions. Germany was ready to engage in substantial discussions on nuclear disarmament and the prevention of nuclear war, on the prevention on an arms race in outer space and on appropriate international arrangements to assure non-nuclear weapon states against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.
Renewed effort to finally engage in substantial steps forward to start negotiations on a Fissile-Material Cut-off Treaty were needed, Mr. Gottwald underscored. It remained the next logical step, beside the entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treat, for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. It was clear that the issue had long been ripe for negotiation in the Conference. They were also aware that key differences remained regarding the content of such a future treaty. It had been a long-held position of Germany that a verifiable Fissile-Material Cut-off Treaty was in the interest of the international community. Pending the start of such negotiations, Germany had proposed the establishment within the Conference of a group of scientific experts to examine technical aspects of such a treaty. In addition to cutting off the production of fissile material for weapons purposes, more needed to be done to increase the security, transparency and control over existing material stocks worldwide. Germany supported initiatives to provide for transparency and accounting of fissile material stocks in order to build confidence and ease tensions.
HISHAM BADR (Egypt) wanted to highlight a matter to which Egypt attached the outmost importance: the creation in the Middle East of a zone free of nuclear weapons. While that matter had since 1995 been primarily addressed within the framework of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Egypt believed that the Conference was nonetheless an appropriated forum to underscore their concerns and the importance they attached to the creation of this zone.
Egypt felt that it was imperative to clearly highlight now their full expectation that the upcoming Preparatory Committee would witness a healthy and dynamic handling of practical ways and means to operationalize the 1995 Resolution on the Middle East. It remained their assessment that the credibility and viability of the Non-Proliferation Treaty continued to be undermined as long as any of the elements of the 1995 package remained unimplemented. The call to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East rested upon the firmest grounds, both within and without the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Several texts made the establishment of such a zone a global imperative, and collectively highlighted that lack of progress in the matter perpetuated a situation that constituted a direct threat to regional and international peace and security, increasing the potential for a regional nuclear arms race. In that connection, the lack of political will exhibited by some States to fulfil their obligations had to be addressed and remedied through immediate and effective action in implementing concrete and practical measures establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. It was time to act.
AHMET UZUMCU (Turkey), outlining Turkey’s position on the four core issues on the Conference’s agenda, said the essence of their thinking on agenda items one and two had been a balanced approach towards the three pillars of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Turkey had been advocating that nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation and peaceful use needed to rest on an equal footing, and had been pleased to observe that that approach had gained increased support. Turkey also welcomed the paradigm shift in nuclear thinking. The key role attributed to nuclear weapons in security and defence policies had been reduced. Additional reductions in nuclear forces and further lowering of their operational status would give a new impetus to current efforts. Preservation of that momentum was particularly relevant for the success of the upcoming Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee meeting and the Review Conference.
Turkey was of the opinion that a comprehensive and non-discriminatory approach to Fissile-Material Cut-off Treaty negotiations should be adopted. It believed that commencement of negotiations on a Fissile-Material Cut-off Treaty and entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty could be a catalyst for a successful outcome at the Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference. On the issue of peaceful uses of outer space, Turkey, as a country operating satellites for the last 15 years and which relied on them in day-to-day life, supported in principle the proposal for strengthening the existing legal international framework aimed at preventing an arms race in outer space. The proposal presented by the Russian federation and China deserved careful consideration. With regard to negative security assurances, Turkey saw them as firmly anchored in the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Furthermore, Turkey’s support for the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East would continue.
With regard to proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery, that issue became all the more worrying in the context of terrorism, Turkey underscored. The challenge included new types of such weapons and radiological devices, and States needed to remain vigilant about the risk of acquisition by terrorist of such weapons. The excessive accumulation and uncontrolled spread of small arms and light weapons also posed a significant threat to peace and security and there was a close and disturbing relationship between the illicit trade in arms and terrorism. Turkey would continue to actively contribute to all efforts towards the establishment of effective norms and rules aimed at eradicating illicit trade in small arms and light weapons.
IDRISS JAZAIRY (Algeria) said that the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) constituted one of the cornerstones of nuclear disarmament. Algeria, as a State party, was fully committed to the terms and obligations of that international instrument, which provided a sense of security to its Members. Nuclear-weapon-free zones also represented a strengthening of non-proliferation and marked an advance in the elimination of those lethal weapons. In that connection, Algeria was seriously concerned about the absence of progress in the efforts to make the Middle East a nuclear-weapon-free zone. Here it was noted that only one party in the region had not accepted and still refused to join the NPT and to place it installations under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. It thus posed challenges and threatened the relevant resolutions for the establishment of such a zone adopted by the General Assembly and the Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference. Israel continued to enjoy exemptions and the efforts of other States raising the banner would be more credible and effective if they did not address the issue of non-proliferation with favouritism for some countries. Some tried to link the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East to the peace process, but that could only undermine the non-proliferation system. The achievement of that objective was important to rid the region of such weapons.
Algeria voiced their hope that the Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference in 2010 would rise to the hopes and aspirations of the peoples and the countries in the region. Also, Algeria reiterated that the member States of the region had the inalienable right to utilize nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
WANG QUN (China) said that China had carefully listened to the statement of Egypt and its views on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. Its establishment would be an important step for nuclear disarmament and the prevention of proliferation as well as for world peace. China always respected non-nuclear weapon countries efforts to set up regional nuclear-weapon-free zones. China hoped that the relevant United Nations resolutions would be successfully implemented and hoped that the parties would seek, during the Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, ways to achieve this.
MEIR ITZCHAKI (Israel) said that they had not planned to take the floor at this stage, but they had heard today of the desire for the implementation of a resolution that had been adopted in a context in which Israel had not been a party. He also underscored that it had also been recognized, in many documents, that the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone was to be reached on the basis of free consent. The conditions in the region, namely the ongoing threats addressed against his country and the fact that States were actively engaged in proliferation and support of terrorism, did not allow fur such a move.
FAIYAZ MURSHID KAZI (Bangladesh), speaking on behalf of the Group of 21, thanked the Conference President and his team and expressed the Group’s deep appreciation of his able stewardship. They appreciated the important tasks he had accomplished during his tenure and recognized his efforts to further energize the momentum of the Conference’s work. They also acknowledged that under his Presidency a number of high-level dignitaries had addressed the Conference. They were further pleased to see that he would pass on the baton to another member of the Group: Algeria.
CHITSAKA CHIPAZIWA (Zimbabwe), President of the Conference on Disarmament, in concluding remarks, said that today marked the end of his presidency. The past four weeks had been a period of consultations and of listening and learning for him; it had highly enriched him. During his presidency it had been a privilege to listen to distinguished officials from capitals from around the world. On 10 March 2009, the coordinators of the seven thematic issues had also orally presented a summary of debates under their guidance. Finally he thanked the Secretariat staff for their support and wished all success to his successor in the presidency, Algeria.
For use of the information media; not an official record
DC09016E