SEVEN STATES JOIN GROWING CONSENSUS AROUND CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT DRAFT PROGRAMME OF WORK

At the Conference on Disarmament this morning Ireland, Italy, India, Bulgaria, Iraq, Belarus and Mexico joined the growing consensus around document CD/1863 by expressing their support for the proposed programme of work.

Ireland saw CD/1863 as a realistic, practical proposal capable of finally breaking the stalemate and getting the Conference back to substantive work. Italy considered the draft programme of work for the Conference, formulated by the President with the support of the other P6, to be a finely balanced compromise document, containing all the necessary elements to finally break the decade-long deadlock. India said it would not stand in the way of the adoption of the draft decision contained in CD/1863 in the hope that this would now allow the Conference to commence substantive work.

Bulgaria said that they found the document a well-balanced compromise that reflected efforts from previous years to narrow down the differences on a programme of work. This document had the capacity to prompt consensus among Member States and provide a basis for the Conference on Disarmament to resume its substantial work. Iraq hoped the Conference would now be saved from the stalemate that had affected it for not so short a time and would embark on serious and realistic negotiations on the basis of the contents of the decision. Belarus hoped this document would bring about renewal in the substantive work of the Conference on Disarmament as it represented a common denominator. Mexico supported this document as it was a realistic proposal and could help end the stalemate that had bedeviled the Conference for many years.

By draft decision CD/1863, on the establishment of a programme of work for the 2009 session, the Conference on Disarmament would establish several Working Groups. Under agenda item 1, cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament, it would establish a Working Group to exchange views and information on practical steps for progressive and systematic efforts to reduce nuclear weapons with the ultimate goal of their elimination, including on approaches toward potential future work of multilateral character. A second Working Group under this agenda item would negotiate a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, on the basis of the document CD/1299 of 24 March 1995 and the mandate contained therein (also known as the Shannon Mandate). It would also establish Working Groups on prevention of an arms race in outer space and on negative security assurances. The Conference would appoint Special Coordinators on the other agenda items, including weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons; radiological weapons; comprehensive programme of disarmament; and transparency in armaments, to seek the views of its members on the most appropriate way to deal with those issues.

The next plenary of the Conference on Disarmament will take place at 10 a.m. on Friday, 29 May 2009.

Statements

JAMES O’SHEA (Ireland) said that Ireland had a longstanding history of activity in the areas of disarmament and non-proliferation but had only become a member of the Conference on Disarmament in 1999. When the Minister of Foreign Affairs had addressed the Conference in 2004 he had pointed out that the inaction which had prevailed at that time had been in stark contrast to the proud past. Thus, Ireland was very encouraged by the momentum which had built up in recent years. They hoped that 2009 would be the year which would see all of these efforts come to fruition. The external environment was propitious to that and positive evolutions in the positions of some States had increased expectations. This was indeed a window of opportunity and they had to grasp it. If they failed to do so, history might not be kind to them.

Ireland saw CD/1863 as a realistic and practical proposal capable of finally breaking the stalemate and getting the Conference back to substantive work. While it was unlikely that any delegation would be completely satisfied with the proposal on a strictly national point of view, they had all to bear in mind their shared responsibility to ensure that the Conference began again to do the work for which it had been established. Mr. O’Shea thus informed the President of Ireland’s support for the proposal contained in CD/1863.

GIOVANNI MANFREDI (Italy) said Italy considered the draft programme of work for the Conference on Disarmament, formulated by the President with the support of the other P6, to be a finely balanced compromise document, containing all the necessary elements to finally break the decade-long deadlock that had so far, regrettably, characterized this body. It provided, among other things, for the start of negotiations on a verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. The urgency of starting negotiations within the Conference on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) had been pointed out by most delegations that had already taken the floor during this session and the past one. Many speakers had taken pains to point out the very favourable political climate for renewed international disarmament initiatives that the world was witnessing and the necessity not to waste this moment in sterile debate. Italy wished to put on record its full agreement with this assessment and its appreciation for the recent policy decisions and statements by the American administration that were instrumental in bringing this about. Italy could endorse CD/1863 and the programme of work therein. It was the intention of the Italian delegation to support efforts in reaching a consensus on this document and so to encourage the Conference on Disarmament to proceed forth in its statutory duties.

HAMID ALI RAO (India) said India noted that the draft decision CD/1863 provided the basis for commencement of substantive work of the Conference, an objective that India had consistently supported. India supported the establishment of a Working Group to negotiate a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT). As a country possessing nuclear weapons, India was willing to conclude a universal, non-discriminatory and internationally verifiable treaty banning the future production of fissile material for nuclear weapons and other nuclear explosives devices. India attached the highest priority to nuclear disarmament and the elimination of nuclear weapons on a universal and non-discriminatory basis. The Conference should continue to explore all possible avenues to make progress so as to respond meaningfully to growing international opinion in favour of a vision of a world free of nuclear weapons.

India would not stand in the way of the adoption of the draft decision contained in CD/1863 in the hope that this would now allow the Conference to commence substantive work. India reserved the right to make remarks on substantive elements of the programme of work after its formal adoption by the Conference.

IVAN GOSPODINOV (Bulgaria) expressed Bulgaria’s deep appreciation for the President’s commitment to make progress in the work of the Conference, which had resulted in the elaboration of document CD/1863. The argument of Bulgaria to support CD/1863 was twofold. Bulgaria had always sought to play a constructive role in the Conference and had supported every initiative that was designed to overcome the deadlock in the Conference. The merit of the draft decision itself was the other reason for their support. They found it a well balanced compromise that reflected efforts from previous years to narrow down the differences on a programme of work. This document had the capacity to prompt consensus among Member States and provide a basis for the Conference on Disarmament to resume its substantive work.

AHLAM AL-GAILANI (Iraq) said Iraq reiterated its support for draft decision CD/1863 which constituted a reasonable balance that addressed the concerns of all the Member States of the Conference. Iraq hoped the Conference would now be saved from the stalemate that had affected it for not so short a time and would embark on serious and realistic negotiations on the basis of the contents of the decision. The Conference must enjoy total agility in carrying out its duties. Iraq was pleased to express its appreciation through the President to all the members of the Conference for their flexibility in order to achieve progress. Iraq hoped that all the members of the Conference would join in the consensus and would accelerate the adoption of the document so that they could all realize their aspirations. Iraq reiterated its support of draft decision CD/1863 and was ready to cooperate to make this draft a success.

ALEKSANDR PONOMAREV (Belarus) said that he wanted to add Belarus’ voice to all the delegations that had said how they assessed the input of the President. Thanks to the enthusiasm and diplomatic skills of the President, he had managed to generate the proposed programme of work. Belarus hoped this document would bring about renewal in the substantive work of the Conference on Disarmament. It represented a common denominator. Their position was that no State would be denied to further express their national opinions during the substantive work. Differences were no excuse for paralysis. With this proposal the Conference on Disarmament was firmly set on the path for fruitful work.

CLAUDIA GARCIA GUIZA (Mexico) said Mexico was very pleased to hear the wide spread support for CD/1863 and the programme of work contained therein. Mexico supported this document. It was a realistic proposal and could help end the stalemate that had bedeviled the Conference for many years. It was very important that the draft programme of work take into account a number of proposals that had been made since 1999, and that it should include on the agenda views and proposals put forward by States or proposals that would be put forward in the future. The programme of work should take on board elements raised in prior discussions. The Conference should establish a Working Group to negotiate a fissile material treaty based on the Shannon report and mandate, which Mexico believed was an important reference on this matter, without diminishing the importance of other proposals. Mexico called on all Member States, as the United Nations Secretary-General told the Conference last week, to take advantage of the current international climate to revitalize the disarmament agenda. The Conference should work on concrete actions. It should not pass up this opportunity and it should begin to create conditions to allow the Conference to comply with its mandate.

IDRISS JAZAIRY (Algeria), President of the Conference, said this afternoon they would hold an informal plenary meeting with selected non-governmental organizations. This would be an informal meeting that would not constitute a precedent but should be an interesting experiment. The next plenary would be at 10 a.m. on Friday, 29 May.


For use of the information media; not an official record


DC09026E