DEPUTY MINISTER OF REPUBLIC OF KOREA ADDRESSES CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT

The Conference on Disarmament this morning heard an address by Cho Hyun, Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs of the Republic of Korea, and authorized the non-governmental organization Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom to read out a statement to the Conference on the occasion of International Women’s Day.

Cho Hyun, Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs of the Republic of Korea, said that it was his earnest wish that, with the joint efforts of all Members States, new life might be breathed into the Conference on Disarmament and that it lived up to its reputation. It was deeply regrettable that the Conference could not resolve differences over how to implement its programme of work and had failed to resume substantive discussions. However, there were numerous evident signs that the international disarmament machinery was gearing up for a new era. The Republic of Korea placed particular emphasis on the early commencement of negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty, as it could be a tool for mutual trust and transparency.

Turning to the current situation on the Korean Peninsula, Mr. Cho said that the peaceful resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue remained vital to securing peace and security in Northeast Asia. The Republic of Korea maintained its firm position that a nuclear North Korea would not be tolerated. They also believed that the Six-Party Talks were the most viable framework for the resolution of this issue and urged North Korea to promptly return to the Six-Party Talks and show a sincere attitude towards denuclearization.

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea, commenting on the statement made by the Deputy Minister of the Republic of Korea, said that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea rejected the content of the statement and viewed it as serious provocation. The statement was not of any help to the Conference on Disarmament. The Deputy Minister had distorted reality and the truth in his statement. It had been the United States who had tried to use nuclear weapons against Korea during the Korean War. The current situation proved that the master key to settle this issue lay with the United States’ dropping its hostile policy against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Norway highlighted a request from the non-governmental organization Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom to be allowed to read out itself its annual statement on the occasion of the International Women’s Day this year.

Sergei Ordzhonikidze, the Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament and the Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva, urged the Conference to allow the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom to make their statement. Without setting a precedent it should be seen as a courtesy to women for International Women’s Day.

The President of the Conference, Ambassador Mikhail Khvostov of Belarus, said that the majority of today’s speakers seemed to support the view of allowing the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom to make their statement themselves on 9 March on the occasion of International Women’s Day. This would be without setting a precedent for NGO participation in the work of the Conference. The Council also decided to conduct informal consultations on this matter and to discuss it further in plenary.

The United States said they fully shared the need for transparency and openness of the Conference. However they needed to look closer at the broader participation of non-governmental organizations and allowing the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom should be an exception and not create a precedent.

Expressing support for Norway’s proposal were Algeria, Canada, Sweden, Austria, Ireland, Syria, Germany, Mexico, the Netherlands, Pakistan, Russia and Brazil.

Speaking at the end of the meeting were Switzerland and Colombia. Norway also addressed the Conference as President of the Second Review Conference of the Mine Ban Convention on the occasion of the date of the entry-into force of the Convention, eleven years ago.

The next plenary of the Conference on Disarmament will take place this afternoon at 3 p.m., when it is expected to hear from the Foreign Minister of Ireland, Michael Martin.

Statements

MIKHAIL KHVOSTOV (Belarus), President of the Conference on Disarmament, offered, on behalf of the Conference on Disarmament, his condolences to the families and friends of those who had lost their lives in the major earthquake that had hit Chile this weekend.

CHO HYUN, Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs of the Republic of Korea, said that it was his earnest wish that, with the joint efforts of all Members States, new life might be breathed into the Conference on Disarmament and that it lived up to its reputation. There had been growing criticism that the multilateral disarmament process had been in disarray or deadlocked in the last decade. Some had described it as a lost decade. The Conference had often been viewed as a forum which could not deliver, mired in standoffs and arguments. It was deeply regrettable, that the Conference could not resolve differences over how to implement its programme of work and had failed to resume substantive discussions.

However, there were numerous evident signs that the international disarmament machinery was gearing up for a new era, said Mr. Cho. The United States Administration was firmly committed to be more forthcoming on disarmament and non-proliferation issues. The prospects of the entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty were brighter than ever. In addition, a new agreement to replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty would be pronounced soon. Many non-governmental organizations initiatives were also generating fresh momentum with concrete proposals on the elimination of nuclear weapons. It seemed that a new consensus was forming that a world without nuclear weapons was indeed possible and an achievable policy goal.

The Republic of Korea stood firm in support of the 2009 Programme of Work, which embodied a balanced and realistic approach to the seven issues of the Conference, said Mr. Cho. His Government however placed particular emphasis on the early commencement of negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty, as it could be a tool for mutual trust and transparency. While there were different positions on the issue due to differences in security environments and the perceptions of each State, it was also true that there was consensus that this issue should be addressed as a matter of urgency. The Conference on Disarmament had a special role to play in addressing this issue.

Mr. Cho said that he believed that nuclear weapon States needed to demonstrate their commitment to nuclear disarmament through more concrete measures. By doing so, nuclear weapon States could enjoy greater moral authority and political legitimacy to call upon non-nuclear States to join them in strengthening non-proliferation norms. It was also of outmost importance to restore trust and nurture a spirit of cooperation between nuclear weapon States and non-nuclear weapon States. His Government also supported the concept of negative security assurances, as a practical means of reducing the sense of insecurity of non-nuclear weapon States.

The Republic of Korea, as a country which was actively pursuing a peaceful space programme, viewed space security, including the prevention of an arms race in outer space, as an important issue of great relevance, said Mr. Cho.

Turning to the current situation on the Korean Peninsula, Mr. Cho said that the peaceful resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue remained vital to securing peace and security in Northeast Asia. The Republic of Korea maintained its firm position that a nuclear North Korea would not be tolerated. They also believed that the Six-Party Talks were the most viable framework for the resolution of this issue and urged North Korea to promptly return to the Six-Party Talks and show a sincere attitude towards denuclearization.

Mr. Cho also said that the 2010 Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference should send a clear message to the world that, despite all the challenges, the Non-Proliferation Treaty was a robust cornerstone of the global disarmament and non-proliferation regime. The Conference on Disarmament also had to demonstrate that it was a valuable element in the robust machinery of the global non-proliferation regime. To that end, it was important to demonstrate flexibility and a spirit of cooperation.

HILDE SKORPEN (Norway) said that, as President of the Second Review Conference of the Mine Ban Convention, Norway was pleased to address the Conference on Disarmament on the occasion of the date of the entry-into force of the Convention, eleven years ago. This had been a historic achievement. The Second Review Conference, which was held from 30 November to 4 December 2009, had adopted the declaration “A shared commitment for a mine-free world”, where States Parties to the Convention had reaffirmed their commitment to ending the suffering caused by anti-personnel mines and to achieving a world free of mines.

Ms. Skorpen said that in the past decade, the number of persons killed or injured by anti-personnel mines had fallen considerably. Survivors were receiving better care and their human rights had been enhanced. Countless lives and limbs had been saved through the destruction of more than 42 million stockpiled anti-personnel mines and the clearance of vast mined areas. Their aim was universal adherence to the Convention. One hundred and fifty-six States had already joined the Convention and would never again use anti-personnel mines. Endeavours to convince other actors not to use them were bearing fruit. However, a small number of States not parties to the Convention and several armed non-state actors still used anti-personnel mines.

Ms. Skorpen also highlighted the request from the non-governmental organization Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom to be allowed to read out its annual statement on the occasion of International Women’s Day. Every year the Conference discussed whether civil society should have a role to play in its work or not; it was time to allow them to do so as the Conference could only benefit from it.

IDRISS JAZAIRY (Algeria), echoing the statement made by Norway, said he wished to highlight the tremendous impact that civil society had had in lifting up the Mine Ban Convention. The Conference on Disarmament should also give a chance to non-governmental organizations and allow them to give their energy to help the Conference to move forward. As Brazil had noted in another forum, it was strange to note that those countries that were most supportive of civil society’s participation in some fora were the same that opposed its participation in the Conference on Disarmament. Civil society should be given the right to express itself and the Conference should use the same standards as the different United Nations fora, with respect to non-governmental organizations’ participation.

On the issue of the Cluster Munitions Convention and the Mine Ban Convention, Mr. Jazairy said that there were differences between the approaches that had been given to them and that one should look at the reasons behind the fact that the Cluster Munitions Convention had not generated as much traction as the Mine Ban Convention. The Conference should discuss this issue and banning any substitute for cluster munitions would be a welcomed development.

GEOFF GARTSHORE (Canada), addressing the issue raised by Norway on the participation of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, said that Canada supported the idea of allowing that organization to express itself at the Conference.

JON YONG RYONG (Democratic People's Republic of Korea), commenting on the statement made by the Deputy Minister of the Republic of Korea, said that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea rejected the content of the statement and viewed it as a serious provocation. The statement was not of any help to the Conference on Disarmament. He wondered whether the Deputy Minister of the Republic of Korea was ignorant of the reason why the Democratic People's Republic of Korea was following nuclear deterrence or whether he had only feigned that he did not know it. There was no doubt that the Republic of Korea was fully aware of the reasons.

The Deputy Minister had distorted reality and the truth in his statement, said Mr. Ryong. It had been the United States who had tried to use nuclear weapons against Korea during the Korean War. Thus, that matter should be dealt with between the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the United States. The current situation proved that the master key to settle this issue lay with the United States’ dropping its hostile policy against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

MAGNUS HELLGREN (Sweden) said Sweden supported the intervention of Norway, Algeria and Canada on the issue of opening the doors of the Conference on Disarmament to civil society. The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom should be allowed to deliver its statement itself and through its own voice.

CHRISTIAN STROHAL (Austria) said Austria added its voice to those who had expressed support for the non-governmental organizations’ collation to deliver their own statements. Non-governmental organizations’ continued interest in the Conference on Disarmament should be welcomed. The small gesture of welcoming their voice in the Conference was a minimum the Conference should do.

Turning to the Cluster Munitions Convention, Mr. Strohal noted it had reached 30 ratifications and that it would enter into force on 1 August. Austria was convinced that this was a positive dynamic and looked forward to similar dynamics on other disarmament issues.

JAMES O’SHEA (Ireland) joined the expressions of hope that non-governmental organization representatives would be able to speak for themselves in the Conference. On the Mine Ban Convention, he observed that there were many States that had either signed or ratified it, this number was increasing and he believed that more would join it.

ABDULMAOLA AL-NUQARI (Syria) said he also wished to add his voice to those who had asked that the representative of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom be allowed to make its statement by itself.

HELLMUT HOFFMANN (Germany) expressed Germany’s support for those who had expressed support to the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom to deliver its speech. On the Cluster Munitions Convention it would be very good to discuss the issues that were touched upon by Algeria.

JUAN JOSE GOMEZ CAMACHO (Mexico) appealed to the delegations who had thus far opposed participation of the civil society in the Conference on Disarmament to reconsider their position. This was inconsistent with the rules in other United Nations fora.

PAUL VAN DEN IJSSEL (Netherlands) said that they had heard several speeches on the requirements for disarmament in this century. Civil society had an important role to play in this connection and he urged delegations who opposed their participation in the work of the Conference to reconsider their positions.

ZAMIR AKRAM (Pakistan) added his voice to all those who had supported the proposal by Norway to give the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom the right to address the Conference. Pakistan also supported the idea of greater non-governmental organization participation in the Conference’s work.

VICTOR VASILIEV (Russia) said that the Russian Federation fully supported the proposal for more participation of non-governmental organizations in the Conference’s work. He proposed that the Conference deal with the actual procedures for the participation of non-governmental organizations in a meeting and discuss the requirements for it. On the issue of the Cluster Munitions Convention and the Mine Ban Convention, these subjects could also be discussed within the Conference’s thematic discussions.

MIKHAIL KHVOSTOV (Belarus), President of the Conference on Disarmament, said that the majority of today’s speakers seemed to support the view of allowing the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom to deliver its speech on 9 March and wondered if the Conference could go ahead and decide to do so.

GAROLD LARSON (United States) said that they fully shared the need for transparency and openness of the Conference. However they needed to look closer at the broader participation of non-governmental organizations and allowing the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom should be an exception and not create a precedent. They would reserve their position until they would have a clearer understanding of what the implications of the decision for a broader participation by non-governmental organizations would be.

SERGEI ORDZHONIKIDZE, Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament, said that it would be necessary to have a document outlining the participation of non-governmental organizations. Other organs of the United Nations were thankful for the role of non-governmental organizations in their work. The support of civil society was highly needed if one wanted to see progress in the field of disarmament. It was a must.

In today’s world, civil society was an important factor in international relations, said Mr. Ordzhonikidze. He urged the Conference to allow the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom to make their statement. He felt confused when he had to deliver it on their behalf. Without setting a precedent it should be seen as a courtesy to women on the occasion of International Women’s Day. After this it would be important to look at the implications of broader non-governmental organization participation.

LUIZ FILIPE DE MACEDO SOARES (Brazil) also expressed his delegation’s support for the direct participation of non-governmental organizations in the work of the Conference. He knew from experience that the presence and direct participation of non-governmental organizations in multilateral negotiations, particularly in the field of environment and human rights, had been a difficult experience to adapt to. But in the end, the result of their participation had been useful.

Mr. Macedo Soares said he also found it rather strange that there was so much non-governmental organization participation in broad debates, such as human rights and environment and so few on an important issue such as nuclear weapons. He proposed to the President to conduct informal consultations with delegations to pursue further involvement of non-governmental organizations in the work of the Conference on Disarmament.

MIKHAIL KHVOSTOV (Belarus), President of the Conference on Disarmament, proposed to the Conference on Disarmament to allow the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom to make their statement themselves on 9 March, without setting a precedent for non-governmental organizations’ participation in the work of the Conference and to conduct informal consultations on this matter and to discuss it further in plenary.

JURG LAUBER (Switzerland) said that what he had just witnessed gave him great expectations for this body in the coming weeks.

DANIEL AVILA CAMACHO (Colombia) said that Colombia was very satisfied with the decision just taken and highlighted the importance of the role that non-governmental organizations played.

For use of the information media; not an official record

DC10/011E