ESTABLISHMENT OF AD HOC COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT PROPOSED AT CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT
Press Release
DCF/256
ESTABLISHMENT OF AD HOC COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT PROPOSED AT CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT
19960320 (Delayed in transmission.)GENEVA, 14 March (UN Information Service) -- The "Group of 21" neutral and non-aligned States proposed once again this morning that the Conference on Disarmament establish an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament that would commence its work immediately after the conclusion of negotiations on a comprehensive nuclear test-ban treaty.
Speaking on behalf of the Group, the representative of Algeria recalled that in a statement during last year's session, and earlier in this session, the 21 countries had called for the inclusion in the agenda of a specific item on nuclear disarmament. The Group of 21 now proposed that the Conference establish the ad hoc committee to negotiate the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons within a specified framework of time during this first part of the 1996 session, which ends on 29 March.
The outgoing President of the Conference, the representative of the Netherlands, told delegations that based on the consultations he had conducted during his one-month tenure, a possible role for the Conference in the field of nuclear disarmament, other than items already under consideration, did not seem to be excluded for the future. However, for the immediate future, he had not been able to identify common views on whether and how work on nuclear disarmament in general in the Conference could start.
Also this morning, the representatives of the Republic of Korea, Ireland and Poland made statements focusing on the importance of concluding negotiations on a comprehensive treaty by June of this year.
Statements in Discussion
JOUN YUNG SUN (Republic of Korea) said his country joined those which desired the early conclusion of an effectively verifiable comprehensive nuclear test-ban treaty. He assured the President of his delegation's willingness to cooperate with all the participants of the Conference on Disarmament in expediting the process of negotiations for the treaty. But since the conclusions of negotiations on the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1992, the Conference had failed to establish ad hoc committees on transparency
in armaments, negative security assurances and prevention of a nuclear arms race in outer space.
This year, it had yet to establish an ad hoc committee on banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices ("Fissban"). The main obstacles to the establishment of those committees came from differing opinions either on "linkage theory" or on scope of the mandate for the "Fissban" committee. Whether or not the mandate for the "Fissban" committee included stockpiles, in addition to future production of the fissile materials, was one of the issues. Those were problems that could most effectively be tackled separately. To resolve those questions, he suggested that the Conference clearly define the greatest common measure for the different positions presented so far, and apply the simplest principle to implement it. The greatest common measure was to proceed towards the ultimate goal of a world free of nuclear arms. Indeed, the simplest principle was that it should not fear to negotiate. If the Conference failed to establish other ad hoc committees, the only fruit to be harvested this year would be the conclusion of the comprehensive treaty. If the Conference failed to bring the treaty negotiations to a successful conclusion, credibility in the eyes of the world community would be much diminished.
ANNE ANDERSON (Ireland) said the achievement of a comprehensive treaty had, for many years, been a key objective of Ireland's foreign policy. Such a treaty would be a major step towards facilitating the complete elimination of nuclear weapons and would greatly strengthen the non-proliferation regime. There had been reference in many statements to the essentially small number of issues which remained to be resolved in the treaty negotiations. Although the text of the treaty was imprisoned in the celebrated 1200 brackets, it seemed to be agreed that only a handful of keys was required to open all of those locks.
In recent weeks, she said, significant contributions to the negotiations had been made by Iran and Australia. The Iranian draft text and the Australian model treaty demonstrated that the brackets were not immutable, that with political will and a determination to explore the potential areas of common agreement, solution to the outstanding issues could be found. Those documents offered important signposts which pointed in the direction of possible compromises.
She said Ireland supported efforts to achieve a comprehensive treaty whose scope embraces a true zero yield; which contained no exemptions or exceptions for any nuclear explosion; which contained a verification regime capable of acting quickly in response to a suspicious event; whose entry into force provisions were based on an agreed political balance between the need to secure the treaty's rapid entry into force and the need to ensure that the treaty is ratified by those States for which its terms were of particular relevance; and which would be overseen by an independent treaty organization
- 3 - Press Release DCF/256 20 March 1996
co-located in Vienna with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with which it could explore the most effective and efficient working relationship.
A world free of nuclear weapons was, and would remain, the goal of Irish policy, she continued. But Ireland also knew that the road ahead was full of obstacles, and that there were no obvious short cuts. Her delegation, therefore, wholeheartedly agreed with those who felt that efforts to link the treaty to the achievement of a more ambitious objective than the cessation of nuclear testing risked jeopardizing the negotiations at this late stage. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the comprehensive treaty and, as soon as possible, a fissile cut-off treaty were important milestones on the way to a nuclear-weapon-free world. In addition to the conclusion of a cut-off treaty, the Conference had to consider what additional work it might usefully undertake in bringing the world closer to the goal of complete elimination of nuclear weapons.
The Conference also had to deal with its expansion, she went on, adding that 23 countries were pressing for the urgent implementation of earlier decision on the matter. Ireland shared and sympathized with their frustration. A further 13 countries, including Ireland, had applied for membership and had not received a reply. Her delegation had an open mind as to procedures for moving the matter forward. The rules of procedure of the Conference stated that the membership would be reviewed at regular intervals. The last such review took place in 1993. The previous review was in 1978. She would submit that three years, and not 17, was a regular interval and that the Conference could not continue to evade its responsibilities in that regard.
LUDWIK DEMBINSKI (Poland) welcomed the announced intention of the Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on a Nuclear-Test Ban to come forward soon with a Chairman's paper on the comprehensive treaty, which would offer the delegations a valuable guide to negotiations to take home to their capitals. The Chairman's Paper would represent a commendable effort to stave off a possible crisis in the negotiations likely to impair the Committee's ability to keep to its agreed schedule. Most importantly, however, bearing the mark of the Chairman's impartiality, such a document would offer proposals for a compromise solution to some, if not all, of the sticky issues of the past two years.
Given those considerations, he said, he was somewhat disappointed with the cautious, not to say sceptical, reaction of some delegations to the proposal. He recalled that, as early as 1995, in his capacity as Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee, he had urged delegations to seek consensus language and a rolling text as free of unnecessary brackets as possible. Since then, the number of brackets had actually gone up, rather than down. "We must not delude ourselves that a rapid downward trend will commence in that regard and that a clean text will start falling in place once the major outstanding
- 4 - Press Release DCF/256 20 March 1996
issues are resolved", he said. Those were two distinct issues which must not be confused.
Delegations had to answer another important question, he added. If the paramount political objective was to come up, before the end of the current session, with a definitive text of the comprehensive treaty, did they need to waste time at this late hour on technicalities pertaining to such issues as the international monitoring system and on-site inspections? What was needed was to concentrate on resolving the key outstanding issues, which included, among others: a question of scope that provided for a comprehensive ban on all nuclear explosions over and above zero yield; an appropriate and legitimate balance between sovereignty of States parties and the effectiveness of the treaty verification mechanism; the place and standing of the five nuclear-weapon States and the nuclear-capable "threshold" States in the treaty, including the treaty organization; and the intrinsic nuclear disarmament value of the treaty, which argued against attempts to establish any formal treaty links with other issues that, however legitimate and worthy, were irrelevant to the nuclear test-ban treaty.
HOCINE MEGHLAOUI (Algeria), speaking as coordinator of the Group of 21, said that in a statement to the Conference during the 1995 session, the Group had recalled that it had foreseen the inclusion in the agenda of a specific item on nuclear disarmament and the opening of negotiations on the question, which was accorded the highest importance by the international community. In another statement made on 23 January, the Group had reiterated that request after expressing its regret over the refusal of certain members of the Conference to negotiate on the question of nuclear disarmament in the framework of this multilateral forum for disarmament negotiations. The Group now proposed, once again, that the Conference establish an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament to commence negotiations on phased programme of nuclear disarmament for the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons within a specified framework of time. The Committee would commence negotiations immediately after the conclusion of the comprehensive treaty negotiations. The Group proposed that the decision be adopted during the first part of the 1996 session, ending on 29 March.
JAAP RAMAKER (Netherlands), outgoing President of the Conference, said that on the basis of the consultations he had conducted, a possible role for the Conference in the field of nuclear disarmament, other than items already under consideration, did not seem to be excluded for the future. However, for the immediate future, he had not been able to identify a commonality of views on whether and how work on nuclear disarmament in general in the Conference could start. While a number of suggestions were made with regard to the format in which that issue could be addressed -- ranging from informal consultations to the establishment of an ad hoc committee with a negotiating mandate -- there was no consensus on a role as such for the Conference in relation to nuclear disarmament in general.
- 5 - Press Release DCF/256 20 March 1996
With regard to the question of expansion of the membership of the Conference, he went on, he had also initiated a series of consultations to establish whether early implementation of the earlier decision would be possible. He had tried to find out whether any other solution or partial solution for the expansion of Conference membership would be possible. Those consultations had shown that, much to his regret, that implementation was not yet possible.
Regarding the review of the agenda of the Conference, he said he was pleased to learn that the Special Coordinator on the question was beginning to see the contours of a more rationalized agenda. He recommended to the incoming President to continue the process of consultations on nuclear disarmament.
* *** *