DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE HEARS STATEMENTS ON ANTI-PERSONNEL LAND-MINES NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT AND FISSILE MATERIAL CUT-OFF
Press Release
DCF/311
DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE HEARS STATEMENTS ON ANTI-PERSONNEL LAND-MINES NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT AND FISSILE MATERIAL CUT-OFF
19970815 (Reissued as received.)GENEVA, 14 August (UN Information Service) -- There was little point in the Conference on Disarmament taking any decisions on a possible mandate to negotiate a land-mine ban until the outcome of the parallel Ottawa process was known in December, a representative of Australia said this morning.
According to John Campbell, who is the Conference's Special Coordinator for Anti-Personnel Land-mines, there was no feeling among delegations that the Conference was in competition with the Ottawa process, which would take a further step forward when negotiations on a draft treaty commenced in Oslo in September. Rather, he had the feeling that delegations would like to see the outcome of that process before taking final decisions on how the Conference might complement the outcomes of Ottawa.
Mr. Campbell's comments came as he presented a progress report on the consultations he has conducted since being named Special Coordinator on 26 June. He told the Conference that he was not in a position to make any recommendation at the moment, but that he would present a further interim report at which stage he expected to seek the Conference's agreement for him to continue consultations in the period between the end of this year's session on 12 September and the beginning of next year's session in January.
The Conference also heard from its outgoing President, Maria Krasnohorska of the Slovak Republic, who said that the efforts to reach consensus on how to deal with the different items on the Conference's agenda had not always borne fruit. Nonetheless, her tenure had seen the appointment of special coordinators on anti-personnel land-mines, the agenda, expansion of the membership and the functioning of the Conference.
The representatives of New Zealand, Iraq and Kazakhstan also spoke.
Statements
CLIVE WALLACE PEARSON (New Zealand) said this year had been one of deadlock and inflexibility. Yet there had never been a more auspicious time for forward movement. New Zealand had consistently urged the Conference to begin a dialogue on nuclear disarmament following a two-track approach: a preparatory track and a negotiating track. In doing so, priority should be given to identifying those proposals on which the Conference could add value now. Secondly, the Conference could determine those areas where it could add value in the future. Finally, the Conference should seek to establish how it could best support progress to be undertaken by the nuclear-weapon States themselves. New Zealand was not looking to constrain work in the Conference by imposing time bindings or tactical linkages on nuclear or conventional weapons. Working for the reasonable middle ground was the way his country wanted to see progress in addressing all disarmament imperatives.
The appointment this year of four special coordinators should not be undervalued, he said. This was a good moment to revisit issues such as membership, functions and the agenda. On improved and effective functioning, it would be wrong to confuse any review of procedures with the separate question of membership. Similarly, consideration of wider membership should not be predicted by concerns over functioning. New Zealand also wished to see non-governmental organizations participate in the Conference to the fullest extent possible.
He said New Zealand warmly welcomed the ongoing efforts of the Secretary-General to reform the United Nations. It was encouraged by his clarification that the proposals in the disarmament area were designed to jump-start one of the United Nations more important areas of activity. Indeed, New Zealand would have wished to see more far-reaching reforms proposed in that area. For one thing, the Conference should look also at implementing output-driven reforms. On questions relating to the agenda, New Zealand would be keen to explore the adoption a thematic and balanced programme, with a longer lifespan and the necessary flexibility for the Conference to get on with its real work. New Zealand considered also that the Conference should take more fully into account consensus-driven calls for action from the General Assembly.
Turning to the consideration of future membership, he wished to reiterate that New Zealand fully supported the principle that it should be open-ended. The Conference would not claim representational exclusivity when it was dealing with global issues. On the question of land-mines, New Zealand was committed to the Ottawa process, which had real momentum behind it. In considering the Conference's future role, it must be ensured that it would reinforce and not dilute in any way the ban on land-mines. Any action must be consistent with, and not merely complementary to the Ottawa Treaty.
- 3 - Press Release DCF/311 15 August 1997
BARZAN AL-TIKRITI (Iraq) said the Conference could achieve desired results with genuine political will. The Iraqi delegation had participated with the Group of 21 in presenting the proposals in document CD/1462 last June. That had been an excellent contribution to facilitating the work of the Conference and was a good basis for agreement. Iraq considered that the priorities specified by the General Assembly's special session of 1978 were still in force. That meeting had designated nuclear disarmament as the first priority. The nuclear States parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) had a special responsibility in that sphere. That was why his delegation strongly supported the establishment of the committee entrusted with the item of the agenda entitled, "Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and Nuclear Disarmament". Results could not come overnight, but the establishment of that committee was the first step towards achieving a convention for complete nuclear disarmament.
He said Iraq looked at the question of total nuclear disarmament with an open mind. Until that noble and human objective was realized, Iraq considered the guarantees given by the nuclear-weapon States to be one of the main concerns of those peoples and States which had not acquired nuclear weapons. That security assurance represented the minimum requirement of the non-nuclear-weapon States. Demanding such safeguards was a legitimate and just right of the non-nuclear-weapon States, which had voluntarily renounced the nuclear option when the NPT was promulgated in 1968. The nuclear-weapon States had not honoured their pledges according to article 6 of that Treaty, contenting themselves with issuing individual declarations that were, from a legal viewpoint, unsatisfactory and inadequate.
On land-mines, he said efforts to deal with the issue could not be realistic if they did not clearly specify humanitarian goals and national interests as priorities in comprehensive disarmament measures. Otherwise, the process of mine clearing and eradication would remain a distant objective. Such a process should not be subject to selective interpretations according to spur of the moment considerations. Achievement of an international document would clearly define the ways and means to rid the world of mines. Such a document should be binding for all States, particularly those with large, highly developed industrial and military capabilities. In 1991, Iraq had been subjected to a large-scale aggression which had left in its wake large numbers of mines. Well-known entities endeavoured to clear some of the Iraqi territories of those mines, not for purely humanitarian reasons, but for clear political purposes.
As for a ban on the production of fissile material, he said any future convention should address the production, acquisition and storage of such material. The prohibition of fissile material used in the making of a nuclear weapon should include material whose level of enrichment was 20 per cent and above, as well as currently stored material and its future production, whether military or civilian -- excepting one kilogram, which the membership quantity
- 4 - Press Release DCF/311 15 August 1997
of that material. He added that Iraq's implementation of Security Council resolutions concerning weapons of mass destruction had been characterized by transparency. JOHN CAMPBELL (Australia), Special Coordinator for Anti-Personnel Land- mines, said that since his appointment on 26 June he had outlined four possible options for dealing with that issue in the Conference through the establishment of an ad hoc committee. The first of those options was a comprehensive mandate which would have the Conference endorse the objective of working towards an effective global ban on land-mines and undertake work on the various aspects of such a ban -- production, use, transfers and stockpiles -- simultaneously. The second alternative was a comprehensive mandate which would affirm an effective global ban as the ultimate objective, but would agree to undertake work towards that goal in a step-by-step manner. The third possible mandate was one which would involve a strictly partial approach to the issue and would have the conference establish an ad hoc committee to look at such discrete issues as export, import, transfers and verification. The fourth possible mandate was really no mandate at all in the sense that it would have the Conference agree to establish an ad hoc committee simply to review and discuss the world situation regarding land-mines . He had found no convergence in support of that option. As there were some delegations with which he had not yet discussed the issue, he was not in a position to make any recommendation to the Conference at the moment. As for the timing for any Conference action on land-mines, he agreed with delegations which had pointed out that there was little point in the Conference taking any decisions on a possible mandate on land-mines until the outcome of the Ottawa process was known in December. He had no sense that there was any feeling among delegations that the Conference was in competition with that process, which would take a further step forward when negotiations on a draft treaty commenced in Oslo in September. Rather, he had the feeling that delegations would like to see the outcome of that process before taking final decisions on how the Conference might complement the outcomes of Ottawa. He said it had been his intention to make a further progress report on his efforts to fulfil his mandate as Special Coordinator. However, there would most likely be a further interim report, at which stage he expected to seek the Conference's agreement that he continue consultations during the period between the end of this year's Conference session and the beginning of next year's session. That would be with a view to presenting a final report during the first part of the 1998 session. ALEXEI VOLKOV (Kazakhstan) read out a statement from his country's Foreign Ministry announcing the Government's 6 August decision to prohibit anti-personnel land-mines, including their re-export and transit. That unilateral moratorium represented the expression of the country's commitment to the strengthening of international peace and security. He said all States would have to accept that it was necessary to pursue in a parallel manner the Ottawa process and efforts in Geneva, in order to achieve progress on the question of anti-personnel land-mines. * *** *
- 5 - Press Release DCF/311 15 August 1997