SWITZERLAND, NORWAY, UKRAINE ADDRESS CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT

Press Release
DCF/327

SWITZERLAND, NORWAY, UKRAINE ADDRESS CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT

(Reissued as received.)

GENEVA, 5 March (UN Information Service) -- The Conference on Disarmament this morning heard statements from Switzerland, Norway and Ukraine which addressed the issues of nuclear disarmament and anti-personnel landmines and stressed the need for reform within the body.

Jakob Kellenberger, Secretary of State of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, said that unless the Conference showed its aptitude to involve new trends in the areas of disarmament and arms control in its work, it risked being confined to a second-class role. He suggested the creation of a bureau for the Conference to facilitate its work, adding that Switzerland saw no valid criteria to exclude any countries from joining the Conference and appealed to the body for openness in order to obtain universality.

That view was also expressed by Aaslaug Haga, State Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Norway, who said that membership of the Conference on Disarmament should be open to all countries. She stressed that the Conference was in urgent need of reform and said issues such as membership, working methods and the agenda should be approached in a comprehensive way. Norway would like to see work started immediately on the reform questions.

Mykola Maimeskul (Ukraine) believed that eventual negotiations on a fissile materials cut-off treaty within the Conference should be conducted at the Ad Hoc Committee within the context of the termination of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament. The nuclear arms race would not end without a non-discriminatory, legally binding agreement to ban the production of fissile material.

Statements

JAKOB KELLENBERGER, Secretary of State of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland, pointed to difficulties facing the Conference on Disarmament which would have to meet more than one challenge in order to remain the ideal multilateral negotiating forum on disarmament.

He said that the Conference should show its aptitude to involve new trends in the areas of disarmament and arms control in its work. It was imperative for the Conference on Disarmament to emerge from its present orientation phase and resume negotiations through dialogue. Otherwise, the Conference would risk being confined to a second-class role. In the first place, the Conference should take into account conventions and treaties concerning weapons of mass destruction already on the international arena.

Switzerland believed that the question of nuclear disarmament should be on the agenda, he said. His country was ready to accept that a multilateral framework might not be the best way to reduce nuclear disarmament, however, the Conference had a role to play in this field, and should begin with the fissile material cut-off agreement.

On anti-personnel landmines, he said that Switzerland believed that international treaties must enter into force globally. There were no objections against dealing with that issue by the Conference. However, the results of those deliberations should not affect international treaties already agreed upon.

Switzerland had earmarked 25 million Swiss francs from 1993 to 1997 for demining, and it would spend another 5 millions francs this year, he said. It had also decided to create the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining and had made funds available for a project with the United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations for demining-related activities.

He observed that light arms caused most losses of human lives in war zones. However, before Switzerland took a stand on the role of the Conference on Disarmament in that complex area, it needed to see if global solutions for light arms and their transfer were appropriate, or if regional solutions were better. The Conference on Disarmament could deal with some aspects of light arms, but it had to take account of action taken in all other forums on that issue.

He said that the Conference should remain flexible as regards the subjects it would choose to negotiate, and it should focus on substance rather than procedural issues. Noting that 20 States had asked to become members of the Conference and another 50 were observers, he said that Switzerland saw no valid criteria to exclude any candidates and appealed to the body to open itself up to obtain universality. One measure Switzerland suggested was the

- 3 - Press Release DCF/327 9 March 1998

creation of a bureau for the Conference to facilitate its work. The question of reform should not become hostage to a sterile debate, rather the Conference should conduct profound procedural reforms.

AASLAUG HAGA, State Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Norway, said that her Government was firmly committed to the efforts of the Conference on Disarmament to promote global security through multilateral negotiations on disarmament, non-proliferation and other security-related issues. The need to prevent the use of the immense destructive capabilities of modern arms, and the development of new costly weapons systems, would continue to be a major objective for global disarmament negotiations.

She said nuclear disarmament issues continued to be a primary preoccupation for the international community. The ultimate goal remained complete nuclear disarmament. The nuclear-weapon States had an obligation, enshrined in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in international politics. They were responsible for nuclear disarmament and therefore it was impossible to transfer the responsibility for negotiations on nuclear disarmament from them to multilateral forums.

However, the Conference on Disarmament had a clear role in questions related to nuclear disarmament and nuclear arms control as it could serve as an important forum for information exchange between nuclear-weapon States and non-nuclear weapon States. Negotiations for an agreement prohibiting the production of fissile material for weapons purposes should be a priority item on the agenda of the Conference, and it was also important to work towards greater openness regarding the stocks of fissile material held by nuclear Powers.

She said that the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction should serve as a practical tool to put an end to the human suffering caused by the use of landmines. The Norwegian Government would allocate $120 million over the next five years to mine clearance activities, care and rehabilitation of mine victims and mine awareness programmes. The Conference on Disarmament could promote the universalization of the total ban on landmines in conformity with the norms now established by the Ottawa Convention.

She felt that the issue of conventional armaments needed to be addressed in a more focused manner and suggested that the Conference might provide a forum for a coherent discussion of various dimensions and complexities of the problem. Urgent action was necessary to combat the illicit trade in conventional weapons, particularly in small arms. The Conference might also have a useful role in discussing the complex issue of licit trade of conventional weapons, including small arms.

- 4 - Press Release DCF/327 9 March 1998

On the issue of the arms race in outer space, she said that Norway supported the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee with a mandate to negotiate a convention on that subject. Norway also encouraged the initiative to appoint a Special Coordinator on the issue of transparency in armaments.

She concluded by stressing that the Conference on Disarmament was in urgent need of reform. Reform issues such as membership, working methods and agenda should be approached in a comprehensive way. The membership at the Conference on Disarmament should be open to all countries wishing to accede. Norway would like to see work started immediately on the reform questions irrespective of activities on what was referred to as matters of substance. It welcomed and supported the immediate appointment of either three Special Coordinators for the specific issues or of one sole Special Coordinator to, in a comprehensive way, cover all aspects of the reform questions.

MYKOLA MAIMESKUL (Ukraine) said that in 1997, the Conference on Disarmament had been split almost equally on nuclear issues. One group declared nuclear disarmament as a priority, while the other advocated the immediate start of negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty. Ukraine was aware of existing views on a cut-off of future fissile material production as merely a non-proliferation issue not related to nuclear disarmament. However, from the Ukrainian perspective, eventual negotiations on fissile material cut-off should be conducted at the Ad Hoc Committee under the agenda item on the cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament.

He stressed that the termination of the nuclear arms race was not possible without a non-discriminatory, legally binding agreement to ban the future fissile material production. The working group of the Ad Hoc Committee might conduct the exploratory work on the political and technical aspects of the issue of excessive fissile material stockpiling without excluding the possibility of considering the issue of a comprehensive ban on fissile material.

He said that negative security assurances occupied an important place in the set of nuclear issues. A multilateral international legally-binding agreement on negative security assurances should be based on, among other things, the commitment of nuclear-weapon States to respect the independence and sovereignty and existing borders of non-nuclear weapon States and the understanding that the very fact of the possession of nuclear weapons enabled the nuclear-weapon State to exert political and other pressure on non-nuclear weapon States, even without overt threat. Negotiations leading to the legally-binding agreement on negative security assurances should be conducted in the framework of the relevant Ad Hoc Committee within the Conference on Disarmament.

- 5 - Press Release DCF/327 9 March 1998

Ukraine supported the appointment of a Special Coordinator on an arms race in outer space, he said. On the issue of anti-personnel landmines, Ukraine hoped that a Special Coordinator on the issue would be appointed. The next step should be the establishment of the Ad Hoc Committee on landmines. Ukraine believed that the Conference on Disarmament had the potential to deal more with conventional disarmament and supported the appointment of a Special Coordinator on transparency in armaments.

He concluded by outlining steps taken by Ukraine in the field of nuclear non-proliferation, including the ratification of an agreement between his country and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on safeguards application in connection with the NPT. By introducing an IAEA inspection regime in Ukraine, his country had made a further logical step to enhance international cooperation with a view of strengthening global stability.

* *** *