CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT STARTS THIRD PART OF 2001 SESSION
| Press Release DC/2800 |
DC/2800 2 August 2001
CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT STARTS THIRD PART OF 2001 SESSION
Hears Statements from Ukraine, Italy, Bangladesh and Cuba as President
(Reissued as received.)
GENEVA, 2 August (UN Information Service) -- The Conference on Disarmament this morning started the third part of its 2001 session and heard statements from representatives of Ukraine, Italy, Bangladesh and Cuba as the President of the Conference.
The President, Ambassador Carlos Amat Fores of Cuba, said that his presidential consultations during the intersessional period had shown that the great majority of delegations had indicated that it would be very difficult to make headway on substantive issues in the final few weeks of work of the Conference. Nevertheless, he had seen unanimous interest in maintaining the Conference on Disarmament and its credibility, and in ensuring that it remained the sole international multilateral forum for disarmament negotiations.
The President said that there was a broadly shared position that the Presidency should maintain its efforts and not allow itself to be discouraged, however complex the situation was. There was a high level of expectation regarding the possible effect that the current dynamics of international events could have on the work of the Conference following developments in recent talks at the highest level among the main powers. Consultations had also shown that the Amorim proposal (CD/1624) continued to enjoy a high level of support as a basis for continuing consultations.
In a general statement, Ambassador Mykhailo Skuratovskyi of Ukraine said that it was vital for the Conference to leave behind the practice of annually reopening the same procedural discussions which deflected it from reaching agreement on how to deal with the substantive issues. The delegations’ work should also cease to conceal itself behind the anonymous facade of the presidential consultations. Other options and forms of substantive discussions should be explored.
Ambassador Mario Maiolini of Italy said that as far as the reform of the agenda of the Conference was concerned, Italy believed that a principle should be introduced to automatically eliminate from the agenda any items on which there had been no proposals for many years. This would apply to items like item
2 (prevention of nuclear war) and item 5 (new types of weapons of mass destruction
and new systems of such weapons; radiological weapons). He also believed that there should be automatic inclusion in the agenda of any item assigned to the Conference through any consensual resolution by the General Assembly. This could apply to the issues of regional disarmament and missile proliferation.
The new Permanent Representative of Bangladesh to the United Nations Office at Geneva, Toufiq Ali, said that the role of disarmament was vital. The first priority of Bangladesh was economic development. The Government would like to see all its available resources addressing the need for social and economic development. The role of disarmament was vital because through disarmament, funds could be released and used to advance the society.
The President of the Conference noted that as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Democratic Republic of Congo had informed the Secretariat that they would be unable to accept the rotating Presidency of the Conference, the next President, who would hold that position from 20 August to
31 December 2001, would be the Ambassador of Ecuador.
The Conference also approved allowing Saudi Arabia to attend its session as an observer. Ambassador Amat Reyes reminded delegations that the Special Coordinator would hold informal open-ended consultations on improved and effective functioning of the work of the Conference as soon as the plenary was adjourned.
The next plenary of the Conference will be held at 10 a.m. on Thursday,
9 August.
Statements
CARLOS AMAT FORES (Cuba), President of the Conference, reported to the Conference on the consultations that he had held as President during the intersessional period. Cuba's remaining period as President was barely three weeks long, therefore there was a need to be very realistic and objective regarding the goals that could be achieved as it completed its term. He had held consultations during the intersessional period and intended to contact as many delegations as possible in the next few weeks. Therefore, his comments were very preliminary. Once consultations had advanced, he would have a more complete picture of the positions prevailing among the members of the Conference.
Ambassador Amat Fores said that so far, there were many indications of support from all delegations contacted. The great majority of the delegations had indicated that it would be very difficult to make headway on substantive issues in the final few weeks of work of the Conference. Nevertheless, he had seen unanimous interest in maintaining the Conference on Disarmament and its credibility, and in ensuring that it remained the sole international multilateral forum for disarmament negotiations. There was a broadly shared position that the Presidency should maintain its efforts and not allow itself to be discouraged, however complex the situation was. There was a high level of expectation regarding the possible effect that the current dynamics of international events could have on the work of the Conference following developments in recent talks at the highest level among the main powers. Presidential consultations had shown that the Amorim proposal continued to enjoy a high level of support as a basis for continuing consultations.
With respect to the specific modalities on how to advance, there were two trends, Ambassador Amat Fores said. One group of countries believed that the only viable option to reach agreement on a programme of work was through a package formula that would respect the relationships that had been established between issues. The other group of countries believed that there was no real possibility of a package solution. The Conference should take up separately the various substantive items and start negotiations on whichever ones it was possible to proceed with. He had also found broad support for the work of the three Special Coordinators who had been appointed and a preparedness to contribute to their work. He asked delegations to consider appropriate replies to the questionnaires prepared by the Special Coordinators and urged that they take part in the consultations as actively as possible so that they could make headway on these matters. In addition, his consultations had shown that although the work of the Special Coordinators was highly useful, there was a clear awareness of the need to advance on the substantive issues that were of interest to everyone.
In conclusion, Ambassador Amat Fores said that in the presidential consultations last Tuesday, the coordinators of the regional groups had basically reconfirmed the positions of their respective groups. He had taken due note of this and would bear it in mind for future work. He reiterated that he was open to any suggestions or ideas that members of the Conference might have as to the best way to conduct the business of the Conference. It was very important to have an open and transparent ongoing dialogue in the body.
MYKHAILO SKURATOVSKYI (Ukraine) said in a general statement that his delegation supported the draft decision on the programme of work, contained in document CD/1624, as a basis for further intensified consultations and for possible consensus. Ukraine was firmly convinced that the Conference on Disarmament was capable of continuing to contribute efficiently to strengthening international peace and stability. The voluntary renunciation of nuclear weapons by Ukraine could serve as an example of great moral significance and political courage to be followed. Ukraine realized the important role the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty played in the system of international legal instruments in the sphere of disarmament and arms control. It believed that the review of national security strategy in the United States should not lead to a deterioration of the global strategic stability situation and resumption of the arms race.
Ambassador Skuratovskyi said that Ukraine reaffirmed its commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It also believed that the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) was rightfully regarded as another key element in the architecture of strategic stability and as a major complementary effort to non-proliferation. The conclusion of the CTBT was standing proof of the continuing relevance of the Conference as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum. Another clear priority in the advance of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament was the negotiation of a fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT). Ukraine was discouraged that negotiations on an FMCT had not progressed in the Conference. The Conference also had an undeniable role to play in promoting nuclear disarmament.
In conclusion, the Permanent Representative of Ukraine said that it was vital for the Conference to leave behind the practice of annually reopening the same procedural discussions, which deflected it from reaching agreement on how to deal with the substantive issues. The delegations’ work should also cease to conceal itself behind the anonymous facade of the presidential consultations. Other options and forms of substantive discussions should be explored, including those proposed by the Foreign Minister of Ukraine in his address to the Conference last year.
MARIO MAIOLINI (Italy) said that he had taken note of the intensive consultations held by the President in an effort to reach consensus on a formula on the three main substantive issues facing the Conference. He commended the work done so far by the Special Coordinators on the reform of the Conference. Italy had promptly replied to their questions. As far as the reform of the agenda was concerned, Italy believed that a principle should be introduced to automatically eliminate from the agenda any items on which there had been no proposals for many years. This would apply to items like item 2 (prevention of nuclear war) and item 5 (new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons; radiological weapons). He also believed that there should be automatic inclusion in the agenda of any item assigned to the Conference through any consensual resolution by the General Assembly. This could apply to the issues of regional disarmament and missile proliferation.
Concerning the expansion of the Conference, Ambassador Maiolini said that not only did Italy support enlarging the body by accepting the requests for membership by the four remaining European Union members, it was not against the universalization of the Conference. In the situation that there was no consensus for that, only for accepting a limited group of countries, Italy believed that priority should be to those States whose requests for membership had been presented first, and according to their functioning and interest as observers to the Conference.
In conclusion, Ambassador Maiolini said that Italy believed that when the necessary political will existed, Member States would strike deals, even without reform of the Conference. But if there was no political will, no reform would be effective enough. Right now, he believed the Conference was in neither of those extreme situations, but in a grey area.
TOUFIQ ALI (Bangladesh), attending his first meeting of the Conference on Disarmament as the new Permanent Representative of his country to the United Nations and other international organizations at Geneva, said that the Conference was a body which was devoted to a noble task and lofty ideas. For Bangladesh, the role of disarmament was vital. The first priority of Bangladesh was economic development. The Government would like to see all its available resources addressing the need for social and economic development. The role of disarmament was vital because through disarmament, funds could be released and used to advance the society. He would do his utmost to advance the goals of the Conference and his delegation would fully cooperate in any efforts to advance the agenda issues.
* *** *