CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT ADOPTS ANNUAL REPORT AS IT CONCLUDES 2005 SESSION

The Conference on Disarmament today adopted its annual report and concluded its 2005 session after hearing statements from the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea on the results of the Six-Party Talks, from Turkey on the expansion of the membership of the Conference, from Japan on the stalemate in the Conference, and from Peru as the President of the Conference.

The Republic of Korea outlined the main points in the joint statement reached at the end of the Six-Party Talks last week, adding that the Government expected that the joint statement would lead to substantial progress, not only on the nuclear issue but also to realizing enduring peace on the Korean Peninsula and beyond.

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea said it would return to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and would sign a safeguard agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency upon the provision by the United States of a light water reactor as a confidence-building measure. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea would now see how the agreement would be implemented in the near future.

Japan said that over the past year, the Conference had been unable to make marked progress, despite various initiatives tried by Presidents and Member States. Nevertheless, the Conference had come a long way since January, and as pointed out by some Member States a few days ago, it was by no means at the end of the road.

The Conference adopted its annual report to the General Assembly (CD/WP.539 and CD/WP/539/Amend.1). The report notes that during the annual session, successive Presidents of the Conference had conducted intensive consultations and had made significant efforts with a view to reaching consensus on a programme of work. A number of informal proposals related to a programme of work had been put forward. In spite of the efforts of the Presidents, the Conference was not able to agree on a programme of work and did not re-establish or establish any mechanism on any of its specific agenda items during the 2005 session.

Felix Calderon of Peru, Acting President of the Conference, said the adoption of the annual report was a source of satisfaction. Everyone was determined to continue to move forward. When he said success, it had to be measured. It was a meagre source of comfort to see that the Conference had a final report which contained within the problem that the Conference had been unable to come up with a consensus on the programme of work. Therefore, the satisfaction the Conference felt must be mixed.

Mr. Calderon said that he would hold an open-ended meeting on 13 December for all States to inform them of the results of the consultations and to present any recommendations that had been reached. This would take place in cooperation with the Ambassador of Poland, the next President of the Conference. During 2006, the Presidency would also be held by the Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Senegal and Slovakia.

At the beginning of the meeting, the President of the Conference welcomed Ambassador Danzannorov Boldbaatar, the new Permanent Representative of Mongolia to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The 2006 session of the Conference on Disarmament will start on 23 January 2006.

Statements

IN-KOOK PARK (Republic of Korea) said he wished to share with the Conference the outcome of the Fourth Round of the Six-P arty talks which had been held in Beijing. Last Monday, the Six Parties had succeeded in adopting a joint statement which set out the principles and guidelines for the peaceful resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue. According to the major points of the joint statement, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes and returning, at an early date, to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Six Parties unanimously reaffirmed that the goal of the Six-Party Talks was the verifiable denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea also stated that it had the right to peaceful use of nuclear energy; the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the United States undertook to respect each other’s sovereignty; and the Five Parties involved in the talks stated their willingness to provide energy assistance to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Ambassador Park said the Korean Government expected that the joint statement would lead to substantial progress, not only on the nuclear issue but also to realizing enduring peace on the Korean Peninsula and beyond. He was confident that the agreement would also contribute to further strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime and would advance the common goal of making the world safer and more prosperous.

FELIX CALDERON (Peru), Acting President of the Conference, said that the joint statement was a significant step which he hoped would ensure peace in the Korean Peninsula.

MURAT SALIM ESENLI (Turkey) said Turkey appreciated the efforts of the President of the Conference which had resulted in the balanced draft annual report. He wished to reiterate Turkey's position on the issue of expansion of the membership of the Conference. In principle, Turkey viewed the expansion of the Conference as a significant issue. This issue had last been taken up in 2002. Unfortunately, the Conference had not been able to agree on a work programme since 1998. In order to save the Conference on Disarmament from another annual report which said nothing, the Conference should continue its efforts to resolve the stalemate, then it should embark on consideration of expansion of the Conference on a case-by-case basis.

Mr. Esenli said as he would be leaving Geneva shortly, he wanted to say it had been a great honour to be part of the work of the Conference which had been an important learning experience. The situation in the Conference resembled the furnace of an ironsmith with a dwindling core. This furnace needed a bit of fanning in order to start beating the iron again.

AN MYONG HUN (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) said he would also like to present a briefing to the Conference on the result of the Six-Party Talks. The second phase of the talks on the nuclear issue between the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the United States had closed on 19 September. These talks had started in August 2003 at the request of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and had been held several times. The talks had repeatedly proved to be unproductive because of the conflicting stances of the parties. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea had always approached the talks with sincerity to achieve the general goal of de-nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. The parties had at last succeeded in meeting all these challenges, making it possible to agree on the joint statement which reflected the consistent stand of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea on the settlement of the nuclear issue between the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the United States and the commitment of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the United States to the de-nuclearization of the Peninsula. The parties would take harmonious measures to implement the points in the joint statement in the days ahead.

As clarified in the statement, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea would return to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and would sign a safeguard agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency upon the provision by the United States of a light water reactor as a confidence-building measure. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea did not need a single nuclear weapon as long as the Peninsula was de-nuclearized and as long as it was not exposed to the United States' nuclear threat any longer. It was essential that the United States provide the Democratic People's Republic of Korea with a light water reactor. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea would now see how the agreement would be implemented in the near future.

YOSHIKI MINE (Japan) said that over the past year, the Conference had been unable to make marked progress, despite various initiatives tried by Presidents and Member States. He had to confess that the initiative presented by the President had taken Japan somewhat by surprise, as it had known very little about the intentions of the President during his term. If Japan had known the working plan beforehand and had had more time to deliberate over his proposal, it may have been able to react in a more forthcoming and constructive manner. Nevertheless, the Conference had come a long way since January, and as pointed out by some Member States a few days ago, it was by no means at the end of the road. Although the President's proposal did not command wider support after the preliminary discussions, it was his sincere hope that the comments made on it would be used in a constructive manner to contribute to future work. He encouraged all delegations to make constructive efforts to move the Conference on Disarmament forward.

FELIX CALDERON (Peru), Acting President of the Conference, said he thanked all delegations for their resolute and timely cooperation which had been accompanied by good will and which had made it possible for the Conference to approve its final report. This was a source of satisfaction. Everyone was determined to continue to move forward. When he said success, it had to be measured. It was a meagre source of comfort to see that the Conference had a final report which contained within it the problem that the Conference had been unable to come up with a consensus on the programme of work. Therefore, the satisfaction the Conference felt must be mixed. Various delegations had been surprised by the style of his proposal. Since January, there had been momentum by Presidents whose endeavour had been to come up with a compromise and who had used Foreign Ministers to assist in the work of the Conference and to give it fresh impetus to enable it to find consensus on a programme of work.

When he had taken the Presidency, Mr. Calderon said he could only continue
with this new momentum and could only try to promote the new dynamism. This year had been a promising year in terms of renewed impetus to try to work towards peace. He agreed with Japan that the short period that each President held in office generated time pressure. If each President had more time for appropriate consultations, this might help. Nothing was happening in the Conference that was new. The Members were simplifying trying to find ways to reach convergence and to revolve around the various positions. At the Conference, national stances were respected, and it had to find places where they could come together, not in agreement, but within reasonably acceptable terms of convergence. With this objective in mind, Peru would continue consultations in the intersessional period in New York. This would be multilateral and bilateral work which would take up everything discussed at the Conference.

In conclusion, Mr. Calderon said that he would hold an open-ended meeting on 13 December for all States to inform them of the results of the consultations to present any recommendations that had been reached. This would take place in cooperation with the Ambassador of Poland, the next President of the Conference. During 2006, the Presidency would also be held by the Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Senegal and Slovakia.

For use of the information media; not an official record

DC05037E