Conference on Disarmament Holds First Plenary of its 2023 Session
The Conference on Disarmament today held the first plenary of its 2023 session, hearing addresses by the President of the Conference and a number of States. The Conference also adopted its agenda for the 2023 session.
Ambassador Ahmed Ihab Gamaleldin of Egypt, President of the Conference, said the Conference on Disarmament was of pivotal significance in light of the serious security challenges faced by the world. Egypt, through its presidency, aimed to restore the efficient and central position that the Conference occupied within the international disarmament machinery. Only a balanced and comprehensive programme of work could achieve this goal. The stagnation that the Conference had suffered from for more than one quarter of a century called for an urgent need to cooperate to support the Conference’s revitalization and sustainability. It was crucial to secure the much-needed political will of the Conference membership.
The President said he intended to invite the Conference to hold two thematic sessions on topics of major international concern: the establishment of zones free of nuclear weapons and negative security assurances for non-nuclear States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. Mr. Gamaleldin affirmed his full commitment to strive for an agreement on a comprehensive and balanced programme of work of the Conference in 2023.
Speaking in the plenary were Sri Lanka, Ecuador, United States, Republic of Korea, Morocco, China, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Tunisia, Sweden on behalf of the European Union, Indonesia, France, Germany, Nigeria, Finland and Iraq.
The next plenary of the Conference on Disarmament will be held at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 26 January, to hear a statement by Tatiana Valovaya, the Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament and the Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva. It will also continue to hear general statements as well as right of reply statements.
Opening Remarks by the President of the Conference on Disarmament
AMBASSADOR AHMED IHAB GAMALELDIN of Egypt, President of the Conference on Disarmament, said the Conference on Disarmament was of pivotal significance in light of the serious security challenges faced by the world. Egypt, through its presidency, aimed to restore the efficient and central position that the Conference occupied within the international disarmament machinery. Only a balanced and comprehensive programme of work could achieve this goal. Humanity aspired to enhance security as the fundamental pillar of international peace. This goal constituted one of the foundational reasons behind the existence of the Conference for more than 40 years. International multilateralism created a clear common vision, which established the global disarmament machinery, within which the Conference on Disarmament was exclusively assigned with a negotiating mandate. Such a common vision also resulted in the conclusion of several legally binding disarmament instruments, including the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the Chemical Weapons Convention. The stagnation that the Conference had suffered from for more than one quarter of a century called for an urgent need to cooperate to support the Conference’s revitalization and sustainability. It was crucial to secure the much-needed political will of the Conference membership.
The future of international multilateral action, particularly in disarmament issues, depended directly on strengthening the climate of trust and close collaboration.
It was undeniable that the Conference had been directly affected by increasing global tension. Despite the promising commencement of work in early 2022 when the Conference successfully adopted the draft decision by the Chinese presidency, the tense international security situation had cast a negative shadow and posed tangible challenges against the adoption of the Conference’s annual report.
Mr. Gamaleldin said the Conference should consider the means which would allow it to keep its pace up with the challenges posed by technological progress in disarmament issues. The current agenda of the Conference could accommodate these new challenges in light of its broad mandate. The examples of new challenges that the Conference on Disarmament could address were not limited to outer space issues. The President intended to invite the Conference to hold two thematic sessions on two topics of major international concern: the establishment of zones free of nuclear weapons and negative security assurances for non-nuclear States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.
Mr. Gamaleldin affirmed his full commitment to strive for an agreement on a comprehensive and balanced programme of work of the Conference in 2023. Over the past few months, a series of consultations at the bilateral level had been held with the previous presidencies of the Conference in 2022 as well as with more than 30 Conference members to bring together views regarding different proposals on how to restore the Conference on Disarmament to its dynamism. Most recently in 2022, the Conference had adopted decision 2229, which was submitted by the Chinese presidency to establish five subsidiary bodies to deal with the Conference’s work; two of these subsidiary bodies succeeded in adopting final reports. The Conference's success in adopting a programme of work was achievable and such success was linked to the shared responsibility of both the Conference presidency and its members. Mr. Gamaleldin wished all participants success in the common endeavour towards achieving positive substantive progress by the Conference on Disarmament in its 2023 session.
The Conference then adopted the draft agenda for its 2023 session.
Summary of Discussion
States congratulated the President on his accession to the presidency of the Conference on Disarmament in 2023, and offered their full and unwavering support. Some States attached significant priority to the work of the Conference as a substantive multilateral negotiating body in the field of disarmament. However, it was concerning that for more than 20 years, the forum had not been able to fulfil its mandate to start negotiations, even as the modernisation and accumulation of weapons continued. Last year’s session of the Conference had been a disappointment. Some States believed that the main obstacle to the commencement of negotiations was the lack of mutual trust and political enthusiasm on the part of some States; it was clear that a critical reflection on the functioning of the Conference on Disarmament was needed, including a careful analysis of its working methods.
Only through confidence building and equal respect for the security of all Member States would the Conference be able to achieve the much-needed consensus towards adopting a programme of work. Delegations extended their full support and cooperation towards the efforts of the President to achieve consensus on a programme of work for this year, and to bring the Conference back to its past glory as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum. It was not easy to break the impasse which had continued for decades. States encouraged the President to continue conducting comprehensive consultations to find a common ground. States were urged to demonstrate flexibility as they worked to achieve concrete outcomes.
Some speakers said the Conference was meeting today in the backdrop of a serious global security situation. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and its nuclear rhetoric could not be ignored. One speaker said the international community could not turn their eyes away from the horrors perpetrated by Russia on Ukraine’s population, the nuclear rhetoric, and the intentional targeting of civilians across the country. These actions presented a threat to world security and arms control, and a challenge to institutions like the Conference on Disarmament. A number of speakers said the Russian invasion in Ukraine had gravely deteriorated the global security landscape, leading many to question the viability of international order. They reiterated their condemnation of Russia’s war against Ukraine and reaffirmed full support for Ukraine’s sovereignty. Russia’s ongoing campaign against the Ukrainian people was a crime, which must be stopped immediately.
In response to this, one speaker noted the groundless accusations against Russia regarding the use of nuclear weapons, saying the purpose of these accusations was to mislead the world about the root causes of Russia's actions on the territory of Ukraine, and to distract attention from hostile actions towards Russia in the context of the Ukrainian crisis. The result of the aggressive line against Russia was the politicisation that prevented a constructive exchange of views throughout the session, and made it impossible to adopt the reports of all five subsidiary bodies and agree on a substantive final report on the work of the Conference.
Concern was also expressed by some States at the unprecedented level of aggression, demonstrated by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, by firing a record number of missiles of various ranges, including eight intercontinental ballistic missiles. This, together with its nuclear blackmail, undermined the attainment of the Conference’s objectives and elevated the possibility of miscalculation which could lead to a catastrophe in the region and beyond. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was urged to positively engage in negotiations.
Some States urged Iran to never develop nuclear weapons, and to return to its stance of nuclear non-proliferation without delay. They reiterated calls for Iran to cease dealings with ballistic missile and to stop supplying weapons to Russia.
Some States said that nuclear disarmament should be the number one priority of the Conference. This must be combined with the negotiation of legally binding international agreements banning fissile material and eliminating stockpiles, as well as to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of such weapons. A number of States said treaties establishing nuclear-weapon-free zones were an important option on the road to nuclear disarmament. Some speakers were concerned by the collective failure to adopt a consensus outcome document for the second consecutive time at the tenth Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty Review Conference held last year, which was a missed opportunity, as well as that of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. Due to the unreasonable ambitions of Western countries and their lack of any desire to take into account the views of other States, it was not possible to agree on full-fledged final documents.
A number of States said nuclear weapons posed an existential threat to humankind and swift action should be taken for the advancement of the total and irreversible elimination of nuclear weapons. In the interim, there should be immediate commencement of negotiations on a legally binding treaty on negative security assurances, particularly in the present context of the growing risk of the use of nuclear weapons. Some States called for a moratorium on the construction of fissile material. Others maintained that it was incumbent on all nuclear-weapon States to behave responsibly and transparently, and to comply with their treaty obligations, explain their policies, and engage in good faith.
Regarding outer space, some States remained concerned about the potential risk of an arms race in outer space as the space environment became increasingly congested with the rapid advancement of technology. Some States strongly supported the negotiation of an international legally binding instrument to prevent any possibility of an arms race in outer space. Such an instrument would prohibit the withdrawal and deployment of weapons in outer space and the threat or use of force against outer space objects. Space was becoming more crowded, and technological advances could be used for civilian but also military purposes. Some States believed that the ineffective measures proposed by Western countries for strengthening security in outer space were aimed solely at diverting the attention of the international community from preserving outer space as a zone of general security, free from any military confrontation. It was important to use outer space for peaceful and equitable purposes.
States also called for the full implementation of the women, peace and security agenda, and for the equal and meaningful participation of women in conflict prevention. Last year had seen resistance to even the most basic and already-agreed language on the full and equal participation of women in the Conference, and a number of Member States continued to oppose updating the rules of procedure to be gender neutral.
Conference on Disarmament Holds First Plenary of its 2023 Session
The Conference on Disarmament today held the first plenary of its 2023 session, hearing addresses by the President of the Conference and a number of States. The Conference also adopted its agenda for the 2023 session.
Ambassador Ahmed Ihab Gamaleldin of Egypt, President of the Conference, said the Conference on Disarmament was of pivotal significance in light of the serious security challenges faced by the world. Egypt, through its presidency, aimed to restore the efficient and central position that the Conference occupied within the international disarmament machinery. Only a balanced and comprehensive programme of work could achieve this goal. The stagnation that the Conference had suffered from for more than one quarter of a century called for an urgent need to cooperate to support the Conference’s revitalization and sustainability. It was crucial to secure the much-needed political will of the Conference membership.
The President said he intended to invite the Conference to hold two thematic sessions on topics of major international concern: the establishment of zones free of nuclear weapons and negative security assurances for non-nuclear States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. Mr. Gamaleldin affirmed his full commitment to strive for an agreement on a comprehensive and balanced programme of work of the Conference in 2023.
Speaking in the plenary were Sri Lanka, Ecuador, United States, Republic of Korea, Morocco, China, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Tunisia, Sweden on behalf of the European Union, Indonesia, France, Germany, Nigeria, Finland and Iraq.
The next plenary of the Conference on Disarmament will be held at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 26 January, to hear a statement by Tatiana Valovaya, the Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament and the Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva. It will also continue to hear general statements as well as right of reply statements.
Opening Remarks by the President of the Conference on Disarmament
AMBASSADOR AHMED IHAB GAMALELDIN of Egypt, President of the Conference on Disarmament, said the Conference on Disarmament was of pivotal significance in light of the serious security challenges faced by the world. Egypt, through its presidency, aimed to restore the efficient and central position that the Conference occupied within the international disarmament machinery. Only a balanced and comprehensive programme of work could achieve this goal. Humanity aspired to enhance security as the fundamental pillar of international peace. This goal constituted one of the foundational reasons behind the existence of the Conference for more than 40 years. International multilateralism created a clear common vision, which established the global disarmament machinery, within which the Conference on Disarmament was exclusively assigned with a negotiating mandate. Such a common vision also resulted in the conclusion of several legally binding disarmament instruments, including the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the Chemical Weapons Convention. The stagnation that the Conference had suffered from for more than one quarter of a century called for an urgent need to cooperate to support the Conference’s revitalization and sustainability. It was crucial to secure the much-needed political will of the Conference membership.
The future of international multilateral action, particularly in disarmament issues, depended directly on strengthening the climate of trust and close collaboration.
It was undeniable that the Conference had been directly affected by increasing global tension. Despite the promising commencement of work in early 2022 when the Conference successfully adopted the draft decision by the Chinese presidency, the tense international security situation had cast a negative shadow and posed tangible challenges against the adoption of the Conference’s annual report.
Mr. Gamaleldin said the Conference should consider the means which would allow it to keep its pace up with the challenges posed by technological progress in disarmament issues. The current agenda of the Conference could accommodate these new challenges in light of its broad mandate. The examples of new challenges that the Conference on Disarmament could address were not limited to outer space issues. The President intended to invite the Conference to hold two thematic sessions on two topics of major international concern: the establishment of zones free of nuclear weapons and negative security assurances for non-nuclear States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.
Mr. Gamaleldin affirmed his full commitment to strive for an agreement on a comprehensive and balanced programme of work of the Conference in 2023. Over the past few months, a series of consultations at the bilateral level had been held with the previous presidencies of the Conference in 2022 as well as with more than 30 Conference members to bring together views regarding different proposals on how to restore the Conference on Disarmament to its dynamism. Most recently in 2022, the Conference had adopted decision 2229, which was submitted by the Chinese presidency to establish five subsidiary bodies to deal with the Conference’s work; two of these subsidiary bodies succeeded in adopting final reports. The Conference's success in adopting a programme of work was achievable and such success was linked to the shared responsibility of both the Conference presidency and its members. Mr. Gamaleldin wished all participants success in the common endeavour towards achieving positive substantive progress by the Conference on Disarmament in its 2023 session.
The Conference then adopted the draft agenda for its 2023 session.
Summary of Discussion
States congratulated the President on his accession to the presidency of the Conference on Disarmament in 2023, and offered their full and unwavering support. Some States attached significant priority to the work of the Conference as a substantive multilateral negotiating body in the field of disarmament. However, it was concerning that for more than 20 years, the forum had not been able to fulfil its mandate to start negotiations, even as the modernisation and accumulation of weapons continued. Last year’s session of the Conference had been a disappointment. Some States believed that the main obstacle to the commencement of negotiations was the lack of mutual trust and political enthusiasm on the part of some States; it was clear that a critical reflection on the functioning of the Conference on Disarmament was needed, including a careful analysis of its working methods.
Only through confidence building and equal respect for the security of all Member States would the Conference be able to achieve the much-needed consensus towards adopting a programme of work. Delegations extended their full support and cooperation towards the efforts of the President to achieve consensus on a programme of work for this year, and to bring the Conference back to its past glory as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum. It was not easy to break the impasse which had continued for decades. States encouraged the President to continue conducting comprehensive consultations to find a common ground. States were urged to demonstrate flexibility as they worked to achieve concrete outcomes.
Some speakers said the Conference was meeting today in the backdrop of a serious global security situation. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and its nuclear rhetoric could not be ignored. One speaker said the international community could not turn their eyes away from the horrors perpetrated by Russia on Ukraine’s population, the nuclear rhetoric, and the intentional targeting of civilians across the country. These actions presented a threat to world security and arms control, and a challenge to institutions like the Conference on Disarmament. A number of speakers said the Russian invasion in Ukraine had gravely deteriorated the global security landscape, leading many to question the viability of international order. They reiterated their condemnation of Russia’s war against Ukraine and reaffirmed full support for Ukraine’s sovereignty. Russia’s ongoing campaign against the Ukrainian people was a crime, which must be stopped immediately.
In response to this, one speaker noted the groundless accusations against Russia regarding the use of nuclear weapons, saying the purpose of these accusations was to mislead the world about the root causes of Russia's actions on the territory of Ukraine, and to distract attention from hostile actions towards Russia in the context of the Ukrainian crisis. The result of the aggressive line against Russia was the politicisation that prevented a constructive exchange of views throughout the session, and made it impossible to adopt the reports of all five subsidiary bodies and agree on a substantive final report on the work of the Conference.
Concern was also expressed by some States at the unprecedented level of aggression, demonstrated by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, by firing a record number of missiles of various ranges, including eight intercontinental ballistic missiles. This, together with its nuclear blackmail, undermined the attainment of the Conference’s objectives and elevated the possibility of miscalculation which could lead to a catastrophe in the region and beyond. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was urged to positively engage in negotiations.
Some States urged Iran to never develop nuclear weapons, and to return to its stance of nuclear non-proliferation without delay. They reiterated calls for Iran to cease dealings with ballistic missile and to stop supplying weapons to Russia.
Some States said that nuclear disarmament should be the number one priority of the Conference. This must be combined with the negotiation of legally binding international agreements banning fissile material and eliminating stockpiles, as well as to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of such weapons. A number of States said treaties establishing nuclear-weapon-free zones were an important option on the road to nuclear disarmament. Some speakers were concerned by the collective failure to adopt a consensus outcome document for the second consecutive time at the tenth Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty Review Conference held last year, which was a missed opportunity, as well as that of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. Due to the unreasonable ambitions of Western countries and their lack of any desire to take into account the views of other States, it was not possible to agree on full-fledged final documents.
A number of States said nuclear weapons posed an existential threat to humankind and swift action should be taken for the advancement of the total and irreversible elimination of nuclear weapons. In the interim, there should be immediate commencement of negotiations on a legally binding treaty on negative security assurances, particularly in the present context of the growing risk of the use of nuclear weapons. Some States called for a moratorium on the construction of fissile material. Others maintained that it was incumbent on all nuclear-weapon States to behave responsibly and transparently, and to comply with their treaty obligations, explain their policies, and engage in good faith.
Regarding outer space, some States remained concerned about the potential risk of an arms race in outer space as the space environment became increasingly congested with the rapid advancement of technology. Some States strongly supported the negotiation of an international legally binding instrument to prevent any possibility of an arms race in outer space. Such an instrument would prohibit the withdrawal and deployment of weapons in outer space and the threat or use of force against outer space objects. Space was becoming more crowded, and technological advances could be used for civilian but also military purposes. Some States believed that the ineffective measures proposed by Western countries for strengthening security in outer space were aimed solely at diverting the attention of the international community from preserving outer space as a zone of general security, free from any military confrontation. It was important to use outer space for peaceful and equitable purposes.
States also called for the full implementation of the women, peace and security agenda, and for the equal and meaningful participation of women in conflict prevention. Last year had seen resistance to even the most basic and already-agreed language on the full and equal participation of women in the Conference, and a number of Member States continued to oppose updating the rules of procedure to be gender neutral.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the information media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
DC23.002E