CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT HEARS STATEMENTS BY STATES EXPRESSING HOPE FOR A QUICK START TO SUBSTANTIVE WORK IN 2010

This morning the Conference on Disarmament held the last plenary meeting of its 2009 session, adopting its annual report by consensus, and hearing statements from over a dozen delegations, as well as Gabor Iklody, State Secretary of Hungary, and the President of the Conference, Ambassador Christian Strohal of Austria, most of them underscoring the need to make a quick start on substantive work in 2010.

Mr. Strohal said a defining moment of change had come with the adoption of the programme of work of the Conference on 29 May 2009. They should build on the success and progress they had achieved with that consensus this year.

Mr. Iklody, while saying the Conference’s inability to adopt the document implementing the Conference’s programme of work had created confusion, noted two positive effects of the momentum created by the adoption of the work programme: first, it had signalled that the body was ready and able to begin substantive work; and, second, it had sent an early warning to capitals that the Conference was ready to begin its work early in 2010, so that they could mobilize the needed support.

Many States echoed the sentiment expressed by one: this year's performance in the Conference was a glass half full, rather than a glass half empty. Perhaps they had been overoptimistic on 29 May, when they thought that they were really going to get down to business following the adoption of the programme of work – like climbing a mountain only to find that the peak remained yet further away. It could be said that CD/1864 already came pretty late in 2009. And it was understandable that there were some issues that were still sensitive in terms of procedure; perhaps they had not been aware enough of that situation.

Speaking today in the Conference were representatives of Japan, China, Sweden on behalf of the European Union, Pakistan, Colombia, Algeria, Mexico, Bangladesh, the Philippines, Syria, Iran, the United States, the Republic of Korea and the Russian Federation.

The first part of the 2010 session of the Conference on Disarmament will run from 18 January to 26 March 2010. The second part will be from 31 May to 16 July and the third part will be from 9 August to 24 September.



Statements

AKIO SUDA (Japan) drew attention to the document prepared by the International Panel on Fissile Materials, entitled "A Treaty banning the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, with article-by-article explanations", dated 2 September 2009, which Canada, Japan and the Netherlands had jointly submitted yesterday for circulation as an official document of the Conference. The purpose was to provide Member States of the Conference with useful reference material for the prospective negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty. It should be noted that the document did not in any way represent the official positions of the States submitting it.

GABOR IKLODY, State Secretary of Hungary, congratulated the President and the P6 for the adoption of the report by consensus. This year, 2009, had been a special year in the Council Chamber, having witnessed the adoption by consensus of a programme of work to get the Conference back to substantive work. In the following weeks, the Hungarian delegation had stood ready to join consensus on the implementation document for that programme of work. The lack of consensus on that document had caused confusion. However, the positive momentum created by the adoption of the programme of work had two positive effects: it had signalled that the body was ready and able to begin substantive work; and, second, it had sent an early warning to capitals that the Conference was ready to begin its work early in 2010, so that they could mobilize the needed support. Hungary asked the Conference to preserve that momentum in the coming months, so that they could begin substantive negotiations early in 2010.

WANG QUN (China) thanked all concerned for their efforts and consensus on the annual report. It was China's view that, based on the work of the past year, they could build on that and facilitate an early start of substantive work on all items next year. China was ready to make its own efforts in that regard.

MAGNUS HELLGREN (Sweden), speaking on behalf of the European Union, congratulated the President and the P6 team on the adoption by consensus of the Conference on Disarmament’s annual report to the United Nations General Assembly. The collective and successful work this year by the P6 gave them reason to reiterate that the European Union strongly valued their work over the past four years, and that that system had considerably contributed to progress in the work of the Conference. The European Union welcomed the fact that it was a common acquis now. The European Union also reiterated its desire to see the Conference on Disarmament enlarged, in particular to include those of the European Union's own Member States which were not yet members of the Conference.

The 2009 session of the Conference would be remembered as the year when it finally mustered the political will to overcome 12 years of stalemate. The European Union joined leaders from all regions of the world in welcoming the adoption of the comprehensive and balanced programme of work on 29 May, signalling that the Conference was again ready to fulfil its role as the single permanent multilateral forum for disarmament negotiations. The European Union had been ready to seize that opportunity. Hence, the subsequent inability of the Conference to even begin implementing its agreed programme of work had been profoundly disappointing. But now was the time to look forward: the annual report just adopted set the stage for an early commencement of substantive work when they met again to start the 2010 session of the Conference. In its 2010 session the Conference on Disarmament had swiftly to begin the real substantive negotiations and work, based on the political consensus achieved in 2009, to which the European Union remained committed.

AFTAB KHOKHER (Pakistan) noted that the final shape of the annual report was the result of collective efforts of all Conference members to make it objective, balanced and factual. Pakistan wanted to reiterate the following guiding principles that ought to underpin consensus on a programme of work of the Conference during the 2010 session. First, any decision on a programme of work had to be taken by the Conference. Presidents, individually and collectively, could only make proposals to the Conference for its consideration. Second, any decision on a programme of work should be for the session and without prejudice to any past, present and future proposal. Third, the Conference should not preclude any outcomes under any agenda item. Fourth, a proposed programme of work, together with a schedule of activities to be elaborated after its adoption, should be for the duration of the yearly session, and therefore should not prejudge any future decision the Conference might take on its programme of work. Fifth, all work, including by subsidiary bodies, should be carried out in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the Conference.

Pakistan underscored that the Conference had to adopt a comprehensive and balanced programme of work for the 2010 session. That programme of work had to envisage substantive outcomes on the four core issues of nuclear disarmament, prevention of an arms race in outer space, negative security assurances and a fissile material treaty.

DANIEL ÁVILA CAMACHO (Colombia) said that the Conference simply could not set aside all the progress that had been achieved to break the stalemate that had lasted for more than a decade. On 29 May 2009, they had all witnessed how it was possible to have policies converge so that they could adopt a programme of work. It was hoped that next year they could align the stars favourably so that they could begin an early start to substantive work on the items of interest to all of them.

Colombia also wished to highlight the upcoming Second Review Conference of States Parties to the Mine Ban Convention – the Cartagena Summit – to be held in Cartagena de Indias from 29 November to 4 December 2010. They would meet to reaffirm their highest political will against the use of mines and their solidarity and support for all the survivors, families and victims. Colombia hoped that the widest possible participation would be achieved for that important event.

IDRISS JAZAÏRY (Algeria) reiterated what had been said by Sweden, that in this context where the rotation of Presidents was so rapid, the establishment of the P6 as an informal mechanism to ensure dynamism and continuity had been a godsend. It was hoped that, based on the experience this year, the P6 next year would continue that tradition of cooperative engagement in the pursuit of common objectives. Algeria saw this year's performance in the Conference as a glass half full, rather than a glass half empty. Perhaps they had been overoptimistic on 29 May, when they thought that they were really going to get down to business following the adoption of the programme of work – like climbing a mountain only to find that the peak remained yet further away. It could be said that CD/1864 already came pretty late in 2009. And it was understandable that there were some issues that were still sensitive in terms of procedure; perhaps they had not been aware enough of that situation.

Regarding the issue of the one-year span for the programme of work, which contained elements that clearly exceeded a one-year span, there was a clear contradiction there. In his view, they should not discuss that issue in the abstract; rather, they should just get on with the job.

MABEL GÓMEZ-OLIVER (Mexico) said that, apart from the work achieved over the course of 2009, international events were marching on. At the international, regional and bilateral levels, numerous disarmament initiatives had been put forward by leaders, Governments, parliamentarians, non-governmental organizations and the academic community, with a view to taking significant steps on the long path to the achievement of the objective of a nuclear-weapon-free world. On 29 May, the adoption of the programme of work for the Conference had raised expectations on the part of the international community. They were all aware of the deplorable situation that had ensued. They had held on to the hope that they would be able to kick-start that programme of work till the last minute – and that hope had been held not just in the Conference, but in the outside world. It was deplorable that the Conference on Disarmament was not only on the margins of arms control initiatives, but was actually a block to that work. What happened in the Conference had an impact on the other forums and venues in which disarmament work was going on. In 2010 they would have to move forward, and they would have to look at their methods of work and reflect on their mandate. Mexico hoped that 2010 would be the time to re-establish the credibility of the Conference by beginning as soon as possible substantive work.

MD. ABDUL HANNAN (Bangladesh) said that, as the next President of the Conference, Bangladesh was acutely aware of the need for the Conference to begin substantive work early next year in order to maintain the positive momentum created in 2009. Both within the Conference and beyond, there was a great expectation that it would be able to resume at an early date its mandated role as the single multilateral forum for disarmament negotiations. In the report just adopted, the Conference had tasked the current President and the incoming President to conduct consultations during the intersessional period, and, if possible, to make recommendations. Bangladesh took that responsibility very seriously and was prepared to work closely with the Austrian Presidency. Bangladesh counted on the support of all members and the other 2010 Presidents, as well as the Secretariat, in getting the job done.

JESUS DOMINGO (Philippines) said the Philippines, too, was eager to sustain the momentum that had been achieved in the Conference with the adoption of decision CD/1864 (on a programme of work). The Philippines reiterated that the expansion of the Conference was of the utmost importance to it. As the report noted, there were 25 States that had formally petitioned for full membership since 1982, and there were more States that had requested the status of Observer in this and previous sessions.

ABDULMAOLA AL NUQARI (Syria) joined others in thanking the President and the P6 in ensuring the consensus adoption of the annual report. This had been an excellent year; a year of optimism. It was hoped that that hope and optimism would continue next year. The adoption of a programme of work, with the extraordinary assistance of the Algerian Presidency, had been a real achievement. It was noted that in 2007 they had almost reached consensus on a programme of work. However, there had been something missing. In 2008, a small step had been taken forward. In 2009, more than a little step had been taken; but there was still a little way to go. If they could find a way to accelerate their work, they would be able to take those steps.

HAMID BAEIDI NEJAD (Iran) said they all knew how sensitive the adoption of the annual report was, given the difficulty in obtaining consensus on the implementation of the programme of work. The adoption by consensus bode well for achieving a quick start in 2010.

GAROLD LARSON (United States) said the United States considered it of the utmost importance to use the next few months to achieve consensus on a quick start to substantive work in 2010, and the United States looked forward to working closely with the P6 and members to ensure progress in 2010.

IM HAN-TAEK (Republic of Korea) paid tribute to the work of the President and the other P6 members for their tireless efforts that had contributed to the historic consensus adoption of the programme of work. Like many other delegations, the Republic of Korea had been hoping for a more forward-looking annual report, which provided more guidance for 2010 based on the decision achieved in CD/1864. It was no less important, however, to carry forward the amicable atmosphere that had allowed that consensus to be achieved. For that reason, the adoption of the annual report was to be commended. The success of the 2010 Conference on Disarmament would hinge on how promptly and smoothly they could achieve consensus on a programme of work for 2010.

VICTOR VASILIEV (Russian Federation) observed that they had all contributed to the success they had achieved in the Conference, both in the adoption of the annual report, and in the consensus adoption of CD/1864 on a programme of work. Like others, Russia lamented the fact that they had not been able to implement the decision taken on a programme of work. However, the work they had undertaken bode well for a rapid start to substantive work in 2010.

CHRISTIAN STROHAL (Austria), President of the Conference, observed that the 2009 session had been characterized by a high level of emotions. They had experienced quite a range: cautious hope; excitement over the adoption of CD/1864; a reversion to disappointment; and finally frustration about the Conference's inability to adopt the numerous documents related to the implementation of that programme of work. Indeed, the number of those draft decisions illustrated the strong efforts undertaken by the 2009 P6. It was fair to say that the Conference had spared no efforts in the search for a consensus that would allow the implementation of its programme of work.

Looking at the issue of continuity and change, Mr. Strohal said a defining moment of change had come with the adoption of the programme of work on 29 May 2009. They should build on the success and progress they had achieved with that consensus this year. The practice of P6 cooperation should also be continued, and this year had shown the strong value of that cooperation. Over the year, they had also seen a certain change in the character of their consultations, which had become more interactive and transparent. That approach had allowed delegations most interested to directly address partners. In doing so, it had enhanced transparency, built confidence and fostered dialogue.


For use of the information media; not an official record

DC09052E