13 March 2008
Rotating President Ahmet Üzümcü opened the Conference on Disarmament (CD) with no list of speakers, giving his closing remarks to mark the end of his four weeks as Conference President and announcing that a document, a draft decision from the six presidents, was to be distributed during the informal session. Brief interventions were made by the representatives of India and China.
Ambassador Rao of India thanked the coordinators of the CD's agenda items for their reports, which were circulated during the week, but highlighted that the reports were "personal summary and assessments" and cannot be considered an "accurate reflection of all concerns of the delegations given the limitations of the process itself." President Üzümcü confirmed that the reports were not official documents.
China's representative intervened several times during the meeting, asking what "document" President Üzümcü was going to circulate in the informal session. President Üzümcü eventually said it was a draft decision for the Conference's consideration. The plenary meeting then ended and went to informal.
The 2008 draft decision, which is meant to "constitute a programme of work for the current session," is very similar to the 2007 draft decision, L.1, and CRP.5, the complementary draft statement reflecting the CD's understanding of the implementation of L.1. The 2008 decision contains both the operative instructions in L.1 and the reflection of understanding in CRP.5.
The 2008 decision appoints coordinators to lead negotiations or substantive discussions on the four core issues in the CD: Ambassador Tarui (Japan) to preside over negotiations of a fissile material treaty; the Ambassador of Chile to preside over substantive discussions on nuclear disarmament and the prevention of nuclear war; Ambassador Grinius (Canada) to preside over substantive discussions on theprevention of an arms race in outer space; and Ambassador Mbaye (Senegal) to preside over substantive discussions on negative security assurances. The coordinators are to present a report to the CD on their progress before the conclusion of the current session.
In reference to "negotiations of a multilateral and non-discriminatory treaty banning the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons or other explosive devices," both CRP.5 and the 2008 draft decision stipulate that negotiations shall not have any preconditions, "thus providing all delegations with the opportunity to actively pursue their respective positions and priorities, and to submit proposals on any issue they deem relevant in the course of negotiations."
The 2008 draft decision also requests the coordinators for other items on the CD's agenda previously appointed by the 2008 Presidents on 29 January to continue their work during the current session: Ambassador Draganov (Bulgaria) on new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons and radiological weapons; Ambassador Jayatilleka (Sri Lanka) on a comprehensive programme of disarmament; and Ambassador Puja (Indonesia) on transparency in armaments.
We hope to hear discussion on this proposed programme of work in the next plenary, though, as it is virtually identical to last year's proposal, it is unclear if progress toward its adoption is anticipated.
During his statement to the CD on 4 March, the Foreign Minister of Slovakia said that the 2007 proposal for a programme of work was organizationally well thought-out and that it puts "existing priorities into a logical sequence." He argued, "It represents a platform that enables everyone to address their own national interests at various stages of negotiations and substantive discussions." However, some delegations objected to the 2007 proposal because the operational paragraph on negotiating a ban on fissile materials did not reference the 1995 Shannon Mandate. Pakistan's Ambassador Khan, for example, has argued that while any issue may of course be raised in negotiations, specific reference to such matters as verification in the negotiation mandate is crucial, as when entering negotiations "one has to be sure what is sacrosanct and what is not."
These positions, of course, are not simply determined by diplomats in the Council Chamber of the Palais. They stem from government policy, influenced by politico-military concerns and posturing such as the US-India deal, tensions in South Asia, US relations with the international community, China's concerns, and hyper-militarism among the major players. All of the these issues demonstrate the capacity for geostrategic concerns to impede progress in multilateral fora, where treaties that could address and help settle some of the imbalances and tensions should be negotiated.
The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 18 March at 10am with incoming President Yevhen Bercheda of Ukraine.
- Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will
- Sandra Fong, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom