15 May 2008

Opening the first plenary meeting of the second session of the Conference on Disarmament (CD), rotating CD President Ambassador Yevhen Bersheda of Ukraine expressed sadness at the recent disasters in China and Myanmar, and welcomed the new Ambassador of Chile, Mr. Carlos Portales. Representatives of Chile, the European Union, the East European Group, Morocco, China, Algeria, Indonesia, and Pakistan took the floor to express their sympathy and condolences to the governments and people of Myanmar and China, to welcome the new Ambassador of Chile, and to comment on the presidential draft decision CD/1840 and the work and structure of the Conference. The CD Secretary General, Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze, also took the floor to clarify one of the rules of procedure, in response to a comment from Morocco.

Brief highlights

-Most delegations spoke in favour of presidential draft decision CD/1840, which contains the CD presidents' proposed programme of work for 2008.

-Morocco's representative pointed out that CD/1840 is virtually identical to last year's proposal. He also criticized the text for its FMCT negotiating mandate and its lack of balance.

-Chile's new ambassador called for a review of the CD's structure and functions to reflect changes in the post-Cold War globalized world.

CD/1840: Proposed programme of work
In his opening statement, rotating President Yevhen Bersheda reviewed the CD's substantive work from the first session and provided feedback on the intersessional consultations in which he and the other six presidents (P6) had engaged during the last month. Admitting it would be an exaggeration to assume that everything in CD/1840 is "of full satisfaction of all members," he added that the P6 are open to amendments to reach a document satisfactory to everyone and also highlighted that it is the closest the CD has come to reaching consensus. Some delegations have yet to provide their view on the document, as they await directives from their capitals.

The representatives of Algeria, Indonesia, the European Union, and the East European Group stated their support for CD/1840 and called on other states to be flexible and join the spirit of multilateralism. On behalf of the Eastern European Group, Amb. Sergei Aleinik of Belarus said that CD/1840 is the "logical outcome" of first session and that it "defines an area where the positions of all the delegations could come together, providing an acceptable basis for compromise." Indonesia's Amb. Puja remarked that though his delegation would prefer "a comprehensive and balanced program of work," his delegation "is flexible in its approach and open to new initiatives."

Morocco's Amb. Loulichki argued that the formulation and structure of CD/1840 "conceals the desire" of member states for the CD to "get into serious and inclusive negotiations" and it "gives the impression of déjá vu and is limited to a combination of documents from last year, that is, L.1, CPR.5, and CRP.6." This marks the first time in a plenary meeting that a member state has recognized that the text of this "new" presidential draft decision is virtually identical to the one introduced in 2007.

Amb. Loulichki also criticized the document for not including verification in its negotiation mandate for a fissile materials cut-off treaty (FMCT) and for giving "differentiated treatment" to an FMCT by calling for negotiations on that issue while merely facilitating discussions on negative security assurances, nuclear disarmament, and prevention of an arms race in outer space. Pakistan's Amb. Kahn agreed with the deficiencies of the document pointed out by Amb. Loulichki and argued that they were constructive and positive. He also welcomed the comments by the President for new amendments to the document, stating that they "will look forward to a new opportunity."

With these criticisms in mind, however, Amb. Loulichki said the Moroccan delegation "could constitute a basis for discussions, inclusive and global consultation taking into consideration the positions of all member states" if it is accompanied by political will and a spirit of flexibility. He did question CD/1840's status, suggesting that as a draft decision it violated rule 18 of the rules of procedure, as it was not a decision adopted by the Conference but rather by the presidents alone. CD Secretary General Sergei Ordzhonikidze explained that CD/1840 is not a decision taken by the Conference but a decision by the Presidents for themselves and presented to the Conference.

Institutional reform
Chile's Amb. Portales called for a review of the CD's structure and "functional terms," arguing that it is "partially obsolete," as it clearly does not facilitate cooperation among its members or help build "an atmosphere of confidence" conducive to adopting a programme of work. He eloquently argued, "One must resolve the substantive contradiction between the privilege implied and the security interest of major powers expressed to the use of the consensus rule in the strict sense of the term, and the requirement in this respect of the international community as a whole." He appealed to the "key actors" to understand that "taking into account the security interest of the international community as a whole will in turn enhance their own security" and called for "imaginative responses in all areas in which reality indicates that we must negotiate."

It is good to see that the new Chilean ambassador has picked up the call of his predecessor, Amb. Martabit, who in his farewell speech to the CD on 11 March 2008 argued that it is necessary to prepare the Conference to respond effectively and efficiently to the challenges it faces and to the changing world in which it must function. He made a number of suggestions that could help overcome the impasse in the CD, including reviewing: the composition of the CD's agenda; the method for adopting decisions; the group systems; the informal mechanisms; requests for expansion of the membership; and appropriate participation of civil society.

Review and reform of the UN's disarmament fora has been on their various agendas for years. The UN Disarmament Commission and the UNGA First Committee have both considered the need and possibility of reform, without taking concrete action. In addition, at the recently concluded second session of its Preparatory Committee, several states parties of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty made suggestions for institutional development of the Treaty. Some delegations argue that these questions detract attention away from the substantive issues at hand; however, the substantive issues are not being addressed efficiently, appropriately, or constructively. Reform of the bodies and structures that consider these issues need to be comprehensively reviewed. At the 2006 UNGA First Committee, Dr. Patricia Lewis, director of UNIDIR, suggested that the impasse in disarmament may partly be due to the machinery itself. Acknowledging that the political climate for disarmament is currently difficult, Dr. Lewis stated, "The machinery that we have created to work for disarmament negotiations should be designed to work in all conditions," arguing disarmament community needs an "all-weather machine" that would allow work to continue even in times of disagreement.

The next plenary meeting is scheduled for Thursday, 20 May at 10am.

- Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will and Sandra Fong, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom