19 August 2008

Ambassador German Mundarain Hernandez of Venezuela opened the Conference on Disarmament (CD) plenary meeting as the new rotating president. The CD then heard interventions from the delegations of France, Pakistan, New Zealand, Brazil, Sri Lanka, and Chinaon the ongoing stalemate on its programme of work, and from Slovakia, the Russian Federation, and Ireland on the conflict in Georgia.

At the beginning of the meeting, the president of the CD also welcomed about 25 peace messengers from Nagasaki in the gallery, who brought thousands of petition signatures to the CD calling for a world free of nuclear weapons. He also commended them, and the generations of Japanese who have displayed for years their deep concern about the work of the CD towards nuclear disarmament.
 
Brief highlights

-Venezuela said CD/1840, the proposed programme of work, could “provide the basis for getting out of the stalemate” in the CD.

-During his farewell speech, in his personal capacity, French Ambassador Dobelle said that despite the importance of the consensus rule, perhaps it should be abandoned.

-Pakistan outlined six questions its delegation still has about CD/1840 and reiterated the requirements for Pakistani endorsement of the proposed programme of work.

-New Zealand responded to Pakistan’s questions point by point, arguing that CD/1840 is a compromise that offers a good basis from which to start work in the CD.

-Brazil argued that including verification in a negotiation mandate does not guarantee it will end up in the final negotiated documents.

-Brazil also argued the final report of the CD should reflect optimism for future progress.

-China welcomed the remarks by Pakistan, New Zealand, and Brazil and called for constructive dialogue instead of criticism.

-The Russian Federation criticized the media bias against Russia in the Georgia conflict and cautioned against NATO membership for Georgia. Russia also accused Georgia of using cluster munitions against civilian infrastructure.

-Ireland asked for clarification regarding the use of cluster munitions in Georgia.

-Slovakia outlined its national position on the conflict in Georgia.

-Sri Lanka welcomed the new rotating president.

CD/1840
Ambassador Hernandez of Venezuela, rotating president of the CD, argued, “The commitment to peace, disarmament, human rights to people obliges us to get the Conference out of the stall in which it finds itself.” He described CD/1840 as “a basis for getting out of the stalemate.” In his farewell statement, speaking in his personal capacity, Ambassador Jean- François Dobelle of France said CD/1840 is the closest the CD has come to an object of general agreement. He suggested that if consensus cannot be reached on the four core items on the CD’s agenda, perhaps the consensus rule should be abandoned, or other issues, such as small arms and light weapons, should be addressed instead.

However, Pakistan’s Ambassador Masood Khan explained that for his delegation, six questions about CD/1840 “remain to be answered on the rule of consensus, the quest for a ‘perfect formula,’ compromise, pre-judgment, preconditions, and ripeness.” He suggested the rule of consensus is being given “innovative interpretations” in its application to CD/1840, while in the case of the A5 proposed programme of work in 2003 it was strictly applied. He also argued that while the perfect should not be the enemy of the good, as many delegations have asserted, CD/1840 is just not good enough—it is “riddled with built-in conditionalities, as it moves the goalposts of the CD 180 degrees” by dropping “verification as a goal for an FMT [fissile materials treaty], ad hoc committees as negotiating subsidiary bodies, and balance between the four core issues.” Furthermore, he argued, it is “a lop-sided compromise among broadly likeminded countries,” it prejudges the outcome, and its preconditions are explicit in its formulation. Finally, he argued, the determination of what is ripe for negotiation is “in the eye of the beholder.”

Ambassador Khan explained that his delegation will be able to endorse CD/1840 if it is revised to address the following issues:

-A commitment to negotiate a “non-discriminatory, multilateral and internationally and effectively verifiable” fissile materials treaty.

-Creation of space for addressing the question of existing and future stocks of fissile material.

-Balance among all four core issues.

-Using ad hoc committees or other subsidiary bodies as mechanisms for negotiation.

-A differentiation between the role of coordinators to facilitate informal discussions and the functions of formal CD subsidiary bodies to conduct negotiations in the context of the programme of work.

New Zealand’s Ambassador Don Mackay responded to Ambassador Khan’s remarks, from the perspective of a country “that is not in possession of nuclear weapons, that has foresworn of ever acquiring nuclear weapons, that is totally committed to the non proliferation of nuclear weapons, both horizontally and vertically.” In response to Ambassador Khan’s point about the misuse of consensus, Ambassador Mackay noted that the CD “is probably unique in the level of safeguards built in with regard to the use consensus”—consensus is needed to adopt a programme of work, to agree to an outcome once work has started, and to adopt an instrument as a whole, and then states have the right to decide whether they will become party to the instrument. With four levels of safeguards, Ambassador Mackay suggested “that states should in fact take a flexible approach with regards to first stage of the process, which is actually agreeing on a programme work, because they then have through the application of the consensus rule here and ultimately through the application of state sovereignty they have a lot of safeguards built in that will assure that they will not become party to an outcome that does not meet their national interest.”

In response to the second point, Ambassador Mackay said the programme of work does not need to be perfect, that national positions should be negotiated in the context of the programme of work. He argued “that everyone in this chamber should be willing to put their positions put in the test, to be negotiated, to see how they stack up rather than establish preconditions, predetermined outcomes on issues which are clearly not the subject as overall agreement on this stage.”

He disagreed that CD/1840 is a lopsided compromise, arguing, “A compromise is an outcome that is a fair position that then enables all arguments to put forward the substance, and in our view, this outcome from the presidents currently meets that criteria.” He also disagreed that CD/1840 contains pre-judgments or preconditions, saying, “CD/1840 enables all issues to be discussed but it does not set out in advance what elements have to be obtained in the actual outcomes.” Finally, regarding Ambassador Khan’s point about having negotiations on all four core issues, Ambassador Mackay said his delegation would be happy to start negotiations on any of the four issues but that they cannot all be dealt with equally and equitably at the same time. He argued, “even for large delegations, it is not possible to negotiate everything at the same time. That is certainly true for small delegations, not because of a lack of commitment but simply because of at a practical level, it would not work.” That said, he indicated that the best place to start right now seems to be a fissile materials cut-off treaty (FMCT).

Overall, Ambassador Mackay pointed out that substantively, the delegations of New Zealand and Pakistan want the same thing. But Ambassador Mackay expressed wariness of demanding or setting out the outcome at the beginning. Ambassador Luiz Filipe de Macedo Soares of Brazil also responded to Ambassador Khan’s statement, saying that while the Brazilian delegation agrees negotiations on an FMCT should contain verification provisions, it is not that important for the principle to be included in the mandate, because even if it was, it would not guarantee that it would be included in the final negotiated document.

In response to Ambassador Mackay, Ambassador Khan said that while it was good to hear the New Zealand perspective, it seemed that Ambassador Mackay perhaps did not hear Khan’s full statement.

After listening to the above exchange, Ambassador Wang Qun of China said he would study the elements of the discussion seriously. He said there seems to be a new reality in the CD: the difference of views, over both procedure and substance, on how the Conference should proceed. He called for constructive dialogue rather than criticism.

Final report of the CD
Noting that the Venezuelan presidency is responsible for the CD’s draft report, which will be presented to the UN General Assembly, Ambassador Soares of Brazil curiously said the report should make it clear that the Conference is not ending in an impasse. He argued the report should not be a “static and rigid photograph” of the current state of the CD but should rather contain “stylistic imprints” highlighting the progress made this year that can be carried forward in 2009.

The CD president will present the draft report to the Conference at its next plenary meeting on Tuesday, 26 August.

The conflict in Georgia
Ambassador Valery Loshchinin of the Russian Federation took the floor to comment on the misleading information provided by Western media regarding the current situation in Georgia. He indicated that Georgian troops used cluster munitions against South Ossetian civilians and Russian peacekeepers and emphasized that Georgia “launched the aggression” and was “responsible for the ethnic cleansing.” He acknowledged that “this type of assessment” may not be pleasant for many states to hear, “particularly those who prepared Georgian leadership, who sent weapons there, and who provided assistance to his regime; they tried to present it as a window to democracy in the post-Soviet space.” Ambassador Loshchinin also noted talk of Georgia’s admittance into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the idea of which seems to be gaining ground, as NATO has reportedly insisted that Georgia “remains on track to become a member” and agreed to “strengthen relations with Georgia by creating a special consultative body” to “assist Georgia, a valued and long-standing partner of NATO, to assess the damage caused by (Russia’s) military action and help restore critical services.” Ambassador  Loshchinin argued this is a dangerous path, that it will not simply be a case of double standards, but a lack of any standards at all. He insisted that what is needed is a legally-binding instrument on the non-use of force, which will “lay the foundations for the restoration of lasting peace in the region.” He called on NATO and the European Union to focus their efforts on that rather than trying to bring Georgia in the political and military fold of their bloc.

The Deputy Permanent Representative of Ireland, James C. O’Shea, asked for clarification on Ambassador Loshchinin’s statement that the Georgian military used the multiple launch rocket system “Grad” as a cluster munition. Mr. O’Shea explained, “As far as I am aware, the rockets of the ‘Grad’ system can have a number of different types of warhead, including unitary high explosive warheads, warheads containing submunitions, and others.” He asked Ambassador Loshchinin to clarify whether  “it is being alleged that ‘Grad’ rockets equipped with cluster warheads, in other words, warheads containing submunitions, were used by Georgian forces on 8 August.”

In response, Ambassador Loshchinin said the Grad system can be considered a weapon in keeping with the definition of cluster munitions, though there is still no agreed upon definition of cluster munitions. He argued that the important thing is that they were fired on objects and destroyed civilian infrastructure, which is unacceptable.

Ambassador Anton Pinter of Slovakia highlighted the statement made by the Foreign Minister of Slovakia on 14 August related to the situation in Georgia. He reported that Slovakia’s position stems from “respect and support of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia in the framework of its internationally recognized borders” and that Slovakia will “support the dispatch of European Union peacekeeping missions in the country.”

Next plenary
The next plenary of the CD is scheduled for 10am on Tuesday, 26 August, when the rotating president will present the draft report on the work of the Conference during 2008.

- Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will