10 May 2005, No. 7

Deciphering Diplomacy
Rhianna Tyson | WILPF

States parties to the Review Conference did not continue their General Debate yesterday as originally planned. With no agreement on an agenda, President Duarte thought it best that governments continue their consultations behind closed doors in order to reach agreement on the agenda (document number NPT/CONF.2005/CRP.1) and the president’s corresponding announcement (NPT/CONF.2005/CRP.2) upon the adoption of the ag—

************OBJECTION***********

The delegation of Greenpeace proposes deleting the words “did not” and replacing them with the words “failed to”.

…

States parties to the Review Conference failed to continue their General Debate yes—

************OBJECTION***********

The delegation of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War proposes deleting the words “With no” and replacing them with the word “Without”.

…

States parties to the Review Conference fa—

************OBJECTION***********

The delegation of the Acronym Institute proposes deleting the words “behind closed doors” and inserting the words “bilateral and regional” before the word “consultations” .

…

States parties to the Rev—

************OBJECTION***********

The delegation of the British-American Security Information Council proposes deleting the words “originally planned” and replacing them with “as they were supposed to have done.”

…

States par—

************OBJECTION***********

…

If NGO reporting were conducted in a manner similar to that by which govern-mental delegations devise an agenda, every issue of the News in Review would probably have read as this one did. It’s not that NGOs don’t know and ap-preciate the haggles and struggles of mul-tilateral deliberations. For a prime exam-ple of how multilateral language negotia-tions can actually succeed, be sure to at-tend the NGO presentations to the dele-gates tomorrow, scheduled for 3-6 in Conference Room IV. May 11, 2005.

[PDF] ()