Dear Reaching Critical Will friends and advisors,
Even during the most seemingly predictable of nuclear disarmament meetings, interesting things do occur. From the Conference on Disarmament to the UN Disarmament Commission, the discussions taking place have been noteworthy as of late and, seeing as how we are encroaching upon the 60th anniversaries of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings, and, with the miserable failure of the NPT Review Conference still fresh in our minds, it has become all the more imperative that we pay attention to these proceedings and their developments, and continue to urge our governments to work toward global nuclear disarmament.
As always, this and all other General E-News Advisories from Reaching Critical Will are archived on our website. We always welcome any feedback, comments, questions or concerns.
Best wishes,
Rhianna
1. RCW Fundraising update
Recently, we sent out an appeal to all of our subscribers who rely on Reaching Critical Will's monitoring, reporting and coordinating services to help us through our current financial dilemma.
Thanks to your support, we were able to raise $5,000. Some of you sent $30 gifts, others sent $500 or $1000 gifts. We are very grateful for all.
Those of you who have not yet sent in a contribution towards the support of our work, we ask you to consider making an investment in Reaching Critical Will. We count on your dollars to maintain our work, which will become all the more important as we head toward the 60th session of the General Assembly, the Millennium+5 Summit and the GA First Committee.
On behalf of the entire WILPF UN Office, I would like to once again thank all of you who have supported the Reaching Critical Will project financially. If you have any other questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact the This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it." style="color: rgb(142, 95, 189); text-decoration: none; ">WILPF UNO Director.
2. The UN Disarmament Commission Opens... Kind of
Today, on July 18, the United Nations Disarmament Commission (UNDC), the only universal body mandated to deliberate and make recommendations to the General Assembly on all disarmament matters, opened its 2005 substantive session. Well... kind of.
After months of organizational meetings and informal consultations, the Chair, Mr. Sylvester Rowe of Sierra Leone, had been unable to obtain consensus on an agenda, thus prompting everyone to believe that the 2005 session of the UNDC would be postponed.
However, after a lengthy discussion this morning that recapped what had transpired in the informal consultations, it appeared that consensus was much more easily within reach than previously believed, and the meeting of the Commission will continue tomorrow. However, agreement on the agenda is still not yet obtained, and, while these meetings were originally scheduled as part of the UNDC substantive session, it seems that delegates will use this time to continue the organizational and procedural work of the Commission.
The UNDC, created in 1978 by the first Special Session of the General Assembly on Disarmament (SSOD I), is a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly, composed of all Member States of the United Nations. It is a deliberative body with the mandate to consider and make recommendations on various problems in the field of disarmament and of following up on the relevant decisions and recommendations of the SSOD I.
(The UNDC, keep in mind, is different from the Conference on Disarmament, or CD, which has a mandate to negotiate disarmament treaties. The CD has only 66 members and is based in Geneva.)
Since 1993, the UNDC has, in practice, dealt only with two or three items on its agenda, each of which has usually been considered for three consecutive years. In 1998, by its decision 52/492, the General Assembly decided that the UNDC's agenda, as of 2000, would normally comprise two substantive items.
This year, the Chairman put forth a two-item agenda for the UNDC:
1. Recommendations for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons in all its aspects, in particular for achieving the objective of nuclear disarmament.
2. Practical confidence-building measures (CBMs), including verification mechanisms, in the field of conventional weapons.
The US reportedly insisted on adding the words "and non-proliferation" after "nuclear disarmament" in the first recommendation. The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) also immediately spat forth their own proposal, which would have mandated the UNDC to deliberate on "guidelines and strategies", rather than "recommendations" for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. After consulting with Washington, the US rejected the NAM proposal.
After a month-long debate over "guidelines", "recommendations" and/or "strategies", it was becoming increasingly clear to everybody that the 2005 UNDC session would be able to provide none of these to the General Assembly this fall.
Then today, the US announced that it was no longer insisting on the word "non-proliferation" at the end of the first recommendation, thus paving the way for true consensus on this one agenda item. Of course, it will have to confirm with Washington that the Chair's original proposal is acceptable, though the US delegate definitely implied this possibility.
While this development is indeed pleasantly shocking, there still remains the task of securing agreement on a second agenda item. The US already made it clear that it has reservations with the second agenda item, noting that a Group of Governmental Experts will be created in 2006 to deliberate and make recommendations on verification in all its aspects, as per the General Assembly resolution 59/60.
The US also made it very clear that they intend to push for a third item on the UNDC agenda: "Measures for improving the effectiveness of the methods of work of the UNDC," which would perhaps be a similar undertaking to that of the First Committee, whose review of its own methods of work has also been initiated by the United States, via two separate resolutions in 2003 and 2004, 58/41 and 59/95, respectively.
Should the UNDC reach agreement on its agenda, it is important to note that the substantive sessions of the Commission are closed to civil society. Therefore, the only input that we have in the deliberations is through our national representatives. Be sure to contact your governmental representatives to urge them to uphold the integrity of multilateralism and to do all they can to ensure that the UNDC makes substantive recommendations on ridding the world of nuclear weapons.
Contact also the UNDC Chairman, and let him know that civil society is paying attention to these proceedings:
Sylvester Rowe
245 East 49th Street
New York, NY 10017
Ph. (212) 688 1656
Fax. (212) 688 4924
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Should the UNDC remain unable to reach agreement on an agenda, the possibility of canceling the remainder of the 2005 UNDC session is not off the table, nor is it far from many delegates' minds. The UNDC is scheduled to convene through August 5. All updates on the UNDC will be available through RCW's General E-News service.
3. Conference on Disarmament ends second session of 2005: Substantive discussions prevail despite deadlock on agenda
On July 14, the Conference on Disarmament (CD) adjourned its second session of the year. While the CD has still not reached agreement on its program of work, they did manage to have some very interesting, focused and useful discussions on the main four issues facing the negotiating body: nuclear disarmament, fissile materials, prevention of an arms race in outer space (PAROS) and security assurances.
28 delegations spoke at the meeting focused on nuclear disarmament. (The United States, incidentally, did not participate, the only Nuclear Weapon State to refrain from doing so). Some countries used the opportunity to present newer ideas and proposals for moving the regime forward, including a reassessment of multilateral machinery. The Netherlands’ Ambassador Chris Sanders, suggested rethinking the mandates of the CD and the UNDC, and proposed instead that governments “settle for one single universal body… (such as) the (General Assembly) First Committee” which “seem(s) capable of negotiating treaties”. Sweden expressed hope that the reform of the United Nations, to be discussed at the September Millennium+5 (M+5) Summit, would be an opportunity to address the failure of existing machinery. Sweden, supported by Mexico, also proposed that the Conference take stock of what disarmament efforts had already been made or were on-going in other contexts. Ambassador Whelan of Ireland suggested that the Conference provide a forum where countries which have not ratified the NPT (Israel, India and Pakistan) could engage meaningfully in nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation issues.
At the meeting focused on fissile materials, 20 delegations spoke, elaborating their positions on the most controversial aspects of a proposed Fissile Material Treaty (FMT), namely its scope (whether or not to include existing stocks in the production cap), verification mechanisms and the mandate for the negotiations. South Africa’s Ambassador Mtshali called the United States’ position on an FMCT verification as “a unilateral conclusion (which is) a major setback and stumbling block in resuming negotiations” and opposed their position “being used as a precondition for negotiations.” The United States, on the other hand, blamed the CD itself, rather than on its own seemingly isolated position against verification, for the lack of progress on this issue. It was the CD, asserted Thomas Cynkin, that must move beyond the Cold War era in order to live up to its potential "to be part of the action" in strengthening international peace and security. Canada’s Ambassador Meyer suggested “establish(ing) an FMCT Experts Group (to bring) together experts” to consider scope and verification, such as was established in the lead-up to negotiations on the Comprehensive nuclear Test-Ban Treaty.
In the area of PAROS, most countries welcomed the efforts of Russia and China, which have submitted three thematic non-papers on the issue, including working paper CD/1679, on "Possible Elements for a Future International Legal Agreement on the Prevention of the Deployment of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects." While staunchly committed to not being the first to deploy weapons in space, Russia warned that, "if someone starts to place weapons in outer space we will have to react accordingly."
In the debate on security assurances, perhaps the strongest intervention (of the 18 that were made that day), came from a Nuclear Weapon State.
The Non-Nuclear Weapon States are, according to China, "fully justified and reasonable to demand not to be threatened by nuclear weapons and to insist that this form of security assurance be made legally binding." While most States are in agreement over the need to negotiate a legally binding negative security assurance (NSA), there remains a dispute over the appropriate forum. Most support discussions taking place in an Ad Hoc Committee of the CD, such as Pakistan, while others, such as Canada, prefer the NPT context, "given that we consider such assurances as one of the benefits of adherence to the NPT," said Ambassador Meyer. Italy, South Koreaand France voiced tepid support for the CD to deal with NSAs, whereas South Africa adamantly maintained that, "security assurances rightfully belong to those States that have foresworn the nuclear weapons option, as opposed to those who still prefer to keep their options open." South Africa also suggested that "an internationally legally binding instrument...could either be in the format of a separate agreement reached in the context of the NPT, or as a protocol to that Treaty."
Despite all of this debate, Ambassador Strømmen, in his final statement as president of the CD, lamented that he "has received no indications from any delegation that we are closer to a resolution with regard to a programme of work for the conference." He made a point to "encourage civil society and academia to analyze the records (of these recent plenary meetings) from their particular perspective and assist all of us in identifying prospects and opportunities".
Two main proposals remain on the table as possible bases for a program of work: the Five Ambassadors' Proposal (the A5 agenda) and the "Food-for-Thought" paper, put forth by Netherlands' Ambassador Chris Sanders. Both proposals would establish four Ad Hoc Committees on the four main issues, though in the Food-For-Thought paper, it is explicitly noted that issues relating to scope and verification of an FMCT would be addressed in the negotiations, rather than settled in the mandate. The Food-For-Thought paper also demotes the mandate of the Ad Hoc Committee dealing with NSAs; in this framework, the Ad Hoc Committee would be tasked to simply "develop recommendations on how the Conference could more effectively deal" with this issue, rather than be charged with negotiating a possible "internationally binding" mechanism, as suggested in the A5 proposal.
The third and last part of the 2005 session of the Conference will be held from August 8- September 23. The next plenary of the Conference will be held on Thursday, 11 August. It should also be noted that Russia will be holding an informal meeting on the issue of PAROS on Tuesday, August 16.
We strongly encourage you to read through the recent CD Reports, which provide a useful summary of where the States stand on these various issues facing the disarmament regime. RCW's CD Report is the only weekly reporting service on the world's lone forum for negotiating disarmament treaties. Understanding the issues, the nuances and the positions of CD Members will greatly enhance your own advocacy efforts as we all push our own countries toward reaching a critical mass of political will for nuclear disarmament.
See the Reaching Critical Will website for:
- all statements delivered to the CD;
- press releases from UNOG;
- the Reaching Critical Will Guide to the CD;
- Other background information on the Conference
and more.
4. Hiroshima & Nagasaki Commemorative Events
August 6 and 9, 2005 mark the 60th anniversaries of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States. Join with people at four central US nuclear weapons sites in major actions calling for an end to the development and production of nuclear warheads. Activities will recognize the devastation caused by nuclear weapons and memorialize the many victims of bomb production at every step - from uranium mining to design, to production, to testing and use. Join the global majority to say NO! to militarism, war and oppression, and YES! to nonviolence, justice and a more secure world for all.
In Japanese culture, the 60th birthday holds a particular cultural significance in celebrating long life. In this 60th year since the US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the greatest gift to the hibakusha (survivors of the atomic bombings) and to the world would be to reaffirm life by immediately initiating negotiations for the elimination of nuclear weapons.
Here is what you can do:
1. Attend a major action on August 6 at one of the core nuclear weapons sites in California, Nevada, New Mexico and Tennessee. Be sure to share the information and bring others with you!
2. Organize or participate in a candlelight vigil at the City Hall in your community on August 9. Click here for more information.
3. Download, copy and distribute the August 6 and 9 National Days of Remembrance and Action flyer to your friends, family, networks and/or members of your organization and encourage them to get involved!
4. Print the August 6 and 9 National Days of Remembrance and Action Postcard to distribute to members of your organization or at events. For more information, please contact Carah Ong at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or (202) 378-3334.
August 6 and 9 National Days of Remembrance and Action are coordinated by: Abolition Now!, Buddhist Peace Fellowship, Nevada Desert Experience, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, Pax Christi New Mexico, Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, Tri-Valley CAREs, United for Peace and Justice, and Western States Legal Foundation.
For a full listing of commemorative events, see: http://www.besafenet.com/2005Calendar.htm
