Rhianna Tyson, Project Associate, Reaching Critical Will

While in Geneva for the Commission on Human Rights, several Ministers of Foreign Affairs are capitalizing on their trip to Switzerland by delivering high-level interventions to the floor of the Conference on Disarmament. In the first of three sessions this week, Ministers from Sweden, Ireland,
Bangladesh, and Canada took the floor on Tuesday.

These statements, and all others from the 2004 session, are available here.

Nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation
The Canadian Foreign Minister Bill Graham discussed the recent developments concerning the DPRK, Libya, Iran, and the A.Q. Khan network, in an effort to draw a frightening picture of "the international environment (which) urgently demands our creativity and commitment." Sweden's Minister Laila Freivalds , too, gave brief overviews on these topics, and voiced nearly exactly the same concerns and recommendations over and in regard to the DPRK, Iran, and Libya.

In the frightening present reality, Ireland highlighted the "tendency (of) some Members of the Treaty to stress its non-proliferation aspects to the neglect of the disarmament provisions of the NPT." He added, "I am firmly convinced that disarmament and non-proliferation are mutually reinforcing."

Minister Freivalds echoed this statement, concurring that "disarmament and non-proliferation are mutually reinforcing." Bangladesh's Minister Reaz Rahman, while acknowledging the importance of non-proliferation efforts, maintained that "nuclear weapons constitute the single most dangerous threat to mankind."

Vertical Proliferation
Without mentioning any State by name, Irish Minister Cowen deplored "the development of new types or new uses for nuclear weapons (which) is unlikely to inspire a sense of confidence." Rather, he maintained, such development "suggests that the taboo on the use of such weapons could be weakened."

Sweden agreed: "Blurring the lines between conventional weapons and non-strategic nuclear weapons would lower the threshold against the use of nuclear weapons." Therefore, in accordance with the New Agenda working papers that have been put forth in recent PrepComs, Swedish
Minister Freivalds suggested that "a binding and verifiable disarmament agreement on non-strategic nuclear weapons should be negotiated." Moreover, she asserted, such an agreement "as a decisive measure to prevent terrorism by nuclear weapons."

Negative Security Assurances
Bangladeshi Minister Rahman, too, refrained from naming names, in Bangladesh's advocacy for a "universal, unconditional, and legally binding instrument" on Negative Security Assurances (NSAs). His country remains "deeply concerned at the changes in nuclear policy of certain nuclear weapon
countries to ease out of their commitment" to provide NSAs to NNWS, as pledged in SC res 984 (1995). NSAs, he maintained, serve as "an important element" in the decision of NNWS to renounce the nuclear option. NNWS in the NPT "have a legitimate right to receive an unconditional assurance" that NWS will not use nor threaten to use nuclear weapons against them. A binding instrument on NSAs would, he assured, "securely anchor the non-proliferation regime" in a time when "serious challenges" facing it are threatening to "unravel the whole process" of the NPT.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
Most States voiced concern over the disintegration of the 13 Steps of the NPT 2000 Review Conference Final Document, "a realistic blueprint for achieving nuclear disarmament," according to Irish Minister Cowen.

To Bangladesh, the lack of progress by the NWS on the 13 Steps "is disheartening." Minister Rahman urged that we not lose sight of the "all important goal of general and complete disarmament.as required by Article VI of the NPT." While welcoming the entry-into-force of the Moscow Treaty,
Bangladesh maintained that SORT "does not fully compensate for the abrogation of the ABM Treaty."

Canada will be using the accomplishments of past NPT conferences to push for progress at the upcoming 2005 Review. At that conference, Canada "will be pressing hard to encourage all states to be faithful to the bargain they made in 1995, a bargain premised upon permanence with accountability. We will encourage states to demonstrate fidelity in deeds and not just words to
Article VI, to reinforce the linkages between Articles III and IV and to improve the Treaty's functioning and implementation."

Comprehensive nuclear Test-Ban Treaty
Ireland, Canada, and Bangladesh all noted the urgency of the CTBT's entry-into-force. As Irish Minister Cowen identified, "there is a fundamental link between the objectives of the NPT and the CTBT- one of the fundamental building steps on the road to disarmament." For his part, Canadian Minister Graham wrote letters to every one of his counterparts in hold-out States, "urging them to complete this important unfinished business." Bangladesh noted that it was the first country in South Asia to sign, "tangible testimony to our constitutional commitment towards general and complete disarmament."

Plurilateral Initiatives
The Western countries all discussed various plurilateral strategies to combat nuclear proliferation. Ireland, the current President of the E.U., noted that as a part of the E.U. Strategy Against Proliferation, the E.U. decided that "non-proliferation should be mainstreamed into our overall
policies." Sweden noted that "multilateralism is at the core," of the E.U. strategy, which covers a "wide spectrum" of proliferation concerns.

Canada welcomed the E.U. Strategy, along with the recent proposals set forth in speeches by U.S. President Bush and U.K. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. Such "joint efforts," Canadian Minister Bill Graham asserted, are "no substitute for the Conference on Disarmament and legally-binding treaties."

Canada, which will be hosting the next meting of Proliferation Security Initiative "operational experts," declared its commitment to PSI principles, stressing also its concurrent commitment to "ensuring that any PSI activity in which we participate will be fully consistent with international law and our own national legal authorities."

Canada also reaffirmed its leadership of the G8 Global Partnership, and supports President Bush's proposal to expand the Partnership to regions outside of FSU.

Verification
Verification remained an important topic to nearly all States. As Swedish Minister Freivalds stated, "Our possibilities to detect, at an early stage, non-compliance must be strengthened through effective use of existing verification arrangements and by devising new complementary mechanisms." Ireland and Sweden both voiced their support for effective compliance and
verification regimes for the BTWC, a noticeable void in the biological weapons nonproliferation regime.

To Canada, the unmasking of the A.Q. Khan network, Libya's relatively advanced nuclear program, the North Korean situation and the continued ambiguity of Iran's nuclear ambitions "highlight the extent to which it is urgent to reinforce compliance and verification mechanisms." Minister Graham
called on countries to strengthen "state-to-state compliance and verification mechanisms across the board. the existing multilateral framework.(and) the capabilities of the UN as well." After all, affirmed
Minister Graham, "the success of the NPT in stopping horizontal proliferation of nuclear weapons ultimately depends on the effectiveness of verification provisions in Article III."

Canada gave notice of the "enhanced support" that it will give to the IAEA. Canada will also be further examining the "interesting ideas on the nuclear fuel cycle" that the Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei has put forth, and they will be "working with all the authorities involved to promote more such realistic initiatives."

Addressing the CD Stalemate
Most all of the Ministers noted with grave disappointment the lack of progress in the CD. Canada and Bangladesh urged the Conference to support the A5, even though to Bangladesh, the A5 proposal "does not necessarily meet all expectations." Minister Rahman acknowledged, however, that "this
may never happen" and that the proposal "seems balanced" enough to reach a consensus.

Minister Cowen voiced Ireland's support for a subsidiary body in the CD to deal specifically with nuclear disarmament. He also urged reconsideration of "the exclusivity" of CD membership, stressing that "legitimacy underpins respect for multilateral action," and that "if we want an effective
multilateral system we must all contribute meaningfully to it." Furthermore, he flummoxed, "I find it hard to believe, much less understand, how a body charged with a mandate of such relevance to humankind.can continue to effectively exclude civil society from a meaningful role in its deliberations."

To Sweden, it is "high time" to begin negotiations on an FMCT, and Minister Freivalds called on all states "not to delay this any further." Canadian Minister Graham asked: "Why should the start of such formal talks, such a small step forward, remain so difficult? I must say that I find it hard to
understand." While Bangladesh maintained that negotiations on a fissban should include the existing stockpiles; "without which, any such treaty will be incomplete."

In regards to PAROS discussion, Ireland unemphatically noted that they "see merit in embarking on a process which could eventually lead to an agreement on the non-weaponization of outer space." By contrast, Bangladesh remains decidedly "convinced" that the only way to save outer space from the poison of its weaponization is through a legally binding international instrument.

The prevention of space weaponization was, and always has been, a "fundamental Canadian goal," Minister Graham declared. He urged the Conference to establish an ad hoc committee on PAROS to "begin discussing, without any preconditions, how the international community can keep outer
space weapons-free." This "fundamentally Canadian" idea, he noted, "has evolved" in Canada. While they remain firmly opposed to the weaponization of space, Canada recognizes "the need to ensure the safety of satellites vital to our security and prosperity." Minister Graham announced the joint
seminar sponsored by UNIDIR and the Canadian DFAIT on "Safeguarding Space for All" to be held in Geneva on March 25-26 this year.

Conventional Weapons
Only Sweden and Ireland noted the upcoming conference on tracking and marking Small Arms and Light Weapons. Ireland's Minister Brian Cowen hoped that "the misuse of" SALW would "be given greater priority," while Sweden called for "export controls, including control of arms dealers, increased transparency in arms trade and marking and tracing of arms" in the discussions set to take place this summer.

Ireland, the host of an April, 2003 conference on the Explosive Remnants of War, noted that the progress on the CCW should be regarded as "a significant step forward," especially in the midst of what he characterized as "a difficult period for arms control." Swedish Foreign Minister Laila
Freivalds noted that the CCW protocol "is presently before the Swedish Parliament for consideration." In addition, Sweden "regrets the decision by the United States to pursue its landmine policy outside the framework of this important Convention" prohibiting APMs.

----
It is encouraging to see that some States are heeding the call of Ambassador Kuniko Inoguchi, the last CD President for the 2003 sessions. In her closing remarks, Ambassador Inoguchi called for more States to send Foreign Ministers or their high-level equivalents, in order to not only raise the profile of the CD's important work, but also as a demonstration of States' commitment to the CD and to the multilateral process that it embodies.

************************************************

Next week at the United Nations, history will be made. The majority of governments, together with international organisations and civil society groups, are gathering to resume negotiations of a treaty banning nuclear weapons. Women are at the forefront of this effort—as they have been at the forefront of the anti-nuclear resistance since the beginning of the nuclear age.

The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) was one of the first civil society groups to condemn the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Women were leaders in the campaign to ban nuclear weapon testing in the United States, including by collecting baby teeth to show evidence of radioactive contamination. Women led the Nuclear Freeze movement in the 1980s, calling on the Soviet Union and United States to stop the arms race. Now, women are the leading edge of the movement to ban nuclear weapons in the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). Women are also leading in some of the delegations negotiating this treaty—and a woman is presiding over the conference!

As part of its efforts to ban nuclear weapons, WILPF is organising a public march and rally, the Women’s March to Ban the Bomb, on 17 June 2017. This event aims to bring together an intersectional, diverse, and inclusive group of people who want to see the end of the nuclear era. Solidarity events are also being organized across Australia, Scotland, and the United States, as well as other points in Europe.

There's still time to join in! Check out our resources like our call to action, infographics, flyers, videos, and other materials for distribution. Your organisation can endorse the march, you can donate to support our efforts, you can volunteer to help with the march and rally in NYC, and you can organise your own event! You can also follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram for more information and for pictures of the day, using the hashtags #womenbanthebomb and #nuclearban!

To celebrate the nuclear ban—and women’s leadership in achieving it—join us on 17 June in NYC and around the world for the Women’s March to Ban the Bomb!

Negotiations will be on at the UN from 15 June-7 July 2017. To follow the negotiations, you can subscribe to WILPF’s ban treaty mailing list to receive daily updates from its disarmament programme Reaching Critical Will. You can also follow us on social media with the hashtag #nuclearban and the Twitter account @RCW_.

Conditions in conflict
Dr. Robert Zuber | Global Action to Prevent War

At the 17 June Conference on Disarmament (CD) plenary meeting, the Swedish ambassador delivered a statement on behalf of Sweden and Finland urging states to endorse the proposed programme of work, CD/1840. The representatives of Cuba and Pakistan  outlined their governments' positions on the document, while Canada and Algeria commented on their statements. As the current rotating president of the CD, the UK ambassador closed the meeting by speaking on the work of the CD and welcoming the ambassador of the United States as the next president of the 2008 session.

Brief highlights

-Finland and Sweden said CD/1840 is a “balanced and carefully crafted compromise” and argued it should be considered “as another grand bargain”.

-Cuba said it would support CD/1840 if everyone else agreed to it, even though Cuba's highest priority is nuclear disarmament.

-Pakistan reiterated its concerns about CD/1840 and argued that given the history of the discussions and efforts on a fissile materials treaty, “CD/1840 is crafted with a built-in prejudgment about the outcome of discussions and negotiations.”

-Canada argued that that not all four of the CD's core issues—fissile materials, nuclear disarmament, prevention of an arms race in outer space, and negative security assurances—are ripe for negotiation and that nuclear disarmament is a long term objective but is not realistically ready for negotiation yet.

-Algeria responded to Canada's comments, arguing that none of the issues are ripe for negotiation or negotiations would have already started on a fissile material cut-off treaty.

-The United Kingdom questioned if four parallel negotiations is realistic for the CD.

CD/1840
On behalf of Sweden and Finland, Swedish Ambassador Hans Dahlgren delivered a statement in support of CD/1840. He emphasized the responsibility of member states to “seize opportunities to negotiate treaties that strengthen global security,” arguing that these opportunities do exist. Amb. Dahlgren said CD/1840 would allow the CD to resume substantive work, to “start a process of hard bargaining based on 'give and take' and respect for each others' security perceptions,” which would lead to legally-binding agreements.

Cuba's representative, Mr Abel La Rose Domínguez, said his country would support CD/1840 if consensus was reached on the document. However, he emphasized that nuclear weapon states need to “unambiguously face up” the commitments under Article VI of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to achieve nuclear disarmament—and until then, CD member states “cannot continue to delay the adoption of a universal legally binding instrument without conditions which would provide security guarantee for non nuclear weapons states.”

Referring to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's call for “political vision” at the 22 January CD plenary meeting, Pakistan's Ambassador Masood Khan agreed with the Secretary-General's assessment that “Top-level political leadership and cooperation can forge a fresh consensus on future projects.” Amb. Kahn explained that Pakistan's position on a fissile material treaty (FMT)—and thus its position on CD/1840—“has been determined at the highest decision-making level”—the National Command Authority.

Outlining the process the six CD presidents undertook to develop CD/1840, Amb. Kahn argued that despite their claim that the version of CD/1840 presented to the Conference on 26 May “commands almost complete consensus,” nothing actually changed between the version presented to states during informal consultations on 13 March. He emphasized, “No engagement to amend or negotiate the text of the paper has yet taken place. The document remains as it was introduced. Not a single comma has been changed, though several substantive and procedural suggestions were indicated by our delegation and other delegations. Our understanding was it was not a take-it-or-leave-it proposal.” He went on to argue that while the six presidents did make sincere attempts to engage and consult with CD member states' missions in Geneva, and in some instances, even with capitals, “No serious overture has been forthcoming so far to accommodate the known concerns of the paper.”

Amb. Kahn outlined the response officials in Pakistan have given the six presidents:

-Pakistan would sign any dispensation or mandate that is non-discriminatory;

-Pakistan proposed the CD should work on a mandate for a verifiable FMT; and

-Pakistan started an interdepartmental evaluation of the recent draft proposal.

He also reiterated Pakistan's concerns with CD/1840, including the necessity of including existing stocks; the need for negotiations on all four core issues; and “differentiation between the role of the coordinators to facilitate informal discussions and the function of formal CD subsidiary bodies to conduct negotiations in the context of the programme of work.” Finally, agreeing that the CD should commence work without preconditions, he argued that there currently are preconditions, imposed by other states, that should be dropped: that no negotiations can start if verification is part of the mandate; that negotiations cannot start if ad hoc committees will deal with the four core issues minus FMT; and that negotiations will only take place on FMT, not on the other three issues.

At the close of the plenary meeting, Amb. John Duncan of the United Kingdom argued that 12 rotating presidents of the CD (from this year and last year), from across all regional and political groupings, have noted almost complete agreement on the proposed programme of work, whether L.1 and its supporting documents (2007) or CD/1840 (2008). He said all of these presidents have called on the remaining states to demonstrate flexibility.

Fissile materials vs. the other three core issues
Responding to Amb. Kahn's remarks, Canada's Amb. Marius Grinius said that not all four core issues are ripe for negotiation, especiallynegative security assurances (NSAs) and nuclear disarmament. He said negotiations on NSAs would require as much background material and in-depth discussion on the subject as has been generated for a fissile materials treaty. He also argued that nuclear disarmament and a new outer space treaty are not ripe for negotiation and called on member states to be realistic about expectations and not to insist on negotiating everything together at once.

Algeria's Amb. Hamza Khelif, also speaking without a prepared statement, responded to Amb. Grinius' comments. He asked if the Canadian ambassador meant that consensus is lacking on the other three core issues or if there are other technical questions that need to be clarified for any of these items. He also questioned Amb. Grinius' comment that lack of consensus on NSAs is reason for it to not be ripe for negotiation, arguing that there is no consensus on any of the core issues, including fissile materials, or else negotiations would have already started on a fissile materials cut-off treaty.

The next plenary meeting of the CD is scheduled for Tuesday, 24 June at 10:00am under the presidency of the United States.

- Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will

Editorial: Negotiating an ATT with teeth
Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

Conference Highlights
Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will and Michael Spies, Arms Control Reporter