ADDRESS
BY THE VICE-MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
OF CHILE, AMBASSADOR ALBERTO VAN KLAVEREN,
AT THE CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT
Geneva,
3 March 2009
Mr.
President,
Allow
me, first of all, to congratulate you on your election to chair this
Conference, which was created in order to negotiate legally binding
instruments on disarmament and arms control. Since its admission as
a Member State in 1996, this is Chile's first political high-level
participation in the debates of the Conference on Disarmament and
it has been our wish to do so at this particular international conjuncture
in which - after too many years of deadlock - the confluence of auspicious
circumstances seems to be generating the critical mass of political
support required for re-launching the multilateral disarmament agenda.
There
are many good reasons that raise the need for this re-launching. You
know them only too well, but I wish to underscore this morning that
the global financial crisis, the food crisis, the energy crisis and
the climate change require all available resources to be canalized
towards reactivation of the economies and adequate response to the
social needs, which cannot be put off, as well towards mitigation
of phenomena which threaten the very existence of insular States.
The
2005 UN World Summit Outcome Document acknowledged that peace and
security, development and human rights are the pillars of the
UN system, while recognizing these three elements as being interlinked
and mutually reinforcing.(*) These pillars are the foundations of
collective security and well-being. The underlying idea is that international
security, national security and human security go hand in hand. The
world recession we are falling into is putting global interdependence
toughly to the test. Therefore progress in the multilateral disarmament
and arms control agenda will contribute to mitigating and eventually
reversing it. Social peace is a requisite for governability and its
absence is seed for conflict. Well aware of this, the negotiators
of the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 incorporated in Chapter XIII
of the Treaty of Versailles the creation of the International Labor
Organization.
Chile
reaffirms that nuclear disarmament constitutes not only the most important
issue of our common agenda, but that its materialization is the keystone
for achieving security for all States at a lower military level.(**)
Aware of this imperative necessity, our Delegation has been making
every possible effort as Coordinator of item I of the Agenda of this
Conference.
For
this same reason we are part of all relevant and related instruments,
including the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT),
the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), the Treaty of Tlatelolco,
the Additional Protocol to Safeguards Agreement and the The Hague
Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation.
Also,
we welcome with expectation the statements recently made at this same
stage by representatives of the great powers and other relevant actors
at the multilateral scene, as well as the ideas that are circulating
on revitalization of nuclear disarmament and renovation of this process.
Allow me, in particular, to underscore, for its political transcendence,
the readiness manifested by President Obama of moving towards ratification
of the CTBT, as well as the flexibility shown right from the start
by the new U.S. Administration when it reestablished the speedy negotiation
of a fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT), endowed with a verification
regime as one of its objectives. We are convinced that this will be
a transcendental step forward towards the final objective of complete
nuclear disarmament.
We
favor an incremental approach, which allows for effective progress.
Mr.
President,
Today
it is crucial to work with determination on strengthening the fight
against nuclear proliferation. We need a successful NPT review process.
The 2010 Review Conference will in fact be a litmus test for
the determination of the key actors. Those actors will have to assume
the political legacy accumulated in the course of the past seven review
conferences and insert it into the context of the present political
circumstances.
The
expected ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
by the United States should make way for a "virtuous" circle
which would foster a speedy entry into force of the said instrument.
A climate of political cooperation between all nuclear powers is both
possible and desirable. The moratoria on nuclear tests - whether proclaimed
or de facto - which are being observed show that ratification
of the said Treaty will not endanger their national security. This
step will offer the legal security and political confidence the CTBT
is due to bring about in international relations.
It
is necessary also to start, as soon as possible, negotiations on an
instrument for the prohibition of fissile material for military purposes.
After the CTBT, this is the natural step to be taken, which will convincingly
reinforce the nuclear powers' commitment to NPT Article VI. This will
also be the opportunity for other States who possess nuclear weapons
to translate into action their oft-repeated affirmations in several
international fora that elimination of nuclear weapons is their prime
priority. Chile holds that verification has a political entity of
its own, which is part of the very essence of Disarmament instruments.
We therefore hope that the flexibilization of the US position will
result in the initiation of a negotiation process aimed at elaborating
a treaty which will effectively contribute towards the objectives
of Disarmament and Nuclear Non Proliferation.
Mr.
President,
Nuclear
disarmament and non proliferation are the obverse and reverse of the
same coin. It is necessary to advance on both sides, always keeping
in mind that the final objective is the complete elimination of nuclear
weapons. We have already pointed out here, as we did in the Disarmament
Commission and in the First Committee and we insist in doing so once
again: there are no good proliferators versus bad proliferators. Any
proliferation is negative and all nuclear weapons generate unacceptable
risk for the international security.
Any
policy or any diplomatic effort that ignores this essential truth
is bound to face the mistrust and frustration of the overwhelming
majority of the non-nuclear states. At almost two decades after the
end of the Cold War, what we notice is that the causes of tension
and conflict apparently are being re-invented. Nuclear weapons, like
all weapons, have been created for potential use. It would be presumptuous
to pretend that the human intelligence is capable of warding off all
the risks created by their mere existence. The only rational course
of action possible is to make honest and determined endeavors to eliminate
them.
Mr.
President,
Multilateral
diplomacy requires the appropriate organs to prosper. And I do not
refer to mere physical or procedural spaces, but to a legitimate framework
endowed with the necessary resources, able to respond with results
to the needs of the international community.
We
understand that the achievement of progress in such crucial areas
as nuclear disarmament calls for the leadership and commitment of
the great powers, whose security interests appear to be protected
by the rule of consensus. This rule, however, interpreted in a fundamentalist
way, led to a kind of veto which, combined with the practice of linkage,
paralyzed the Conference impeding even the slightest result: if this
were not the case, the Ottawa and Oslo conventions would have been
negotiated in Geneva.
One
thing, Mr. President, is to safeguard privileged security interests
requiring consensus in order to enter into the final stage of a disarmament
negotiation, but something quite different is to block the initiation
of any negotiation or the mere establishment of a subsidiary organ
to set the stage for such negotiation. This rigid interpretation of
the rule of consensus contributed to the Conference's deadlock.
International
security is based on the principle of its indivisibility. All States,
independently of their size or power, bear part of the responsibility
of preserving it. The decade which is coming to its end shows that
not even a superpower can protect efficiently its security interests
when acting unilaterally. We all need each other. Therefore the sound
thing to do is to render the CD procedures more democratic.
The
organs of the multilateral system are tools to meet collective political
needs. Their utility is proven by their results. They are not an end
in themselves. Disarmament contributes to the achievement of general
public good. The Conference on Disarmament is only an instrument.
Mr.
President,
This
Conference needs to be renewed and expanded in order to become the
more legitimate, more inclusive and more transparent organ we are
in need of. Therefore we support resolutely all initiatives and exercises
of reflection on this renewal. The restructured Conference on Disarmament
we are aiming at should definitely incorporate an appropriate participation
of the civil society in its work, as well as a better coordination
with the other bodies of the "Disarmament machinery" and
a communication and dissemination policy with regard to the public
opinion which is up to the mark of the present-day culture of accountability
enforceable upon any authority.
Mr.
President,
My
country founds its Foreign Policy on values that have to be pursued
in a proactive and practical way. The message I wish to deliver to
this Conference is that the time has come to search for results. The
conjuncture is propitious to get back to work: let us seize the opportunity.
We are well aware that a substantial part of the required leadership
lies with the big powers and that without their cooperation the great
objectives we have on the Agenda will be difficult to achieve. Nevertheless,
it is also clear that there are new emerging powers that also have
to take their responsibilities and contribute to this process. It
is a common task which requires the commitment of all of us. The big
challenges our civilization faces call for more and better multilateralism.
We do hope this Conference on Disarmament to prove itself up to the
mark.
Thank
you very much.
(*)
RES A/60/1, par. 9
(**) SSOD-I Final Document, par. 22
