ACRONYM NPT Update No. 19A service during the 1995 NPT Review and Extension Conference of the ACRONYM Consortium and Disarmament Times
Decision Time11 May 1995 Extension Decision Postponed The decision on extending the NPT and adoption of the principles and
strengthened review process was postponed until Thursday,
in part so that delegations could discuss the three
finalised documents with their governments, and in part
to give more time to come to a compromise over the
resolution on Israel which had been proposed on Tuesday
by 14 Arab League states. However it is now widely
assumed that the Canadian/South African indefinite
extension package will be adopted by consensus at
Thursday morning's plenary. Rules of Procedure Adopted The President finally
achieved agreement on rule 28 (3)f that 'all proposals
shall be voted on simultaneously by written ballot. Each
State Party shall have one vote, to be cast in favour of
one of the proposals.' Following this decision, the Rules
of Procedure could finally be adopted by consensus. Two
voting procedures, for 'open' and 'secret' written
ballots, either including or omitting the name of the
State Party, were attached as appendices. While many are
now openly saying that no votes will need to be taken,
providing two options has made it possible to get
agreement now, leaving the possibility of crossing the
secrecy bridge only if necessary. Resolution on the Middle East On 9 May, 14 members of
the Arab League, Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan,
Kuwait, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Mauritania, Morocco,
Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia and Yemen, submitted
a draft resolution expressing concern about Israel's
unsafeguarded nuclear facilities, and calling on Israel
to accede to the NPT. As all specific mention of Israel
had been negotiated out of the Principles and Committee
reports, the co-sponsors wanted their resolution to put
the weight of the NPT Conference behind their call for a
Middle East 'free of nuclear and all other weapons of
mass destruction and their delivery systems.' They made
clear that their acquiescence in the consensus on
extending the NPT would be contingent on the Conference
giving a much higher priority to their regional concerns.
However the US in particular resisted any attempt to put
a single spotlight on Israel's nuclear programme. By the
end of Wednesday a compromise had been nearly finalised,
whereby the language of the resolution was considerably
generalised and softened, the Middle East peace process
was endorsed, and support for a Middle East zone free of
weapons of mass destruction was underlined as an
objective to be supported by all NPT parties as well as
all states in the Middle East. The compromise resolution
avoids mentioning Israel by name, instead noting 'with
satisfaction' the report from Main Committee III, which
had named all non- NPT states and called on them to
accede to the Treaty and accept IAEA safeguards. While
the text has been agreed, the sponsorship of the final
resolution was still under discussion late on Wednesday,
with the Arab states wanting to ensure that it carries
the maximum authority possible in the circumstances. Review Document Far from Agreement The final review document
of the 1995 Conference is still bogged down in the
Drafting Committee. It is understood that the non-aligned
(NAM) text on unilaterally enforced restrictions to
technical cooperation, inserted into the Committee III
report at the last minute by Iran, as well as text on the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) and Iraq,
and on nuclear weapon free zones (NFZ), are still to be
resolved. However, the primary difficulties remain with
the sections on nuclear disarmament. Unless the text on
Articles I, II and VI are moderated so as to become
almost meaningless, it is difficult to see how a common
text can satisfy the fundamentally different perceptions
that exist on these issues. Ambassador Strulak of Poland,
Chair of the Drafting Committee, will continue his
attempts to bring order to the final document, but there
is growing concern that the disagreements are so deep
that consensus on adopting a final declaration might
prove impossible. Alternatively, consensus might be
sought by inserting into the review document language
that has now been agreed for the resolution on principles
and objectives. However, many States Parties would prefer
the review document to go further and provide a more
genuine assessment of the Treaty's performance and the
task ahead. North Korea withdraws from Conference decisions On May 9, the Ambassador of the DPRK sent a formal letter absenting his delegation from the Conference decision-making, in protest at the 'outdated prejudices' in the representation of North Korea's nuclear programme. In doing so, the letter reiterated DPRK's 'special status', referring to the procedures they had initiated last year to withdraw from the NPT, but which had been suspended as a result of the DPRK-US framework agreement. The decision on extending the NPT is likely to be adopted by consensus, together with the two documents outlining Principles and Objectives and an enhanced review process, at the NPT Plenary meeting scheduled to open at 10.00 am Thursday May 11, 1995. This update was written by Rebecca Johnson.
|