NEW ZEALAND MISSION to the UNITED NATIONS
Nga Mangai mo Aotearoa
FIRST SESSION OF THE
PREPARATORY Committee FOR THE
2000 REVIEW CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES
TO THE TREATY ON THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
STATEMENT BY THE
NEW ZEALAND HEAD of DELEGATION
CAROLINE FORSYTH
TUESDAY 8 APRIL 1997
STATEMENT BY MS CAROLINE FORSYTH
HEAD OF THE NEW ZEALAND DELEGATION TO
THE FIRST SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY
COMMITTEE FOR THE 2000 REVIEW CONFERENCE
OF THE PARTIES TO THE TREATY ON THE
NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Let me begin by congratulating you on your election to the
Chair of this first session of our preparations for the
Review Conference in 2000. You may be sure of the full
cooperation of the New Zealand delegation.
We intend to be brief during this general exchange of views
since we believe the Prepcom must begin as it intends to
proceed, in a businesslike, pragmatic way, with our
attention focused on the achievement of concrete outcomes,
rather than on general statements of posit on.
In this statement I intend to make some comments on bow
we might proceed; and highlight what New Zealand sees as
some of the key elements m our review.
First, procedure. We have adopted an agenda which will
enable us to get down to substantive work from the start.
The agenda will cover all treaty-related issues at this
Prepcom rather than focusing on just one or two themes.
This seems the most practical way to proceed. It will allow
this Prepcom to begin an ongoing and focused review of
developments as well as starting to consider appropriate
future action. This is the twofold nature of the task assigned
to us by the 1995 Conference: to be both evaluative and
forward- looking. We need procedures and reporting
systems which facilitate that task.
Our Canadian colleagues have presented some very sound
proposals for how we could go about our work. We support
their suggestions. Specifically, we agree that the Prepcom
must take account of the following:
a. the role of the Prepcoms is a substantive one. They
must prepare the ground procedurally for the next
Review Conference but must also evaluate the
operation of the treaty stringently, against the
benchmarks of the Principles and Objectives.
b those Principles and Objectives constitute a
programme of action designed to promote the full
implementation of the treaty. The programme is not
static but dynamic in due course it will need to be
added to -identifying areas and means for further
progress towards treaty implementation.
c part of this process involves accounting for what we
as parties have undertaken in pursuit of the treaty's
objectives, and what next steps we plan to take.
d a mechanism is needed for recording the main
strands of our discussion and forwarding this to the
next Prepcom meeting. This could be a compilation
of proposals, not necessarily agreed by consensus.
We already have some suggestions which could
serve as a starting point.
e. the Prepcoms may find it useful to appoint sub
groups or intercessional groups to carry out work in
more depth on some issues, particularly as we
approach the next review conference Our decisions
on procedure should allow for this possibility.
The reason for clarifying our procedure at an early stage is
to enable our debate to make real progress and to Ret down
to substance as soon as possible.
The 1995 indefinite extension was an important statement
of confidence in the NonProliferation treaty and its role as
cornerstone of international security cooperation. The
decisions adopted at the same time placed the treaty and its
subsequent reviews clearly within the framework of an
enhanced multilateral nuclear non proliferation and
disarmament process. In debating the treaty's
implementation at this meeting, it is appropriate for us to
evaluate where that multilateral process has got to, as well
as to look at bilateral and plurilateral developments, and
further ahead to necessary future Steps.
The key multilateral achievement of the past year was,
without doubt, the adoption of the CTBT and its signature
by a large number of countries' including all five nuclear
weapon states. The commitment to halt testing forever is an
outcome that New Zealand has worked for decades. Despite
the problems associated with the future entry into force of
the treaty, its conclusion is a great step forward.
Another multilateral achievement we want to highlight is
the completion last week of negotiations in the IAEA on a
protocol for the strengthening of safeguards. The
implementation of these new measures will be a real
contribution to confidence in the non-proliferation
provisions of our treaty.
New Zealand is a strong advocate of the value of nuclear
weapon free zones and in this area too we can be pleased
with the progress achieved since 1995. In our own region.
the South Pacific, we now have the protocols to the Treaty
of Rarotonga signed by all five nuclear weapon states and
ratified by three of them. Nuclear weapon free zones have
recently been established in Africa and Southeast Asia. A
UN resolution adopted in December last year by a large
majority of members endorsed the value of NWFZs and
urged them to cooperate to further their goals. The
establishment of other zones is an aim that NPT parties can
work towards.
The past year has also seen some additional clarification of
the obligations of the nuclear weapon states under Article
VI. of the NPT, in the form of the advisory opinion from
the International Court of Justice which confirmed the legal
obligation to pursue and bring to a conclusion negotiations
leading to complete nuclear disarmament. The report of the
Canberra Commission has set out some practical steps
which would contribute towards that goal. NPT patties can
draw on these suggestions, and others. as we define further
necessary steps in our agreed programme of action as set
out in the Principles and Objectives
In updating the Principles and Objectives to include further
steps towards nuclear disarmament we should also consider
ways of overcoming the obstacles that have prevented
further progress on the steps already listed. New Zealand is
concerned at the current impasse within the Conference on
Disarmament which is preventing both substantive
discussion of nuclear disarmament measures as well as the
start of negotiations on a cut-off treaty, acknowledged as an
essential step in our programme of action. We urge all
countries to be open to practical proposals which will allow
the negotiations to move forward
Mr. Chairman, multilateral steps on nuclear disarmament
should proceed side by side with steps taken by the nuclear
weapon States themselves. We have been encouraged by
reports from the US and Russia on the discussions at the
Helsinki Summit on parameters for further reductions in
both countries' nuclear forces. We look forward to seeing
these embodied in a START 111 agreement. We also think
it timely for the other three nuclear weapon States to give
us an indication of their own intentions As a first step, we
endorse the suggestion (put forward by Canada in its
outline for a "rolling document") that those three States
make a political commitment not to increase their nuclear
weapon inventories.
Mr Chairman. these are some of the areas in our review of
particular concern to my delegation. We shall have
additional comments on specific issues as we move through
our agenda and work programme.