The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
The NPT Review Conference 2005: Acronym Special Coverage
Day 25, or "My Objection is Bigger than your Objection"
May 26, 2005
Rebecca Johnson
Back to the main page on the NPT
The penultimate day confirmed yesterday's prognosis that there will be
no substantive agreement coming out of the NPT Review Conference. The
morning opened with a short plenary in which the president, Ambassador
Sergio Duarte of Brazil, told the Conference that he would schedule two
plenaries for Friday, morning and afternoon, "with presentation of the
chairs' reports, after which we will consider and adopt the final document...
after which delegations will make statements" before the conference is
concluded. The meeting was then closed and civil society requested to
leave, which we did. I wondered for a hopeful moment if he intended to
convene negotiations to find a way to adopt at least some of the aspirations
and recommendations contained in the stymied reports from the various
committees and subsidiary bodies; but no, it turned out the business too
sensitive for civil society ears was an attempt to resolve yesterday's
replay of the agenda conflict, and the reports we can expect tomorrow
are only from such scintillating bodies as the credentials committee.
Though of course such things are very important!
The rest of the day there were group meetings and closed sessions on
the 'technical report', in particular the characterisation of the agenda
decision that had been challenged yesterday by the UK. After much wrangling,
it was decided to remove the text of the NAM's statement of understanding
from the technical report of the conference, while keeping in the sentence
of the president's understanding. Apart from that, the report will list
various officers, documents and meetings. It will not contain any ideas
or recommendations for work for the future. Having deleted the actual
text of the NAM understanding, it will not even refer to the review conference
outcomes of 1995 and 2000.
In view of the serious proliferation problems in the world, it is a great
pity that the 2005 Review Conference has not been able to adopt measures
that would strengthen the NPT, but it is not calamitous, as some have
suggested. Having been adopted by consensus and not yet implemented, the
agreements obtained in the review conferences of 1995 and 2000 still stand.
Lack of agreement at the 2005 RevCon is to be deplored because it may
erode confidence in the regime, but it neither invalidates nor undermines
relevant obligations and undertakings previously agreed to. They continue
to stand as benchmarks for measuring progress and promoting compliance
until the treaty is fully implemented in all its nuclear disarmament and
nonproliferation contexts.
During the plenary, the Japanese ambassador read a message from Foreign
Minister Nobutaka Machimura: "Given the serious challenges the NPT regime
is currently facing, it is an urgent task for the State Parties to maintain
and strengthen the authority and credibility of the NPT". He expressed
the "strong hope" that the RevCon "would issue a robust message enabling
the NPT regime to be further consolidated. Remaining time is limited and
the task ahead is tremendous. Each one of the State Parties shares the
responsibility to make this Conference a success. With our creative and
cooperative efforts, an agreed document is still achievable. Japan will
not spare any efforts to this end." Luxembourg on behalf of the EU and
Egypt on behalf of the Arab Group said they agreed with the Japanese foreign
minister and pledged their full support to work intensively and cooperatively
to achieve consensus on a final document, but some delegations greeted
Egypt's statement with laughter, which does not bode well.
26.5.05
Back to the Top of the Page
© 2005 The Acronym Institute.
|
