Biological Weapons Convention (BWC)

BWC Protocol Bulletin, May 7, 2001

By Jenni Rissanen

"Middle-Mass" Grows as AHG Continues to Examine the Text

The Ad Hoc Group (AHG) of states parties to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BWC), charged with negotiating a verification Protocol to the treaty, proceeded with a close examination of the Chair "composite text" during the second week of its twenty-third and penultimate session (April 23-May 11). The Group is aiming to complete its work in time for the Fifth BWC Review Conference, scheduled for November 19-December 7 this year. The Chair, Ambassador Tibor Tóth (Hungary), who introduced his text on March 30 in an attempt to focus deliberations bogged down in discussions of a heavily-bracketed rolling text, continued his article-by-article explanation of the composite text, following a brief suspension to allow for a meeting (April 25-27) of the Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) considering arrangements for the Review Conference.

Some forty supportive statements were heard during the first and second week of the AHG session, including a cross-regional group statement on May 2, endorsing the Chair's move to introduce the text in the AHG and arguing that efforts to conclude the negotiations must now focus on Tóth's text as opposed to the rolling text, on which the Group had been working since 1997. However, some delegations are still openly reluctant to pursue this course, while others continue to be silent or non-committal on their position.

As demonstrated by the May 2 collective statement by Austria, Brazil, Chile, Guatemala, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru and South Africa and other statements, there is a growing "middle-mass" in the negotiations comprised of countries from all groups. Although the Chair's text contained proposals that caused them "concern", the ten countries thought it reflected a "careful and sustained endeavour to reach comprehensive and balanced compromises". In a clear message to the AHG, they acknowledged Tóth's text as "the basis" to conclude the negotiations. The statement, by its own description, represented "clear testimony that there is common ground between the different groups in these negotiations and that there is real scope for outstanding issues to be resolved".

At the same time, other states, notably China and Iran, have stated that they still consider the rolling text as the basis of the negotiations (see BWC Protocol Bulletin, April 23, 2001) and have, throughout the examination of the composite text, refrained from commenting on substance in an effort to underline this position. India and the United States, on the other hand, have both kept silent in this session so far. The continuing US silence is not going unnoticed, and there is speculation about when the American delegation will make the outcome of the new administration's policy review known in the AHG. According to rumours and press reports (see for example Chemical & Engineering News Today, April 20, 2001) the US review, although yet to be approved at the highest political level, takes a negative stance on the Protocol.

As the examination of the text has progressed, the question 'what next' has become more and more prominent. Pakistan raised this issue on May 3, arguing that the AHG should soon refer back to the rolling text negotiations, so as to not "lose momentum and the proverbial race against the clock". Pakistan's comment indicates that there might be a procedural battle in store next week, when the AHG will need to determine the status of both the rolling and the composite texts in its procedural report on this session.

China, Cuba, Iran, Indonesia, Libya, Pakistan and Sri Lanka pressed on the matter further in a joint statement on May 4. The seven countries noted that there were less than 30 working days left, and expressed concern "that the Ad Hoc Group may not be able to conclude its work as mandated". Thus, they "firmly" believed that the AHG "should immediately resume substantive negotiations based on the rolling text to achieve consensus on those outstanding issue[s]." They did not explain, however, just how the negotiations on the heavily-bracketed rolling text, rather than the composite text, could solve those issues more expeditiously. Some noted that Mexico and India did not join in this statement, believing this indicated a shift in one "like-minded" group in the AHG. India made a short statement, its first in this session, which called for "greater political will" in the interests of time, so that the AHG could conclude its work before the Review Conference. India did not express preference for one text or the other.

There now seem to be roughly two groups emerging in the negotiations. There is a large majority, some forty countries, which has welcomed Tóth's text as the basis of further negotiations. This group includes a broad range of states from the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), the European Union (EU) and other western countries, as well as many Eastern European nations. However, there is also a small minority of countries that either oppose these efforts or remain silent. Delegations in the majority group have been providing Tóth with feedback on his text, and he is expected to start addressing these points and concerns in consultations next week. Notwithstanding this constructive work, the non-engagement by some in the minority group could throw a spanner in the works, potentially dragging the process.

Whether there will be a procedural debate on the status of the composite and rolling text during the final week is yet to be seen. Tóth said last week that the AHG would "need to have a clear understanding on the status of the rolling text" as well as see whether the composite text could "really [be] a helping hand" in the negotiations. However, making the composite text the official basis of the negotiations (in the AHG's procedural report) will need consensus.

Speaking on May 4, Tóth called for "necessary political maturity" to make the task ahead manageable. While acknowledging that countries had national interests to defend, he reminded delegates that all states parties had subscribed to the AHG's common mandate. There were now only 26 days of negotiations left to try to fulfil that mandate - an "extremely short time", during which the AHG needed to "have real discussions on real issues".

Tóth concluded his detailed explanation of the composite text last week and is now preparing a list of issues, based on the comments made on the text during the first two weeks, to be tackled in consultations with delegations during the third and final week of this session. It is understood that these will include at least declarations, visits, investigations (particularly decision-making procedure), transfers, definitions and some legal issues such as entry into force. On Monday, he appealed to delegations to try to keep the list short and to refrain from restating their known positions, and asked them to move on to identifying possible consensus solutions to these issues.

Jenni Rissanen is the Acronym Institute's analyst monitoring the BWC AHG Protocol negotiations in Geneva.