John Duncan

« ENGAGING CIVIL SOCIE... | Main | NUCLEAR NON PROLIFER... »

Tuesday 05 May, 2009

NUCLEAR NON PROLIFERATION TREATY MEETINGS IN NEW YORK: DAY 1

A reasonable start to the NPT PrepCom in New York. UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon set the tone in his opening address in which he said that “The global economic crisis, climate change and the outbreak of the H1N1 flu virus are all reminders that we live in an interdependent world. We cannot afford to place disarmament and non-proliferation on a backburner”.

Most nations opening statement’s followed a similar measured and constructive tone although there was a little too much jargon and reiteration of tired old formula’s. As one senior diplomat commented to me “The last ten years have been the decade of Mantras” Africa’s voice and their tendency for straight talking was a refreshing break from some of this.

Egypt, true to form was vocal and forthright. Unfortunately in the afternoon Iran embarked on a lengthy attack on the US, UK, and France making a number of wild allegations they know perfectly well to be incorrect, as does everyone else in the room. The media was predicting worse, but still a shame to see a great nation indulging in this sort of polemics, which we then have to rebut.

I have been posting on Twitter throughout the day for those who are so inclined (also on the ATT page sidebar) and will blog as we move through the week.

Posted at 03:54 05 May 2009 by John Duncan | Comments[7]

Share this with:

Comments:

Hi There, Well i think the great nations are too afraid to live in peace. They think the others going to conquer them.

Posted by Rayhan on May 05, 2009 at 07:37 AM BST #

John I am following NPT events in New York from your blog, as the media are, as ususal, overlooking the NPT. Could you post both the full Iranian critical statement and the UK & EU? rejoinder on your blog? thanks Dr David Lowry

Posted by Dr David Lowry on May 05, 2009 at 09:41 AM BST #

Iran is a problem but at least they are attending the conference. We may not like what they say but at least we have the oportunity to argue and discuss with them. I was wondering how you compared their stance to that of Israel. You may be interested in the Government's position on Israel.'The UK strongly supports the creation of a zone free from weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East and co-sponsored the resolution to that effect at the 1995 Non-Proliferation Treaty Extension and Review Conference. We have gone on to consistently support resolutions in support of this aim in the IAEA and the UN First Committee, most recently in October 2008. However, realistically, Israel is only likely to accede to the NPT as Non-Nuclear Weapon State when political solutions have been found to the tensions in the region.' It seems that we accept Israel as a wild card and understand their position. Why?

Posted by Paul Macdonald on May 05, 2009 at 10:46 AM BST #

Dear David. The link to all official statements at the PrepCom is as follows:http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPT2010Prepcom/PrepCom2009/statements.html. You can also find links to this and many of the recent media articles on my Delicious site http://delicious.com/ukarmscontrol. My right of reply is not reported except in the formal record which will be available later.

Posted by John Duncan on May 05, 2009 at 04:05 PM BST #

More analysis and discussion documents as well as all statements can be found at www.reachingcriticalwill.org too. See NPT News in Review

Posted by Carol Naughton on May 05, 2009 at 05:20 PM BST #

Dear Paul Thanks for your comment. Since Israel has not signed the NPT they have not agreed to take on the obligations that those who have signed including Iran namely a commitment to disarm for Nuclear states and not to acquire or develop nuclear weapons for Non-Nuclear states. That Israel has not been willing to take on such commitments is to be regretted, others would put in stronger terms but it is not the same as a country which has accepted a legally binding commitment and where the international community has raised serious concerns about whether that commitment is being honored and which does not respond to UN Security Council Resolutions. Ban Ki Moons statement http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPT2010Prepcom/PrepCom2009/statements.html was a very measured call for action by Iran. John Duncan

Posted by JOHN DUNCAN on May 06, 2009 at 04:03 AM BST #

Dear John Thanks for taking the time to answer. I tried to access Ban Ki Moons statement but access was forbidden. As I said Iran is a problem but they may go the same way as India and Pakistan which is regrettable. They would then be in the same position as the UK, a country with Nuclear Weapons. Does that make them better or worse than us. The sooner we are free of Nuclear Weapons the better. However, we want to react very harshly against Iran and the US is harassed by Israel to attack Iran. No doubt if the US or Israel did attack Iran because of this issue we would support them or we would complain and move on. Why do we not want to bring severe sanctions against Israel for their position? Iran is in the discussions and probably going against the international treaty they signed up for and the rest of us are pretty pissed off with them. On the other hand, we support Israel who excludes itself from international control and at the same time Israel is at the forefront of demanding sanctions and attacks against Iran. Where is the logic? Would it not improve the negotiation position with Iran and other countries who will follow if we made it clear by words and actions that Israel's stance is totally unacceptable. Regret is not enough. Thanks for the Blog

John Duncan

Ambassador for Multilateral Arms Control & Disarmament

Search

Feeds

Tag cloud

Blogroll

Evaluation

FCO websites

Related websites

Twitter