John Duncan

Ambassador for Multilateral Arms Control & Disarmament

FCO Logo
Thursday 07 May, 2009

NUCLEAR NON PROLIFERATION TREATY NEW YORK DAY 3

A day of surprises. Has the “Decade of Deadlock” finally ended? After 15 years when the final Preparatory Committee, currently meeting in New York, has completely failed to agree the Agenda for the major Review Conference, this morning we actually did it.

Quite remarkable. Of course to anyone outside the community of Disarmament  diplomats this may seem quite a bizarre thing to get exited about. But the agenda sets out in some detail what the 5 yearly Review Conference next year is going to focus on. The fact that the last Review Conference in 2005 failed is largely due to the inability of  nations to agree what they wanted to discuss.

This year both the Nuclear Weapon States (UK, US, Russia, France and China) and the Non Nuclear Weapons states (everyone else in the NPT Regime) simply said enough is enough and refused to allow those who wanted to use procedural tricks to prevent discussion from blocking the way forward. US leadership is part of this, but one nation cannot carry the day alone. It takes those on the centre ground to rally around to defeat those on the extreme wings.

Now of course the serious work begins.

  • Share this with:
Comments:

Congratulations on agreeing the Agenda. Has the new US administration brought significant change and drive to this meeting?

Posted by Paul Macdonald on May 08, 2009 at 09:04 AM BST #

Dear John, First of all thank you very much for this really unique and breathtaking possibility to follow the PrepCom from this perspective! Are you aware of any other of your colleagues blogging as well? I would be particularly interested in how a member of the Iranian delegation would comment on the Committee. I align with the question of Paul - has the recent success been enabled by a SHIFT in the US approach and/or behaviour? A question regarding your tedium with the "mantras": For what reasons isn't it simply possible to SKIP reading the introductory statements and, while of course distribute them to all participants, directly come to business? At a minimum read out statements could be left to those states that really believe that they say something new. Maybe it is a naive idea, but don't PrepCom participants anyway mostly know in advance what delegations will say?

Posted by Hansfrieder Vogel on May 08, 2009 at 08:21 PM BST #

Dear Paul and Hansfrieder Vogel, yes I am sure that the US new engagement has made a difference to the debate and our ability to make progress. I am not aware of colleagues from other countries blogging, but there are several blogs from Civil Society that you can link to via the TWITTER conversations. We have tried to encourage people to distribute statements. It worked at the first PrepCom, but not since. The other way is to limit the time for speaking, but it requires the chair to enforce it. In UNGA 1st Cmte. there is a green, amber, red light system to show people when they over run their time. Not everyone respects it. The real revenge is that people go for a coffee when the longwinded speakers come on and then read the statement later! But this wastes a lot of precious time.

Posted by John Duncan on May 16, 2009 at 12:16 PM BST #

Post a Comment:
  • HTML Syntax: NOT allowed

Search

Feeds

Technorati Profile

Tag cloud

Blogroll

Evaluation

FCO websites

Related websites

Twitter