STATEMENT

by H.E. Ambassador Mykola Maimeskul,

Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations Office and other International Organizations in Geneva,

Head of the Delegation of Ukraine to the Conference on Disarmament

(Geneva, 6 August 2013)

Mr. President,

As far as this is the first time that Ukrainian delegation takes the floor under your Presidency, I would like to congratulate you on your assumption of this position.

Let me also commend tireless efforts of your predecessors - Hungary, India, Indonesia and the Islamic Republic of Iran, striving to ensure the swift beginning of the substantive work of our forum.

Mr. President, distinguished delegates, 

As it was stated by my delegation in the past, Ukraine considers the adoption of the substantive Programme of Work and its implementation to be the only veritable evidence of the revitalization of the CD and the restoration of its credibility as the sole multilateral disarmament negotiating body.

Ukraine consistently adheres to the further elaboration of the needed "magic formula" on the basis of the CD/1864, which could enable an immediate commencement of negotiations on the FMCT together with the consideration of other core issues. Although we could also consider any other result-oriented decision, incl. the adoption of a simplified Programme of Work, which would enable the CD to carry-out its negotiating mandate.

As everyone in this room, Ukraine deeply regrets that numerous consultations of the 2013 Presidencies to bridge the gaps have not yet taken us forward an inch in terms of commencing substantial work. However, my delegation is encouraged by the latest positive message on the development of the current consultation process and is ready to provide to the Iraqi Presidency whatever support is necessary to strike a deal opening a way forward. In the first place, I mean adoption of the Program of work of the CD, “robust in substance and progressive over time in implementation”.

The last 15 years of the CD’s standstill have gone by, mostly used in a greater extent to speculate on the implementation of our collective ambition of achieving a world without nuclear weapons, rather than to show collective ownership of the forum which, in its full operational mode, could bring us closer to this desired goal.

Apart from these protracted deliberations the elaboration of the Programme of Work is also obstructed by the inefficient Rules of Procedures. Among other complications, a short term of presidency makes it difficult to provide long-term consistency and inclusiveness of consultative process with all member states, especially taking into account a need to build consensus.

Therefore the need for considering taking several steps aside in order to gain a fresh look on the situation and to examine new approaches is long overdue.

In this respect, my delegation commends the CD Secretary-General Mr.  Kassym-Jomart Tokaev for the initiatives on the CD revitalization, which in our view deserve much closer consideration by the Conference and appropriate action.

 In particular, Ukraine would like to add its voice to those who support the establishment of an informal Working Group with a mandate to produce a draft Programme of Work, in accordance with the Rule 23 of the Rules of the Procedure.

Do we have other alternatives to this approach? No, if we really want to work.

First of all, we proceed from understanding that the primary responsibility for the effective functioning of the Conference rests upon all member states.

In the same vein, the establishment of the Programme of Work is a responsibility of all member states, including the member state holding Presidency. According to the Rule 28, “on the basis of its agenda, the Conference, at the beginning of its annual session, shall establish its programme of work”. Thus the Conference can and should act not only on the last stage – taking decision, but on all stages of program establishment it deems necessary, inter alia while drafting and discussing its elements.

In this context, our opinion is that there are no procedural restrictions which should impair the CD action on that matter and prevent establishing the WG with the mandate to support the President and to provide institutionalized forum for constructive discussions of the draft Programme of Work.

Although according to the Rule 29 of the Rules of Procedure it is the right and duty of the President to draw up the provisional Programme of Work, Rule 28 stipulates the right and duty of the Conference to establish a draft Programme of Work, inter alia by means of creation of an informal working group.

And it will be up to the acting President of the Conference to forward the draft paper to the CD for consideration and taking decision.

In this setting an informal Working group may rather perform an assisting role to the President, accumulating specific propositions, discussing the controversial elements of the draft PoW, thus contributing to the emergence of a compromise.

Furthermore, to ally concerns about the strict adherence to the letter of the Rule 29 of the Rules of Procedure, the CD could consider an option of the President being a Chair of an informal Working group.

The issue of transparency stays high on the international agenda, including this forum, and the proposed informal Working group could be a vivid illustration of this principle due to wider and more effective engagement of all member states.

As regards the issue of time limitation, my delegation is ready to support a continuing mandate for the informal Working group, since, again, the Rules of Procedure do not strictly prevent us from such decision.

The Conference could consider it appropriate to adapt rules of procedure for the subsidiary body in the light of the Rule 24, thus ensuring the functioning of the Working Group beyond the 2013 session.

Mr. President,

It is redundant to say, that the main objective of the CD is negotiations. I presume that it is the negotiations on the substance – namely on treaties in the field of disarmament, which reside in the core of this objective, not negotiations on the procedure.

If the substantive work of the Conference remains our ultimate goal let us not hesitate to explore all options which could bring us closer to its implementation.

I thank you.

,