1995 Review and Extension Conference
of the Parties to the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
13 May 1995
VERBATIM RECORD OF THE 19th MEETING
Held at United Nations Headquarters, New York,
on Friday, 12 May 1995, at 9.05 p.m.
President: Mr. DHANAPALA (Sri Lanka)
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE DRAFTING COMMITTEE AND OF THE FINAL DOCUMENT
CONCLUSION OF THE CONFERENCE
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
CLOSURE OF THE CONFERENCE
This recordd contains the original text of speeches delivered in English
and interpretations of speeches delivered in the other languages.
Corrections should be submitted to original speeches only. They should
be incorporated in a copy of the record and be sent under the signature
of a member of the delegation concerned, within 10 days of the date of the meeting,
to the Chief of the Verbatim Reporting Service, Room C-178. Corrections
will be issued after the end of the Conference in a consolidated
The meeting was called to order at 9.05 p.m.
The President: As representatives are aware,
consultations continued throughout today to finalize the work of the
Drafting Committee, in which I was personally involved. It is my
understanding that the Drafting Committee needs time to meet in order to
finalize and adopt its report. Accordingly, I propose, if there is no
objection, to suspend this meeting for an hour in order to allow the
Drafting Committee to meet here, immediately following this suspension,
for the adoption of its report.
It was so decided.
The meeting was suspended at 9.10 p.m. and resumed at 10.30 p.m.
Statement by the President
The President: I should like to inform the Conference
that I have received a letter from the Permanent Representative of the
Republic of Chile to the United Nations, stating that Chile has
completed its parliamentary procedures to enable it to adhere to the
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. I welcome this
wholeheartedly as this important decision taken by Chile has been done
at the conclusion of the Conference which Chile attended as an observer.
Adoption of the report of the Drafting Committee and of the Final Document
The President: I now call on the Chairman of the Drafting Committee.
Mr. Strulak (Poland), Chairman of the Drafting Committee:
I should like to introduce the report of the Drafting Committee, which
the Committee has just adopted, as well as the draft Final Document of
the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on
the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons: organization and work of the
Conference, which the Drafting Committee also adopted. I present it to
you for adoption by the Conference.
The President: Delegations will understand that in view
of the lateness of the hour it was not feasible for the secretariat to
produce the report in all languages. The report is therefore only
available in English and the other languages will follow as soon as
possible. May I take it that the Conference wishes to take note of the
report of the Drafting Committee as introduced by the Chairman of that
Committee? If I hear no objection it will be so decided.
It was so decided.
The President: I should like to express my gratitude to
Ambassador Tadeusz Strulak, Chairman of the Drafting Committee for his
strenuous efforts to conclude the work of that Committee.
I turn now to agenda item 20 "Consideration and adoption of
Final Document(s)". The Conference has before it a draft Final Document,
document NPT/CONF.1995/DC/L.l/Add.1 as amended, which was by unanimous
decision of the Drafting Committee transmitted to the Conference. It is
my understanding that there is general agreement on this document. If I
hear no objection I shall take it that the Conference wishes to adopt
the Final Document?
It was so decided.
Conclusion of the Conference
The President: I now turn to the final business of the
Conference, the concluding statements by delegations. The first speaker
is the representative of Ukraine.
Mr. Hryshchenko (Ukraine): Yesterday, by taking the
decision to extend the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons (NPT) indefinitely, we inscribed the names of our countries in
the book of history.
This decision, taken without objection, underscores months and
years of scrupulous routine work by thousands of statesmen, politicians,
diplomats and experts and definitely can be considered as a triumph of
common sense over transient, short-lived political considerations.
The Conference reconfirmed that today nuclear weapons are more a
relic of the past than the ultimate symbol of national pride, as many
believed only a few years ago.
The recent accession to the NPT of Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan
and South Africa, which have voluntarily renounced nuclear weapons,
significantly changed the dynamics of nuclear geopolitics and opened the
way for new, far-reaching endeavours in the field of nuclear
disarmament. But, by giving up nuclear weapons and joining the Treaty,
Ukraine did not give its blessing to the eternal continuation of the
existing right of official nuclear-weapon States to possess their
nuclear arsenals. Moreover, we urge the nuclear-weapon States to follow
our example and move towards the complete elimination of nuclear weapons
in the shortest possible time.
Dragging out the process of nuclear disarmament for whatever
reason would constitute a serious breach of the now strengthened and
reinvigorated Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
We also hope that the strengthening of the Non-Proliferation
Treaty and the continuing process of nuclear disarmament will provide
new incentives for the non-participating countries, which apparently
have not yet abandoned nuclear ambitions, speedily to accede to the NPT
as non-nuclear-weapon States.
By taking practical steps, Ukraine has clearly demonstrated to
the whole world the consistent character of its policy in the field of
nuclear disarmament. We are proud that our contribution to the
strengthening of the non-proliferation regime has been highly commended
by the international community. We shall continue to fulfil on an equal
footing with the United States, Belarus, Kazakhstan and the Russian
Federation our common obligations under the Treaty on the Reduction and
Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START I) and, inter alia,
continue the removal of all the nuclear warheads on our territory,
inherited from the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, to the
Russian Federation for elimination under our control.
At the same time, we expect the United States, the Russian
Federation and the United Kingdom our partners in the trilateral
statement of 14 January 1994 and in the 5 December 1994 Memorandum on
Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine's Accession to the NPT
to comply fully with their relevant obligations and commitments under
Having eliminated the third largest nuclear arsenal in the
world, Ukraine expects all the nuclear-weapon States that have not yet
done so to join at the earliest possible time the multilateral
negotiations on the reduction of strategic offensive weapons. We hope
that this process will be initiated after the ratification of START II
by the United States and the Russian Federation.
We are convinced that dedicated efforts aimed at balancing the
rights and obligations of all the Parties to the NPT both
nuclear-weapon States and non-nuclear-weapon States must follow the
decision on the indefinite extension of the Treaty, since only the
harmony of the fundamental interests of the Parties to the Treaty could
guarantee its long-term durability and effectiveness.
From this perspective we view the decision to indefinitely
extend the Treaty as an expression of confidence by the
non-nuclear-weapon States in the nuclear-weapon States, which the latter
should justify in the near future.
In this context, the full implementation by nuclear-weapon
States of the provisions of the principles and objectives of nuclear
non-proliferation and disarmament, adopted without a vote by the
Conference, will be of the utmost importance.
One important element in balancing the interests of the
nuclear-weapon States and non-nuclear-weapon States would be the
achievement in the shortest possible time of an agreement on an
international legal instrument on security assurances. Providing such
assurances would erase the feeling of mistrust between the Parties to
the Treaty and provide a new impetus to the negotiations on nuclear
In this regard, I should like to recall the words of President John F. Kennedy, who said in his inaugural speech:
"Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate."
The delegation of Ukraine urges all the Parties to the
Non-Proliferation Treaty to follow this wise advice, and, building on
the success of our Conference, to move steadily towards the goal of
global security and stability based on universal adherence to the
non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament principles we all reconfirmed
yesterday and today.
Mr. Quiros (Peru) (interpretation from Spanish):
The Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Peru, Ambassador Ponce Vivanco,
has asked me to read out the statement he had intended to deliver
tonight, Mr. President. It is as follows:
"The unflagging diplomatic skills you have shown throughout the
proceedings ending today have made it possible to extend indefinitely
the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), despite
valid differences of opinion on specific issues, an important result
Peru has sought determinedly since 1993.
"However, Peru believes that if this outstanding effort to
establish and strengthen international law is to have genuine
significance, the international community must, above all, continue to
instil a real commitment to the idea that treaties and arbitral awards
are to be respected and that the legal order and peace and security of
peoples will be secured only when the principle pacta sunt servanda
is the sole inspiration for the international conduct of all States,
given that each month brings new surprising kinds of conflict and
different forms of violence and disorder at the present stage of
"We welcome the fact that the ultimate objective of
non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament has prevailed as a standard
for relations between States. If we want to consolidate this reality
once and for all, we now have to face up to our legal and moral
obligation fully to implement the Treaty. This is an urgent and priority
task and needs a firm commitment on the part of all States Parties to
the Treaty, above all the nuclear Powers, in accordance with the letter
and the spirit of the Treaty.
"With a renewed feeling of trust and solidarity we have adopted
two important documents on principles and objectives and a further
document on strengthening the review process for the Treaty. These will
be of fundamental importance in the new phase opened up by this
Conference. Peru is already looking forward expectantly to the Review
Conference due to be held in the year 2000 and to the preparatory
process scheduled to begin scarcely two years from now, in 1997. We
firmly hope that by then, there will be full compliance with the
agreements contained in the declaration of principles and objectives. We
will work actively to that end in Geneva, New York and in any other
"It is also essential that we ensure, without delay, that all
countries fully participate in the Treaty: the continued existence of
nuclear capacity which does not come under the safeguards system of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is a nagging threat. We are
convinced that the agreements reached at this Conference will help us to
reach this goal.
"I should now like to refer to the case of Latin America and the
Caribbean. As we all know, we have been able to create the first
densely populated nuclear-weapon-free zone on the planet, equipped with
necessary safeguards as set forth in a legally binding document signed
by the five nuclear Powers. The region also possesses the political will
to move forward towards the establishment of a zone free of all weapons
of mass destruction and linked, in so far as possible, with existing
nuclear-weapon-free zones in order to make the entire southern
hemisphere into such a zone.
"However, Latin America still faces the problem of
conventional weapons and the establishment of machinery to control and
reduce military expenditure in cases where it exceeds the legitimate
needs of national defence. For these reasons Peru considers that
non-proliferation in Latin America and the Caribbean should also be
extended without delay to include conventional weapons.
"Because of its destabilizing effects, the illegal arms traffic
must be halted and international machinery to ensure transparency in
international arms transfers must be strengthened. For that reason we
have firmly supported the extension of the United Nations Register of
Conventional Arms to include national stockpiles and local arms
production as well as universal participation. This will build trust,
which is the basis of friendship and dialogue among States."
Mr. Wisnumurti (Indonesia): I am profoundly honoured and
privileged to speak on behalf of the non-aligned countries at the
concluding session of this historic Conference. It was 25 years ago that
the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) came into
force. In the intervening time, its effectiveness in stemming
proliferation and its role in creating an international norm in
achieving that objective has been universally acclaimed. Beyond doubt,
the Treaty has codified the interests of a vast majority of States,
indicating an abiding commitment to its validity.
As the single most important piece of legislation to have come
out of disarmament negotiations, it has given legitimacy to the
non-proliferation regime. For the great majority of States it is the
only instrument to stem proliferation. For these reasons, the NPT has
made a major contribution to nuclear-arms limitation. However, the
non-aligned countries are also acutely aware of its shortcomings. It is
undeniable that the Treaty has imposed asymmetrical obligations. There
has been a growing concern that intensified efforts are needed to remove
the very real danger of the proliferation of these weapons, both
vertical and horizontal. The question of unhindered access to civilian
uses of nuclear energy has also assumed increasing prominence.
It is against this backdrop that the non-aligned countries
welcomed the convening of the Review and Extension Conference of the
NPT. It afforded an unparalleled opportunity to engage in the assessment
and appraisal of the workings and functioning of the Treaty.
For the past three weeks we have deliberated and vigorously
addressed all aspects of the NPT, whose ramifications for the critical
interests of all States Parties are all too self-evident. In that
process we have also thoroughly examined our options and assiduously
sought a common position on the manner of review, on effective measures
to promote the implementation of the provisions of the Treaty and on its
extension so that it advances rather than congeals the disarmament
The NPT has today reached an important stage in the onward march
of our efforts to achieve the objectives contained therein. In these
endeavours the non-aligned countries have made significant contributions
to the work of the Conference which have led to the adoption without a
vote of three important decisions. These three decisions namely,
decisions on the principles and objectives for nuclear non-proliferation
and disarmament, on strengthening the review process for the Treaty and
on the extension of the Treaty are of equal importance and constitute a
It is regrettable, however, that the Conference has failed to
adopt a final declaration, one of the important expected results of the
Conference. The divergence of views, especially in assessing and
reviewing the implementation of the Treaty, are too substantial for the
reaching of a common ground. It is our sincere hope that this
unfortunate development will not constitute a preview of what will
happen in the Preparatory Committee meetings and the Review Conferences
which we all are agreed to strengthen.
It is, however, the fervent hope of the non-aligned countries
that as a result of the decisions taken by this Conference the
inequalities inherent in the Treaty concerning disarmament, peaceful
uses of nuclear energy and other aspects will be forthrightly addressed.
Our priorities now include further reductions in nuclear
weapons, arresting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,
ensuring peaceful applications, detecting non-compliance wherever and
whenever it occurs and thereby maintaining the regained momentum of
support for the NPT generated by the Conference.
Assuring the orderly flow of badly needed technology for the
developing countries without leading to weapons proliferation is an
issue of great importance to the non-aligned countries. What is needed
is a formula for cooperation involving greater willingness by the
developed nations to meet the needs of developing countries for science
and technology for peaceful purposes.
We cannot allow our determination to waver. Let us renew that
determination in fulfilling the solemn commitments that we have
undertaken. Let this Conference give new impetus to our combined efforts
for a world without nuclear arms, for global peace and security, for
greater and generalized prosperity. We all know that the stakes are high
and much depends on the efficacy and outcome of our efforts and our
will to accommodate and compromise in order to arrive at a common
ground. It is the unanimous view of the non-aligned countries that we
have achieved all this and, indeed, much more.
These attainments were greatly facilitated by your patience, Mr.
President, and by your perseverance, by your indefatigable energy, your
skilful handling of the complex issues, your gentle prodding of the
delegates towards flexibility and compromise and, above all, your deep
and abiding commitment to the cause of disarmament. The confidence which
we all reposed in you has been fully borne out by the successful
conclusion of what is admittedly a difficult and complex task. We are
for ever indebted to you.
Let me also avail myself of this opportunity to convey our
sincere thanks to the secretariat and to all those with responsibility
for the Conference for their dedication and their contribution.
Mr. Earle (United States of America): This Assembly has
just completed the most important multilateral arms control conference
in history. Its successful outcome, I should like to say at the outset,
is due in large part to you, Sir, President Dhanapala, your well-tested
patience, your diplomatic adroitness, your personal leadership and your
unstinting devotion to build and then mobilize a consensus
decision-making process. On behalf of the United States delegation and
for my own part, I heartily and sincerely congratulate you. I also
congratulate the tireless and professional members of the Secretariat
and the able members of the Sri Lankan delegation who have assisted you
and contributed so very much to the positive outcome of the Conference.
The decisions undertaken by the Conference reflect the
exhaustive efforts and the collective will of the international
community. No single group of States and no single set of interests
prevailed. Historians who review our efforts will note that our
diplomatic compromises have been skilful, our language carefully chosen,
and our decisions not without controversy.
Nevertheless, those historians will also note that States
Parties made these historic decisions because fundamentally the Treaty
on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) serves the interests
of its Parties, but more important, of all mankind. Moreover, they will
note that the Treaty's contribution to international peace and security
grew in importance after our decisions were made.
Our foresight to make the Treaty permanent is in effect a "gift"
to future generations and it will long overshadow the differences or
the reservations that may have arisen during our deliberations in these
past four weeks.
When Vice-President Gore spoke from this podium to the
Conference in April, he stated that the indefinite extension of the NPT
without conditions would reduce the uncertainty that often leads States
to develop weapons or to preserve their options to do so. With the
decisions of the Conference, we have greatly reduced the potential for
that climate of uncertainty. The Conference has definitively endorsed
the authority of the NPT, and it has underlined the intention of the
international community to strengthen, make universal, and extend the
principles and objectives of non-proliferation. What lies ahead now is
not only to reduce uncertainty regarding proliferation but to commit
ourselves to the certainty of a safer and more secure world. Having
adopted these principles, we must, with the good faith and pragmatic
idealism that we have shown here this week, move towards the full
implementation of the lofty objectives we have set for ourselves and our
The United States Government is resolutely committed to do its
part to support the non-proliferation regime and the terms and
obligations of all the articles of the Treaty. In the short run this
will mean redoubling our efforts to achieve a comprehensive test-ban
treaty and a fissile-material cut-off agreement. But at the same time we
will be exploring ways to move beyond the significant reductions to
which we are committing ourselves in the START I and START II Treaties.
We will not we cannot walk away from this process.
The 1995 Review and Extension Conference decided to extend the
NPT indefinitely, to adopt a set of Principles and Objectives for
Nuclear Non-Proliferation, and to create an enhanced Review Process.
These decisions give us a framework for our future efforts and
guiding principles by which we can judge our success. We are committed
to them and it is particularly satisfying that the impetus for two of
these decisions the Principles and the enhanced Review came from a
recent adherent to the NPT, South Africa.
While the Conference was unable to complete a final document,
the review process was comprehensive, thorough and frank. As past
reviews have demonstrated, there are a few issues on which we cannot
reach easy accord and on some of these we have been unable to reconcile
On the other hand, the review revealed large areas of agreement
as well. We have agreed to give Conference endorsement to the
International Atomic Energy Agency's "93+2" plan for strengthened and
cost-effective safeguards. We have also endorsed the value of increased
cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, including
particularly the safe and efficient utilization of nuclear energy. And
we have agreed to pursue the creation of more nuclear-weapon-free zones,
universal adherence to the NPT, and the early attainment of a
comprehensive test-ban treaty.
Finally, let me stress that the outcome of the Conference is in
fact a significant victory for all the Parties to the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. On 1 March 1995, President Clinton
noted that the United States believes that nothing is more important to
international security than the achievement of the indefinite
extension, without conditions, of this Treaty. In that view we
associated ourselves with an overwhelming majority of the Parties to the
Treaty. We understand that every sovereign nation at this Conference
rendered an historic judgement; we are hopeful that all States Parties
will now work towards the Treaty's ultimate goal: a world without
Mr. Rodrigo (Sri Lanka): The past four weeks have been
critical ones, and you, Mr. President, have succeeded in presenting us
with a package held together, if not with the bright ribbons of
consensus, then certainly with the cords of realism that signify
collective accession to the undeniable fact that the NPT must continue
in force indefinitely as the fundamental international basis for
non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament.
The documents adopted yesterday without a vote provide the
political, legal and institutional framework for what could be an
enduring system of security that could serve us far into the future. Sri
Lanka's statement in the general debate, which expressed cautious
optimism that a consensual approach to the extension of the Treaty was
both essential and possible, has now been vindicated. We owe you, Mr.
President, a major debt of gratitude for what you have helped us all to
achieve. That achievement is all the more remarkable considering the
number of participants involved in the process and the complexity of
differing, often conflicting, concerns that participating delegations to
the Conference wished to reconcile.
All delegations share in the conclusions reached yesterday as
you, Mr. President, observed dramatically around high noon. The
celebrated Western film "High Noon" concluded with the victors quitting
town, leaving the vanquished prone dead in the dust.
Today, however, we are concluding a major international
conference and we are not watching the end of a Western movie. The
delicate balances that have been achieved in the Conference documents
which you, Mr. President, will transmit to Heads of State should be a
triumph in which all of us can share. What is important is a sense of
identification by all in the conclusions reached. All delegations have
indeed contributed to those conclusions.
At least three resolutions or decisions representing varying
perceptions on the past record of the NPT and its future were before us.
They were all advocated with conviction. They illustrate the complexity
of the concerns the Conference had to confront. What is remarkable is
that the delegations concerned did not insist on pushing their prime
positions to a vote, choosing instead to submit patiently to a
collective examination of the multiplicity of issues involved. That that
choice was made is itself significant. Compromises had to be made in
the process, and the costs of such compromises in terms of individual
national interests for many delegations are probably quite heavy. These
must be respected. They are as much a part of the final outcome as those
points that prevailed.
The precise nature of the conclusions and their impact will
continue to be discussed. The decisions on the extension of the Treaty
affirm the need for full compliance with all its provisions. Whatever
the assessment of the Treaty's performance has been over the last
quarter century, we are now at the point, in a sense, of a fresh
beginning. The world today is different to that which prevailed in the
1960s, and the prospects for genuine international cooperation are
universally acknowledged as being far more favourable. The attainment of
the goal of the complete elimination of nuclear weapons should thus be
rightly an objective that is less distant and less difficult today.
Simply put, the clear message that emerged yesterday was a firm "yes" to
the indefinite extension of the Treaty, and an equally clear "no" to
the indefinite extension of nuclear weapons into our lives.
The decisions we have taken to strengthen the review process of
the Treaty are aimed not at casting doubts on the Treaty or weakening
its thrust, but, rather, at providing a standing institutional framework
to ensure that the purposes of the preamble and the provisions of the
Treaty are being realized.
Some concerns articulated in the last few weeks have not found
expression in the documents to the satisfaction of all delegations.
However, the strengthened review mechanism we adopted offers a
satisfactory framework within which to consider all issues that lie in
the future implementation of the Treaty.
We must, however, express regret that it was not possible,
largely due to time constraints tonight, to reach agreement on the draft
declaration. We need to benefit from this experience by learning that
the strengthened review process agreed on will need to be fully utilized
to build confidence among States Parties.
The principles and objectives enunciated in document
NPT/CONF.1995/L.5 provide the basis to explore these and other issues
seriously, in a genuine climate of cooperation. These include issues
such as those concerning the Treaty's lack of universality, one of its
major shortcomings. The resolution contained in document
NPT/CONF.1995/L.8 is important in this regard.
We have together taken a historic decision extending the NPT for
an indefinite period. That this was possible without resort to a
decisive vote should not breed complacence. Much remains to be done to
ensure the verifiable implementation of the Treaty, to prepare the way
for an eventual nuclear-weapon-free world in which all States can
concur. Our work together has, in this sense, only just begun.
Mr. Sannikau (Belarus): The most important Conference of
this year is nearing completion. A very intensive period of
multilateral, regional and bilateral negotiations and consultations in
preparation for the Review and Extension Conference, and at the
Conference itself has yielded the results which my country has hoped for
and worked for. Yesterday, by adopting three decisions of vital
importance for the Non-Proliferation Treaty, States Parties created a
new disarmament and security environment, thus establishing a solid
basis for further common efforts aimed at strengthening international
peace and security.
By adopting yesterday the decision on indefinite extension of
the Non-Proliferation Treaty, together with the decisions on
strengthening of the review process and principles and objectives of
nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, the Conference has
consolidated the legal basis for non-proliferation, established a viable
mechanism for implementing the spirit and the letter of the Treaty, and
outlined areas of concerted actions of all States Parties.
Belarus has on many occasions stated its views on priorities in
nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, and we were satisfied to see
them reflected in the decisions of the Conference, although we cannot
conceal our frustration over the failure of the Conference to adopt the
final declaration, despite all the efforts exerted.
The target date set by the Conference for the completion of the
negotiations on a comprehensive test-ban treaty (CTBT) is a very
important factor for the work of the Conference on Disarmament in
Geneva. In our view, this Conference has created the necessary
conditions for concluding a solid Treaty, truly comprehensive in its
scope and internationally verifiable.
There have been specific examples of actual disarmament in the
period between the last Review Conferences. Under different
circumstances and in different ways, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and
South Africa have chosen to renounce nuclear weapons and acceded to the
Non-Proliferation Treaty as non-nuclear-weapon States.
From the very beginning of its movement towards independence,
Belarus clearly stated its position on nuclear weapons and led the way
in nuclear disarmament on the territory of the former Soviet Union.
Together with Kazakhstan and Ukraine, Belarus has contributed to the
process of the elimination of nuclear weapons. Having become a Party to
START I, Belarus is scrupulously observing its obligations under this
formerly bilateral Treaty. Nuclear disarmament of a non-nuclear-weapon
State has turned out to be a difficult process, which creates political
and economic problems, demands substantial financial and human resources
and is not necessarily appreciated by all. Nevertheless, Belarus is
firmly committed to nuclear disarmament, supports all the efforts in
this regard and will do everything possible and necessary for further
steps in this direction.
In this connection, it was encouraging to learn about the
resolve of President Clinton and President Yeltsin to see START II
ratified this year. We hope not only that this goal is attainable, but
that the long-awaited talks on START III are within the reach of the two
The Conference decision on principles and objectives mentioned, inter alia,
the possibility of developing a legal international document on
security assurances for non-nuclear-weapon States Parties. In our
opinion, it might be a necessary measure, provided that it is regarded
as an interim step towards the complete elimination of nuclear weapons.
Belarus has suffered severely from nuclear consequences, and
unfortunately understands only too well the lethal danger of nuclear
weapons or nuclear accidents. That is why we have a strong policy as
regards non-proliferation and are trying to consolidate our own
non-nuclear-weapon status, to prevent any attempts to use Belarus as a
transit territory for fissile-material smuggling. That is one of the
reasons for our proposal to consult on the creation of a
nuclear-weapon-free zone in Europe.
In conclusion, the Conference has created a new international
security reality that has to be accepted and safeguarded. The Conference
has also created a momentum that has to be preserved and further
Mr. Fostervoll (Norway): We should not permit our failure
to adopt a final document to overshadow the remarkable results that
were achieved. Yesterday we ensured the permanency of the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and agreed on a set of
principles and objectives for non-proliferation and disarmament. A
structure has been established for an improved and strengthened review
process that will enable us to focus more sharply on the specific issues
of Treaty obligations and implementation. These decisions are of
historic significance. They provide us with better tools with which to
shape a safer world. They have the full support of my Government. We owe
this success, Mr. President, to your efforts, skill and dedication.
We adopted yesterday a programme of action for nuclear
disarmament, the draft of which was contained in the document on
principles and objectives. We agree with the measures it contains and
the priorities it indicates for the years ahead. In 1997 we shall meet
again to review the progress made. By then a comprehensive treaty
banning all nuclear tests should have entered into force, and an
agreement to halt the production of fissile material for weapons
purposes should be near its conclusion. We look forward to new efforts
to strengthen security assurances to non-nuclear States, if possible in
the form of a legally binding instrument.
We welcome the renewed commitment by all nuclear-weapon States
to the determined pursuit of systematic and progressive efforts towards
nuclear disarmament, as reflected in the decision on principles and
objectives for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. In the course
of the continued and comprehensive disarmament process in the years
ahead, it will be a major challenge to ensure secure and environmentally
safe handling of huge amounts of weapons-grade plutonium, highly
enriched uranium and other toxic substances. We must also ensure
internationally accepted standards for the safe management and handling
of radioactive waste from civilian as well as military-related
activities and installations. The management of disarmament is a new
challenge affecting us all.
Permit me to draw attention to the interrelationship between
nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. As my country currently
holds the chairmanship of the Commission preparing for the
implementation of the chemical weapons Convention, I would like to
express concern at the slow pace of ratification, and would urge all
States that have not yet done so to conclude their ratification process
as soon as possible so that the Convention may enter into force at the
earliest possible date.
In conclusion, I believe we should acknowledge that no single
legal instrument or political agreement is sufficient to halt
nuclear-weapons proliferation. The most important barrier to the
proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction
is the establishment of an international political order that makes such
weapons irrelevant. International cooperation to resolve regional and
local conflicts is indispensable in this regard. Confidence, stability
and cooperation should replace distrust, tension and uncertainty in
relations between States.
Mr. Gorita (Romania): Allow me, on behalf of the Eastern
European group of States Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation
of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to express our satisfaction that this historic
Conference is coming to an end with positive results. The decision on
the indefinite extension of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons, the decision on principles and objectives for nuclear
non-proliferation and disarmament and the decision on strengthening the
review process for the Treaty, constitute a valuable outcome and a solid
foundation for future achievements in the field of arms control and
disarmament, and an important contribution to international peace and
To a very large extent, Mr. President, this outcome of the
Conference is due to your exceptional qualities: leadership, competence,
diplomatic skill, patience and painstaking effort in guiding our work.
We are deeply grateful to you.
We would also like to express our appreciation and thanks to all
those who contributed to the success of the Conference: the Bureau; the
secretariat, under the able guidance of the Secretary-General of the
Conference, Mr. Prvoslav Davinic; the non-governmental organizations
that have been so actively following and supporting our efforts; and
The States Parties to the NPT members of the Eastern European
group strongly believe that the 175 participants in the Conference have
every reason to be satisfied with the success of our common efforts,
confident as they are in the further pursuit of endeavours aimed at
nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament.
Mr. Park (Republic of Korea): I would like to join other
delegations in expressing deep appreciation to you, Mr. President, for
having guided this historic Conference to a fruitful conclusion. We pay
tribute to your excellent leadership, which provided the kind of
sensitive and professional touch that was required for reaching a
solution to the complex issues and challenges of the Conference. I have
no doubt that this sentiment is shared by all my colleagues in this
My delegation welcomes the decision on the indefinite extension
of the Treaty, adopted at this Conference yesterday without a vote. That
historic moment was an unmistakable expression of mankind's desire to
build a more stable world through the permanence of the Treaty.
While applauding the historic decision on the issue of
extension, my delegation considers it unfortunate that we were unable to
adopt a final declaration. It is our sincere hope that the pending
issues that we have been so arduously working on will be satisfactorily
resolved as soon as possible.
The set of decisions which we collectively took yesterday should
be considered an initial step towards ensuring a world free of nuclear
weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. In this sense, we are
convinced that the objectives of the Treaty can truly be attained when
the nuclear-weapon States remain committed to nuclear disarmament
through the full implementation of article VI.
Notwithstanding the significant cuts which have been made in the
nuclear arsenals of the nuclear-weapon States during the past 25 years,
we urge these States to make systematic and progressive efforts to
reduce nuclear weapons with the ultimate goal of their total
elimination. At the same time, my delegation sincerely hopes that the
other two decisions of the Conference on the principles and objectives
for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament and on strengthening the
review process for the Treaty will properly address the legitimate
concerns of the non-nuclear-weapon States regarding fairness and equity.
In order to secure the universality of the Treaty, we once again
call upon those countries which have not yet acceded to the Treaty to
join at an early date. The international community should exert every
effort to achieve this objective as a top priority.
My delegation is encouraged to see that there is a strong desire
further to strengthen efforts aimed at the enhanced effectiveness and
efficiency of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards
system. I am confident that the momentum gained at this meeting will
lead to the early realization of the "93+2" programme.
I would like to stress that the future shape of the NPT will
greatly depend on the degree to which we are able to promote
international cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. With
regard to the export control system, it is expected that reinforced
transparency will lead to greater opportunities for the peaceful uses of
We believe that preferential treatment should be given to the
non-nuclear-weapon States Parties to the Treaty and that, accordingly,
the transfer of nuclear technology should be ensured for those
non-nuclear-weapon States which faithfully comply with the IAEA
My delegation notes with regret that one delegation has decided
not to participate in the adoption of the document of the Conference.
Taking this opportunity, my delegation would like to reiterate its hope
that the DPRK, as a responsible State Party to the NPT, will contribute
to the achievement of the objectives of the NPT by fully complying with
the IAEA-DPRK Safeguards Agreement under the Treaty.
In conclusion, the Republic of Korea would like to reiterate its
full commitment to the aspirations and vision of the international
community to build a nuclear-free world through the faithful
implementation of the Treaty, which we agreed yesterday to extend in
Mr. Sha Zhukang (China) (interpretation from Chinese):
Having worked intensively for more than 20 days, we are nearing the end
of the Conference. This has been a Conference with achievements. We
unanimously adopted the decision to extend the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), a decision on the principles
and objectives for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, a
decision on strengthening the review process for the Treaty, and a
resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.
It is regrettable that we have not agreed on a final
declaration, but our efforts to draft such a declaration were not
futile. Through consultations, we have enhanced mutual understanding and
identified our differences, which has set a course and provided a basis
for future reviews.
This is a Conference of historic significance. Nuclear weapons
first appeared 50 years ago, ushering humanity into the nuclear age. The
entry into force of the NPT 25 years ago marked the beginning of
efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation. Today, as we approach the turn
of the century, we have achieved the seamless extension of the Treaty
and solemnly reaffirmed its three objectives: nuclear disarmament,
nuclear non-proliferation and the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. The
extension of the Treaty should give new momentum to efforts towards
nuclear non-proliferation, a comprehensive ban on and thorough
destruction of nuclear weapons, and the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
The Conference owes its success to the concerted efforts and
cooperation of all the States Parties to the Treaty. Although our
positions and points of views differ on some matters, we share the
common objective of strengthening the Treaty. The Conference also owes
its positive outcome to the unflagging efforts of its President, Mr.
Dhanapala, who, with his outstanding talent and rich diplomatic
experience, has fulfilled with distinction the important mission with
which history has entrusted him and has made a vital contribution to the
agreements reached at the Conference. The Chinese delegation offers him
its particular thanks. We also wish to thank the Chairmen of all the
Committees and the other members of the Bureau for their important
contributions to the Conference. We express our gratitude to the staff
of the Secretariat, including the translators and interpreters, under
the leadership of the Secretary-General of the Conference, Mr. Davinic,
who have provided reliable support services to the Conference.
Humanity is approaching the twenty-first century. While
reviewing the past and looking to the future, we find ourselves still
faced with the lofty mission of achieving the objectives of the Treaty
in all its aspects, with the final goal of a comprehensive ban on and
complete destruction of nuclear weapons. China is ready to contribute,
along with all the other States Parties, its unremitting efforts for
Mr. Kisliak (Russian Federation) (interpretation from Russian):
The historic Review and Extension Conference of the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) is coming to an end. In the
view of the Russian delegation, difficult but extremely important and
necessary work has been done by all delegations to achieve agreement in
one of the pivotal areas of our time. They have seen to it that joint
efforts will be pursued to ensure stability, to preserve civilized rules
of behaviour in a nuclear century, and to establish the necessary
conditions for the process of nuclear disarmament and broad cooperation
in the area of nuclear energy as a whole and for its development.
The decision has been taken that the NPT, which has withstood
the test of time and has established what are now almost universally
recognized norms of international law designed to contain the threat of
the spread of nuclear weapons, will remain in force indefinitely. In
this connection, I should like to draw attention to the joint statement
by the President of Russia, Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, and President
Clinton of the United States published in Moscow on 10 May. Both
Presidents appealed to our Conference to make the Treaty permanent and
reaffirmed their countries' commitments under article VI of the Treaty
to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to
nuclear disarmament, which continues to remain their ultimate goal.
The Presidents also stated their intention to cooperate closely
to achieve the wider goals of non-proliferation, including improving
implementation of their commitments to cooperate with other Parties to
the Treaty on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy while at the same time
carrying out their commitments to eliminate the threat of
proliferation. We shall steadfastly abide by these decisions.
We include the decision on the principles and objectives for
nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament and the decision on
strengthening the review process of the Treaty on the list of major
achievements. Unfortunately, however, we note that it did not prove
possible, for the Conference to agree to a text of a Final Declaration
on the implementation of the Treaty during the period since the fourth
However, in our view, an enormous amount of work has been done
in terms of meshing approaches to and harmonizing assessments of nearly
all the key provisions of the Treaty. Russia was prepared to go on
working on the Declaration but we all ran out of time before we could
conclude it. Even so, a good basis has been established for further
cooperation between States Parties towards the full implementation of
On behalf of the Russian delegation, I should like to thank you,
Mr. President, for your great professionalism and your energetic
leadership of our work, which, to a great extent, were responsible for
making it possible to unite all delegations and take these historic
decisions on 11 May without a vote, despite the many and well-known
nuances in all our positions regarding them.
On behalf of the Russian Federation, I should like to express
our gratitude to the delegation of Canada for its contribution in
putting forward the idea and the corresponding draft for the decision on
an indefinite and unconditional extension of the Treaty, which, from
the very outset, the Russian Federation supported.
We also express our gratitude to all the other sponsors of our
joint draft. We are grateful too to the sponsors of other drafts
different from the one originally proposed by Russia for their
willingness to seek agreed decisions, for their flexibility and realism
and for the consensus that united us all in this most important decision
to extend the Treaty indefinitely.
We should like also to express our gratitude to the secretariat
and to our Secretary-General, without whom it would have been impossible
for this forum to work effectively.
Mr. Butler (Australia): Mr. President, Australia is
deeply grateful to you. Your leadership in the President's consultations
and your management of the proceedings of this Conference have been
outstanding. We also thank the Secretariat for its great work for the
History was made in this Hall yesterday with the decision to
give the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) an
indefinite life. That decision, and the accompanying decisions to
strengthen the review process and adopt a set of Principles and
Objectives for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament, was to the
credit of all States Parties. It was crucial to the maintenance of
international peace and security and, through its strengthening of the
implementation of the Treaty, to the continuing pursuit of a world free
of nuclear weapons.
We also warmly welcome the adoption of the Depositaries'
resolution on universal membership of the Treaty, focusing on the Middle
East. The goal of universal membership has been an underlying theme for
successive NPT review conferences and one for which Australia and many
other States Parties have worked long and hard. In 1995, only a handful
of countries remain outside the Treaty, and this attests to the enormous
importance accorded to the NPT by the international community. Of the
185 States Members of the United Nations, 178 are Parties to the NPT;
and of these, 175 States participated in this Review and Extension
Conference. There has never been a Conference of States of this size.
Decisions taken by such an overwhelming majority of the world's
nations send the clearest possible message to those small number of
States only 12, and shrinking in number that remain outside the
Treaty, particularly those that operate unsafeguarded nuclear facilities
in regions of tension. Such States cannot afford to, and should not,
ignore the call from this Conference to become part of the
non-proliferation regime, to accede to the NPT and to place their
facilities under IAEA safeguards.
Australia shared the disappointment of many States that more
progress towards nuclear disarmament was not possible during the long
years of the cold war, particularly during the first 25 years of the
Treaty's life. But this trend has been reversed in recent years. It
needs to be promoted. The decisions taken on 11 May make this clear: it
is of the greatest importance that all Parties to the NPT reaffirm their
commitment for all time to prevent nuclear proliferation and to work on
a programme of action for nuclear disarmament, with the eventual goal
of a world free of nuclear weapons.
Australia has never accepted that an indefinitely extended NPT
would in some way legitimize the status of the nuclear-weapon States for
ever. That would be not only unacceptable but simply wrong. It does not
reflect what article VI of the Treaty states. With the Treaty extended
indefinitely, the obligation on all States, but particularly the
nuclear-weapon States, to pursue nuclear disarmament has now become one
from which there is no escape. Thus it is not only our hope but our
expectation that the Principles and Objectives adopted by this
Conference will consolidate progress to date, promote accelerated
progress in disarmament negotiations currently under way, and result in
additional early steps, in particular a permanent end to nuclear testing
This Conference has also undertaken a substantial review of the
Treaty's operations. We regret that it did not prove possible for the
full measure of that review on this occasion to be reflected in the
Final Documents of this Conference. Australia has always taken the NPT
review process very seriously and strongly endorses the decision by this
Conference to strengthen that process in the future.
The Conference has produced highly worthwhile outcomes in both
the Principles and Objectives document and in the work of the Main
Committees, and these include support for ongoing work to strengthen the
Treaty's verification mechanism; the IAEA safeguards system;
endorsement once and for all that all new supply of nuclear material to
non-nuclear-weapon States Parties to the Treaty must be on the basis of
their having accepted full-scope IAEA safeguards; promotion of measures
to ensure a secure environment for trade and cooperation in the peaceful
uses of nuclear energy; endorsement of the vital role of the Security
Council in ensuring compliance with non-proliferation obligations; and
endorsement of the value of regional non-proliferation arrangements such
as the South Pacific Nuclear-Free-Zone in our own region.
The Conference also dealt with the concerns of States Parties
about nuclear safety, waste management and the transport of nuclear
material, the latter being of particular concern to small island States.
My delegation is proud to have participated in this event, a
defining moment in contemporary history. As partners in this Treaty, we
share a collective responsibility to strengthen its operations, to
prevent proliferation, to strive for disarmament and for universal
membership. By extending the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons (NPT) indefinitely and by making key changes that were
necessary, strengthening its review mechanism and defining our common
objectives for the future by doing these things, we have discharged our
common obligations in the best way we were able to do at this time. We
have answered those who question whether, with indefinite extension,
nothing would change. It has and it will.
Mr. Mayor (Switzerland) (interpretation from French):
At the culmination of a Conference which included exceptional
participation by States, a Conference which provoked enormous interest
and great hopes but also scepticism in our countries and in public
opinion, we can leave with a feeling that our mission is accomplished.
To be sure, not all the problems were resolved. It would have
been desirable this evening for us to have adopted a final document on
consideration of the treaty summing up the results of our detailed
discussions, our conclusions on the operation of the Treaty and our
recommendations on its future. But we have achieved together, through
consensus and without adverse confrontation that would have threatened
the credibility of the Treaty, an objective that we share, namely,
maintaining a strong non-proliferation regime whose duration is ensured.
We have consolidated international norms and we have finally renewed,
if not spelled out, commitments whose implementation cannot be postponed
My delegation particularly welcomed the initiatives undertaken
by South Africa and Mexico. Numerous elements of these initiatives
correspond to the views of Switzerland which, from the outset, hoped
that the decision for extension would be accompanied by brief and
precise texts which recall and strengthen the principles, mechanisms and
fundamental commitments of the parties to the Treaty.
The Declaration of Principles which, to a great extent, takes
into account the concerns that my delegation voiced at the beginning of
the Conference, opens up prospects and will serve to measure progress
and to stimulate efforts to achieve all the goals of the Treaty. It is
quite clear that the decision taken yesterday must not be the indefinite
extension of the status quo, particularly as regards the prerogatives of the nuclear Powers.
Mr. President, if our Conference has been able to fulfil its
objective, it is largely thanks to your commitment, your courage and
your subtlety. Many other protagonists also deserve congratulations, but
you clearly have pride of place.
May our efforts be crowned with success, not only today, but
also tomorrow and beyond, when the need will arise for all parties to
hold fast to the commitments they have renewed and to pass on to
concrete action for rapid progress on the way leading to the complete
elimination of nuclear weapons.
Sir Michael Weston (United Kingdom): Mr. President, on
behalf of the Western Group, I should like to express our deep thanks
and appreciation for the way in which you have conducted this
Conference. You have made possible a remarkable achievement: agreement
on extension of the Treaty with a renewed sense of purpose and
commitment from all its Parties. The Treaty will continue in force
indefinitely, thus permitting the full realization of all its aims:
non-proliferation, disarmament and the promotion of the peaceful uses of
nuclear energy. I am certain that this achievement would not have been
possible without your skilful leadership. Your determined sense of
purpose and your patient efforts to identify those elements which unite
us were an inspiration to us all. You had the courage to set yourself
the highest possible goal and to keep to it. I am glad that we all had
the courage to follow you. I am confident that no one could have done a
better job and that history will give you credit.
While pleased that the Conference decided without a vote to
extend the Treaty indefinitely, the Western Group regrets that time did
not permit us to reach agreement on the review of the Treaty. For our
part, we were ready to continue the search. We attach great importance
to the review process. We contributed fully both to the debate and to
the drafting exercise. We also attach importance to the agreement
reached yesterday on strengthening the review process for the Treaty. We
fully support this and we will play our full part in the future, as we
have in the past and on this occasion.
I should also like to express my Group's deep thanks and
appreciation for the work of the team from the secretariat which has
assisted the President throughout this Conference. Its members too have
demonstrated enormous dedication and a great capacity for hard work and,
even more remarkably, they have done so with great good humour. I
should specifically like to mention Secretary-General Davinic, Ms.
Hoppe, Mr. Fraser, Ms. Ikegaya and Ms. Ng. But I know that there were
many others whose roles were equally important in ensuring the
efficiency and effectiveness of the team.
Finally, and again on behalf of the Western Group, I should like
to emphasize that we believe that the decision to extend the Treaty
without a vote owes much to the spirit of cooperation among the various
regional groups. It is this which has brought success to our efforts.
Mr. President, hard-working members of the secretariat and distinguished
colleagues, thank you.
Mr. Elaraby (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic):
The Conference has concluded its work on the review and extension of the
Non-Proliferation Treaty. My delegation had hoped indeed expected
that on this occasion the Conference would succeed in adopting a final
declaration and would agree on a consolidated, uniform draft of the
reports of the Committees so as to reflect the importance of this
session. The final outcome was however very disappointing. The
Conference failed to adopt a final declaration but did adopt the reports
of the three main Committees. Despite the fact that this is not the
first time that the Conference has failed to issue a final declaration,
and although the Conference decided yesterday to strengthen the review
mechanism, we had high hopes that we would begin its implementation
today by adopting the final declaration of the Conference.
It seems that some people mistakenly believe that, because the
Conference took a decision on the extension of the Treaty, it had
achieved its objective. I hope that that mistaken notion does not apply
to the success of the Conference in achieving its objectives regarding
future efforts on disarmament in general.
In its opening statement at the beginning of the Conference, in
an attempt to send out the right signals, Egypt called for a link
between the review process on the one hand and the extension of the
Treaty on the other. If the NPT is to continue to fulfil its role, the
nuclear-weapon States, no less than the non-nuclear-weapon States, will
be obliged to comply with the Treaty. The result of the Conference, and
the fact that we have not agreed to such a review, raises serious
concerns as to whether the nuclear-weapon States will fulfil their
commitments, especially after the indefinite extension of the Treaty.
This result emphasizes our stance, which is to oppose the indefinite
extension of the Treaty, as we said in our statement to the Conference
I should like to point out that this failure could have a
negative impact regionally, which would strengthen the arms race in
areas of tension. That would in turn lead to the escalation of regional
problems. The Conference was interested in the regional aspect and
yesterday called for all the countries of the Middle East to accede to
the Treaty, for Israel's nuclear installations to be subjected to
international supervision and for the Middle East to be a
nuclear-weapon-free zone, a zone free of weapons of mass destruction.
Now that the Treaty has been extended and though the work of the
Conference on the review process has been impeded, we hope that all
Parties to the Treaty will consolidate their efforts to implement what
we agreed on yesterday as soon as possible.
On behalf of Egypt, I call on all Parties to look to the future,
to work together to strengthen the Treaty and to achieve universality
so as to provide credibility and to save humanity from the scourge of
In conclusion, Mr. President, my delegation would like to extend
to you our profound thanks for all your efforts to achieve consensus.
You conducted the work of this Conference in admirable style. I should
like also to thank the Secretary of the Conference and the members of
the Secretariat for their remarkable efforts throughout the Conference.
Mr. Errera (France) (interpretation from French):
Yesterday I had the opportunity, on behalf of the European Union and
associated countries, to speak of our satisfaction at the major decision
taken by the Conference and of the debt of gratitude that we owe you,
As the Conference draws to a close, allow me, again, speaking on
behalf of the European Union and associated States, to express the
thoughts that the culmination of our work has inspired. We regret that
it did not prove possible to adopt a final declaration containing a
shared assessment of our consideration of the Treaty. We regret it all
the more as three of the Committees were chaired by members of the
European Union or associated States, who spared no effort to achieve
that end. This Conference was also a Review Conference and that role was
carried out in a spirit of professionalism. It allowed for a general
debate on all aspects of the Treaty.
In the course of our work, differences were highlighted, but
they were also clarified and sometimes they were reduced. We were thus
able to recognize that on many major points we have shared interests,
our approaches are closely related to one other, and sometimes they
converge. Those points of convergence allowed us to adopt the decision
on the principles and objectives for non-proliferation and nuclear
disarmament. Those same points of convergence very quickly made possible
an agreement on the need to strengthen the review process in the
It is true that we lacked the time to finalize all the documents
relating to the review, but we should not draw negative conclusions.
Perhaps we did not succeed in reaching full agreement on the assessment
of the past, but we achieved basic agreement on the prospects for the
future. We are united, individually and collectively, in implementing
the Treaty in all of its aspects, including non-proliferation, the
peaceful uses of atomic energy, and disarmament.
We wanted to provide ourselves with a means to achieve this,
with clearly stated principles and objectives and a renewed and
strengthened review process. If our decisions yesterday demonstrated
that there was basic agreement on giving the Treaty the permanence it
lacked, they also attested to our common will, equally strong, to
continue to assure its implementation in a new world.
Every one of us here must be convinced of the determination of
the European Union and the associated States to preserve the vitality of
this shared asset, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons. The announcement this evening of Chile's accession, which the
European Union and associated States welcome, is yet another proof of
this. That accession bears witness to the pursuit of progress towards
the universality that each of us here so desires.
The President: This brings us to the end of the concluding statements, and also to the end of the work of the Conference.
Statement by the President
The President: The States Parties to the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) have had a truly unique
encounter with history. We have emerged from that tryst with our Treaty
not merely extended indefinitely but greatly strengthened by the
solidarity of its adherents participating in this Conference in their
total commitment to the objectives of the Treaty, to the need for its
universality and with a collective determination to achieve the goal of
the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. A historic Conference has
therefore ended with a historic agreement.
We have concluded the work of the 1995 Review and Extension
Conference of the Parties to the NPT with some momentous decisions. That
it was possible to arrive at these decisions without a vote is indeed a
vote of confidence in the political and security regime underpinned by
our Treaty, which is the only global security compact with
near-universal membership. I do not wish to impose my interpretation in
regard to the nature or the content of the agreement reached. It is
nevertheless my duty as the President of the Conference to highlight the
significance of our collective achievement and the need for all States
Parties to consolidate and implement these important decisions.
It is also important for us all to remember always that there
were no winners or losers in this Conference: it was the Treaty that
won. No one delegation and no one group brought us within reach of that
success. All delegations and all groups contributed to the success we
all achieved for the Treaty and for ourselves. There is therefore no
reason for smug complacency about the past performance of States Parties
to the Treaty. There is still less room for any relaxation of our
pursuit of the prevention of the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the
achievement of the complete elimination of those weapons through their
prohibition and the promotion of cooperation in the field of the
peaceful use of nuclear energy. It is less important to debate what is
legally binding and what is politically binding. What is more important
is that through delicate and painstaking negotiations the States Parties
were able to craft a balanced and forward-looking agreement that they
are committed to implementing in a systematic and progressive manner.
They will also periodically review and evaluate the
implementation of the package of principles and objectives, together
with the provisions of the Treaty. This review and evaluation process
will be ongoing, regular and action-oriented. The institutional
infrastructure required to operationalize this process has also been put
in place. All these elements of the agreed package represent a
framework to further the objectives of the Treaty regime, the endurance
of which is essential for the future security order of the world.
The strengthened review process that we have established will
now ensure a sharper focus on review conferences of the future and their
preparatory committees. These forums of rigorous accountability will
play a more crucial role in the operation of the Treaty than ever
before. As States Parties to the Treaty, we have to ensure that we make
maximum use of this mechanism of accountability in the fulfilment of the
undertakings in the Treaty.
Our Treaty has been rendered permanent by our actions at this
Conference. The permanence of the Treaty does not represent a permanence
of unbalanced obligations, nor does it represent the permanence of
nuclear apartheid between nuclear haves and have-nots. What it does
represent is our collective dedication to the permanence of an
international legal barrier against nuclear proliferation so that we can
forge ahead in our tasks towards a nuclear-weapon-free world.
I want to highlight the unmistakable message emanating from this
Conference: non-proliferation and disarmament can be pursued only
jointly, not at each other's expense. Delegations voiced their strong
support for the Treaty as a legal basis for achieving non-proliferation
and disarmament. The final output of our Conference encapsulates those
sentiments and provides a political, legal and institutional framework
for translating them into reality in a verifiable, progressive and
systematic manner. As President of the Conference, I urge all States
Parties now to proceed with dispatch to implement this important
In my opening statement, in accepting the honour of presiding
over this historic Conference, I said that we had a historic opportunity
of making a statement against the possession and use of nuclear weapons
for all States for all time. That statement has been made, and it will
be heard in the world and reverberate for years to come. The final
realization of the objective of nuclear disarmament will prove the
wisdom of our Conference decisions.
In emphasizing the importance of the results achieved, let me
not minimize the concerns and differences that we have had to take
cognizance of. That would not be fair to those delegations that have
made genuine compromises; nor would it be in the interests of the
Treaty. However, the very fact that the delegations were willing and
able to address frankly their fundamental security concerns and
negotiate viable compromises within the context of the Treaty is a
reaffirmation that the Treaty has indeed become a truly broad-based
Despite the absence of a final declaration because of lack of
time and lack of agreement on certain parts of the reports of the Main
Committees, especially Main Committee I, the three Main Committees were
able to develop general agreement on several crucial questions dealing
with disarmament, non-proliferation, safeguards, negative security
assurances and peaceful uses of nuclear energy. These will provide
invaluable inputs in the implementation of the decisions of this
Conference, in particular in the strengthened review process.
Multilateralism and the consensual approach have prevailed over
parochial and divisive politics. The painstaking process of enlarging
the area of agreement through consultation and compromise was ultimately
more fruitful than proselytization with pieces of paper. One month of
hard work and complex negotiations has brought about a political package
that points to an incremental way forward in non-proliferation and
disarmament. The objectives and principles on non-proliferation and
disarmament, together with the strengthened review process, which are
intricately bound up with the decision on the extension of the Treaty,
represent a pathfinder for a nuclear-weapon-free world.
Over the past 25 years non-governmental organizations have
performed valuable services for the Non-Proliferation Treaty in
encouragement, ideas, public support and advocacy of further progress
towards the goals of the Treaty. I should like to pay them a sincere
tribute for their dedication.
The expertise and resources of non-governmental organizations
are being increasingly integrated into various facets of human
endeavours within and among States, including in the context of the
United Nations. Arrangements for communication between non-governmental
organizations and NPT parties should therefore be improved. For that
purpose, consideration might be given to the possibility of having a
presentation of one to two days to delegates by non-governmental
organizations, in written and oral format, which would encourage maximum
exchange of ideas between non-governmental organizations and delegates
during the Preparatory Committee meetings and at Review Conferences. The
Centre for Disarmament Affairs could take on the organization of these
Let me, before concluding, thank the Chairmen of the Main
Committees, the Vice-Presidents and the other officials for the support
and advice they gave me in the management tasks of this Conference. I
should also like to thank the Secretary-General and his diligent staff
for the splendid job they have done under difficult conditions. Let me
also thank the conference services staff and interpreters and all the
other Secretariat staff whose services were invisible but indispensable.
Above all, I should like sincerely to thank all delegations who have
given me unreserved support and encouragement for my efforts at seeking
agreement. All of you inspired me in my convictions about the need for a
consensus approach to decision-making. I should like, therefore, to
express my deepest gratitude to all delegations for the support,
flexibility and cooperation extended to me at all times.
Closure of the Conference
The President: I declare the 1995 Review and Extension
Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons closed.
The meeting rose at 12.25 a.m. on Saturday, 13 May 1995.