The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) Database
REPORT FROM GENEVA -- FRIDAY 27 April 2001
A series of accasional reports on developments in the Geneva Negotiations
1. The 23rd session of the Ad Hoc Group engaged in negotiating a Protocol to strengthen the effectiveness and improve the implementation of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention commenced in Geneva on Monday 23 April 2001. In the opening meeting, the Chairman, Ambassador Tibor Toth of Hungary, said that he believed that everyone was aware of the importance of this specific session of the Ad Hoc Group as it was the penultimate session for this year and secondly, all delegations had before them the composite Protocol text (BWC/AD HOC GROUP/CRP.8) with the Chair had adopted compromises to the outstanding issues. He undertook to walk the delegations through the composite text in detail explaining the main compromises and pointing out the changes in the text.
2. Ambassador Tóth then gave his appreciation of the overall status of the negotiations noting that the rolling text had been under negotiation for almost four years since July 1997 and much progress had been made in developing the text with the draft Protocol now well developed with a large part of the text agreed by consensus and therefore free from square brackets. He pointed out that every delegation can point to parts of the rolling text where their specific preferences are reflected and likewise that every delegation can indicate parts of the rolling text where they have already made compromises. However, despite the fact that great progress had been made since mid-1997, quantifiable progress had come to a halt for more than a year even though there are still a number of issues that require resolution.
3. He recalled that the Ad Hoc Group had sought new ways of addressing the outstanding issues with one of the most visible outcomes being the circulation of building blocks which had, by the end of the February 2001 session, covered most of the draft Protocol. By the end of the February 2001 session the Ad Hoc Group had become more and more aware that only a composite text to resolve the outstanding issues would help to move the Ad Hoc Group forward as the remaining issues were so interrelated that solutions simply are not possible if attention is focussed on one issue at a time, or even on a cluster of issues at a time. Consequently, the challenge that had faced the Chairman was to provide the Ad Hoc Group with a composite text while at the same time not endangering the efforts and great progress made by the Ad Hoc Group so far. The Ad Hoc Group had recognised that a more holistic approach is needed to complete its work and that it is necessary and timely to take the work of the Ad Hoc Group into its final stage. He had therefore presented both in States capitals and to delegations in Geneva a composite text in which he had adopted compromises on the unresolved issues.
4. Ambassador Tóth pointed out that the composite Protocol text in CRP.8 should look very familiar to delegations as it is in its entirety based on the rolling text. In the composite Protocol text he had developed language to bridge the remaining gaps, drawing upon the Chairman's exploration of these issues in the informal consultations that had been conducted since July 2000 with all delegations and in very close cooperation with the Friends of the Chair and the Facilitators. He said that he had retained the clean parts of the rolling text, while remaining as conservative as possible with any new ideas needed for compromises. The composite text therefore would not contain any great surprises for delegations. It is, however, a composite text that would achieve the mandate of the Ad Hoc Group and will strengthen all the provisions of the Convention. However, the compromises would require compromises by all delegations as the compromises adopted represented a carefully judged balance of the views of all delegations. Consequently, Ambassador Tóth urged all delegations to take a holistic view of the composite text.
5. He went on to say that in circulating the composite text, his intention was to break the impasse of the negotiations and facilitate the work of the Ad Hoc Group so as to fulfil its mandate in a timely manner. He noted that the Ad Hoc Group had spent quite a number of years and expensive negotiation sessions on the development of a Protocol to the Convention and said that "We cannot allow ourselves to now fall short of reaching agreement."
6. He called on all delegations to give serious consideration to the composite text with the customary flexibility on the side of all delegations. He expected all delegations to consider and examine the text with a view to what benefits they are gaining. These benefits have two aspects: first, which compromises in the composite text originate from their favoured options; and, secondly, and more importantly, what is to be gained collectively by agreeing and, ultimately, becoming a State Party to the Protocol. Conversely, delegations needed to recognise what will be lost if the Ad Hoc Group cannot agree to strengthen the Convention during a period when biological sciences become more and more important each day and important new moral, political and legal barriers have been raised in the way of other types of weapons of mass destruction during the past ten years when there have been negotiations to strengthen the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention.
7. In the subsequent plenary session, a number of statements were made. Sweden spoke on behalf of the fifteen member States of the European Union (EU) as well as the Central and Eastern European countries associated with the EU -- Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia -- and the associated countries Cyprus, Malta and Turkey. It was noted that the negotiations had been ongoing since 1995 and the Ad Hoc Group is now within reach of a Protocol which will strengthen confidence in compliance with the Convention. A successful conclusion of these negotiations would not only strengthen the Convention, but will also be a demonstration that multilateral negotiations are capable of achieving progress towards disarmament and non-proliferation. Sweden went on to say that it was apparent that the negotiations had reached a point where compromises and solutions to critical issues have to be found. In respect of the composite text, the EU was looking forward during this session to the Chairman's comments and explanations of the composite text to clarify understandings of the compromises. However, the EU already wished to underline that the text does not meet all EU expectations. The Chairman's composite Protocol text constituted a new phase in the negotiations and it was the view of the EU and the associated countries that "Your text, Mr Chairman, should be the platform for the political decisions that are needed now. Mr Chairman, at this point of the negotiations finalising a Protocol to strengthen the BTWC is within reach."
8. Switzerland noted the responsibility of the Ad Hoc group in finally concluding the negotiations on the Protocol and the importance of giving a clear signal of the determination to control weapons and move towards disarmament. Switzerland went on to thank the Chairman for his composite text which he said had the advantage of transparency and are generally well balanced. The composite text clearly contained compromises which in the nature of good compromises is in some way satisfying to all. Switzerland would have like to see greater transparency in the Protocol but was prepared to let the general interest prevail over its own interests. In this new phase of the negotiations, Switzerland considered that the Chairman's composite text should serve as a point of reference.
9. Iran again assured the Chairman and the Ad Hoc Group of the full cooperation of Iran. Iran said that the Chairman's composite clean text gives the indication of entering a more crucial phase of the negotiations. Although Iran had expected to receive a version of the Chairman's text in a format that would facilitate comparison with the rolling text, the Chairman's endeavour was so much appreciated that the Iranian delegation could go along in taking this text and having a holistic look at the text and continuing the negotiations. Iran had expected the text to be balanced, including both regulational and promotional pillars; Iran felt that the composite text was more oriented towards the former. Iran also felt that entry into force was not dealt with appropriately in the composite text. Attention was also drawn to the importance of the right of States Parties to participate in the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for peaceful purposes. Iran concluded by recording their sincere appreciation of the Chairman's efforts in producing the composite text in order to facilitate the further advancement of the negotiation and their determination to actively participate with the spirit of cooperation.
10. Chile said that they had seen a materialisation of the wish to put before the Ad Hoc Group a compromise formula which by its very nature will not satisfy the expectations of all delegations. There are certain provisions in the Chairman's text which do not satisfy Chile but this should be seen as a good symptom as if all of us were dissatisfied with the text then this would show that it is a good compromise text. Chile went on to say that the Chairman's text fills a political gap and should be the very centre of our negotiating effort.
11. China said that the composite text attempts to seek a balance between divergent views and, in various degrees, to take into account the concerns of different parties. China, however, considered that the text takes into account concerns of developing countries only in a symbolic way and is therefore one-sided. Although some solutions in the text have certain merits, China considered that a number of major issues were not properly addressed. China therefore considered that since the composite text is composed of proposals from the Chair, its status should be the same as that of Part II of the rolling text and serve as reference material for the delegations. China ended by emphasizing the importance of the quality of the Protocol which China saw as the first priority.
12. Pakistan said the Chairman's composite text had been received and was being closely examined in their capital. Pakistan looked forward to the elaboration by the Chairman of the key compromises and these explanations would be reported to their capital. Pakistan considered that the Protocol must balance the need for transparency with the need to reflect vital national security-related information. Facilities most relevant to the objectives should be the most transparent. The Protocol must, for promoting its universality, contain unambiguous provisions for cooperation in the relevant fields. Pakistan said that in the course of the current session they would seek to find out how the composite text fulfilled these requirements and where it does not, to rectify its shortcomings. Pakistan concluded that they were ready to work intensively to conclude the negotiations in accordance with the agreed time frame to achieve a Protocol which is comprehensive and responds to the concerns, interests and hopes of all delegations.
13. Japan said that the Chairman's composite text, which had been waited for anxiously by many delegations, was produced at a very critical juncture. Japan considered that the Ad Hoc Group should now do its best to come to an agreement on the Protocol using the composite text as a valuable basis for their further work so that there should be no loss of the momentum created by the presentation of the composite text. Japan went on to say that painful labour has just begun but we have to pass through this process to produce a good Protocol. However hard it may be, we ought to exert all our efforts to have a meaningful outcome by the timeline agreed upon by all of us. In order to realise this, Japan would urge all delegations to work in the most cooperative way. We must realise that the Protocol is not for the benefit of one country, any country, or any groups of countries as the Protocol we need is the one which benefits the whole humankind. We should collectively, jointly and cooperatively aim at the common goal to strengthen the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention.
14. Libya thanked the Chairman for the effort that he had made in producing the composite text in order for the Ad Hoc Group to reach general agreement that would be acceptable to all parties. Although Libya was concerned about the provisions relating to entry into force, Libya undertook to be as flexible as possible during these negotiations as they hoped that the Ad Hoc Group was going to reach a solution acceptable to all in a way that would lead to the destruction of this fatal, lethal weapon which does not discriminate between anyone.
15. Cuba said that they had always appreciated the need to have a Protocol to strengthen the Biological Weapons Convention. Cuba said that they considered it necessary for the Protocol to strike a balance between the two fundamental pillars in the sphere of disarmament and weapons control by having clear provisions of a practical nature to deal with verification and also with a view to economic and social development. Cuba went on to say -- as other have said earlier -- that they are not completely satisfied with the composite text although we do feel that you have made a good attempt to arrive at compromise solutions. Cuba would consider the Chairman's composite text in a balanced fashion and try to see it as a package deal in the hope that in the roundabouts and swings we have not lost too much in social and economic development and security aspects.
16. South Africa noted that the threat of the deliberate use of disease against humans, animals or plants is not only morally repugnant but is a direct threat to human existence and the socio-economic development of countries. The potentially devastating consequences of the use of biological and toxin weapons and the relative ease of developing them makes it essential for the negotiations in the Ad Hoc Group to deliver an effective Protocol. South Africa supported the decision of the Chairman to arrive at a composite Protocol text containing compromises on the outstanding issues based on the consensus elements developed during the negotiations. South Africa would support the use of the composite text as the basis for the further work of the Ad Hoc Group during which South Africa will continue to pursue its national concerns as well as those of the broader group of developing countries.
17. The Russian Federation said that they were very much attached to the objective of setting up a mechanism for multilateral control of compliance with the Convention. They went to say that they believed that the Chairman had produced a composite text that is to a great extent based on what is included in the rolling text. A first look at the composite text indicated some very positive points as well as a number of elements which are not acceptable to Russia. However, Russia would work with the Chairman and other delegations with a view to ensuring that ways of solving these problems can be identified.
18. Australia said that this session was a critical juncture in the work of the Ad Hoc Group. After six years of hard work, the Ad Hoc Group faced a choice: they could either rise to the challenge and bring the Protocol into being or they could succumb to pessimism, to an inability to see past our differences and allow the negotiations to fail. Australia firmly believed that global security can be enhanced by concluding the Protocol and raising the barrier to potential proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Australia believed that we cannot allow biological weapons to proliferate. It is because we confront a real and present danger that we should act now. Australia said that we should never forget that the BWC is based on two pillars: compliance with our obligations to never develop biological weapons and international cooperation to maximise the peaceful potential of biotechnology. Both pillars are necessary. Indeed, it is the abuse of biotechnology to create such heinous weapons that threatens our capability to use that very technology to improve the daily lives of human beings.
19. Australia welcomed the release of the Chairman's composite text. It is a substantive and fair effort to strengthen the two pillars of the Convention. It is in our view the circuit breaker we need. The Chairman has clearly worked extremely hard to put together this composite text and Australia appreciates the Chairman's considerable efforts. The Protocol negotiations have matured and the composite text is a quite natural product of that gradual evolution in the Ad Hoc Group process. Australia agreed that we now needed to consider the composite Protocol text in a holistic manner. All States Parties stand to benefit from the Convention and from the key provisions of the Protocol which is now taking shape before us. Australia concluded that if the Ad Hoc Group allowed the Protocol to fall over this year, it may be quite some time before we are again this close to achieving a result. Can we afford such a delay and its unpredictable consequences? Australia thinks not. The Chairman's composite text has given us the basis for moving forward, for making the political decisions that will be needed to bring the Protocol into being and again we thank the Chairman for his industry in producing it for us.
20. Brazil said that they were very pleased with the Chairman's decision to circulate the composite text with its compromises aimed at bridging the final gaps for Brazil considered that the time had come for this important decision to be taken. Brazil considered that these compromises had been made on the basis of a more holistic and integrated approach aimed at ensuring that the Protocol is strong enough in both its verification and cooperation aspects -- a Protocol capable of combining verification of compliance with exchange of technology and technical assistance and cooperation for peaceful purposes. A Protocol seen as advantageous by all participants and thus inherently valuable as a multilateral instrument to deal with an entire category of weapons of mass destruction. Brazil is of the view that in the Chairman's composite text we have a balanced text that can serve as a satisfactory basis for further work with a view to reach a final agreement and that can be accepted as such a basis by Brazil.
21. The Republic of Korea said that the release of the Chairman's composite text represents the fact that the negotiations have entered a very crucial stage. The Republic of Korea appreciated the Chairman's intention and sincere efforts to strike a careful and fine balance between divergent views on several important and controversial points. However, from a Republic of Korea standpoint, we believe that the Chairman's composite text could serve a very important and constructive basis for further intensive and accelerated negotiations in the coming months. The Republic of Korea believed that now is the time to move this negotiation process forward on the basis of the Chairman's composite text with concerted efforts from the delegations present here in order to produce the long awaited BWC Protocol. Above all we should not lose momentum to reach a constructive win-win conclusion. In that context, the Chairman's composite text could be a springboard for further intensified negotiations of the Ad Hoc Group.
22. New Zealand said that they fully supported the Chairman's efforts to conclude this crucial Protocol and appreciated the effort that the Chairman had expanded in producing the composite text. New Zealand supported the call that this composite text should be a basis for future work. New Zealand recognised that the negotiations were at the point where they need to gather momentum and the composite text recognises this political reality.
23. The Chairman in the afternoon of the opening day then commenced the explanation of the substance of the composite text in considerable detail after a general statement by Argentina in which Argentina said that the composite text is a step forward and would generate renewed impetus. Argentina noted that compromise does not satisfy everyone 100 per cent but the Chairman's composite text should be the basis for future agreement. Argentina welcomed the composite text and think that it is a good basis for final agreement of the Protocol to the Convention.
24. Further general statements were made on the second morning, Tuesday 24 April 2001, of the Ad Hoc Group session. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of The Netherlands, Jozias van Aartsen, noted that biological weapons still constitute a real threat as they threaten the security of all, in each and every region of the world and that threat is enhanced by the fact that with ever faster developments in biotechnology, such weapons are nowadays relatively easy to manufacture, cheap to procure and easy to use. He continued by saying that the Protocol is well within our grasp and the provisions in the Chairman's composite text will ensure that there will not be an undue burden on the biological and pharmaceutical industry as they strike an appropriate balance between securing non-proliferation and safeguarding industrial and commercial interests. In the Netherlands, bioindustry is of considerable economic importance. We are, however, prepared to accept this burden in order to give the Organization for the Prohibition of Biological Weapons and all its State Parties a clear and transparent overview of activities that can so easily be diverted from their peaceful purposes. He went on to say that no international agreement ever came into being without a spirit of commitment and compromise by all parties involved. Painful and seemingly impossible concessions may be required, but not for a single moment did he doubt that this will be compensated by the benefit that we will all gain from the strengthening of the Biological Weapons Convention. He concluded by saying that the Ad Hoc Group must finalise the Protocol before the Fifth Review Conference. The will to do so is there and by successfully concluding our negotiations, we will send a strong signal to the international community: that a multilateral approach to security issues is indeed very feasible.
25. The Director General of the Agency of the Russian Federation for Munitions, National Authority of the Chemical Weapons Convention, Dr Z.P Pak, then spoke saying that the Russian Federation fully supports the purposes and objectives of the Ad Hoc Group and drawing attention to the need to avoid problems associated with the inefficiency of the mechanism for the implementation of any international instrument by mentioning some of the problems associated with the Chemical Weapons Convention. He said that an appropriate legislative and regulatory basis providing for the implementation of the Convention's provisions has been established and is now in force in Russia. In regard to the Protocol, there is a need now to make decisive efforts to reach a compromise on the remaining issues. Among the priority ones are the volume of the information to be declared, types of declared production facilities, objectives, types and number of visits to the facilities, the procedures for investigation requests and mechanisms for the conduct of investigations. Russia is against any reservations made at the time of the Protocol signing or ratification as they undermine a specific country regime established by the Protocol. He went on to say that the work on the Protocol has been going on for six years, which is a pretty long time. So we cannot afford that the remaining differences either make null the positive results achieved by the States parties over the years or be used as the pretext for undermining or even giving up their efforts designed to ensure a more comprehensive and efficient implementation of the Convention. He concluded that the Russian Federation is determined to strictly comply with the mandate of the Fourth Review Conference as a successful completion of work on the Protocol in 2001 will contribute not only to the strengthening of the Convention but to the consolidation of the disarmament process as a whole.
26. Canada said that they highly valued the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, the first global treaty abolishing a class of weapons of mass destruction, fundamentally enhancing our common security. Canada would also highly value a Protocol to enhance our common confidence in the complete, faithful implementation of the Convention in all its aspects. The fact is that the rolling text provides a sound base for the successful completion of our work. Indeed, we would think of the rolling text we've achieved as a well-equipped base-camp near a high summit. The question is how we can get from here to the top. In this context Canada highly values the Chairman's composite text. Perfect in no one's eyes, a comprehensive package of carefully balanced compromises based entirely on the rolling text, it represents for Canada a natural evolution in our negotiations, a timely effort to focus our work on a realistic end product. Canada went on to say that they had taken careful note of the assessments of the composite text offered to date and Canada had been encouraged. Several parties have problems, to be sure, but there does nonetheless seem a quite general satisfaction that a necessary step forward has been taken, that at last we have a composite text which reflects the broad agreement we have achieved and offers an honest painstaking effort to bridge, equitably, the gaps which have remained -- and, it is clear, will not be bridged in time by the previous negotiation on the rolling text. Canada commended the Chairman's composite text and urge that it be considered in its entirety, with due respect for the balance it has been designed to achieve in reflecting our diverse views -- as well as our surely more compelling common interests. Canada considered that this is vitally important; much more than the rolling text, the composite text has the virtue of credibility as a whole proposal. Canada pointed out that the composite text is the gist of the last chance that the Ad Hoc Group would have to get this highly worthwhile job we're at done any time soon.
27. In addition, Canada mentioned a contribution that they had made to the Protocol process. Recognizing the importance of transparency and making information on the Protocol available to the broadest possible audience, Canada has prepared a BTWC Protocol website. This site contains relevant information on the Protocol, including the various iterations of the rolling text. It also includes: a Protocol primer; a brief summary of the AHG's history, goals and mandate; copies of other relevant documents -- including the Geneva Protocol, the BTWC, and final declarations of previous Review Conferences. Where possible, these documents have been posted in all official UN languages. The site is not designed to be Canadian. It is rather to be a factual compendium of information on the BTWC and the eventual Protocol. Once a Protocol is concluded and a Provisional Technical Secretariat established, this site could constitute a basis for an eventual OPBW web site -- if the States Parties so choose. Consequently, Canada had recently transferred the web site to the Chairman of the Ad Hoc Group. Canada hoped that this information tool will be instructive and useful for all those interested in the continued progress of the work of the Ad Hoc Group.
28. Poland noted that they were aligned with the statement of the European Union but wished to share a few thoughts on the negotiations. Poland has all along been of the opinion that the Ad Hoc Group must discharge its mandate. Poland found the Chairman's composite text a very useful measure supporting the work of the Ad Hoc Group and called upon all delegations, bearing in mind common security and well-being, to approach the prospect of final compromise in the negotiations with the necessary amount of vision and flexibility.
29. Croatia welcomed the Chairman's composite text which adopts compromises between the different positions of the Ad Hoc Group delegations. Whilst Croatia agrees that more work is required in several areas of the composite text, it provides an excellent opportunity towards bringing the negotiations to the desired conclusion of a Protocol to ensure that biological agents are not used to the detriment of humankind.
30. The United Kingdom said that they had long argued for the early appearance of a Protocol text, primarily in order to guarantee the possibility of concluding the work of the Ad Hoc Group by the time of the next Review Conference in November this year. In recent months, it had become increasingly clear to the UK in its role as Friend of the Chair on Compliance Measures that the possibility for real progress in the Ad Hoc Group format had been exhausted. Despite strenuous efforts, progress was no longer being made. The UK believed that the recent appearance of the Chairman's composite text breaks that impasse and the UK wished to congratulate the Chairman for having produced what has at the very least to be acknowledged as a masterful attempt at compromise as the Chairman had picked his way with great care and sensitivity through many of the rival and competing views so often expressed in the Ad Hoc Group. To repeat only one element of the European Union statement of 23 April, the United Kingdom is firmly of the view that the composite text is now the platform for the further political decisions that will be required in the course of this year. The UK concluded by saying that a Protocol to strengthen the Biological Weapons Convention has long been an important arms control objective as the UK believed that such an agreement will complete the last remaining gap in treaty provisions designed to help prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The emphasis must surely be on looking at the Chairman's composite text in the round as the basis for a necessary compromise for the sake of progress and BW arms control.
Preparatory Committee for Fifth Review Conference
31. The first week of the Ad Hoc Group session also saw the holding on Wednesday to Friday 25 to 27 April 2001 of the Preparatory Committee for the Fifth Review Conference. This began on Wednesday morning when the Preparatory Committee elected by acclamation Ambassador Tibor Tóth of Hungary as Chairman of the Committee. The meeting moved rapidly through the substantive business of the Committee in accordance with the draft Provisional Agenda for the Preparatory Committee (BWC/CONF.V/PC/INF.1) unanimously electing Ambassador Munir Akram (Pakistan) and Ambassador Markku Reimaa (Finland) as Vice Chairmen of the Committee, adopting the agenda of the Preparatory Committee, addressing the organization of the work of the Preparatory Committee and then the organization of the Review Conference itself deciding that the Review Conference should take place in Geneva from 19 November to 7 December 2001 and agreed to recommend to the Fifth Review Conference the provisional agenda as contained in BWC/CONF.V/PC/INF.6 which, as expected, contained the following substantive items:
10. Review of the operation of the Convention as provided for in its article XII
(a) General debate
(b) Articles 1 - XV
(c) Preambular paragraphs and purposes of the Convention
11. Consideration of issues identified in the review of Article XII contained in the Final Declaration of the Fourth Review Conference, and possible follow-up action
12. Consideration of the work of the Ad Hoc Group established by the Special Conference in 1994
32. The Preparatory Committee then turned to the consideration of the draft Rules of Procedure of the Fifth Review Conference, as in BWC/CONF.V/PC/INF.2, which were the same as those for the Fourth Review Conference. Ambassador Toth reminded delegations that standard rules of procedure were usually adopted along with oral amendments. Oral amendments were proposed and accepted to Rule 5 so as to elect two Vice-Chairmen for the Drafting Committee and to Rule 8 so that the General Committee would include the two Vice-Chairmen of the Drafting Committee and also the three Regional Group Coordinators and the Depositaries.
NGO participation in the Review Conference
33. In further consideration of the draft Rules of Procedure, Mexico made a proposal that Rule 44, paragraph 5 which states:
5. Non-governmental organizations
Representatives of non-governmental organizations who attend meetings of the Plenary will be entitled upon request to receive the documents of the Conference.
should be revised as Mexico noted that in fora such as the Committee on Human Rights, NGOs are practically equivalent to States Party. It was important to consider the civil society element and Mexico did not see why participation by NGOs might not be extended and they proposed the oral amendment to add at the end of paragraph 5 the words "and to submit material both orally and in writing."
34. Chile then took the floor and supported the proposal made by Mexico. Canada said that they supported the proposal made by Mexico as Canada was in favour of an active role for NGOs referring to the useful role of NGOs in fora such as the NPT Review Conferences and the Small Arms and Light Weapons Conference. New Zealand said that they fully supported the active participation of NGOs and they supported the amendment proposed by Mexico. South Africa joined the support for the Mexican proposal as South Africa favoured stronger participation by NGOs.
35. The USA then spoke on the proposal by Mexico. The US also agreed that NGOs are very important and need to be taken into account. However, they had doubts about oral participation. A way should be found to allow NGOs to participate but not to speak.
36. India said that they were not clear about the proposed amendment put forward by Mexico and asked the Chairman to repeat this for clarity. India referred to the very good work done by NGOs during the Protocol negotiations -- some documentation, analysis, text -- which was all very useful. India agreed that NGOs should attend at Plenary sessions and receive the documents of the Review Conference and wondered if NGOs might speak at a special session of the Review Conference but doubted participation beyond that. India also wondered how many NGOs might be involved -- India recalled that there was an NGO Committee on Disarmament and felt that this should be the criteria for NGO participation. India would like to hear the voice of civil society -- but there were NGOs and NGOs and NGOs. Given the time constraint on the Review Conference, perhaps one afternoon slot might be used for NGOs who have demonstrated a direct relevance on other occasions to the Biological Weapons Convention.
37. The Chairman then read out again the proposed Mexican oral amendment to paragraph 5 of Rule 44. Chile then spoke saying that they had not proposed that NGOs should take part in the making of decisions by the Review Conference. Chile had no problem whatever -- like Canada -- in listening to NGOs. Chile felt that listening to NGOs express their views was a healthy trend in the multilateral arena. Chile agreed with India that these should be NGOs who have some relevance with the subject matter dealt with by the Review Conference.
38. France then said that they agreed with the Mexican proposal that NGOs should be given the possibility of contributing in writing or orally within limits. NGOs play an important role as the public media do not appreciate the importance of the BWC and NGOs could be of assistance. Communication was a two way street.
39. The Chairman then suggested that the Review Conference should rely on practice as at the previous Review Conference. He recalled that Ambassador Sir Michael Weston as Chairman of the Fourth Review Conference had developed a solution which allowed NGOs to address delegations when on 27 November 1996 he had suspended the meeting and remained in the Chair whilst NGO statements had been made. Ambassador Tóth recommendation was that this practice should be followed.
40. Mexico said that they had listened carefully to what had been said but felt that the practice as at the Fourth Review Conference was not effective as such a session isn't given the full attention by delegations -- it is a second rate meeting. The thrust of the Mexican proposal was to keep pace with practice regarding NGOs in other multilateral fora. Mexico did not see why NGOs could not make a contribution when invited to do so by the Chairman. Mexico felt that further thought should be given to this issue and an extra effort should be made to progress this.
41. The Chairman said that the Preparatory Committee should come back to this issue. There would be consultations to see if a proposal could be made on ways and means for NGO participation.
42. The Preparatory Committee then continued its consideration of its agenda agreeing that the Secretariat would be called upon to provide background information documentation on the participation of the States Parties in the agreed Confidence-Building Measures. In addition, States Parties would be requested to provide information regarding their compliance with all the obligations and provisions of the Convention and the States Parties together with the Depositaries would be invited to submit information on new scientific and technological developments of relevance to the Convention. Such background information would be circulated no later than four weeks prior to the opening of the Review Conference. It is to be noted that one of the papers issued for the Preparatory Committee meetings (BWC/CONF.V/PC/INF.5 20 April 2001) provides a list of the BTWC States Parties and Signatory States as of March 2001. The numbers of States parties and Signatory States are unchanged at 143 and 18 respectively.
43. After completing consideration of the items on the Preparatory Committee agenda, the Chairman said that consultation would take place during the afternoon on the issue of NGO participation with a view to returning to complete the work of the Preparatory Committee when that had been done.
44. Informal consultations with those NGOs present in regard to NGO participation resulted in the identification of the following: NGOs would ideally like to participate and contribute in the same way as in the environmental treaties, the Land Mine Ban Convention and the Commission on Human Rights; in addition, NGOs would like to be able to be present as observers in all sessions as they would thereby become much more aware of the real issues -- rather than just the fixes presented in Plenary sessions. NGOs were, however, realists and recognised that evolutionary progress was more likely and were keen to contribute more effectively than at the Fourth Review Conference by making oral contributions during a formal session of the Review Conference thereby giving delegations more access to those contributions, and by circulating written submissions by relevant NGOs as CRP documents with the detailed arrangements being coordinated with the relevant NGOs by the NGO Committee on Disarmament.
45. Following further extensive consultations among the States Parties to the Convention, it was eventually decided that the same approach would be taken to NGO participation at the Fifth Review Conference as had been followed at the Fourth Review Conference.
Other Events
46. In addition to the statements made during the Ad Hoc Group and the meeting of the Preparatory Committee, there was a two day Ambassador's Conference hosted by The Netherlands in The Hague on Friday/Saturday 20/21 April 2001 attended by representatives from 37 countries which included some 16 Ambassadors. The programme started with a welcome from Frank Majoor, Secretary General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of The Netherlands which was followed by a visit to the OPCW where Dr John Gee, Deputy Director General spoke and Ron Manley, Director of Verification gave a status report on the implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention. This was followed during lunch by a presentation by Dr Graham Pearson of the University of Bradford on the value of the Protocol to the BTWC. In the afternoon, a visit was made to DSM Delft, a leading Dutch company in chemicals, biotechnological products and plastic materials with a workforce of 22,000 worldwide. In the opening remarks, the director of the company said that the company had had regular discussions about the Protocol with the Netherlands government departments and they felt that a good balance had been reached to strengthen the non-proliferation regime and the necessity of protecting commercial proprietary information. The company felt that the Protocol regime -- and in particular the declarations and visits would not impose an undue burden. A visit was then made to the penicillin fermentation production plant as well as to the fermentation pilot plant.
47. The first week of the session also saw several NGO events. First on Monday, 23 April, in Salle XII there was briefing from 1400 to 1700 for NGOs. The aim of this briefing is to update representatives of environmental, disarmament, peace, human rights and other NGOs on biological weapons, their history, current situations and policy questions.
48. Then on Tuesday, 24 April, in Salle XII, from 1300 to 1500 the Sunshine Project gave a briefing to an audience of about 36 individuals including delegations to the Ad Hoc Group entitled "Closing Loopholes in the Bioweapons Convention" which included the presentations on the Colombian chemical and biological war on drugs; why forced drug plant eradication is not biological control; and the scope of the Convention under threat. During this briefing, an international petition in which more than 100 civil society organizations from 28 countries was presented to Ambassador Tibor Tóth of Hungary as Chairman of the Ad Hoc Group and prospective Chairman of the Fifth Review Conference. This petition called on all governments to reinforce the global ban on biological weapons through the completion of a strong Protocol. In addition, the petition calls upon the Fifth Review Conference to reiterate the broad prohibition of all non-peaceful applications of living organisms and toxins, regardless of whether they target humans, animals or plants; to reaffirm in their Final Declaration that there is no exemption in the BTWC for law enforcement, and; to state that any use of biological agents against a nation, a regional group or individuals against their will is not a peaceful purpose and thus banned by the BTWC.
49. On Wednesday 25 April in Salle XXV from 1300 to 1500 there was a further European Union/NGO meeting this time hosted by Sweden who currently hold the EU Presidency. There were some 50 participants from the EU delegations and from NGOs. Short papers were presented by Ambassador Jim Leonard representing the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) entitled "Prospects for the BWC Protocol", by Professor Graham Pearson of the Department of Peace Studies at the University of Bradford entitled "The Composite Protocol Text: An Effective Strengthening of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention", and by Daniel Feakes of the Harvard Sussex Program entitled "Tha architechture of compliance verification in the draft BWC Protocol." Oral presentations were also made by Oliver Meier of VERTIC and Professor Marie Chevrier of the University of Texas at Dallas and FAS. These were then followed by a very lively debate and discussion between the representatives of the EU delegations and the NGOs.
50. On Thursday 26 April in Salle XXV from 0930 to 1000, the Department of Peace Studies of the University of Bradford, UK presented and distributed to an audience of 55 individuals from 28 Ad Hoc Group delegations the first two Review Conference papers in a new series:
In addition, a further Evaluation Paper was presented and distributed:
51. Later the same day, Thursday 26 April in Salle XXVI from 1500 to 1700 the Geneva Forum and the Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford held a seminar entitled An Analysis of the Chairman's Composite BTWC Protocol Text. Patricia Lewis, Director of the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) was in the Chair. Five presentations were made analysing the Chairman's composite Protocol text by Ambassador Jim Leonard (FAS), by Jenni Rissanen, Geneva Analyst, Acronym Institute entitled "Preamble, General Provisions and Legal Issues", by Graham Pearson, Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford entitled "Compliance Measures (including Definitions and Objective Criteria", by Malcolm Dando, Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford entitled "Technical Cooperation and Assistance" and by Marie Chevrier, University of Texas at Dallas entitled "Organization and National Implementation Measures." The seminar was attended by about 100 to 120 participants and there was lively discussion following the presentations.
Graham S. Pearson
27 April 2001