The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) Database  

REPORT FROM GENEVA -- FRIDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2001

A series of accasional reports on developments in the Geneva Negotiations

1. The 22nd 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 12 February 2001. In the opening meeting, the Chairman, Ambassador Tibor Toth of Hungary, recalled that in his remarks at the end of the previous session in November/December 2000 he had put the work of the Ad Hoc Group into context so that all participants could better understand what work remains to be done. He had said then that the most difficult work needed to be done in 2001 and that "it was now time to move away from talking about compromises to actually delivering such compromises". Ambassador Toth went on to note that the indicative programme for the 22nd session provides each Friend of the Chair with a meeting or part of a meeting. The remaining meetings – some 11 out of the 20 available – are allocated to the Ad Hoc Group or to informal consultation. It was important that Friends of the Chair carry forward their work in their own respective areas of the rolling text and, where possible, deliver the necessary compromises. Ambassador Toth, however, recognised that it was becoming more difficult for the Friends of the Chair to achieve progress as "It is no longer possible to consider the rolling text of the Protocol in its discrete sections, because the remaining areas of difference are linked to progress in other areas of text."

2. Ambassador Toth said that he had given much thought to the working methods of the Ad Hoc Group during the 8 weeks since the last session as the overall number of square brackets had reached numerical stagnation during the past three sessions. He therefore judged that negotiations based solely only on the procedures used so far would not allow the Ad Hoc Group to fulfil its mandate in the timeframe allocated to the work. He recalled that he had carried out a series of informal consultations at the 20th and 21st sessions in which he had had approximately 100 bilateral meetings with delegations in each session. He intended to continue these informal consultations at the 22nd session.

3. Ambassador Toth also said that in addition to the bilateral consultations, and as a direct result of them, delegations had received a series of written elements related to certain parts of the text. At the last session, written elements had been circulated related to: Declarations; Follow-up after submission of declarations; Randomly-selected transparency visits; Declaration clarification procedures; Transfers; Entry into force; Cooperation; and issues related to the Organization. A further series of written elements had been made available on Friday 9 November dealing with Definitions; Lists; Measures to ensure submission of declarations; Legal elements; Assistance; National implementation; and Organization. He invited delegations to let him have their views on all these written elements during the informal bilateral informal consultations during the 22nd session.

4. He went on to note that there is much to be done in the nine weeks available to complete the work: not only has the rolling text to be finalized and a Protocol agreed that is acceptable to all, the report of the Ad Hoc Group has to be drafted, issues relating to the Preparatory Commission for the future Organization addressed , and a Special Conference convened to adopt the report before November 2001. He concluded by saying that "Every single delegation ... here now has to move from its long-standing favoured options towards a middle ground that brings an acceptable compromise to all delegations. That will, I know, be painful." and went on to remind delegations of the aim of the negotiations by saying "Let us not forget what the ultimate goal of our endeavours is: it is not about a new treaty, it is about strengthening existing obligations and preventing human beings from being subjected to the willful infliction of disease. Only with such a bulwark in place will technological progress deliver its benefits to all countries and help make the world a safer place."

5. In the subsequent plenary session, a number of statements were made. Peter Goosen of South Africa spoke to introduce two Working Papers, one on investigations and the other on confidentiality, in which South Africa proposed an adjustment of the language between the Articles and the corresponding Annexes to ensure that the central provisions are in the Articles and thus not subject to reservations. He went on to recall the consensus that the negotiations should be concluded so that its product can be considered by a Special Conference before the Review Conference in November-December 2001. South Africa believed that the method of negotiation adopted previously has now taken the Ad Hoc Group as far as it is possible to go and that the time is now ripe for the Ad Hoc Group to move to a new methodology that will create the necessary foundation to meet the mandate within the timeframe agreed at the last Review Conference. South Africa went on to say that the only way to generate the new momentum is for the Chairman to take the initiative to bring before the Ad Hoc Group his best estimate of the compromises that should be considered as a basis for concluding the negotiations. He went on to say that South Africa had studied the building blocks circulated at the previous session which are only snapshots of certain elements of the text and for the necessary compromises to be seen there is a need to see the full picture. Given that there are nine weeks of negotiation time in three sessions, South Africa believed that the full picture will only be achieved by the distribution of a complete compromise or vision text. It was the view of South Africa that such a text would need to be distributed as soon as possible before the end of this session.

6. Italy then spoke saying that during the last session Italy had welcomed in particular the circulation of the first proposals for key parts of the rolling text. Italy was confident that those first building blocks on the way to being refined may soon be followed by the Chairman's consolidated text from which to take the final leap towards the conclusion of the Protocol. Italy noted that the Protocol must be realistic but at the same time effective. International cooperation in the field of biotechnology must be seriously implemented and enhanced for the common benefit of all States Parties through Article VII of the Protocol.

7. The Russian Federation said that they were ready to work to find compromises as they recognised the decision of the Fourth Review Conference to complete the Protocol by the Fifth Review Conference in November 2001. The Russian Federation were ready to study the compromise materials distributed at the last session and more recently for this session. New Zealand spoke to associate themselves with the South African view on the need to move forward as soon as possible on the basis of having a complete picture of the Chairman's assessment of an adequate compromise for the completion of the Protocol as they believed that this was critical to maintaining momentum towards completion of the Protocol.

8. Ambassador Hu Xiaodi of China then spoke noting that this was the first meeting in the new century and saying that "Strengthening the effectiveness of the Biological Weapons Convention in a comprehensive and practical manner and freeing humanity from the threat of biological warfare at an early date is an important task the times entrust to us." He went on to say that "After years of intensive work, the framework of the Protocol has gradually come into shape....The negotiation, in our judgement, is now making steady progress. However, great efforts remain to be made in order to complete our negotiation in a timely manner." He said that China remains committed to completing the negotiation within the envisaged timeline. He noted that the Ad Hoc Group's working methodology had changed with informal consultations taking place more frequently with more compromise proposals being put forward and said that this is the logical development of multilateral negotiation. He concluded by saying that "The conclusion of the Protocol will only be the result of compromises made by all sides, which to a great extent depend on their political willingness."

9. Norway spoke briefly to support the South African views regarding reservations and to associate Norway with the intervention made by New Zealand. Pakistan then spoke to express concern about the South African working papers which proposed moving chunks of text from the Annexes to the Articles. He urged that the Ad Hoc Group should avoid such drastic structural changes in the rolling text. Pakistan believed that it was not the time to look at "texts that are sent from heaven" but that negotiation are the name of the game. Australia then spoke to reiterate that chunks of text did not provide the full picture and Australia looked forward very much to having the full picture as to how the Ad Hoc Group might finalize their work. As to when the Chairman should provide the full picture, Australia believed this was very much a decision for the Chairman as he was the best judge as to when this should be. He went on to say that he did not expect to see in every slab of text exactly Australia's preferred positions as this was not the nature of negotiations. Finally, he said that he agreed that the Ad Hoc Group process hitherto had begun to be a little stale and to have outlived its purpose. Consequently, Australia looked forward very much to working with the Chairman and other delegations in drawing upon any kind of negotiating style including the informals and bilaterals and group discussions as that was a way to make progress.

10. Iran spoke to reiterate its readiness and willingness to fully cooperate in a constructive manner in order to successfully complete the negotiations within the deadline that the Ad Hoc Group expected and wished to fulfil. Iran recalled that they were among those who welcomed the modified methodology of negotiation and the holding of more informal consultations by the Friends of the Chair and the Chairman. Iran appreciated the informal consultations by the Chairman and welcomed the chunks of paper which he had prepared as the informal result of the consultations. However, Iran felt that producing a text parallel to the existing text would not be helpful. They were however keen to continue the informal consultations and to work towards reaching agreement. Libya then spoke to express their satisfaction at what has been achieved in previous sessions and looked forward to the day when there is a clean text that meets the approval of all States Parties which they hoped would not be too far off. He then went on to emphasise the importance of Article X of the Convention and Article VII of the Protocol as well as of Article VI of the Protocol on the provision of protection for States Parties. Finally, the Netherlands spoke to reaffirm their support for the points made by South Africa on reservations and on the timing of the issuing of the Chairman's text as an integral text and to associate the Netherlands with the support expressed also by New Zealand and Norway.

11. During the first week of the session it became evident that the emphasis was now more on informal bilateral consultations and informal meetings as there were several days or half days without any formal meetings.

12. The first week of the session also saw an additional event on Friday 16 February 2001 when a further Briefing Paper in the series produced by the Department of Peace Studies of the University of Bradford, UK was presented and distributed to all the Ad Hoc Group delegations:

a. Briefing Paper No 33, The BTWC Protocol: Improving the Implementation of Article III of the Convention: Pragmatic Considerations, February 2001.

Graham S. Pearson

17 February 2001