1. 2005 NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY REVIEW CONFERENCE
BRIEFING TO THE PARLIAMENTARY
PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
7 SEPTEMBER 2005

2. 2005 NPT REVIEW CONFERENCE Introduction
History of the NPT
Previous Review Conferences ( ; 2000)
Preparations for 2005 deadlocked
2005 Review Conference General Debate (Plenary)
Procedural Issues
Work of the Main Committees and Subsidiary Bodies
Role of the Non-Aligned Movement
Role of the New Agenda Coalition
Role of South Africa
Importance and future of the Treaty

3. INTRODUCTION
2005 NPT Review Conference held in New York from 2 to 27 May 2005
Conference adopted procedural report - all three Main Committees and Subsidiary Bodies of Conference unable to reach consensus on substantive issues
Time constraints; unwillingness to reach compromise; selective insistence on fixed positions by certain States Parties - major factors contributing to the failure of the NPT Review Conference

4. INTRODUCTION (Cont.)
The failure by some States to implement obligations under the Treaty (esp. nuclear disarmament)
Roll-back of agreements reached at previous Review Conferences
These factors and the failed Preparatory Process created a climate wich made it difficult to make progress on some key challenges facing the Treaty

5. GENERAL DEBATE Opening address by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan
Statement by the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency
Support for proposal on a moratorium on new enrichment and reprocessing facilities and creation of so-called multinational facilities that will ensure a “reliable” supply of fuel for nuclear reactors is of concern - may impact on countries’ article IV rights and their choices in the area of the peaceful application of nuclear energy

6. GENERAL DEBATE (Cont.)
NAM may find it increasingly difficult to argue against some of the positions and proposals advanced by the US and others
Could damage cause of developing countries and compromise positions and solidarity in structures such as the NAM

7. GENERAL DEBATE (Cont.) Central themes during General Debate
Non-compliance by both nuclear- and non-nuclear-weapon States
Protracted pace of nuclear disarmament - source of frustration among the non-nuclear-weapon States
Confidence in the NPT - ensure that peaceful uses do not contribute to nuclear-weapon proliferation.

8. GENERAL DEBATE (Cont.)
Growing number of countries questioning the 1995 decision to extend the Treaty indefinitely particularly in view of the current status of the Treaty and the unequal treatment of the various provisions, which has impacted negatively on the core bargains agreed to during the 1995 Review and Extension Conference

9. PROCEDURAL ISSUES
Agenda for 2005 NPT RevCon not resolved during third PrepCom - remained unresolved more than 2 weeks - prevented substantive work from being undertaken
Originally US/Iran problem regarding the inclusion of language referring to “developments since the last Review Conference”.
President’s proposal - Iran supports - although proposal created difficulties for most delegations, no other countries willing to object to proposal

10. PROCEDURAL ISSUES (Cont.)
Except Egypt - started to object to proposal on basis that outcome of 2000 Review Conference was being compromised
General perception at Conference that Egypt’s objection was a posturing exercise - no agreement possible without Egypt’s concurrence
Egypt insistence that agenda should specifically reflect 1995 Resolution on Middle East and wanted undertaking from President that subsidiary body on Middle East will be created

11. PROCEDURAL ISSUES (Cont.)
Major area of disagreement within the NAM
South Africa emphasised the adopted NAM position on three subsidiary bodies (incl. Middle East), but urged de-linking of agenda from other issues - to ensure progress on substantive work
Adoption of agenda on 12 May - made possible by de-linking agenda with programme of work and establishment of subsidiary bodies

12. PROCEDURAL ISSUES (Cont.)
NAM decision - support proposed agenda provided that President issues interpretative statement as official document by means of asterisk contained in the agenda
After the adoption of the agenda - intensified informal consultations to finalise the allocation of agenda items to the Main Committees, as well as the establishment of subsidiary bodies

13. PROCEDURAL ISSUES (Cont.)
Based on proposal by Chairs of Main Committees, President issues informal paper on proposed allocation of items to the Main Committees, as well as draft decision on establishment of 3 subsidiary bodies:
nuclear disarmament and security assurances
regional issues (including the Middle East)
other provisions of the Treaty (including Article X – withdrawal)

14. PROCEDURAL ISSUES (Cont.)
NAM indicated that it could only respond to proposal when other groups have responded
Most WEOG countries indicated support, but US had to await new instructions
After almost three weeks of intense negotiations on the outstanding procedural issues, including the adoption of an agenda, the allocation of items to the Main Committees and the establishment of subsidiary bodies, the Conference finally resolved these issues on 18 May 2005

15. WORK OF MAIN COMMITTEES & SUBSIDIARY BODIES
Overall agreement on allocation of time within Main Committees and the subsidiary bodies, except for subsidiary body on regional issues, including the Middle East
Egypt insisted on more time for deliberations on 1995 resolution on the Middle East
Decision: allocate time in a similar manner as 2000 Review Conference - more time to the Main Committee, less time to subsidiary bodies

16. WORK OF MAIN COMMITTEES & SUBSIDIARY BODIES
Main Committee I: 4 sessions for general exchange of views and 1 session each for nuclear disarmament and security assurances, respectively
Main Committee II: 4 sessions for general exchange of views and 2 for subsidiary body - also preference to delegations that would specifically speak on the issue of the Middle East to be followed by other regional issues
Main Committee III: 4 sessions for general exchange of views and 2 for subsidiary body

17. MAIN COMMITTEE I (NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT)
Major factors preventing consensus in Main Committee I:
Position of US on significance of certain aspects and provisions of the NPT
Reluctance to reaffirm agreements and undertakings at previous Review Conferences
Tendency to avoid balance between nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation

18. SUBSIDIARY BODY ON NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY ASSURANCES
US rejection of most elements on nuclear disarmament, including CTBT, prevented agreement on substantive report on nuclear disarmament in Subsidiary Body
Deliberations on security assurances less polarised
However, Subsidiary Body was unable to reach consensus due to fixed positions of some nuclear-weapon States and insufficient time to consider substantive and textual changes proposed by some delegations

19. MAIN COMMITTEE II (SAFEGUARDS & NON-PROLIF.)
Most controversial issues:
Proposal to adopt the Additional Protocol as condition of supply for nuclear material, equipment and technology
Acceptance of integrated safeguards (i.e. the Additional Protocol), as new verification standard
References to UN Security Council resolution 1540 in relation to the strengthening of export controls
Chair of Main Committee II draft report on basis of debate and working papers - many pertinent NAM issues omitted

20. MAIN COMMITTEE II (Cont.) (SAFEGUARDS & NON-PROLIF.)
Also no proposals on institutional issues (review and preparatory process up until the 2010 Review Conference) or work of the Subsidiary Body on regional issues, including the Middle East
Egypt (also Iran) established linkage between report of Committee II and the report of the Subsidiary Body - Committee II cannot adopt a report without agreement on a report by the Subsidiary Body on Regional Issues, including the Middle East

21. SUBSIDIARY BODY ON REGIONAL ISSUES, INCLUDING THE MIDDLE EAST
Most controversial issue was the decision by some western countries (particularly the US and some EU countries) to focus on Iran’s nuclear programme
Subsidiary Body unable to reach agreement on a report
Main Committee II consequently unable to reach consensus on a substance report
First Committee to conclude work - set tone for other Committees

22. MAIN COMMITTEE III (PEACEFUL USES)
Work focussed on peaceful uses of nuclear energy and other provisions of the Treaty not dealt with by other Main Committees
Also unable to adopt a substantive report, although there was a possibility to attach to the Committee’s report bracketed text of the substantive work of the Subsidiary Body on Articles IX and X of the Treaty
Egypt, supported by some Arab Group members, could not agree

23. MAIN COMMITTEE III AND SUBSIDIARY BODY ON OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY
US blocked consensus to attach a report on substantive work to the procedural report
Main areas of disagreement:
proposal to suspend nuclear co-operation if a State Party is in non-compliance with its non-proliferation obligations and safeguards agreements or withdraws from the Treaty
proposal to minimise the use of Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) for nuclear energy
issue of not targeting nuclear installations under IAEA safeguards for an attack

24. ROLE OF THE NON-ALIGNED MOVEMENT
NAM well prepared for Conference
Positions of some NAM countries on certain aspects of the Treaty created tension within the Movement
Changing of NAM Chair created some continuity problem

25. ROLE OF THE NEW AGENDA COALITION
Group established especially to advance nuclear disarmament
Problems with some partners who regard nuclear arms reductions (Moscow Treaty) as important steps towards nuclear disarmament
Some NAC partners developing hesitation with the group’s position on negative security assurances (NSA)
Personal commitment of the New Zealand Minister - effectively mobilised other members

26. ROLE OF THE NEW AGENDA COALITION (Cont.)
NAC far less active than at 2000 RevCon
NAC unable to play meaningful role due to divergent views on some key aspects of the original goals of the New Agenda Coalition
Conference illustrated that without cohesion and sense of purpose, NAC will not be able to make any real impact in the area of nuclear disarmament
Need to mobilise all members effectively so as to ensure that NAC advances the demand for nuclear disarmament

27. ROLE OF SOUTH AFRICA
With all the difficulties on key issues, South Africa acted most of the time as deal breaker, particularly within the NAM, but also within the broader conference
Delegation was instrumental in breaking deadlock on agenda and was able to come up with consensus language with regard to the final report of the Conference

28. ROLE OF SOUTH AFRICA (Cont.)
South Africa, both in the context of bilateral consultations with key delegations at the Review Conference, as well as in consultations within the Non-Aligned Movement and the New Agenda Coalition, worked towards securing agreement on some of the major challenges facing the NPT Regime

29. IMPORTANCE AND FUTURE OF THE NPT
Failure to reach any substantial conclusions at the 2005 Review Conference represents a serious crisis for the NPT
Continued denial and lack of implementation of undertakings and agreements at previous Conferences undermines the intergrity of Treaty
Incremental restrictions on the inalienable rights of States Parties in compliance with obligations raises questions regarding the original core bargains