At the outset, allow me to express my appreciation, Mr. President, for your leadership and hard work that have enabled us to undertake the initial stage of the 2002 session of the Conference on Disarmament in such a positive manner. I would like to assure the full support of my delegation for you and the successive presidents throughout this year.

Also special thanks go to Mr. Vladimir Petrovsky, Secretary-General of the Conference, to his deputy, Ambassador Enrique Roman-Morey, and to the other capable members of the Secretariat for their untiring and invaluable support to the Conference.

Now the Conference needs, more than ever, to show to the world its determination for action and its spirit of solidarity. Both are essential if the Conference is to overcome so many difficulties. The Conference must be consistently determined to pursue concrete action and universality in the field of disarmament. It is not an easy task at all but crucial to global security. In addition, a spirit of solidarity is a fundamental prerequisite for the Conference to bridge the gaps, find a common ground and reach agreement on arms control and disarmament instruments. We, all the delegations, are here to do so. Now is a particularly opportune time to focus more on the universal concepts and commonalities among us than on differences. Time counts. After having, over the past years, had all those serious exchanges of views, some of which were contentious, we must even more seriously look for agreement to start our substantive work.

The Conference must resume its work immediately because of the compelling realities in the international security landscape. Humanity has already experienced so many wars and terrors, and it seems those sufferings will never end. Random violence, conflicts and military confrontations still undermine stability in too many areas. Major regional conflicts are becoming even more dangerous because of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, like nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons or ballistic missiles.

As the September 11th incident so clearly showed, terrorism is increasingly a major threat to international peace and security. Terrorist acts are becoming even larger in scale; and terrorist networks are now more global and employ even more sophisticated technology for their operations.

In order to cope with these imminent threats to world security, international dialogue and cooperation must be further developed at all levels. In particular, multilateral disarmament measures, which we are here to negotiate, ought to play a special role by enhancing the fundamental security conditions globally and improving individual countries' security environments. Multilateral disarmament measures also provide the international community with a predictable long-lasting security landscape, thereby increasing the prospects for peace and stability.

Currently one of the topics that attract the greatest attention in disarmament and arms control is strategic stability among the nuclear-weapon States. It is evident that their strategic stability has a significant impact on world security. However, it is also true that regional conflicts and terrorism are often hardly relevant to it. Global peace and security can no longer be maintained solely by a strategic balance among the nuclear-weapon States, but essentially require broader international cooperation.

Some people maintain that collective measures by like-minded countries or regional measures can cope with the variety of new threats better than multilateral measures. This might be true in certain aspects, but the fundamental value of multilateral measures should not be too lightly dismissed. I am convinced that different approaches including multilateral measures should be mutually supporting and reinforce each other to enhance world security.

In the 21st century technological development and globalization will increase the dangers from the proliferation of weapons because even the most advanced weapon technologies will become more and more easily available all over the world. To counter such dangers multilateral disarmament measures will become ever more crucial. For this purpose the international community should first endeavor to strengthen the existing multilateral measures and next to create the new ones that are necessary.

Let us first consider the existing measures. The Conference on Disarmament and its precursor organizations adopted important international legal instruments such as NPT, BWC and CWC. These instruments constitute the foundations of current global security. However, they have yet to become universal and free from concerns of non-compliance.　The CTBT is also one of the significant multilateral accomplishments in disarmament, but it has not yet come into force. These problems must be addressed to strengthen the existing measures.　

As for the second aspect, namely the creation of new multilateral measures, that is the role of the Conference on Disarmament. However, the Conference has not produced any new instrument since 1996 when it worked out the CTBT. It has not even achieved any substantive progress over the past three years, and that is causing an extraordinary delay in the multilateral process. International security problems are just worsening with the passage of time as the Conference has not been able to make any initiatives. This critical situation should be brought to the attention of the leaders of the international community, including the presidents or prime ministers of each and every country.

As I mentioned earlier in this statement, strategic stability among the nuclear-weapon States is no longer the sole dominant factor in world security. Therefore, the Conference should not allow its work to be hampered by the strategic consultations among the nuclear-weapon States. The Conference should not just wait for an opportune time to be provided from outside but create the momentum on its own to strengthen the multilateral disarmament regime. Respective member States should renew their determination to agree on the program of work this year. This is for world security and for the benefit of all.

The proposal of Ambassador Amorim has been the basis for consultations for one year and a half. Japan has been supporting the proposal since it was tabled, and today I would like to reiterate our position and declare that we can endorse it as such. The Amorim proposal is widely accepted in the Conference, acceptable to more than 90% of the member States in my analysis. I believe that such a broad support for this proposal derives from the following advantages:

Second, it is based on a sound and well-balanced assessment on the maturity of different issues. If there is an agreed mandate on a certain issue, the work on this issue should be based on such a mandate.

Third, its constructive ambiguity which is an essential factor for agreement on any difficult issue under the present circumstances. An appropriate degree of ambiguity will help the Conference to become more relevant to the real security situation by resolving ideological conflicts.

I am convinced that the Amorim proposal will never undercut the essential national security interests of any country but will serve for agreement to commence the substantive work of the Conference, leading to the enhancement of global security. For those countries which have yet to accept the proposal, it seems to me that the following clarifications could foster a better understanding of this proposal:

First, the Conference on Disarmament is the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum as is clearly mentioned not only in the presidential statement contained in the proposal but also in the annual consensus resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly on the CD report. More specifically, whatever language the program of work is couched in, to be more precise, whether one uses the word "negotiate" or "deal with" in the respective mandates, the initial phase of any substantive work to be conducted in accordance with those mandates will be the same with the common understanding that the Conference is a negotiating forum. In what pace such work can proceed and whether such work will ultimately lead to "actual" negotiations will depend on the will of the member States.

Second, in order to reach the goal of the negotiations, the Conference needs to overcome the many differences in the positions of various countries. The final decision can only be made by consensus. Therefore, the program of work does not prejudge the conclusion of the work in one way or another. In other words, every issue is open until all negotiations are concluded, and every country has the right to say "no" to the final product at the end of the day. Then, why say "no" on the threshold of starting work, thus blocking constructive exercises?

May I repeat, it is now urgently necessary for the multilateral disarmament regime to be further strengthened and the time is ripe for the Conference to commence its substantive work. Time counts. If the Conference should fail to start its work at an early date this year, it will have serious negative implications for international security. Then, a voice might emerge demanding a substantial reduction of the budget of the Conference or even the setting up of another disarmament negotiating forum as an alternative. A Conference which does not work would be vulnerable to such a voice and have no other choice but to consider drastically reforming itself so that it could function better. Otherwise even its existence would be in jeopardy. Therefore, Mr. President and my fellow ambassadors, it is my sincere and heartfelt appeal to all of you that we should sideline any small differences for the sake of international solidarity and begin our work here and now.

Before concluding my statement which has focused upon the revitalization of the Conference on Disarmament, I would like to remind you that there are other important subjects which are not dealt with here. Above all I am pleased to announce that my delegation requested the Secretariat to circulate as a CD official document the chairperson's summary of the Tokyo Follow-Up Meeting of the UN Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects, which was successfully held on 23-25 January.