Statement by H.E. Mr. Yoshiki Mine
Ambassador, Permanent Representative of
To the Conference on Disarmament
Third Review Conference to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions
on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be
Excessively
Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects
Mr. Chairman,
Distinguished Delegates,
Firstly, allow me to state
that the Government of Japan hopes that this Review Conference, taking stock of
the discussions of the past five years, leaves behind a meaningful
outcome. To this end,
Mr. Chairman,
We would like to reiterate that
for the purpose of addressing the issue of conventional weapons with a
humanitarian perspective, the CCW is an internationally trusted, multilateral
legal framework. Since the previous
Review Conference in 2001, a number of concrete outcomes have been achieved in
addition to the entry into force of the Amended Article I of the
Convention. The Meetings of the
Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) carried out beneficial discussions on the
further development of the CCW; created Protocol V; formulated the Action Plan on
Universalization and the sponsorship programme,
in addition to the substantive discussions on explosive remnants of war (ERW)
and mines other than anti-personnel mine (MOTAPM).
On the other hand, it might
be time for us to examine how the GGE, which is held a number of times every
year, is to be convened in the future from the viewpoint of cost-effectiveness.
Mr. Chairman,
On the regulation of MOTAPM,
intensive and extensive discussions have been taking place since the last
Review Conference in 2001. We would
like to especially thank the tireless efforts of the coordinators to date, not
to mention Ambassador Rocha Paranhos of
Nevertheless,
we must never forget that the objective of a new protocol is to reduce the
humanitarian impact of MOTAPM. In
this connection, a new protocol should strengthen Amended Protocol II, not
weaken it. In particular, for humanitarian
purposes, detectability and active life are a
fundamental part of the protocol to regulate MOTAPM. Therefore these obligations should apply
to States Parties equally. In
cooperation with other States,
Mr.
Chairman,
Since
the last Review Conference there has been marked progress in the efforts to
comprehensively address the problem of ERW. Specifically, in addition to the
adoption of Protocol V in 2003 and its entry into force this weekend, concrete
discussions have been deepening the understanding of international humanitarian
law principles applied to ERW and substantial discussions are underway on technical
preventive measures for munitions. In
particular, the McCormack Report, after taking into account the actual application
of international humanitarian law principles by each country, presented specific
proposals for the resolution of ERW, and these proposals are now the practical basis
for our further discussions. On the issue of cluster munitions, consensus has
yet to be reached among the States Parties. Nevertheless, while balancing both
humanitarian and security concerns, we believe it is important to continue and
deepen the discussions.
Mr.
Chairman,
In
order for the international community to gain greater confidence in the CCW
hereafter, a mechanism ensuring compliance with the whole CCW is crucial. On this point, I would like to give
credit to the substantial and specific deliberations that were carried out on
the paper prepared by the Chairman and the Friend of Chairman in the GGE.
Mr.
Chairman,
In
conclusion, in view of the establishment of the five protocols, including
Protocol V, as well as the amendment of Protocol II and Article I of the
Convention, the obvious merit of the CCW lies in the fact that the Convention
itself can respond and be developed to face the international community’s
problems of the day. At the same
time as taking advantage of this merit,
Thank
you.