(97.05.15)黒河内大使ＣＤ（一般）

　 Current international situation provides a favorable environment for further progress in disarmament. Indeed, there have been a number of encouraging developments even since the negotiations on the CTBT concluded last year. Thus it is all the more disappointing that the Conference on Disarmament could not reach an agreement on a concrete work program during its first session. My delegation would stress that its second session must not be a mere repetition of the first, but should reinvigorate disarmament efforts so that further progress might be achieved as expeditiously as possible. Indeed, the Conference on Disarmament, as the sole multilateral negotiating body on disarmament, has a particularly important role to play in addressing various issues confronting the international community.

　 Concerning nuclear disarmament, first of all, substantive work for the establishment of a verification system under the CTBT goes under way with the inauguration of the CTBT Provisional Technical Secretariat. The early establishment of verification system is important in order to deter any country from conducting nuclear testing, as well as to expedite the entry into force of the Treaty. Japan, for its part, is actively participating in the work of the Preparatory Commission in Vienna. Moreover, the Government of Japan submitted, on April 25, the CTBT text to the Diet for ratification.

　 Secondly, we note with satisfaction the result of the first Preparatory Committee for the 2000 NPT Review Conference, which was held in New York just last month. At the meeting, many delegations emphasized that the new review process was qualitatively different from past practice. Thus, while important decisions were made on procedural matters, the participating States discussed in depth substantive matters related to operation of the Treaty and produced a Chairman's Working Paper. We consider this a very positive step and hope that the preparatory process will continue to proceed smoothly so that we can agree on forward-looking, action-oriented recommendations for the 2000 Review Conference.

　 I should like to add that Japan noted with a great interest the statement made collectively by the five nuclear weapon States as well as the individual reports of nuclear weapon States at the Prep.Com. regarding the concrete measures they have taken for nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament. It may be recalled that the United Nations General Assembly resolution 51/45G, which my country sponsored, requests nuclear weapon States to inform the international community of the progress of nuclear disarmament. We believe that increased transparency in nuclear disarmament will contribute to building confidence between the nuclear weapon States and non-nuclear weapon States.

　 Thirdly, we welcome the new commitment made by the United States and Russia at the recent summit meeting in Helsinki to engage in further talks on the reduction of strategic forces in the context of START, and look forward to seeing concrete measures in this regard. In this context, Japan strongly hopes that Russia will ratify START II as soon as possible.

　 Moreover, in February this year, the Treaty of Tlatelolco celebrated the thirtieth anniversary of its opening for signature. As described in the Chairman's Working Paper which I already mentioned in relation to the first Prep.Com. of the 2000 NPT Review Conference, important steps have been taken since 1995 to conclude additional nuclear weapon free zone treaties. We welcome this progress and will continue to follow further developments with great interest in the belief that the establishment of internationally recognized nuclear weapon free zones, on the basis of arrangement freely arrived at among the States of the region concerned, enhances global and regional peace and security.

　 Turning our attention to developments relating to other weapons of mass destruction, we note that the Chemical Weapons Convention entered into force on April 29, and heartily welcome its ratification by both the United States and China on April 25, thus making them original States parties to the Convention. We would like to urge other countries which have not yet done so to ratify this important treaty as soon as possible. With regard to verification measures of the Biological Weapons Convention, we are encouraged by the result of the recent Ad Hoc Group meeting in which a general convergence of views emerged to prepare a rolling text by the next meeting in July.

　 Perhaps most encouraging is the fact that the tide of support for a total ban on anti-personnel landmines has become irreversible. Japan, for its part, will spare no effort to contribute to the international efforts to address the dreadful problems caused by APLs. The Tokyo Conference on Anti-Personnel Landmines, which Japan hosted in March to explore mine-clearance measures, is just one example of such efforts.

　 In addition, we are of the view that it is important for us to realize, as soon as possible, the entry into force of the Revised Protocol II of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) which strengthened prohibitions or restrictions on the use of anti-personnel mines. At present, the Diet of Japan is deliberating this Revised Protocol II as well as the Protocol IV of the CCW prohibiting "Blinding Laser Weapons."

　 International efforts to elaborate ways and means for strengthening and further developing the UN Register of Conventional Arms are now under way. In March of this year, the Panel of Governmental Experts met to commence work on a report to the UN Secretary-General. The Tokyo Workshop in May considered various aspects of the issue of transparency in armaments. We look forward to seeing the further developments of this Register.

　 A number of developments have been recorded following the second meeting of the UN Panel of Governmental Experts on Small Arms in January. In addition to the meeting held in South Africa last September, the Central American Workshop was held in El Salvador in January and the Asian Workshop will be organized at Kathmandu this month. Furthermore, Japan, also, will host a workshop on small arms in Tokyo this month. We believe that these regional meetings will ensure that the report to be produced at the third meeting of the UN Panel of Governmental Experts in July will prove to be a useful and important document.

　 Against this background of ongoing international efforts in arms control and disarmament, it is somewhat strange that the CD has not yet begun its substantive work this year. It is important that the CD agree on a program of work as soon as possible during this second session. My delegation continues to believe that the CD should take up the following three tasks : the commencement of negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT), the establishment of some mechanism on nuclear disarmament and the setting up of Ad Hoc Committee on anti-personnel landmines.

　 The CD Member States, with very few exceptions, support the commencement of negotiations on an FMCT based on Ambassador Shannon's report. At the first Preparatory Committee for the 2000 NPT Review Conference, the need for immediate commencement and early conclusion of such negotiations was also reaffirmed. Thus we believe that the linkage between the start of the negotiations on an FMCT and the progress of other issues must be abandoned, and that the CD should start the FMCT negotiations immediately.

　 My delegation would like to see both the nuclear weapon States and G21 delegations take more flexible positions on the issue of nuclear disarmament. We hope that the CD will agree to appoint a Special Coordinator on nuclear disarmament as we proposed at the first session, who would guide our examination of the role the CD might play on this issue.

　 Concerning APLs, while Japan considers the so-called Ottawa Process to be a valuable initiative to keep momentum on the issue, we are of the view that the CD is an appropriate forum for negotiations on a treaty which could cover all key countries and hence be effective in solving the problem caused by APLs. The establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee in the CD for this purpose is thus an urgent task. In my delegation's view, it would not be necessary for us to seek a detailed mandate of the Ad Hoc Committee as this might prejudge the modality of negotiations. It would be sufficient if we succeed in producing an agreement to establish an Ad Hoc Committee to negotiate, in accordance with the UNGA resolution last year, "an effective, legally binding international agreement to ban the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of anti-personnel landmines."

　 In order to make a contribution in this regard, Japan, together with Hungary, would like to submit a new proposal on a draft mandate of the Ad Hoc Committee, which is attached to the text of my statement. I would like to request you, Mr. President, to be good enough to distribute this proposal as an official document of the CD and my delegation hopes that this new proposal will be considered favorably by other delegations.

　 If we cannot reach an agreement on an Ad Hoc Committee immediately, we should, as proposed by Finland, Chile and Poland, appoint a Special Coordinator to facilitate this effort.