CTBTO

Statement

by the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation

 to the International Organizations in Vienna

Mikhail ULYANOV

at the VCDNP event

“Strengthening the CTBT and its Verification Regime”

28 January 2020

      Ladies and gentlemen,

First of all, I would like to thank the organizers for the invitation to attend and speak at the CTBT- event. This discussion is especially relevant in terms of the 25^th anniversary of the Treaty's opening for signature that we mark this year. This becomes a good opportunity to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the situation around the CTBT as well as the state of affairs in the CTBTO Preparatory Commission.

Needless to say, that the opening of the CTBT for signature in 1996 was a real milestone in the history of international relations and multilateral efforts in the field of nuclear nonproliferation and arms control. A tremendous work has been done since that time. Now the Treaty enjoys almost a universal support - it was signed by 184 states and ratified by 168. For the vast majority of countries, including Russia, the CTBT has become an integral element of international security architecture. Today we are witnessing the establishment of an unprecedented global verification mechanism to ensure compliance with the obligations of the States Signatories under the Treaty after, I stress, its entry into force. The verification mechanism already stands 90 percent completed, including in my country. We have made a significant progress.

At the same time, it is extremely regrettable that after a quarter of a century the CTBT has not yet become operational. In recent years the situation even degraded, when the previous US administration openly stated that it will not seek ratification of the CTBT and was preparing for possible resumption of nuclear tests. I hope that the new US administration will demonstrate a more responsible approach to international security. The US is not obliged to be the first among the remaining 8 countries from the list of 44 to ratify the Treaty. But objectively, the United States is the major possessor of nuclear weapons and claims to be a leader in international relations. So, other states remaining outside the Treaty look at the United States first. Washington can change to the better the current situation if it moves towards ratification. I hope that soon or later it will happen.

I believe that the main slogan at the CTBT Preparatory Commission must be a call for the earliest and soonest entry of the Treaty into force. Instead we often hear a very different message – “States cannot further delay establishment of their facilities of the International Monitoring System (IMS)”. Such statements are very misleading. They change subject and shift attention from principal issues to technical. It is obvious, that prior to the CTBT’s entry into force the verification mechanism, no matter how developed and effective it is, operates in a test and provisional mode. This is provided by the mandate of the CTBTO Preparatory Commission. Therefore, until the CTBT becomes operational, we cannot justifiably criticize States and demand them to complete immediately the construction of their IMS stations and provide data transmission.

I would like to say a few words about the CTBTO Preparatory Commission and its work in the pandemic period. Of course, the consequences of the pandemic, including for the Commission, have yet to be assessed. Nevertheless, we can already say that the Secretariat of the Preparatory Commission, led by the Executive Secretary L.Zerbo, has ensured the successful and uninterrupted functioning of the Organization in emergency situation.

The last point, on the contrary to the effective technical work of the Commission in the pandemic period, the atmosphere in the Preparatory Commission has deteriorated to very significant extend. Last October, for the first time in its history, the Preparatory Commission voted on a substantive issue. My impression is that a group of states made very significant mistakes when they refused to consider in a more constructive manner the issue of restoration of voting rights of those countries who are in arrears. Voting rights were restored in a selective manner against any logic, without any explanation. This led to growing antagonism among the members of the Commission. I hope that this trend will be stopped and will not be heated right now when we undertake the second attempt to elect the Executive Secretary.

Regardless who wins the election for the post of the Executive Secretary of the Preparatory Commission, it is important that a new leader continues to work towards entry into force of the CTBT, preserves all the positive traditions developed over the past quarter of a century in the Organization, and ensures stability and predictability of its work.

Thank you.