UN Geneva - Multimedia Newsroom : UNODA Press conference: Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)

very good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

Thank you for joining us here at the

UN office at Geneva for this press conference today

with Mr

A. Rameen,

who is the first deputy foreign minister of the

Republic of Kazakhstan and chair of the second session

of the NPT Preparatory Committee.

Uh,

the Preparatory Committee for the 2026 Review Conference of

the Parties to the Treaty on the Nuclear Proliferation.

Uh, non proliferation of nuclear weapons, otherwise known as the NPT

second session commenced this morning here at the Palais de

N.

It will run from today the 22nd of July until the second of August.

So at the onset of this important event, we were very pleased to have with us

the chair of the committee.

Uh, Ambassador

Mamadu, uh,

who's gonna deliver some opening remarks and then over to you for your questions,

sir.

Thank you very much, Rhoda.

Dear colleagues, it's a great pleasure and honour to be here,

and,

uh, yes, indeed. Today we've commenced our deliberations

in the Pale des

and

on the second, the

Committee of the

11th

Review

conference cycle.

And

I just wanted to set the importance of the NPT which is still remaining

the cornerstone

of the non proliferation disarmament regimes. And

it's really the treaty which

is working, which is quite demanded and

which is really very capable to

keep the world safe, and particularly when

participating states would

unite and consolidate their efforts to find out

the common ground for its success.

And

we all know the recent developments the worldwide in different continents,

in different places of the world

and which is not very conducive to the

deliberations within this process and in

many other different international fora.

But of course we have to find out the proper way

how we could

bridge the gaps and how we could

bring together delegations having different approaches, different visions,

and to try to find out the

the common ground to find the compromise

in order to

ensure the process going on.

And

I mentioned process because this is really the process,

not the final stage of the review

review of the NPT or whatsoever.

But this is the ongoing process and we have to concentrate

both on deliberations on constructed deliberations, sometimes to find out the

ways out

and also to produce some kind of deliverables upon the completion of our

discussions during these two weeks.

And, um,

I very much hopeful that

all participating states will be, as I said,

open, transparent and flexible to find out the

way forward. And

despite of their discrepancies

and during my

run up my preparation to the

second prep,

I conducted a number of

meetings with consultations in different places

like in New York, Geneva, Vienna, Moscow and

Tehran.

I met with various colleagues and

everywhere I received only support. I heard this

NPT

both as the treaty and as the process

remain very important instrument and tool to

get the world free of nuclear weapons.

The main thing is that

their vision, how to attain those goals are

different. And

again, we have to be very careful and very persistent at the same time

to try to find out the

proper solution to the challenges we face.

And

as the chair designate for this process, I am.

And my team also will remain, as I promised to all delegations

will remain open, transparent, flexible

and to try to take on board every concern, every proposal, every

idea, particular creative idea

so we could attain

success.

But at the same time, we have to be very

practical and

sober

that today's deliberations.

I mean, today's political and geopolitical circumstances

are not really very conducive to produce

really tangible results.

But we will be working hard me and our team

on attaining practical

results, moving the process forward and finding out the,

uh

the way when state parties participating states

will be

eager and will be ready to,

uh,

to implement the treaty in in in its

full,

uh

uh, scale.

So this is my short introductory remarks,

Rhonda.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr

Romulan.

and I should just remind you colleagues that we

shared with you some weeks ago a media advisory

with lots of details, background, pertinent background and in a sort of a, uh,

link practical link to the web page where you can find a lot more information,

including

side events, exhibitions and additional resources. So please do consult

that media advisory we share with you Previously

do we have, uh, questions?

Yes. Uh, Mava

is our colleague from

Kyoto News Agency of Japan.

Thank you very much for taking my question. I'm not. Yes, it's working. Thank you.

Um, I just have a couple of questions about, uh, the session itself.

What do you expect from this session? IN comparison to the previous one?

Are you waiting for a precise improvement?

And, um, if you ask which one

and I also have a question regarding

your relations with the delegation of North Korea,

Are you engaging with the delegation of North Korea

and are they also engaging with you or do they remain more distant?

Thank you very much.

So if, uh just to make myself correct, you meant, uh

if there is any tangible or practical results we aimed at right

Uh,

honestly speaking, it's really very hard to say at this stage.

As I said, we try to be very optimistic, but we have to keep being practical

and to see how you know

different delegations are different in their

approaches.

But

what,

honestly, speaking, what gives me a kind of a hint of

optimism that

we are coming from such a region,

which is

quite

balanced.

We try to be very balanced in our relations

with the various groups of states with different states,

regardless of the

geographic geopolitical location,

and it gives me kind of feeling that

we will be a

bit more successful in trying or in attaining

some results from all countries who are,

for example, in

quite a strong controversy among among each other.

And as far as the

D

PR K is concerned, since it's no longer the,

uh, the NPT part of the NPT.

Uh,

it's really a bit difficult, for example, to

produce any

kind of a

push or, you know, an impetus on this country

to stick to the provisions of the treaty.

But we've heard even today the general debates that

many countries raise this issue and raised their concern

about their

nuclear programme.

Thank you very much.

We have a question now for you from Antonio Broto of the Spanish news Agency.

Antonio,

thank you very much. So I would like to ask

if, uh,

the countries that attend this meeting are only the nuclear powers

Or are all the UN members who are part of the treaty

and also because you mentioned that there is, uh, different points of view on how to,

uh, how to get results. Uh, on nonproliferation.

Can you elaborate more on on which countries defend, which approaches to this.

Thank you.

Thank you. As far as the membership is concerned, its participation is concerned.

Uh uh, if I'm not mistaken, there are 189

participating states. So it means that

we have only five

nuclear weapon states, and the rest are the non nuclear weapon states.

And this is the dialogue

and they are very active. And thus far, we have

more than 120

tw uh, sorry. 110

delegations countries inscribed

into the list of speakers

As far as the different discrepancies or contradictions are concerned,

of course, countries cannot be equal in their

approaches to

how the treaty should be implemented and

about

which

nuclear states what kind of

commitments the nuclear states have to implement

and what kind of benefits or what kind of stance the non nuclear

states may

have

and that

make the deliberations quite different.

Uh,

the main, uh,

the main expectations are about, for example,

keeping the balance among three pillars.

It's about

disarmament.

It's about non proliferation and about peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

Other deliberations are

quite tough about

transparency and accountability.

How, for example, the nuclear powers should

exercise their commitments

in being transparent and accountable and trying to

decrease the nuclear arsenal nuclear stockpile they possess.

It's also about the future of the treaty, how it should be implemented

in all three pillars and,

for example, also about,

ah,

negative consequences of nuclear

weapon use or nuclear test use.

So there are a lot.

There is a lot of different topics which is being under consideration

and

which we have to

cover during these two weeks

and to try to find out

the further recommendations how to better implement the treaty.

Thank you again. Do we have further questions?

Yes. Meva once again,

Thank you very much.

Uh, I just have one question regarding, um, the nuclear disaster

that took place in Japan Dec decades ago.

do you think that the Japanese experience of nuclear weapons continue

to inspire the necessity to to stop these nuclear weapons?

Actively. I mean,

I'm sorry.

Um, I wanted to ask you if you think that decades,

decades after the Japanese disaster,

um you think that this Japanese experience continue to inspire

Ah, the delegates in the room to stop the the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Thank you.

Yes, indeed. Uh,

and,

uh,

when it comes to discussions for example, and

many delegations refer to the disaster

to the atomic bombing

both in Hiroshima and Nagasaki

and

its influence and its its role

in consolidating the efforts of all states,

be it nuclear powers and non nuclear powers

to bring to an end to the,

uh, the arm race,

particularly the arm nuclear arm race and any of weapons of mass destruction.

And also, I wanted to note that Japanese delegation is very active,

uh, in this, uh,

process, and, uh,

they participate at the level of government at the level of the NGO S

and the level of the academia.

And so and, uh,

we very much rely also on the constructive

and convincing,

uh, role

of, uh, Japanese delegation.

Thank you.

Thank you. Uh,

Another question from Antonio of Spanish news Agency. Antonio.

Thank you, Orlando.

Uh, I would like to ask,

how important is this dialogue for your country for Kazakhstan?

Because

I understand that,

uh, it was a country, uh, important for Soviet nuclear tests.

Also, I think it stored nuclear weapons. I don't know if if you have to

give them up. When, When? Uh, when the country got the independence.

So is it, uh, particularly important for Kazakhstan. Thank you.

Thank you very much. It's a really good question

and to which I love

give the answer

because K

used to be part of the Soviet Union and it possessed

the fourth

largest nuclear arsenal nuclear stockpile on its territory.

And once we got our independence, the

question appeared whether we have to keep this nuclear arsenal,

But it was the only

viable and the right decision that we have to get

rid of that nuclear stockpile

in order to move forward peacefully

among the other nations which appeared emerged after the

Soviet Union collapsed.

And since then, we are very active proponents of nuclear disarming,

non proliferation.

We

we got rid of this nuclear stockpile and at

that time it was really a good example of how nuclear powers

collaborated and cooperated together.

Because it was very close Cooper operation of the

United States and the Russian Federation,

who helped us

in close co ordination,

who helped us to remove all the

nuclear

warheads, all the equipment from the territory of Kazakhstan.

And

since then we remain

very active, try to be to remain very active on different

disarmament

directions

because

for example, the

the fact that I was

designated as the chair of this second preparatory Committee

It was also, I think, the kind of recognition of our

strife

to a nuclear free, uh, nuclear weapon free world.

And, um,

we are also

trying to be involved in many other

different

anti nuclear for

be

it the government, like

prohibition of the nuclear weapon or be it non governmental

ideas.

So we are trying to be everywhere in nuclear disarmament and non proliferation.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Do we have further questions? Uh, yes.

Uh, Musa in the back Musa, is our call from Alma Ain,

Thank you very much.

Can you tell

us, please, if there is some details about the nuclear weapons

augmentation from since the war in Ukraine

today,

there is some change about the number of heads of nuclear weapon. Thank you

in the world,

The headphone

there. Would you mind just repeating the first bit of your question?

I ask if there is some change concerning the number of nuclear weapons had

in the world in the United States and Russia

since the beginning of the war in Ukraine. Thank you.

Thank you. very much.

Uh,

I don't think we have very accurate and exact number of, uh,

how these dynamics is going up or down,

but, uh,

according to the declarations made by those countries,

they are trying to decrease the number

even. For example,

there is no longer

the start treaty between Russia and

the United States on reducing the number of the warheads in their position.

But internally,

the

I mean, they declared officially and publicly,

that they are working on the decrease of their warheads.

But again, we cannot judge about the accuracy and the number

provided by those countries. And

but, um,

you know, the war in Ukraine,

it entailed. And it caused kind of,

you know, maybe a bit

belligerent rhetoric

about the possible nuclear

military

build up.

But I'm not sure that it entails or causes the practical

nuclear military build up

sick.

Thank you very much. Uh, for those comments,

do we have further questions?

No, I don't see. Ok, One additional question from Antonio. Thank you.

Over to you.

Uh, yes. I would like to ask if, uh, do you think the sense of urgency,

uh, for nonproliferation

is higher now than, uh, before the Ukrainian war.

Now that, uh, the threats of using, uh, nuclear weapons, uh, have been, uh,

have been expressed by by people like President Putin in the last, uh,

in the last, uh, months or years. Thank you.

You know, um,

there was not

any kind of, you know, very,

uh,

straightforward threat of using nuclear weapon.

There were kind of some hints or some.

If we read between lines,

we can see from either side, I wouldn't single out any particular country or a

group of states.

But the mutual

claims and mutual accusation

are quite strong. And

indeed, the conflict in Ukraine caused

the race of the of this. As I said, belligerent

rhetoric about the possible use. But again,

they were never

expressed. Like

we are going to use this weapon or we are going to drop a bomb somewhere.

But it was like

we have to think about keeping our nuclear forces in

a high preparedness regime and so on and so on

as a reaction to someone else's.

You know,

statement made.

I hope I answered your question.

Thank you very much.

And of course I need to remind you that of course, Secretary general has been

reminding

states of reducing minimising,

eliminating altogether belligerent rhetoric as as just referred to,

um I don't see any further questions

unless last

minute hands go up. No, I don't see that's the case. So

I'd like to thank you very much for joining us here for this press conference.

Um, and colleagues again do consult the Media Advisor.

We have lots of important information. Practical links to statements,

among other things. So do consult that. And so, once again, uh, Mr

Ahma

Tin,

thank you very much. And good luck for the next two weeks. Thank you very much for

calling you all ask questions and attended the meeting. Thank you again

best.

UNODA Press conference: Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) - 22 July 2024