http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/opennlp-sandbox/blob/1f97041b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/un/C/188un_CD_PV861.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git
a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/un/C/188un_CD_PV861.txt
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/un/C/188un_CD_PV861.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..171dab4
--- /dev/null
+++
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/un/C/188un_CD_PV861.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+21 September 2000 Held at the Palais des Nations , Geneva , on Thursday , 21
September 2000 , at 10.40 a. m. President : Mr. Petko Draganov ( Bulgaria ) The
PRESIDENT : I declare open the 861st plenary meeting of the Conference , the
last for the 2000 session . I should like at the outset to extend a warm
welcome , on behalf of us all , to the three new colleagues who have recently
joined us as representatives of their Governments to the Conference ,
Ambassador Roberto Betancourt Ruales of Ecuador , Ambassador Rakesh Sood of
India and Ambassador Mario Maioloini of Italy , and assure them of our full
cooperation and support in the discharge of their functions . Allow me also to
bid farewell to the representative of Ukraine , Ambassador Mykola Maimeskul ,
who , I understand , will soon be leaving his post to take up important
responsibilities in his Government . Ambassador Maimeskul has represented his
country in this Conference since August 1996 and we had the privilege to work
under
his presidency at a difficult time , when efforts were being made to widen
the areas of agreement on the Conference 's programme of work . He discharged
his functions with dedication and diplomatic skill . It is an especially moving
occasion for me , because he was presiding over this Conference when I first
appeared in it and you will also recall that it was under his presidency and
skilful leadership of this Conference that the Conference took a decision on
the establishment of the Ad Hoc Committee on fissile material . I am sure that
you will all join me in extending to him and his family our best wishes for the
future . I have on my list of speakers for today the representatives of Costa
Rica , the Russian Federation and Algeria , who will be speaking on behalf of
the Group of 21. I give the floor to the representative of Costa Rica ,
Ambassador Nora Ruiz de Angulo . Ms. RUIZ DE ANGULO ( Costa Rica ) ( translated
from Spanish ) : Mr. President , allow me to convey greetings to
you , both on my own behalf and on that of the Government of Costa Rica , and
to congratulate you on the way in which you have been presiding over this
Conference . I also thank you for allowing me to speak before the plenary of
the Conference on Disarmament , with a view to drawing the attention of
distinguished representatives to Costa Rica 's renewed desire to become a
permanent member of this Conference . We know of the difficult times through
which the Conference is passing and of the various points of view on this
subject and it is precisely for that reason that we wish to reiterate our
aspiration and to commit ourselves to its attainment . Throughout its history
Costa Rica has been distinguished for its pacifist tradition and its rejection
of the use of force as a means to resolve conflicts . Since its beginnings as a
republic , it has endeavoured to maintain relations of peace and friendship
with neighbouring countries and to date it continues to participate in many
internat
ional activities and agreements aimed at reducing conventional armaments and
weapons of mass destruction . Its most relevant decision in this regard was the
abolition of the army in 1949. It thereby reaffirmed its commitment to peace
and entrusted its safety to international law , rejecting force as a means of
solving conflicts . From that time on , Costa Rica has entrusted its security
to international rules and agreements and for that reason we wish to play an
attentive and active role in addressing the international agenda on disarmament
and international security . In 1958 Costa Rica submitted the first specific
proposal on the limitation of conventional weapons and the prohibition of
nuclear weapons in the Organization of American States ( OAS ) . Subsequently
we ratified with great enthusiasm the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear
Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean . Costa Rica firmly supports general
and complete disarmament . Ever since the San Francisco Conferenc
e , at which Costa Rica was a participant , we have continued to place our
firm trust in the United Nations and we are strongly committed to its mandate
to safeguard international peace and security . We shall therefore continue to
support the work of the First Committee and the Commission on Disarmament by
preparing , co-sponsoring and considering proposals conducive to international
disarmament . To this end we advocate the creation of nuclear-free zones ,
complete nuclear disarmament , the holding of the fourth special session of the
General Assembly on disarmament and the expansion of the United Nations
Register of Conventional Arms . We consider there should be a ban on the
transfer of materiel and military personnel and the provision of financial or
logistic support to States whose military or paramilitary units , or whose
security forces are responsible for violations of human rights or contribute to
such violations . At the first preparatory meeting of the 2001 United Nation
s Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons , held on 3
March 2000 , the Costa Rican Government officially presented a working document
on an international code of conduct on arms transfers . The Preparatory
Committee elected our country to the vice-chairmanship of the United Nations
Conference , to be held in 2001. During its participation on two occasions as a
non-permanent member of the Security Council , most recently in 1998 , Cost
Rica focused its efforts on preventive diplomacy , the resolution of conflicts
, humanitarian assistance and the protection of human rights in war zones ,
both during and after hostilities . Within the framework of OAS Costa Rica has
proposed a set of practical guidelines for the attainment of disarmament as a
dividend for peace . These guidelines are designed to ensure a genuine
reduction in conventional weapons , so that more resources can be devoted to
development . The agreements ratified by Costa Rica include the Treaty on
the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons ; the Treaty on the Prohibition of
the Emplacement of Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction on the
Seabed and the Ocean Floor and in the Subsoil Thereof ; the Convention on the
Prohibition of the Development , Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological
( Biological ) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction ; the Convention on
the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental
Modification Techniques ; 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 and its three protocols ; the
Convention on the Prohibition of the Development , Production , Stockpiling and
Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction ; the Comprehensive Nuclear
Test-Ban Treaty ; the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use , Stockpiling ,
Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and Their Destruction ;
and the Inter-American Convention against the Manufacturing of and Trafficking
in Firearms , Ammunition , Explosives and Other Related Materials . Costa Rica
attaches great importance to multilateral forums and focuses its activities in
the area of security on the strengthening of collective security agreements ,
of both regional and international scope , and on the promotion of the peaceful
solution of conflicts and disarmament as a basic principle of its foreign
policy . Costa Rica 's achievements in the national and international arena are
attributable to our sound decision , made more than 50 years ago , to abolish
our army as this has enabled us to devote more resources to social investment ,
to renounce weapons and to promote democracy and development . Given that Costa
Rica 's efforts to promote the security and well-being of the country 's
society are largely linked to the development of international law and the
effectiveness of the protection which it provides , we deem it
essential that we are properly represented in these forums . Where
international law prevails , the risk of war are reduced and we therefore
consider it necessary to continue preparing effective verification mechanisms
that guarantee that there is no use , threat of use or manufacture of weapons
of mass destruction . In the light of all that I have said , Costa Rica
reiterates once more its request to be admitted to the Conference on
Disarmament . Over the last 50 years Costa Rica has not spent any money on an
army and has devoted its budget to education , preventive health-care and
infrastructure investment . Our national experience has taught us that to
decide not to invest in weapons is the best way forward for those countries
that are really committed to the well-being of their peoples . We believe that
the promotion of peace and security , both internationally and on the domestic
front , is contingent upon a determined policy to reduce military expenditure
and to strengthen ci
vil power . It stands to reason that disarmament , demilitarization and the
reduction of military expenditure are essential for the welfare of mankind and
the promotion of a culture of peace . The PRESIDENT : I thank the
representative of Costa Rica for her statement and for the kind words addressed
to the Chair . I now give the floor to the representative of the Russian
Federation , Ambassador Vasily Sidorov . Mr. SIDOROV ( Russian Federation ) (
translated from Russian ) : First , may I thank you for giving me the floor and
congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Conference . I
wish you every success and assure you of my delegation 's willingness to
cooperate in the most constructive manner . I would also like to welcome those
new colleagues who have recently joined us in our work in the Conference . At
the Millennium Summit , held recently in New York , attention was given to an
issue of particular importance to the modern age : what system of international
r
elations will prevail over our lives and activities in the twenty-first
century ? We believe that the new age should be one of equal security and a
just peace , as stated by President Putin of Russia in his speech at the Summit
: â The new age for the United Nations must continue well into a millennium
of global stability . It must go down in history as a period of real
disarmament . It has already proved possible to create an efficient disarmament
machinery . That machinery comprises the 1972 ABM Treaty , non-proliferation
regimes governing weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery and
dozens of highly important agreements on the reduction and limitation of
various weapons . â I have already had ample occasion in this auditorium to
state the abiding significance of the ABM Treaty for strategic stability and
international security . The issue has recently been raised again , more than
once , in plenary meetings of the Conference on Disarmament and points have
been
made which require clarification on our part . We are firmly convinced that
the ABM Treaty remains the cornerstone for strategic stability and that it
continues to serve as a basis for ensuring further reductions in strategic
offensive arms . We believe that this linkage will be further strengthened in
the foreseeable future . Incidentally , it was the United States which was the
first to raise the issue of a connection between agreements to reduce and limit
strategic offensive arms and the ABM Treaty . On 9 May 1972 , during the final
stage of preparations for the ABM Treaty , Ambassador Smith of the United
States of America made a statement to the effect that the United States
reserved the right to withdraw from the Treaty unless the START agreement was
concluded within five years . The significance and historic role of the ABM
Treaty are not confined merely to the sphere of Russian-United States relations
. It underpins the entire modern system of arms control agreements and the
collapse of the ABM Treaty would therefore disrupt the whole range of
disarmament agreements created over the last 30 years . There is an increasing
threat of the erosion of the regimes of non-proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction and their means of delivery . The creation and deployment of the
United States national missile defence system would give powerful impetus to
the proliferation of missiles and missile technology . The positions of many
countries on nuclear disarmament would shift and the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons would fall victim to these developments .
Those who oppose the idea of preserving the ABM Treaty in its present shape
often say that nothing would happen if it were to be slightly amended and
adjusted to current realities , particularly since corrections have already
been made to it before . Let us look more closely at this argument . It is true
that the 1972 ABM Treaty does make allowance for the possibility of changing
its provisi
ons and the parties to the Treaty have made use of that possibility in the
past . The intent of those changes was to strengthen the Treaty 's regime and
to enhance its â restraining â elements . Today , however , it is suggested
that we amend this instrument so as to accommodate the deployment of a â
limited â anti-missile defence system for a national territory . This is
contrary to the core provisions of article 1 , which constitute the very
essence of the ABM Treaty . In other words , what is being suggested is that
the ABM Treaty be changed from one which prohibits the creation of national
missile defence systems to one which actually provides for the creation of such
systems , its very opposite . Such a change in the Treaty would set a precedent
in disarmament practice whereby the introduction of additions or amendments to
an agreement limiting and restraining the development of an advanced weapon
could turn it into an agreement which actually permits military build-up
. We cannot accept this sort of logic . The announcement by President Clinton
of the United States that he would not enter into any commitment to deploy a
national missile defence system is seen in Russia as a well-considered and
responsible decision . As President Putin stresses , however : â This does
mean that Washington and Moscow now share completely identical approaches to
the issue of ABM â . We cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that programmes
are still under way to set up a national missile defence system in the United
States of America . No one has repealed the National Missile Defence Act
adopted in the United States in 1999. According to our analysis it is difficult
to conceive of a United States national missile defence system which would not
impair Russia 's deterrent potential and yet would still fall within the limits
of the ABM Treaty . Among the implications of creating any United States
national missile defence system would be the disruption of the prevailin
g strategic stability and the devaluation - to some extent or other - of
Russia 's strategic capability . It would also ensure the unilateral military
superiority of the United States of America . In these circumstances ,
assurances by the United States that it is committed to the ABM Treaty , that
its national missile defence system is supposedly not directed against Russia
and that it stands ready to pursue â trade-off â cooperation with Russia in
the area of ABM cannot allay our fears . We are not shirking dialogue with the
United States of America . This does not , however , imply any consent
whatsoever on our part to adapting the ABM Treaty to accommodate the United
States national missile defence system . Our position is dictated by the best
interests of strengthening peace and international stability . We do not intend
to change our approach . Our message to our United States partners is clear and
plain : we will not participate in the destruction of this fundamental inst
rument - for this , effectively , is what is at stake . Russia is ready to
continue active joint efforts both with the United States of America and with
other interested States to ensure international security , including through
prompt progress towards agreements on further reducing nuclear arsenals ,
improving the regimes for nuclear and missile non-proliferation and
strengthening strategic stability by political means . We recently ratified the
START II Treaty , the 1997 New York package of START and ABM-related agreements
and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty . We are now awaiting reciprocal
steps by the United States of America . We advocate the immediate start of
negotiations on START III . During the Okinawa summit , President Putin
submitted to President Clinton detailed proposals regarding the main areas of
the START III negotiations . These are based on our belief that the conclusion
of a START III Treaty is only possible if the ABM Treaty remains inviolate .
Let u
s now try to respond to the arguments of those advocates of amending the ABM
Treaty who invoke the changed strategic situation and the increased missile
threats . We consider that references to such a threat have no real foundation
. The deployment of a United States national missile defence system is
motivated by the necessity to counter the strategic ballistic missiles of
certain countries . However , the proliferation of such ballistic missiles is
not expected to occur either today or in the foreseeable future . The changes
in the strategic situation cited by the proponents of amendments to the ABM
Treaty are in no way comparable to the changes in the strategic situation that
could occur if the Treaty were to be undermined and the disarmament process
destroyed . We are convinced that the issue of missile proliferation can and
must be dealt with without disrupting the ABM Treaty . Instead of the military
solution to the issue , we suggest a constructive approach , through politica
l and diplomatic measures . We are ready to engage in the broadest possible
consultations on the whole range of missile non-proliferation issues with all
interested countries . Furthermore , as you are aware , initial results are
already available from work with those countries mentioned by the United States
as posing a missile threat . We are satisfied that the United States has
started to give positive consideration to Russia 's ideas concerning the
creation of a global missile and missile technology non-proliferation control
system . It is significant that the joint Russian-United States statements on
the outcome of the recent meetings between the presidents of the two countries
in Okinawa and in New York registered their readiness for joint action to
resolve the issue of missile proliferation , including the implementation of
Russia 's proposals for a global control system . The role of the ABM Treaty
goes well beyond arrangements among the narrow circle of States to which it is
formally confined . This was clearly demonstrated by the results of the vote
at the fifty-fourth session of the General Assembly on the resolution on the
preservation of and compliance with the ABM Treaty , which was put forward by
Russia jointly with Belarus and China . We see these results as endorsement of
our efforts to enhance the effectiveness and authority of that Treaty . Any
country 's attempt to strengthen its own security at the expense of that of
others is doomed to failure , as history has shown . The collapse of the ABM
Treaty and the consequent collapse of all the other nuclear disarmament
treaties based on it would undoubtedly cause many States to reconsider their
priorities and methods for ensuring security . In this regard , the resolution
adopted in 1999 by the General Assembly sends an unmistakably clear message to
those seeking to disrupt the ABM Treaty . We plan to submit a draft resolution
to the General Assembly at its current session in support for the ABM
Treaty . The text of the draft , which is virtually identical to that of last
year 's resolution , was circulated a few days ago to all delegations here in
Geneva . The draft is not confrontational . It is based on the language of the
Treaty itself and on the joint statements on the issue by the Presidents of
Russia and the United States of America . It is not directed against any
country , nor does it prejudice anyone 's interests . Its purpose is clear and
entirely constructive : to ensure that , through rigorous and full compliance
with the ABM Treaty , the Treaty is preserved and strengthened . Adoption by
the General Assembly at its current session of the draft resolution on the
preservation of the ABM Treaty would send a new signal to the international
community on the importance of ensuring the viability of this Treaty . We
expect our draft to receive broad support from the international community .
The task of preserving the ABM Treaty under current conditions is closely rel
ated to the prevention of an arms race in outer space , another issue that has
been entrusted to our Conference . The ABM Treaty prohibits the development ,
testing or deployment in outer space of missile defence components .
Application of its regime will keep outer space free of an entire class of
space weapons - anti-missile weapons . We are firmly convinced that the
preservation of this agreement will constitute a major obstacle to any possible
escalation of the arms race , both here on Earth and in outer space . We share
the view of those delegations who consider that the elaboration at this early
stage of specific measures to prevent an arms race in outer space will help
obviate the enormous costs involved in disarming space in the future . In this
context , I would like to draw the attention of the participants here in the
Conference on Disarmament to the proposal made by President Putin at the
Millennium Summit , that an international conference on the prevention of
demilita
rization of outer space should be convened in Moscow in spring 2001 under the
auspices of the United Nations . The Russian Federation supports the
re-establishment in the Conference on Disarmament of an ad hoc committee on the
prevention of an arms race in outer space with the mandate to elaborate
specific practical arrangements which will prevent near-Earth space from being
transformed into a new arena for confrontation between the great Powers . As we
see it , the international community should set as one of its priorities the
earliest possible elaboration of an international legal regime prohibiting the
introduction in outer space of other weapons besides weapons of mass
destruction , primarily strike weapons . At the same time , it is our firm view
that the work of the Conference on Disarmament on outer space issues should not
obstruct the peaceful exploration of outer space . I should like to reaffirm
that we look favourably on the groundwork being carried out by Canada on the
non-weaponization of outer space , the French ideas for a notification regime
for launches of space objects and ballistic missiles and other proposals by
participants in the Conference which could serve as a basis for substantive
discussion . In concluding my statement , I would like to cite the words of
President Putin at the Millennium Summit , â I am convinced that by building
upon a just world order and strategic stability , we shall ensure sustainable
development for civilization . The Russia of today is , as never before , open
, responsible and ready for cooperation on the basis of equal partnership . â
The PRESIDENT : I thank the representative of the Russian Federation for his
statement and for the kind words addressed to the Chair . I now give the floor
to the representative of Algeria . Mr. BENFREHA ( Algeria ) ( translated from
French ) : I thank you , Mr. President , for all the efforts you are making and
for the way in which you are conducting our work . I also mus
t pay particular tribute to Mr. Abdelkader Bensmail , Deputy Secretary-General
of the Conference , for the work he has done in the Conference . I have the
honour , on behalf of the Group of 21 , to make the following statement , which
I shall deliver in English : ( continued in English ) As the 2000 session of
the Conference on Disarmament draws to a close , the Group of 21 regrets that
the Conference on Disarmament , as the single multilateral negotiating forum on
disarmament , has once again been unable to agree on a programme of work during
its current session . This failure is primarily due to the continued
inflexibility of some of the nuclear-weapon States regarding negotiations on
nuclear disarmament and on measures to prevent an arms race in outer space .
The Group of 21 emphasizes that nuclear disarmament remains the highest
priority for the Conference on Disarmament and stresses the necessity of
establishing in the Conference an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament under
agenda item 1. In this regard , the Group invites the Conference 's attention
to its proposals contained in CD/1570 , CD/1571 and CD/1549 and to the
statement made by the coordinator of the Group on 27 January 2000. The Group
emphasizes that outer space is the common heritage of humankind . In this
regard , the prevention of an arms race in outer space has assumed greater
urgency because of legitimate concerns that existing legal instruments are
inadequate to deter imminent attempts aimed at the further militarization of
outer space and its possible weaponization . In accordance with resolution
54/53 of the United Nations General Assembly , the Group emphasizes the urgent
need for commencement of substantive work in the Conference on Disarmament on
the prevention of an arms race in outer space . In this connection , the Group
calls upon the States parties to the ABM Treaty to comply fully with its
provisions . The Group of 21 reaffirms its flexibility and readiness to
continue to c
ontribute constructively and extends its full support to the efforts of the
President of the Conference . The Group of 21 urges other groups to display
matching flexibility so that substantive work can commence early next year
within the framework of a programme of work which reflects the priorities and
interests of all delegations . The PRESIDENT : I thank the representative of
Algeria for his statement and the kind words addressed to the Chair . That
concludes my list of speakers for today . Does any other delegation wish to
take the floor at this point ? I give the floor to Ambassador Hu of China . Mr.
HU XIAODI ( China ) ( translated from Chinese ) : Mr. President , I have
listened attentively to the previous speakers . Last week I took the floor to
convey , yet again , the views of the Chinese delegation on national missile
defence and the work programme of the Conference on Disarmament . I would like
to take this opportunity to present further views on these two issues . First
, with regard to national missile defence , the reason advanced for
developing and employing such systems is defence against the missile threat
posed by certain so-called â countries of concern â . It is manifest to all
, however , that those countries , given their military capacity and technology
and their overall national strength , simply are not in a position to pose any
military threat in the foreseeable future to the militarily most powerful
country in the world . They are even less likely to pose any threat of
missile-borne weapons of mass destruction . Still more important is the lack of
motive . No small country would ever attack or threaten to attack the
militarily most powerful country in the world with missile-borne weapons of
mass destruction , unless it had decided to commit suicide . For that reason ,
attributing the need to develop and deploy a national missile defence system to
the missile threat posed by so-called â countries of concern â is far from
conv
incing . It is only a clumsy pretext . International arms control ,
disarmament and security treaties concluded in the past are not necessarily
unamendable in the light of new circumstances . Any amendment ought , however ,
to promote the purpose and objective of the treaty concerned , namely ,
international peace and security . If the effect of an amendment is to
undermine the treaty 's purpose and objective and to jeopardize international
peace and security it must be rejected and opposed . The attempt to amend the
ABM Treaty to allow the deployment of national missile defence systems is
precisely such a case . It is an incontestable fact that the country possessing
the world 's most sophisticated space technology is busy pursuing its plan to
develop space weapons . The memory of the â Star Wars â programme of the
1980s remains fresh in our mind . The long-range plan to develop a space
military strategy , drawn up in April 1998 , is also no secret . It explicitly
states that m
ilitary space capabilities will become a major factor in ensuring that country
's national security and implementing its military strategies and that the
primary task of its space force in the twenty-first century is to seek
superiority in space . For that purpose , the space command of that country has
promoted such operational concepts as securing control of space and global
engagement . This is the background against which the development of space
weapons has been stepped up , with the national missile defence programme as
part of the overall effort . Space systems are an important component of the
national missile defence programme . Space will also become the battlefield for
national missile defence . The national missile defence system currently being
developed is only the first stage in the overall national missile defence plan
. More advanced national missile defence systems will follow ; even more weapon
systems will be deployed in outer space . The danger of the weaponizat
ion of outer space and an arms race in outer space is therefore very real . It
is essential for the international community to negotiate now an international
treaty to prevent the weaponization of outer space and an arms race in outer
space . With regard to the work programme of the Conference on Disarmament , to
date the Conference has been unable to carry out any substantive work for two
consecutive years . This is a matter of profound concern to China and it
earnestly hopes that the Conference will be able to break the impasse as soon
as possible . As everyone can see , the impasse is caused by the different
parties taking different items of the Conference 's agenda as their top
priority . Is there any way out of this impasse ? In my opinion , the answer is
yes . What we need to do is to take the concerns of all sides into
consideration in a comprehensive and balanced way and set up ad hoc committees
with negotiating mandates on the priority items of all sides . That is the only
approach that will bring a solution that is genuine and fair without favouring
any side , and therefore realistic and workable . We will never reach consensus
on the work programme and break the impasse if any one delegation insists on
negotiating only on its own priority items and will not permit negotiations on
the priority items of other parties . Regrettably , some delegations are
persisting in this , which has thus far kept the Conference on Disarmament from
establishing any working mechanism , including ad hoc committees , on nuclear
disarmament and outer space and prevented it from carrying out any substantive
work . China advocates the establishment of an ad hoc committee on outer space
, to negotiate a legal instrument to prevent the weaponization of outer space
and an arms race in outer space . I have already had occasion , last week and
many times before , to elaborate on our reasons for this . China 's position on
nuclear disarmament is consistent . We support the positi
on of the Group of 21 with regard to the establishment of an ad hoc committee
to conduct negotiations on nuclear disarmament . Although negotiations on FMCT
are not a priority item for us , China does not oppose such negotiations .
However , in view of certain negative developments , including the setback of
CTBT and , in particular , the ongoing national missile defence programme , any
formula would be unacceptable to us if it led only to negotiations on FMCT ,
without also leading to negotiations on outer space . It is clear that there
are two possible approaches . One is that advocated by China , namely , to
launch negotiations on the priority items of all parties . The other approach
is to negotiate only on the priority of one country and not to permit
negotiations on the priorities of others . China 's approach , if acceptable to
all , could certainly lead to consensus on the Conference 's work programme .
By contrast , the other approach , if accepted by all , could never lead
the Conference out of its impasse . It is the hope of the Chinese delegation
that in the future all sides will treat each other equally and deal with issues
in a just and fair way , rather than attending only to their own interests at
the expense of the interests of the majority of other countries . In conclusion
, Mr. President , the Chinese delegation would like to convey its appreciation
for your continued efforts to find a good solution to the problem of the work
programme and for your guidance in preparing the annual report of the
Conference on Disarmament and the draft General Assembly resolution . We are
also grateful to the distinguished Secretary-General and Deputy
Secretary-General of the Conference and to all the staff of the secretariat and
of the Conference Support Branch for the enormous help they have given us in
our work . Mr. MAIMESKUL ( Ukraine ) ( translated from French ) : Mr. President
, you still have New York and the General Assembly ahead of you , so let me
take this opportunity to wish you every success in your mission . I would like
in particular to thank you for your kind words to me . You will recall that ,
at the height of Ukraine 's presidency two years ago , it was my privilege to
welcome you to Geneva . Two years ago , we were able to overcome the
difficulties , uncertainties and , on occasion , opposition which faced us and
we resolved to move forward . Notwithstanding the difficult times which the
Conference is currently experiencing , I believe in its potential and its
future . As was said one and a half years ago by Ambassador Joëlle Bourgois of
France , the very existence of the Conference on Disarmament is a
confidence-building measure which nothing can ever replace . All we need now is
a result . Before concluding , Sir , I would like to thank all my colleagues
for their cooperation and to bid them all farewell for now , but not for ever .
I thank the Secretary-General of the Conference , Mr. Petrovsky . I thank you ,
M
r. Bensmail , for having so generously shared your unique experience with the
Ukrainian delegation , particularly during our tenure as President . I thank
the whole team of the Conference secretariat for their readiness to help ,
their kind consideration and their counsel . The PRESIDENT : I thank the
representative of Ukraine for the kind words addressed to the Chair and for his
statement . I now give the floor to the Ambassador of Ecuador . Mr. BETANCOURT
RUALES ( Ecuador ) ( translated from Spanish ) : Thank you , Mr. President .
For me it is a great honour to speak to the distinguished members of this
important forum , as I begin my term of office in the area of disarmament as
head of the delegation of Ecuador . I thank you for your kind words of welcome
, which commit me not only to the primary objectives of this Conference but
also to continued cooperation in the essential work that all Governments are
carrying out to maintain international peace and security . For these reaso
ns , Sir , I must express my gratitude for all the efforts made by your
predecessors and , in particular , my full support for your own efforts as
President . In my view , the Conference on Disarmament has as its purpose the
coordination of all political aspirations on multilateral issues related to
peace , with particular emphasis on disarmament , and progress towards a new ,
positive climate in international security . The uncertainties and the
challenges that this Conference has come up against in recent years may
eventually be dispelled if all members heed the call of the international
community by cooperating more closely and striving , for example , for
consensus on a necessary programme of work for the Conference . Ecuador
associates itself with those countries which have stated that this Conference
must not shirk its responsibility any longer . It must begin the new millennium
with an agenda that will safeguard the process of nuclear disarmament and
nuclear non-proliferation
, an agenda that will be very clear and inspire hope in all humankind .
Ecuador believes that nuclear disarmament is a priority of the international
community ; at the same time disarmament is one of the greatest challenges of
our times , and one that we must overcome as soon as possible . The PRESIDENT :
I thank the representative of Ecuador for his statement and the kind words
addressed to the Chair . I now give the floor to the representative of India .
Mr. SOOD ( India ) : Mr. President , I have sought the floor to thank you for
your warm words of welcome to me this morning . I would also like to convey my
appreciation for the many friendly faces that I see around this room as I
return to this chamber after an absence of almost 11 years . I look forward
very much to working with all my colleagues here and I am quite sure that we
should be able to move things forward in the months to come , as we have under
your presidency this month . I would like to add that we are aware of th
e fact that , for the last couple of years , we have not seen active
negotiations taking place in the Conference on Disarmament , but nonetheless ,
the fact that my Government has chosen this moment to appoint me here as head
of the Indian delegation to the Conference on Disarmament is a reflection of
India 's deep commitment to multilateral negotiations and of its awareness of
the importance of multilateral negotiations in disarmament and the unique
position that this particular institution has in this field . The PRESIDENT : I
thank the representative of India for his statement and the kind words
addressed to the Chair . I now give the floor to the representative of the
United States of America . Ambassador Grey , you have the floor . Mr. GREY (
United States of America ) : I regret that the distinguished representative of
China has seen fit again to misrepresent the plans and intentions of the United
States . In my view , these misrepresentations become less persuasive with each
repetition . When I spoke on 31 August and 14 September , I addressed these
questions in considerable depth . It would be a disservice to the Conference
and disrespectful to those here present for me to repeat the same comprehensive
answers I have already given , so I shall refrain from doing so today . But I
will note that the way to get the Conference on Disarmament back to work is to
move along the lines suggested by three past presidents , the ambassadors of
Algeria , Belgium and Brazil . My delegation is prepared to proceed in this
direction and , I would remind you , so too are the vast majority of the
Conference 's members . The PRESIDENT : That concludes the list of speakers
that I have for today . Does any other delegation wish to take the floor ? That
does not seem to be the case . I will then invite you to formalize the
provisional agreements reached at the informal plenary meeting on the draft
annual report , as contained in document CD/WP.511 , together with the revisio
ns contained in document CD/WP.512 . Since we were able to go through the
draft annual report , paragraph by paragraph , at the informal plenary meeting
held last Thursday , and since we have gone through the revisions contained in
CD/WP.512 earlier this morning , I shall now proceed to the formal adoption of
our annual report as a whole as revised . May I take it that the annual report
in its entirety , as contained in document CD/WP.511 and as revised in
CD/WP.512 , is adopted ? It is so decided . The secretariat will issue the
report as an official document of the Conference in all official languages as
soon as feasible . Does any delegation wish to take the floor at this stage ? I
should like to inform the Conference that , as Cameroon has notified the
secretariat that it will not be in a position to preside over the Conference
from 1 January 2001 , as provided for in rule 9 of the rules of procedure , the
representatives of the following member States will preside over the Conf
erence in 2001 : Canada from 1 January to 18 February ; Chile from 19 February
to 18 March ; China from 19 March to 27 May ; Colombia from 28 May to 24 June ;
Cuba from 25 June to 19 August ; and the Democratic People 's Republic of Korea
from 20 August to 31 December 2001. I would now like to give the floor to the
Deputy Secretary-General of the Conference , Mr. Abdelkader Bensmail , who
wishes to make a brief statement . Mr. BENSMAIL ( Deputy Secretary-General of
the Conference on Disarmament ) ( translated from French ) : Mr. President ,
dear friends , as you know , I am about to leave my position as Deputy
Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament and as Director of the
Geneva Branch of the Department for Disarmament Affairs . I therefore wish to
take advantage of this last plenary of the 2000 session to take my leave of you
all and briefly to share a few personal reflections with you . Let me reassure
you at the very outset : I do not intend to apply the tacit rule in
the Conference that the length of a valedictory statement should be one page
per year of service with the Conference . I certainly do not intend to inflict
a 20-page statement on you , nor do I intend to abide by the ritual but
perilous exercise of drawing definitive conclusions on the future of the
Conference . Others have done that before me and with greater authority , so I
will merely make a few comments inspired by the long experience I have gathered
in this forum . It is my great privilege to have been associated with the
Conference on Disarmament since its very beginnings , following the first
special session of the General Assembly on disarmament in June 1978. I was a
member of the Algerian delegation which had the honour of being the first to
preside over the Conference in January 1979 and thus helping to do the
groundwork for its future work . My move from the Algerian diplomatic service
to the secretariat here in March 1980 was thus a natural progression , because
in fact
I continued to deal with the same subjects , albeit from a different
standpoint , since in that new office I was no longer defending the position of
my Government but serving the interests of all delegations and working to seek
consensus . The move was not an easy one but the counsel which I received from
my superiors was of great assistance to me at the time . When one day I asked
the first Secretary-General of the Conference , the late Ricki Jaipal , what
the golden rule was for the secretariat , he said : â The secretariat should
be seen and not heard . â I think I can say that I have scrupulously stuck to
that rule throughout my service , except for one particular occasion when there
was an attempt to question the secretariat 's integrity . Thus , I was present
at the birth of this institution . I witnessed the immense hopes surrounding it
, that it would help rid the world of the threat of weapons of mass destruction
and help create an international community determined to
reduce conventional weapons to levels compatible with the preservation of
national security . I observed its hesitant steps as it tried to forge
consensus on priorities for negotiation . I also lived through the Conference
's hours of glory , as it conducted the negotiations which led to the
conclusion of the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1992 and the Comprehensive
Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty in 1996 , to which processes I made my own modest
contribution . And , finally , I have shared your frustration at the Conference
's inability to embark on substantive work on its agenda items . ( continued in
English ) The ongoing debate on the role of the Conference in the field of
multilateral disarmament diplomacy in the current international security
environment is legitimate and necessary . In this connection , it should be
recalled that periods of inactivity and deadlock have occurred before in the
framework of the predecessors of the Conference on Disarmament , namely , the
Ten-Nation Com
mittee on Disarmament , the Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament and the
Conference of the Committee on Disarmament . I remember the days when questions
were raised as to whether there was a life for the Conference on Disarmament
after the conclusion of the Chemical Weapons Convention . These questions were
, as I recall , answered with the decision of the Conference to negotiate the
Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty . Similar questions are being asked now .
Can the Conference overcome the impasse it currently faces , following the
indefinite extension of the NPT and the conclusion of the CTBT ? Are we
witnessing the emergence of a new model for arms control and disarmament with
the â Ottawa process â , which led to the agreement on a convention to ban
landmines ? Can this experience be repeated in other fields of arms control and
disarmament ? Are diplomatic conferences convened through a coalition of
like-minded Governments and non-governmental organizations , as a sub
stitute for genuine multilateral negotiations , which are the only
negotiations that can ensure universal adherence to treaties and their
effective implementation ? The debate on all these questions is not over and is
unlikely to be conclusive for the simple reason that the nature of the issues
to be addressed in the field of arms control and disarmament , their complexity
and magnitude , require that all possible avenues , whether bilateral ,
regional or global , are fully explored and used . The current deadlock in the
Conference on Disarmament has been and continues to be the subject of various
interpretations . While it is recognized that the Conference , as an
institution , has served the international community well in the past , and
that its potential for other multilateral negotiations remains intact , the
prolongation of this stalemate is a source of concern to all . The Conference
's value cannot , and should not , be reduced to a simple accounting of the
number of treatie
s it produces . The situation it faces can be largely attributed to a
fundamental divergence of views on the wider question of what is the
international disarmament agenda after the end of the cold war , the conclusion
of the Chemical Weapons Convention , the indefinite extension of the
Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty . In
particular , it relates to the requirement to strike the right balance between
the preservation and consolidation of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and
the need to accelerate and multilateralize the nuclear disarmament process ,
while at the same time preserving and enhancing strategic stability . Preparing
the ground for future negotiations through discussions and technical work is a
prerequisite for the start of genuine negotiations . All major negotiations
have been preceded by a pre-negotiation stage , in which some shared
understanding is reached that a security problem exists and that it must be
addressed multilat
erally . This process may be arduous and time-consuming , but it provides the
guarantee that the end-product , that is to say , treaty-making , is based on
solid foundations which take into account the security concerns of all and
therefore ensures the universality and effectiveness of the agreements reached
. What is required is a common willingness of all the membership of the
Conference , making full use of its in-built flexibility and recognized
expertise , to develop a workable and balanced programme of work which takes
into account the priorities and concerns of all . Multilateral disarmament
forums have always evolved over the years in response to changed political
realities . The Conference on Disarmament is no exception in this respect , and
the difficulties it now faces are not due to what is perceived by some as the
rigidity of its rules of procedure , of its working methods and the group
system . They are rather a reflection of the complexity and the dynamics of
contempo
rary international relations , and therefore all efforts should focus on the
creation of a political climate conducive to the full use of the Conference as
a negotiating forum , in particular on the restoration of a minimum harmony
among the major players . ( continued in French ) I realize that I have strayed
somewhat from my intention not to embark on serious political comment , but I
am sure that you will not hold that against me . My long association with the
Conference on Disarmament has been a valuable experience for me at all levels ,
personal , political , intellectual and cultural . The friendship and trust
that you and your predecessors have always shown towards me has really made
things very much easier for me and I am grateful to you for that . I would not
want to conclude these comments without conveying my sincere thanks to the
whole team which has given me such valuable assistance in carrying out my
duties over all these years : Hannelore Hoppe , Silvana da Silva , Vl
adimir Bogomolov , Jerzy Zaleski , Sonia Koppe , Alexandre Golay , Yvonne
Santa Eugenia , Charlotte Laut Hernández , Cheryl Darby , Annette Ekberg ,
Lynne Hardewall and Saïd Zoughy were skilful , devoted colleagues , always
ready to help and to put up with my Mediterranean character . And , finally ,
my thanks go to the interpreters , whom we so often put through the mill and
who have always responded courteously to the sometimes unreasonable demands
placed on them by the Conference . The PRESIDENT : I thank Mr. Bensmail for his
profound and enlightening statement . Would any delegation like to take the
floor at this point ? I see the representative of France . Ambassador de La
Fortelle , you have the floor . Mr. de La FORTELLE ( France ) ( translated from
French ) : Mr. President , my dear colleagues , the interpreters , ladies and
gentlemen , the Deputy Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament ,
Abdelkader Bensmail , has just given us some sad news today : for him this
will be the last plenary meeting of the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva .
Fortunately , he will be accompanying many of us to New York to follow the work
of the First Committee and will take his retirement thereafter . It is with
great sadness that we will see him leave after a long career that has taken
place , if I may say so , on both sides of the looking-glass : first , as a
diplomat representing Algeria , and then as an international official in the
United Nations . At the risk of offending his well-known modesty , I will
recall the major stages of his university , professional and family life which
have made of him both a great Algerian and a great Frenchman . Abdelkader
Bensmail attained outstanding academic success in my country . He has a
postgraduate degree in English and degrees from the Toulouse Institute of
Political Studies and the Institute for Foreign Affairs in Paris . With such
fine qualifications , a career in international affairs was unavoidable and it
is i
ndeed that career that he chose . Abdelkader Bensmail began his career in the
Algerian diplomatic service and served his country with distinction . As he has
recalled to us , he became an international civil servant with the United
Nations first in New York , in the International Affairs Department , and then
in Geneva in the Conference on Disarmament . In October 1993 , the
Secretary-General of the United Nations appointed him to the post of Deputy
Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament and head of the Geneva
Branch of the United Nations Centre for Disarmament Affairs . As you can see ,
at the end of a career both varied and full , his outstanding merits have
always received due appreciation and positions of high responsibility have been
conferred upon him , in particular , the post which he has held for the last
seven years here in Geneva . Abdelkader Bensmail has always acted in a manner
both effective and discreet . He has rarely taken the floor , and he has told
us
why , but his advice was always valuable , particularly for us . As he departs
, he will be taking with him the memory of the Conference . We could always
turn to him to learn of those ever useful precedents . My predecessors were
able to appreciate his many qualities during both the negotiations of the
Convention on Chemical Weapons and those of the CTBT , and I believe I speak
for all of us when I say that we will all miss him in the time to come , as he
enjoys his well-deserved retirement . It remains only for me to convey my very
best wishes to the Deputy Secretary-General and to hope that he enjoys
happiness and the best of health in his new life . The PRESIDENT : I thank the
representative of France for his statement . Would any other delegation like to
take the floor ? I see the representative of Egypt . Ambassador , you have the
floor . Ms. ABOUNAGA ( Egypt ) ( translated from Arabic ) : Mr. President ,
since I come from the same region as Mr. Bensmail , might I be allowed t
hrough you to say these few words to him ? On behalf of the Egyptian
delegation , I would like to express our gratitude and appreciation to Mr.
Abdelkader Bensmail , the Deputy Secretary-General of the Conference on
Disarmament , who unfortunately is leaving us today to enjoy what I am sure
will be a better life after his official duties and after all the dedicated
services that he has rendered , for almost a quarter of a century , to his
country , Algeria , and in furtherance of the aims of the Conference on
Disarmament and the programmes and agenda for disarmament in general . As we
and previous representatives of our countries to this Conference can testify ,
these services were rendered over the years in a highly competent manner . They
were made possible by virtue of his commendable personal qualities , which he
described , very modestly , as being possibly attributable to his Mediterranean
character . They certainly turned him into a team leader who has worked with a
great dea
l of skill and efficiency . Today we bid him farewell , but only here in the
Conference , and may I personally , on behalf of the Egyptian delegation , wish
him every success in his future life . I am quite sure that , in mind , thought
and spirit , he will not abandon the Conference on Disarmament or the
objectives of disarmament and that he will always remain very close to us here
in the Conference . I wish him all the best and reiterate my sincere gratitude
and appreciation on behalf of the Egyptian delegation . Thank you . The
PRESIDENT : I now give the floor to China . You have the floor , Ambassador Hu
. Mr. HU XIAODI ( China ) ( translated from Chinese ) : Thank you , Mr.
President . Like the two previous speakers , I shall also deeply regret the
impending retirement from office of our Deputy Secretary-General , Mr. Bensmail
. With his outstanding diplomatic skill and rich work experience , Mr. Bensmail
has over the course of many years performed a great deal of valuable work
for our Conference on Disarmament , and has rendered enormous assistance to
all the delegations , for which he has earned the highest praise . In fact ,
since the very foundation of the Conference and throughout his work with this
forum , he has served as a veritable living encyclopaedia of all the issues
relating to the Conference on Disarmament . The statement which he has just
delivered is full of wisdom and merits our deep consideration . Without
question , his departure will be a loss both to the Conference on Disarmament
and to us all . On behalf of the Chinese delegation , I would like to express
our wholehearted appreciation for all the help that he has given us over all
the years since we first joined the Conference on Disarmament . I also
sincerely wish him every success for his future . The PRESIDENT : I now give
the floor to the representative of Algeria . Mr. BENFREHA ( Algeria ) (
translated from French ) : As a fellow countryman , it is incumbent on me , on
behalf of
my country , to pay special tribute to Mr. Abdelkader Bensmail , Deputy
Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament , for the quality of the
work he has performed here in the Conference on Disarmament and , at the same
time , to extol the efforts he has made since the establishment of this
multilateral forum to instil in it a spirit of consensus . We see in Mr.
Bensmail a consummate product of the Algerian diplomatic service , the service
in which he embarked on his professional career . His exemplary approach to his
work was forged in this school of diplomacy , which has always advocated the
attainment of consensus in dealing with key issues of disarmament , in the
interest of peace and international security . I would also like to associate
myself with the eloquent praise expressed by those speaking before me for Mr.
Bensmail 's outstanding qualities and to give him my best wishes for his
retirement . The PRESIDENT : I thank the representative of Algeria for his
comments .
Does any other delegation wish to take the floor ? I see the representative
of India . Mr. SOOD ( India ) : It is perhaps somewhat presumptuous for a
person who has just joined the Conference on Disarmament to seek the floor
twice on his very first day in this forum , but this is a rather special day ,
and I exercise this privilege as one of the people who have known Kader since
1986. It is both strange and somehow special that , as I attend my first
plenary in this new appointment , it also happens to be Kader 's last plenary
in his present appointment . Many people around this table have spoken about
his professional skills , but what I would like first to single out in this
enormously rewarding relationship , my personal relationship with Kader , are
his generosity with his time , which he so willingly shared with me when I came
here for the first time in 1986 , knowing very little about multilateral work
and even less about disarmament , and the ease with which we could rely on
him to give us the history and the background of issues and to educate us in
the niceties of multilateral work . And second I recall his warm hospitality ,
which I have enjoyed on more than one occasion . The last memorable such
occasion was the farewell dinner given in my own honour at his house in 1989.
When I was appointed here , one of the things I looked forward to was the
chance to resume this close contact , which we had kept up over the years , but
within obvious limits , given that we were in different cities . All the same ,
I am glad that I have been present today at your last plenary meeting in this
appointment . I would like to wish you the best of luck and good health ,
happiness and contentment . The PRESIDENT : I thank the representative of India
for his statement . I now give the floor to the representative of the Republic
of Korea . Mr. SUL ( Republic of Korea ) : Since this is the first time that I
am taking the floor under your presidency , I should like to cong
ratulate you on your assumption of the presidency . Please be assured of my
delegation 's full support in carrying out your noble endeavours . I would also
like to express my appreciation to Mr. Petrovsky , Secretary-General of the
Conference , and to the staff of the secretariat for their excellent job in
providing conference services . I have asked for the floor today on behalf of
the members of the Western Group to express our regret and deep sadness over
Mr. Bensmail 's departure . It is very difficult for me to add anything to the
eloquent tributes already paid to Mr. Bensmail this morning . I would like to
say , however , how much we have benefited from his vast knowledge and
experience in disarmament negotiations , his diplomatic skills and the
managerial proficiency which he brought to the Conference . Mr. Bensmail
assumed many roles , sometimes as an untiring negotiator , sometimes as a
diligent provider of a good and constructive atmosphere for the work of the
Conference .
His charming personality and engaging character have constantly stimulated
the work of the Conference . He was a good friend of the Western Group and , I
am sure , of all the delegations to the Conference on Disarmament . We all
agree that , with his years of experience and dedication , Mr. Bensmail has
become a â walking library â of the Conference , given his extensive
knowledge not only of all those complicated procedural issues but also of many
aspects never recorded in any document . How reassuring it was to know that we
could always count on Mr. Bensmail effortlessly to solve what seemed to us
unfathomable mysteries . The Western Group expresses its most sincere gratitude
to Mr. Bensmail for his dedication and outstanding professionalism . We will
miss him very much , but I find consolation in a Korean proverb which wisely
says that , while those who meet are destined to part , those who part are
destined to meet again . We wish him all the best , continued good health an
d happiness . The PRESIDENT : I thank the representative of the Republic of
Korea for his statement and for the kind words addressed to the Chair . I now
give the floor to the representative of Romania . Mr. HORUMBA ( Romania ) : Mr.
President , speaking on behalf of the Eastern European Group , I would like
wholeheartedly to endorse the kind words of appreciation addressed by previous
speakers to Mr. Abdelkader Bensmail . The Eastern European Group would also
like to thank Mr. Bensmail for his efforts in the important office of Deputy
Secretary-General of the Conference on Disarmament and to commend him on his
long-standing experience and expertise in the field of multilateral disarmament
, his diplomatic skills and the managerial competence he has displayed in the
activities of our unique international body . As we bid farewell to Mr.
Abdelkader Bensmail , we wish him every success in the years ahead , long
health and prosperity , as well as personal happiness . The PRESIDENT : As
I see no other speakers , I shall proceed with some short closing remarks .
In my opening remarks I identified two principal objectives in my work as the
last presiding officer of the 2000 session of the Conference on Disarmament :
to continue the efforts towards finding a compromise on the programme or work
and to facilitate the adoption of the Conference 's report to the General
Assembly of the United Nations . The second task has just been accomplished ,
and I am grateful to all delegations for the assistance and the collaboration
that have made this possible . I believe that the report which we have adopted
is factual and accurate in accounting for the Conference 's activities in the
year 2000. With regard to the first task , I am compelled to conclude today ,
on behalf of this Conference , that we have spent yet another session mostly on
trying to pre-negotiate the conditions for our possible future negotiations on
the different topics of our agenda , upon which we happen to a
gree . My consultations to date have confirmed that we are still short of a
compromise on a programme of work for the Conference . While there is a broad
measure of agreement on most of the elements for such a programme , there are
two issues , nuclear disarmament and the prevention of an arms race in outer
space , that have still to be tackled further . In addition , to be able to
agree about anything in the programe of work , it seems that first we have to
agree about everything . There were times when the situation seemed so serious
that , as the saying goes , we could only joke about it . It is clear that we
have before us a tall order and there should be nothing exceptional about the
fact that it is taking us so long to perform . That having been said , these
past four weeks I have also become aware of a number of promising signs in the
Conference on Disarmament . Of the two outstanding issues on our draft
programme of work , our positions on nuclear disarmament seem to be a li
ttle closer to convergence today than they were about a year ago . In addition
, most of the delegations with which I have had meetings share the same concern
and similar perceptions with regard to the delicate stage at which we find
ourselves in the Conference on Disarmament . The positive attitude of all
members in preparing our annual report to the General Assembly , as well as the
contents of that report , are also testimony to the good will prevailing in the
Conference for our endeavour to surmount the hurdles that face us . Our joint
efforts brought about an encouraging development in our report CD/1624 , as the
accumulation of new constructive ideas expressed in the Conference during the
current and previous years . The report that we adopted delivers a
forward-looking recommendation to me and to my successor to conduct intensive
consultations during the inter-sessional period on the basis of the progress
that has already been achieved . I intend those consultations to be ope
n , pragmatic and cooperative , with the sole objective of preparing a good
beginning for the 2001 session . All in all , provided we are able to
demonstrate the necessary political will , we may well be just a couple of
critical steps away from the desired compromise and the start of substantive
work in the Conference on Disarmament . As in a long-distance race , the last
few steps often prove to be the most difficult . But I believe that these steps
will not be impossible to make ; we are , after all , carrying the baton
forward into the next millennium ( please forgive the cliché , but desperate
times call for desperate metaphors ) . At this threshold in time , we the
peoples are striving for a safer world , based on development and disarmament .
We the peoples prefer to compete in sporting competition , rather than arms
races . Our heads of State and Government exercised their political will in
resolving , earlier this month , to share the responsibility for international
peace
and security , assigning special significance to disarmament , amongst other
areas . The Conference on Disarmament , as the sole multilateral negotiating
forum in its field , has a unique role to play in delivering on this commitment
. In conclusion , I would like to express my gratitude to the Secretary-General
of the Conference , Mr. Vladimir Petrovsky , who today had to attend a memorial
service and unfortunately could not be with us ; to all the members of the
secretariat for their efficiency and valuable advice ; to the interpreters ,
for their patience and dedication ; and to all delegations for their
cooperation and understanding . Today is also a special occasion for us . It is
my honour and my privilege to pay tribute , on behalf of all the members of
this Conference , to the Deputy Secretary-General , Mr. Abdelkader Bensmail ,
who will be retiring later this year . Mr. Bensmail has had an illustrious
diplomatic career , the last 20 and more years of which have been devote
d to the Conference on Disarmament and to disarmament in general . His expert
guidance and professional competence have been emblematic of the work of the
secretariat and will remain as an example to follow . He is what I would call
the â living history â of this Conference , and I can only hope that some
day he will put it all down on paper . Mr. Bensmail , your experience and
outstanding contribution will be greatly missed by us all . We wish you and
your family good health , good luck and continued success . The next plenary
meeting of the Conference will be held on Tuesday , 23 January 2001 , at 10 a.
m. The meeting rose at 12.15 p. m.
\ No newline at end of file
