DYB2011-Part-II-web

Related issues, including information and outreach
would facilitate work on the four core issues based on the consensus reached
in document CD/1864.
The Board also recommended that should a high-level panel of eminent
persons be established, the Secretary-General should ask the panel as an urgent
task to make recommendations on the way to revitalize the United Nations
disarmament machinery as a whole, especially the CD. In this connection, the
Board suggested that the Secretary-General may wish to consider establishing
an institutional link between the Advisory Board and the proposed high-level
panel by inviting one or more current or former Board members to be part of
the proposed panel.
Another recommendation by the Board was that the Secretary-General
should continue to raise public awareness and encourage civil society groups
and non-governmental organizations to contribute their ideas on ways to
overcome the stalemate at the CD and facilitate progress towards the ultimate
goal of a world free of nuclear weapons.
During the discussion among its members, the Board considered the
prolonged deadlock in the Conference. Most members expressed growing
frustration over that body’s inability to move forward. The Board considered
that the root cause of the stagnation in the CD could be attributed to both
political and procedural problems. However, different views were expressed
on the nature of the problem and its possible solution.
It was generally agreed that a lack of political will was a more
fundamental matter than the technical issues being faced by the CD. It was
also posited that changing the method of work of the CD may not necessarily
make that body more efficient. Nevertheless, some of the procedural issues
and the CD method of work received attention. Views also differed on how
the Conference could be made more efficient, including the idea of changing
the dynamic between that body and the General Assembly. It was generally
agreed that the CD remained a valuable forum where States could articulate
their positions.
Different views were also expressed on the issue of a fissile missile
cut-off treaty (FMCT), including the idea of parallel negotiation under the
General Assembly’s oversight. At the same time, it was recognized that an
FMCT was an international security–related issue that was quite different
from some of the procedural problems being faced by the CD. The Board also
considered an FMCT to be a priority issue, while recognizing the importance
of other core issues such the peaceful uses of outer space and negative security
assurances.
Similarly, views differed on various issues related to establishing a
high-level panel of experts, including its size, composition and effectiveness
in fulfilling its proposed purpose. Nevertheless, the desirability of an
179