Mr. President,
Mr. Acting Secretary-General,
Distinguished Delegates,

It is a great honor and privilege for me to address today the Conference on Disarmament (CD), the sole multilateral disarmament negotiation forum. Based on the ideal of achieving peace and security through disarmament, the CD has produced a series of landmark treaties that constitute the very foundation of international peace and security.

As a member of the CD since 1996, the Republic of Korea has rendered its unwavering support to the work of the Conference, while actively participating in its deliberations. I deeply appreciate the ongoing efforts by the President of the Conference, Ambassador of Mongolia and the Member States to put the CD back to work, and wish you every success throughout the entire 2015 Session.

(Revitalization of the CD and an FMCT)

Mr. President,

This spring, we are looking at a number of opportunities ahead in the field of disarmament and non-proliferation. The nuclear talks between the P5+1 with Iran are on the final stretch. The International Partnership for Nuclear Disarmament Verification will take place in two weeks. The UN Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) on Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT) will convene for its final session. And the NPT States Parties will discuss ways to reinforce the cornerstone of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime at the 2015 Review Conference.

Although it would be naïve for us to assume that everything will be on an even keel, potentially we can change the scene quite dramatically within a few weeks. But here is one thing to note: we do not see the CD playing much of a role in any of these international efforts.

The inconvenient truth we must squarely face is that the CD has not delivered anything tangible for nearly two decades. First we called the situation a stalemate, then, a deadlock. But when this continues, we must admit that the very foundation of the forum will be called into question. It must be seen as a wake-up call for the entire membership.

Here we might need to look outward: diverse alternative pathways toward disarmament negotiations are starting to emerge outside the CD. We know at least three successful cases: the Ottawa Convention, the Oslo Convention, and the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). As we are living in a hyper-connected new digital age where one can manufacture weapons with 3-D printers and robots can choose their own targets, concerned group of individuals can always create a new trend. The CD cannot take its status as the “sole multilateral negotiating forum” for granted.

Among the core issues of the CD, the Republic of Korea believes that an FMCT stands out as ready for negotiation. The CD has already created two stepping stones -- the Shannon Mandate in 1995 and CD/1864 in 2009. Yet, it did not build upon the hard-won momentum. An FMCT will contribute not only to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation but also to the global nuclear security architecture.

At this juncture, I would like to emphasize the important task entrusted to the UN GGE on FMCT. Its consensus report will not only provide our future negotiators with useful guidance, but also carries the potential to work as a strong catalyst that drives the CD forward. I sincerely hope that the work of the GGE can provide the international community with fresh hope, positively influencing other fora as well. And we can initiate the change here in Geneva.

(NPT Review Conference)

Mr. President,

The year 2015 has a special meaning for the international community as the year of the NPT Review Conference. In 2010, the NPT RevCon adopted the consensus Action Plan that contains a number of recommendations to the CD as well. Aside from requesting immediate commencement of FMCT negotiation, the Action Plan called for the establishment of a subsidiary body to deal with nuclear disarmament, and the immediate discussion of effective international arrangements on negative security assurances (NSA).

It was a successful conference, filled with a spirit of cooperation. And CD’s adoption of the Program of Work in 2009 added an extra push towards the success in 2010. Now, the CD can do the same. Progress in Geneva can again alter the whole calculus of the Review Conference in New York. In less than two months, many of the distinguished delegates here will be representing their governments at the NPT Review Conference. At that juncture, a positive metamorphosis of the CD inspired by progress on the FMCT front would be the best hope we can offer.

(DPRK Nuclear Issue)

Mr. President,

The year 2015 marks the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II, as well as the establishment of the United Nations (UN). For the Korean people, that means the unexpected and unwanted division of the Korean Peninsula also lasted for 70 years. There are stark differences between the two Koreas in almost every area imaginable: political system, economic performance, and the degree of freedom and dignity that their people enjoy. But perhaps the most fundamental difference is that the DPRK is developing a WMD program, in defiance of the most basic obligation for any UN member state -- that is, to be a peace-loving country.

The North Korean nuclear issue presents a serious threat to the international non-proliferation regime. The complete resolution of this issue is important not only for the maintenance of peace and security in Northeast Asia, but also for the credibility of the international disarmament and non-proliferation regime.

In order to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue, we are continuing various efforts for a complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization (CVID) through dialogue and negotiations, based on close cooperation with the participating states in the Six-Party Talks as well as the international community. The international community has been clear and consistent in its position that North Korea must abandon its nuclear program and cannot have the status of a nuclear-weapon state. We hope that North Korea promptly returns to meaningful negotiations on denuclearization with a sincere attitude in response to the repeated calls from the international community.

Yesterday, the North Korean Foreign Minister addressed this Conference. Although I do appreciate such efforts to explain its views, it is unclear to me whether North Korea has chosen the right forum. This Conference is created to achieve peace through disarmament, not armament.

Especially, regarding their claim for the status of a “nuclear weapon state”, let me simply cite a legal maxim ex injuria jus non oritur (unjust acts cannot create laws). The international community will never grant any status whatsoever to the country known for the most blatant case of nuclear proliferation.

And it is not without a certain sense of irony that a state posing a clear and existing nuclear threat calls an annual defensive exercise a “nuclear war exercise” against itself.

Historically, North Korea made short-lived but strategic decisions twice in the past: first, in the 1970s in the midst of the East-West detente; second, in the early 1990s after the end of the Cold War. This means that opportunities for substantial change in inter-Korean relations have arrived on the Korean Peninsula almost every two decades. Now, some twenty years after the end of the Cold War and another time of tectonic shift in regional geopolitics, it is time for North Korea to make another strategic decision, difficult as it may be. We will see if North Korea is wise and courageous enough to do so.

(Conclusion)

Mr. President,

It is almost two decades since the CD has yielded outcomes from negotiations, and even the most optimistic of our colleagues somehow seem to be getting used to the current situation. I see in your eyes the same doubts and concerns that I feel as well: that we may be tacitly accepting the current deadlock as something unavoidable with no way to break through.

But let us start precisely from that point. Now is the time to move forward. Our limited membership is a privilege, and the responsibility attached to the membership demands our joint action. We need to embark on joint endeavors towards the start of the substantive work immediately.

It is possible that our efforts may fail, and that this forum may lose its relevance and cease to exist, but not today. As long as we have the swords and spears to beat into plowshares and pruning hooks, our choice should be to move forward with a joint political will, against all odds. Our past achievements will be truly meaningful when they remind us that we can advance further. Let us prove that peace will never be achieved through clash of arms. Thank you very much. /END/