Wanted new realism, new thinking
– Ambassador Jayatilleka

[Friday, February 08, 2008 - 06.40 GMT]  

 
Sri Lanka and the Group of 21 certainly did not believe in the moral superiority of certain countries that had invaded others on the basis of an outright lie on WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction), said Ambassador and
Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations, Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka responded to the statement made by the British Defence Secretary, Mr. Des Browne, at the Conference on Disarmament (CD) on February 5.

“In the view of the Third World, what was needed was realism and new thinking – a new paradigm – one that frankly addressed the concerns of all, and that eschewed threats and moral grandstanding,” he added.

A summary of Ambassador Jayatilleka’s statement follows:

“Sri Lanka was situated in a volatile part of the world that included two nuclear weapon States and had, therefore, a vested interest in the themes and objectives of the Conference on Disarmament. However, he said, he had listened to the speeches of that morning with a growing sense of unreality. He was reminded of a statement attributed to both  Hitler and Stalin "What's mine is mine, what's yours, let's negotiate". That attitude would not ensure progress in the Conference. If there were States that had not come "on board", it was inaccurate to say that there was international consensus. There was some consensus, but it was obviously not international consensus. That was not because they had run out of time; it was because they had serious differences of opinion. That was true about document CD/2007/L.1,
and other issues raised.

“Great progress could not be expected on the basis of agreements forged during the period of détente when there is a revival of the dream of encircling Russia with new weapons systems on its periphery. They could not
expect their great Asian friend to come on board the consensus that was supposed to exist, with speculation over whether it constituted the new enemy. Progress would not be made on the FMCT issue if they continued to demonize one or two States in a volatile ark of crisis, forgetting that there was at least one State with a long-standing nuclear stockpile, and which had invaded almost all of its neighbours. Progress could not be made
while there was talk of unilateral strikes on certain States, including strikes with low-yield, tactile nuclear weapons. None of that would work. Sri Lanka and the Group of 21 certainly did not believe in the moral
superiority of certain countries that had invaded others on the basis of an outright lie on WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction).

“In the view of the Third World, what was needed was realism and new thinking – a new paradigm – one that frankly addressed the concerns of all, and that eschewed threats and moral grandstanding.“