First Committee, 21st plenary meeting - General Assembly, 81st session

Thank you.

Good morning, Excellencies, colleagues. The 21st meeting of the Disarmament and International Security Committee of the 81st session of the General Assembly is called to order. Distinguished delegates, in accordance with the programme of work, the committee will first hear briefings by our panellists. Following the briefing, The Committee will change to an informal mode to engage in a question-and-answer session. Thereafter, the Committee will continue its thematic discussion under the cluster of regional disarmament and security. I would like to warmly welcome to the podium here today the representative of the President of the Conference on Disarmament, Mr. Hassam Hammad, and the Vice-Chair of the United Nations Disarmament Commission, Mr. Papa Samba Diack. The Chairperson of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters, His Excellency D. V. Venkatesh Bomma, and the Director of UNID, Mr. Robin Geiss, couldn’t be present at this meeting to brief the Committee in person and sent written statements circulated to all delegations last Thursday. The Committee will now hear a briefing by the representative of the President of the Conference of the Disarmament, Mr. Hasam Ahmad. Mr. Ahmad, you have the floor now.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have the honour to deliver these remarks on behalf of the President of the Conference on Disarmament, Ambassador Tahir Andrabi, the Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the UN in Geneva, who regrets that he could not be with you in person today. I thank you for inviting the Presidency of the Conference to brief the Committee. I also thank the Secretary-General of the Conference and the Secretariat for their unfailing support throughout the year. It has now been three decades since the Conference last concluded negotiations of a disarmament instrument. Much has been discussed about this impasse, both inside the Conference and outside it. I would only like to point out that the Conference does not operate in isolation. The difficulties it faces are visible across the wider disarmament machinery, where other forums have also struggled to reach agreement, and they reflect a security environment marked by growing mistrust and divergent security interests among states. Some delegations point to the CD’s working methods, and these deserve attention, but in our assessment, the impasse is at its core a reflection of political conditions rather than of procedure. Yet the picture is not one of irrelevance. States continue to invest in the conference and to value it as a place where they can engage one another directly in search of common solutions to the gravest security challenges. Its high-level segment this year brought together one of the largest gatherings of ministers on disarmament issues in 2026. Its setting and format allows for a direct, in-depth, and interactive exchange on disarmament and international security that no other multilateral body offers, and its agenda continues to mirror many of the foremost priorities of States. The 2026 session set out to carry forward the momentum built since 2024 and to give continuity to the substantive work of the Conference. Regrettably, it could not fully do so. Despite the extraordinary efforts of the first President, Mongolia, there was ultimately no consensus on resuming work in the subsidiary bodies. Nor was there any consensus on a proposal by Egypt to adopt a schedule of activities, although the Conference later turned to its established practice in this regard. What followed deserves also recognition. The subsequent presidents of the session coordinated closely so that the conference could hold plenary meetings covering every item on its agenda. Under the presidencies of Morocco and Norway, the cessation of nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament; under the Netherlands, the prevention of nuclear war, including all related matters; under Pakistan, the prevention of an arms race in outer space; under Nigeria, effective international arrangements to assure non-nuclear weapon states against the threat or use of nuclear weapons, and again under Norway, new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons, radiological weapons, comprehensive program of disarmament, and transparency in armaments. These meetings also allowed the five coordinators of the 2024 and 2025 sessions to place on record a full account of the work they had facilitated, preserving it as a foundation on which Conference can build. The Conference also gave sustained attention to its effective functioning. Under the presidency of the Netherlands, it held a plenary meeting on the review of its membership. Under the presidencies of Nigeria and Norway, It held informal meetings on the basis of concept notes addressing, respectively, the rule of consensus and a proposal reaffirming its past decision on the organization of the initial part of its annual sessions. UNIDIR and UNODA also convened a side event, updating delegations on the revitalization efforts initiated in 2023 under the presidencies of France and Germany. In November, our Presidency intends to convene informal consultations to hear a briefing on the financing and organizational modalities of the Conference, with a view to ensuring its effectiveness. Such efforts have value in making the Conference more efficient and better prepared to act when conditions allow, but that progress will ultimately depend on political will among its members. Mr. Chair, on 9 September, the Conference also adopted by consensus its annual report to the General Assembly, now before this Committee as document A/81/27. That outcome required significant flexibility from every delegation, and the Presidency is grateful to all members for it. The Conference also continues to grapple with the participation of non-Member States in its work. This year, the Conference received 33 requests for participation. Eighteen non-Member States were invited to participate in its work, but the Conference was unable to reach agreement on the remaining 15 requests. This is a matter of real significance to the General Assembly and to the wider membership of the United Nations. Seeking solutions that enable interested States to contribute consistent with the rules of procedure, drawing on Conference own past decisions and practice, and taking into account views of all members, will remain an important task for the current and incoming Presidents. Mr. Chair, as is customary, the President of the Conference has submitted to this Committee the draft resolution on the report of the Conference on Disarmament contained in document L/66, The Presidency approached the text in the same spirit as the annual report, inclusively drawing on previously agreed language and consulting widely with delegations in Geneva and in New York. This resolution has traditionally been adopted without a vote, a signal that whatever our differences on how the Conference should work, we share a common stake in its future. That tradition came under strain last year. The Presidency's aim has been to offer a balanced and factual text around which the widest possible support can gather. This has required us at times to set aside our own national position in the interest of the collective. We hope the Committee will be able to adopt the draft resolution with the broadest possible support. The Presidency remains available to all delegations to engage on this. Looking ahead, the work of the Conference continues to be shaped by broader developments in international peace and security. These developments can be disruptive, but they also remind us of the Conference’s centrality in the multilateral security architecture. When trust is scarce, A forum that brings all military significant states to the same table becomes more valuable, not less. Looking to the 2027 session, we can be guided by what the High Representative for Disarmament Affairs has called pragmatic optimism. Despite the geopolitical headwinds, the Conference remains capable of setting a course towards progressive steps for the resumption of substantive work and negotiations. That course may be found through a combination of focus on what is achievable and a balance that reflects the security interests and priorities of all its members. For its part, the Presidency of Pakistan remains committed to pursuing consultations during the intersessional period in close coordination with the incoming Presidents of the 2027 session, beginning with Peru, with a view to facilitating the early resumption of substantive work. I thank you, Chair.

I thank Mr. Hassam Ahmad for his statement representing the President of the Conference of Disarmament. We will now hear from the Vice-Chairs of the United Nations Disarmament Commissions. Mr. Papa Samba Diack, you have the floor now.

Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, co-panelists, ladies and gentlemen, ambassadors, distinguished colleagues, it is my pleasure to present to you the report of the 2026 session of the Disarmament Commission of the United Nations. And for this session, which was comprised of Madam Victoria Lirula Doukchoka of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Damle Misul Haque from Bangladesh, Flavio Aedes of the Dominican Republic, and myself as Vice Chair, as well as Madam Gloria Boese-Gebert of Austria as Rapporteur. In the absence of a President, the Commission determined that I will preside over the organizing meeting as well as the substantive session, and I wish to extend gratitude for the trust placed in me. The Commission failed to reach consensus on the adoption of the agenda for the substantive session for 2026. Without establishing a precedent for the future, the session did reach an agreement according to which the Commission will preside on the basis of the 2026 substantive agenda without formal adoption of that agenda. And the Commission will also hold meetings through an informal framework on the basis of the calendar for meetings, as simultaneous interpretation of meetings will be provided for in all official United Nations languages. And in extenso, there won't be a report established for the informal meetings of the Commission. And lastly, the Commission will adopt in an official session a procedural report on the 2026 substantive session. This report will not have any substantive components. On the 9th of April, the Commission heard, through an informal framework, a statement from the Deputy Director and High Representative for Disarmament Affairs. This statement was followed up by a general exchange of views. This was also part of an informal framework, which took place on the 9th, 13th, and 14th of April. From the 15th to the 17th of April and the 20th and 21st of April, the Commission dedicated five meetings in accordance with Resolution 8066 on the format of informal plenary sessions in order to consider possible adjustments to its work as well as to its working methods. The Bureau established a factual summary of these discussions on the work and the working methods of the Commission. This is available on the Meeting Place platform. I wish to highlight that this was established under the sole responsibility of the Bureau without prejudice to the position of any State. This summary is not exhaustive and is not a negotiating document. The purpose of this document is to contribute to the institutional memory preservation. The statements delivered by delegations have been transmitted to the Secretary. They are also available on Meeting Place. On the 24th of April, the Commission concluded its work with the adoption of its report. By consensus, this report was published. as document A/81/42. Before concluding, I wish to take this opportunity to deliver a few remarks in my personal capacity. The Disarmament Commission is an integral part of the disarmament architecture and occupies a significant role in multilateral discussions held in New York. This offers an opportunity for inclusive discussions, in-depth discussions, bringing together all 193 Member States, and supplements the role of the First Committee as well as the Disarmament Conference. Throughout its history, and still recently in 2023, agreement was reached on important recommendations, and it is critical for this success to be built upon. And for this reason, it is vital for delegations to reaffirm their faith in this mechanism with the adoption, with the broadest possible consensus of the resolution that the Bureau has tabled this year. My sincere hope is that the Commission will resume its substantive work in 2027, and I welcome the opportunity to collaborate with the forthcoming chairmanship to reach this goal. I cannot conclude without a word of thanks to the Secretariat for its leadership role in the work, as well as to all delegations for their unstinting commitment to the conduct of the 2026 session of the Commission. Thank you.

I thank the Vice-Chair of the United Nations Determined Commissions for his briefing now. Distinguished delegates, in keeping with the established practice of the Committee, I will now suspend the meeting to afford delegations the opportunity to have an interactive discussion on the briefings we just heard through an informal questions and answers session. The meeting is suspended. Now I request the delegations wishing to make any comments or raise questions on the briefings to kindly press the microphone button now. So I see no request for the floor. On behalf of the delegations, I thank our panelists, Mr. Ahmad and Mr. Diack, for your presentations today and briefings to the Committee. And the Committee will now resume its formal meeting. The meeting is resumed. Distinguished delegates, once the Committee completes its considerations of the cluster on regional disarmament, envisaged by the programme of work, we will immediately begin considerations of the cluster on disarmament machinery. The Committee will now continue its thematic discussions under the cluster on regional disarmament and security. With this, I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Algeria.

Mr. Chair, my delegation aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of NAM. Regional approaches complement global efforts and respond to specific security realities. In an era of rising geopolitical tensions and evolving security threats, Regional disarmament frameworks are essential for global peace. They provide tailored responses that reflect each region's unique security dynamics, history, and priorities. In Africa, the illicit proliferation of small arms and light weapons continues to fuel instability, undermine development, and endanger civilians. Algeria calls again for a comprehensive approach that tackles both the symptoms and root causes, linking security measures with economic and social development so that the cycle of violence can finally be broken. This integrated approach aligns directly with the AU flagship Silencing the Guns initiative, which aims to create a conflict-free continent. Africa has also shown exemplary leadership in nuclear disarmament. The Treaty of Pelindaba affirms our continued steadfast commitment to a nuclear-weapon-free world. Algeria was among the first to ratify this treaty. We urge all remaining nuclear-weapon states to sign and ratify its protocols, thereby consolidating Africa as a nuclear-weapon-free zone. Mr. Chair, in the Middle East, A zone free of nuclear weapons and other WMD remains a legitimate and urgent necessity for regional and international peace and security. Algeria fully supports this goal, in line with relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. We remain deeply concerned by the continued non-implementation of the 1995 resolution on the Middle East, which undermines the credibility of the NPT regime. This resolution remains valid until its objectives are fully achieved. We welcome the sixth session of the Conference on a Middle East Free of Nuclear Weapons and other WMDs held so far, and look forward to the upcoming seventh session. In closing, connecting Africa, Asia, and Europe, Algeria has submitted a traditional draft resolution on strengthening security and cooperation in the Mediterranean region. We look forward to the continued strong support of Member States. We hope this resolution will be adopted by consensus, as was the practice until 2018, thereby reaffirming our shared commitment to peace and stability across the Mediterranean basin. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Algeria. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Kazakhstan.

Regional security improves when neighbors can address shared risks. through regular dialogue and agreed rules. Kazakhstan's experience in Central Asia demonstrates the value of maintaining cooperation even when wider international relations are under strain. This year marks 20 years since the signing of the Treaty on Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone in Central Asia. It represents commitments freely undertaken by the five states of our region, and a practical contribution to the goal non-proliferation regime. Legally binding negative security assurance, including through the protocol to the treaty, remain essential for the state announced nuclear weapons. We call for completion on ratification of the protocol. As the current chair, Kazakhstan supports further strengthening the treaty institutional framework. Regular consultation and continuity between meetings can help states parties implement their obligation and develop practical cooperation. Stronger exchanges with other nuclear weapons free zones can also support mutual learning and coordinated engagements on common concerns. Mr. Chair, lasting regional security rests on respect for territorial integrity and peaceful settlement of disputes. Security arrangements should promote cooperation and avoid creating new divisions. Dialogue must remain available even when positions differ. Regional initiative can also help connect security and development priorities, including through the United Nations Regional Center for Sustainable Development Goals for Central Asia and Afghanistan in Almaty. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Kazakhstan. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Islamic Republic of Iran.

We align ourselves with the statement delivered by Indonesia on behalf of the NAM. In June 2025 and February 2026, the Israeli regime and the United States committed acts of aggression against Iran, including deliberate attacks on peaceful nuclear facilities. These unlawful attacks threaten regional and international peace and security. We strongly condemn these acts of aggression and call upon all States to abandon double standards, unequivocally condemn these attacks, and hold their perpetrators accountable. Those enabling aggression must also be held accountable. We deplore neighboring States’ provision of territory, military bases, facilities, and logistical support for these attacks. Iran's defensive actions against US military bases and facilities in the region were undertaken pursuant to its inherent right of self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. These acts cannot be viewed in isolation from the broader regional reality. Over seven decades of the Israeli regime's occupation, aggression, genocide, and systematic violations of international law, sustained by political, military, and diplomatic support of the United States, the UK, France, Germany, and the European Union, including continued arms supply and diplomatic protection. The current US administration is preparing a roughly $3 billion sale of 2,000-pound bombs to the Israeli regime. These weapons have been used in Gaza and Lebanon, including in areas designated as safe for civilians. causing devastating destruction. The Israeli regime remains the only entity in the Middle East possessing nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, while refusing to accede to the NPT, the CWC, and the BWC. It remains the only obstacle to establishing a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and other WMDs. Its vast conventional arsenal and exceptionally high per capita military expenditure further threaten regional and international stability. Restoring security requires concrete action: a comprehensive arms embargo on the Israeli regime, elimination of its nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, accession to relevant disarmament treaties, and accountability for its officials responsible for crimes in our region. including its warmongering Prime Minister. Iran, a party to all major WMD prohibition treaties, remains committed to a nuclear-weapon-free Middle East, an initiative it first proposed in 1974, and to its inherent right of self-defense, including lawful missile development. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Islamic Republic of Iran. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Congo.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, we underscore the importance of the Pelindaba Treaty, which enshrines the commitment of Africa to remaining a nuclear weapons-free zone. We call for its implementation in full, as well as for the reinforcement of international mechanisms which are geared towards preventing the proliferation and use of WMDs, be they nuclear, chemical, or biological. No strategic consideration can allow or justify Africa being exposed to the humanitarian and environmental consequences, the devastating related consequences of the use of these weapons. Our continent also continues to confront illicit circulation of SALW, which in turn fuels armed conflict, undermines institutions, and compromises the safety of people. This threat has alarming ties to terrorism, facilitating terrorist groups receiving supplies and resulting in their greater ability to act as spoilers. For this reason, we underscore the important need to ensure meaningful implementation of both regional and subregional arms control mechanisms, such as the Kinshasa Convention in Central Africa, as well as African initiatives to silence the weapons. And this requires stepped-up cooperation in the area of border control, of traceability of weapons and munitions, as well as efforts to combat illicit trafficking networks. In this vein, we call upon African subregion, which does not have a legally binding instrument in this regard. and or where mechanisms continue to fall short for them to step up the necessary commitment and consultation for the crafting and adoption of a common framework adapted to reflect the reality. Fragmentation of our control mechanisms should not result in a gap in which arms trafficking networks and other malicious actors can capitalize upon. Disarmament also includes preventive measures for conflict prevention, resolution, peacebuilding, and development initiatives, we call for collective mobilization rooted in African solidarity and international cooperation so as to ensure that Africa can make resolute headway towards a future free of the scourge of weapons. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Congo. Distinguished delegates, we just heard the last speaker under the cluster on regional disarmament and security. There were 33 delegations made statements this year compared to 36 statements last year. Distinguished delegates, the Committee will now begin its thematic discussions under the cluster on disarmament machinery. The first speaker on the list of speaker is the distinguished representative of Indonesia, speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

Mr. Chair, it is my honor to speak on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. The full version of the statement is submitted to the Secretariat. NAM is concerned at continuous erosion of multilateralism in the field of disarmament, non-proliferation, and arms control. The preservation of the UN Disarmament Machinery and the enhancement of its effectiveness is thus a shared objective. NAM believes that the main difficulty lies in the lack of political will from some states to achieve progress, particularly on nuclear disarmament. For its part, NAM stands ready to engage constructively to advance the issues on the UN disarmament agenda and the ways and means of strengthening the disarmament machinery. NAM reiterates its conviction that the special sessions of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament can set the future course of actions in the field of disarmament, arms control, non-proliferation, and related international security matters. NAM underscores the importance of convening the SSOD IV and welcomes the GA endorsement of the report of the open-ended working group on SSOD IV. and the substantive recommendations contained therein, and stresses the need to continue consultations on next steps for convening of SSOD IV. NAM reaffirms the importance of the Conference on Disarmament as the sole multilateral negotiating body on disarmament, and reiterates its call on the CD to agree by consensus on a balanced and comprehensive programme of work, by inter alia, establishing an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament as soon as possible and as the highest priority. NAM underlines the importance and relevance of the UN Disarmament Commission and regrets that despite overwhelming support, the United States obstructed the Commission’s provisional agenda, preventing it from commencing its formal meeting and formally carrying out the work of the working groups during its session in 2026. noting especially that 2026 was intended to mark the closing cycle of the UNDC for 2024-2026. NAM urges all Member States, in particular nuclear weapons states, to show required political will and flexibility in ensuring that the formal and substantive session of UNDC could take place in 2027. In this regard, NAM notes the effort of the UNDC under the leadership of Senegal in convening the informal discussions on the work and working methods of the Commission from 15 to 21 April 2026. Expressing its deep concern on the continued lack of adequate representation from NAM countries in the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs, NAM requests the Secretary-General and High Representative to undertake steps to ensure proper, balanced and equitable representation in that office. NAM urges all countries to work together cooperatively and demonstrate their political commitment concretely, including here in the First Committee, to ensure that the disarmament machinery can achieve its potential fully to bolster global peace and security. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Indonesia speaking on behalf of the Non-Alignment Movement. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Singapore speaking on behalf of ASEAN.

Mr Chair, I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the 11 members of ASEAN. ASEAN aligns itself with the statement just delivered by Indonesia on behalf of NAM. Multilateral cooperation in the field of disarmament and non-proliferation is more critical than ever. ASEAN acknowledges the contributions of the UN Disarmament Machinery, which has produced important treaties, instruments, and processes. Against the backdrop of a weakening disarmament and non-proliferation architecture, it is imperative that we ensure the continued relevance and credibility of this machinery. This is particularly relevant to the First Committee, which ASEAN recognises as the most inclusive platform for discussions on disarmament and international security. ASEAN reiterates its concern over the declining commitment and cooperation in global disarmament, non-proliferation, and arms control mechanisms. We call on all countries, especially the nuclear-weapon states, to maintain and fully implement their obligations and commitments under these mechanisms, including the NPT. ASEAN regrets that despite sustained efforts, the 11th NPT Review Conference was unable to adopt a consensus final outcome document. We commend the role of Vietnam as the President of the Review Conference for its leadership in promoting inclusive consultations and transparency with a view to achieving consensus during the Conference. The Conference on Disarmament has an important role in pursuing substantive negotiations in key areas of disarmament. ASEAN is concerned by the deadlock on its Programme of Work, which has persisted for over two decades. We call upon the CD to intensify consultations and make progress in the adoption and implementation of a balanced and comprehensive programme of work. ASEAN also believes that the UN Disarmament Commission, UNDC, with its universal membership, retains a unique role in building trust and confidence among Member States in the disarmament sphere. ASEAN regrets that the UNDC could not reach a consensus on adopting the provisional agenda this year. noting that this year marks the closing cycle of the UNDC for 2024-2026. We look forward to supporting and actively engaging in the UNDC during its 2027 session. Mr. Chair, In our region, the ASEAN Regional Forum, or ARF, is a vital platform for dialogue and cooperation on political and security issues of common concern. ASEAN welcomes the convening of the 17th ARF Intersessional Meeting on Non-Proliferation and Disarmament, and the adoption of the ARF Manila Plan of Action 2026-2036 at the 33rd ARF meeting in July, and looks forward to its implementation. ASEAN emphasises that the disarmament machinery should keep pace with the rapidly evolving security landscape and advancements in science and technology, including developments in cyberspace and outer space. We should also strive to prevent duplicative processes, optimise resources, and pursue inclusive avenues for deliberations among Member States. ASEAN reaffirms its support for the UN Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific. We acknowledge the value of a multi-stakeholder approach and welcome sustained engagement with civil society, the private sector, and academia, whose perspectives enrich and complement States’ discussions. We also appreciate the role of think tanks and research bodies, such as the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, and welcome their contributions to strengthening the disarmament agenda in the region. In closing, ASEAN reiterates its strong commitment to working constructively with all member states and stakeholders in advancing international peace and security. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Singapore. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Australia, speaking on behalf of the distinguished Member of Parliament of Australia, speaking on behalf of the KAN group.

Thank you, Chair. At a time of growing nuclear and other strategic risks, member states need disarmament machinery that can support dialogue, build confidence, which will deliver practical results. Cairns is committed to working constructively with all member states to strengthen this system. Reform should be strategic, inclusive, and focused on outcomes. It should preserve what works. and address persistent weaknesses and ensure that our institutions can fulfil their mandates effectively and efficiently. The responsibility to effectively strengthen the disarmament system rests with Member States. We should approach differences in good faith, seek common ground, and ensure that procedural disagreements do not prevent substantive progress. Cairns is ready to listen, contribute, ideas and work across regional and political groups to build practical solutions. Chair, Cairns is united. Cairns thanks the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs for its work in New York, Geneva, and beyond support to member states and the effective function of the disarmament machinery, including in its application of the principles underlying UN80. We value its efforts to build disarmament literacy and capability, and its focus on youth, gender equality and inclusion. Cairns also strongly values the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. The independent research and conveying role helps member states understand emerging challenges, identify areas of conversion and develop informed responses. Its independence remains critical. We must also make better use of institutions already available to us. Cairns remains concerned that the Conference on Disarmament has not fulfilled its core negotiating mandate for three decades. The conference exists to negotiate, not just to deliberate. We encourage its members to build on substantive discussions, improve continuity between sessions, and work with urgency towards negotiations. Its work should be more inclusive, including through the participation of non-member states and serious consideration of membership applications. The United Nations Disarmament Commission has not functioned as effectively as it should in recent years. Its universal membership and consensus-based approach give it a distinctive role in developing common understandings and practical recommendations. If the Commission is to resume substantive work, we should consider focusing on achievable agendas, build on areas where conversion is possible, and explore pathways to resolve procedural deadlock. CANS stands ready to work with other practical improvements to enable the Commission to deliver. The First Committee remains the universal forum in which all Member States can address disarmament and international security on an equal footing. It should help connect the different parts of the machinery, promote implementation, and hold our institutions to their mandates. Cairns does not seek reform for its own sake. We seek a disarmament system that is inclusive, efficient, responsible, and capable of results. That will require sustained political will, flexibility, and cooperation from all of us. Cairns will continue to be a constructive partner in all of that work. Thanks.

I thank the distinguished Member of Parliament of Australia speaking on behalf of the Cairns Group. Now I give the floor to the distinguished Permanent Representative of Honduras, speaking on behalf of the Francophonie Ambassadors. Good morning.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This statement is issued on behalf of the Francophonie member states and observers of the International Organization of Francophonie. Our countries wish to reaffirm their deep commitment to the fundamental rules of multilateralism, specifically multilingualism, that is a guarantee of inclusivity in negotiations and discussions. They must be held in the six official languages of the UN. Multilingualism guarantees the effective participation of all, richer dialogue as well as greater involvement of all. At a time when the UN system is witnessing significant changes through the UN80 reform, it's vital to ensure that this diversity remains an asset. In this context, we wish to draw your attention to the need to preserve the interpretation service and the translation services during negotiation sessions, whether they be held in person or online. That bolsters fully inclusive participation of all states. in our work, here it is important to seek alternatives, lower cost alternatives, and to consider the use of new technologies to preserve this multilingualism without replacing core linguistic services, at the same time we must foster efficient uses of all resources. Chair, the OIF and UNIDIR organized in Geneva French-speaking information sessions with the support of the Disarmament Section and the Group of Francophonie Ambassadors. That was chaired this year by Senegal and France. The OIF Francophonie Summit was held in Paris in 2024. All of these French-speaking meetings demonstrate what multilateralism can produce: dialogue, analysis, and the quest for shared solutions. That's where it's most valuable. All of these fora offer spaces in Geneva, particularly, for discussions on technical matters which concern us, such as AI in the military domain, other threats, or the regulation of small arms and light weapons. Chair. Member States and Observer States of OIF wish to reaffirm their support for the Fellowship Programme on Disarmament that was launched by the General Assembly in 1978. This programme allows the training of large numbers of civil servants in the spheres of disarmament. We wish to see this Fellowship Programme continue to genuinely benefit French-speaking people in order to foster partnerships between states and participatory organizations. To conclude, we reaffirm our commitment to multilingualism, which is a prerequisite for inclusion and the effectiveness of multilateralism. These must remain a cardinal principle of the United Nations system. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished Permanent Representative of Andorra, speaking on behalf of the group of Francophone Ambassadors. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of European Union, speaking on behalf of the European Union and its member states.

Chair, I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member states. The candidate countries, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine, Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Georgia, and the EFTA countries, Iceland and Norway, as well as Monaco and San Marino, aligned themselves with the statement. The EU remains firmly committed to effective multilateralism and to the rules-based international order, with the United Nations at its core. We all have a responsibility to ensure that the UN Disarmament Machinery remains relevant and delivers results in line with its agreed mandates. The Conference on Disarmament is a unique multilateral disarmament negotiation forum of the international community. At the same time, the continued inability of the Conference to fulfil its negotiation mandate for 30 years stands in stark contrast with the security challenges we face today. We call on all CD members to support measures to improve the functioning and efficiency of the Conference. Our long-standing priority in the CD is to immediately commence negotiations of a treaty banning the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons or other explosive devices, in accordance with document CD/1299 and the mandate contained therein. The EU calls for a more streamlined and targeted program of meetings, including, where appropriate, reduced meeting days, taking into account the broader context of budgetary constraints and UN reform efforts. Such measures should make the conference more efficient. They cannot, however, substitute for the political decision required to move its substantive work forward. The revitalization efforts should also contribute to enhancing the inclusiveness, transparency, and openness of the Conference. In this regard, the continued blockage of the participation of observers on political grounds, particularly by Russia, is unacceptable. The EU calls on all CD members to support the participation of requesting states as observers in accordance with the established practice. We also reiterate our longstanding support for the expansion of the membership of the conference. Its composition should better reflect today's geopolitical realities and the wider membership of the United Nations. Chair, we also acknowledge the contribution of UNIDIR as a standalone autonomous institution to disarmament and non-proliferation architecture. We recall that the EU continues to provide significant political and financial support to a number of treaties, conventions, and other agreements in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation. The EU supports efforts to promote gender equality and the full, equal, and meaningful participation of women in disarmament, arms control, and non-proliferation. We also encourage greater participation of youth and recognize the contribution of civil society, academia, and the scientific community to our collective efforts. Chair, the EU stands ready to engage with partners in driving forward UN reform through the UN80 initiative, towards a more effective, cost-efficient, and responsive UN. But the disarmament machinery cannot function effectively without adequate and predictable resources. The EU calls on all UN member states to fulfill their financial obligations in full and on time. At a time when the international security environment is becoming more challenging, The international community needs a disarmament machinery that can deliver. Thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of the European Union speaking on behalf of the European Union and its member states. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Libya speaking. on behalf of the Arab Group.

Sayyid al-Rais.

Chair, The efforts of the Arab Group to ensure the universalization of the NPT, namely in the Middle East, are part of its commitment to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons. That is indeed the first priority recognized by the SSOD of the General Assembly, SSOD 1 on disarmament. We recall that in terms of the disarmament mechanisms, the work of the mechanisms on disarmament in the UN are based on SSOD, and these priorities can only be reshuffled through another SSOD devoted entirely to disarmament. wish to see that this session be convened with the support of the non-aligned movement. We call for the holding of a fourth special session on disarmament. building on the work of the Open-ended Working Group, to achieve tangible results able to go hand in hand with developments on the ground, namely threats to the international arena. We decry the third consecutive failure of the Review Conference to achieve an outcome document. We call for the preservation of the credibility of the NPT by stepping up efforts to ensure the equitable, overarching implementation of the three pillars: complete elimination of nuclear weapons is one of them, as is the creation of a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East, alongside, of course, the third pillar. We must allow the Conference on Disarmament as the sole multilateral negotiating forum in this field. We must allow it to play its role fully. We are of the view that the impasse that has gone on too long is due to the lack of political will on the part of certain states. As such, we must ensure that the Conference is able to play more of a role in negotiations. We are of the view that issues placed on the programme of work are in line with international priorities and goals agreed upon on the international level. No one must be prioritized above another. We must agree upon tangible principles and goals in terms of nuclear disarmament. We attach great importance to the role of the Disarmament Commission as the fora for universal negotiation. We deplore its inability to hold negotiations and substantive discussions during its most recent session in April. We hope that this situation will be remedied. It is highly disappointing. We hope it will not be repeated next year. And of course, it should heed the substantive discussions in the two working groups. We are concerned at the effects of polarization and effects of competition between international disarmament mechanisms. This undermines the credibility of these mechanisms. Thank you.

The representative of Libya is speaking on behalf of the Arab Group for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Mexico. You have the floor.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. My country wishes to recall that the outcome document of the SSOD-1 recognizes that disarmament is one of the most urgent tasks of the international community. However, the machinery established to fulfill that goal continues to prove unable to produce tangible results. This year, the Conference on Disarmament marked three years of having proven unable to discharge its negotiating mandate. Mexico recognizes the value of diplomatic dialogue, but we insist that a crucial distinction be made. Having deliberations is not the same thing as negotiating. Convening a meeting does not, in and of itself, stand as progress in the field of disarmament. The proliferation of informal discussions and subsidiary bodies cannot be presented as the fulfillment of the Conference on Disarmament's mandate. On the contrary, this practice duplicates the mandate of the Disarmament Commission, a body that was designed precisely to stand as the universal forum for deliberations within the United Nations. Moreover, we note the ongoing lack of inclusiveness within the Conference on Disarmament. 22 requests for entry by states remain unanswered, and Non-member countries' participation continue to be restricted. It is contradictory to pretend to move towards collective security at the same time as a body is excluding vast swathes of the international community. Chair, the situation of the Commission on Disarmament does not either offer reason to be satisfied. This year, it did not even adopt its programme of work. That stymied progress in the substantive deliberations and laid bare just how deep its dysfunction ran, it is very concerning indeed that the two crucial bodies of the disarmament machinery are constantly in a state of gridlock. International risks are on the rise at the same time, and our people are asking us to take urgent action. Consequently, it is no surprise that the most significant normative progress seen in recent decades, including the TPNW, have been championed from within other fora. more specifically, the General Assembly. We must ask ourselves whether this paralysis is really only a result of international circumstances or if it also reflects the contradictions inherent within an institutional architecture that has ceased to respond to the needs of the international community. Mexico is of the view, once again, that it is vital that we hold an SSOD 4. This must stand as an opportunity for us to conduct a comprehensive review of disarmament machinery and to restore its effectiveness and legitimacy. We cannot wait for an even greater crisis to compel us to recognize the urgent need to reform mechanisms designed precisely to prevent such crises. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Mexico for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of the Republic of Korea. You have the floor.

Chair, at a time of deepening geopolitical tensions and growing pressure on the disarmament and non-proliferation framework, effective disarmament machinery is more important than ever. In this context, the ROK wishes to highlight the following points. First, with regard to the First Committee, we support efforts under the UNAT initiative to improve the efficiency of the Committee’s work. We appreciate the Chair and the Bureau for further streamlining the Committee’s schedule while accommodating diverse views. We also appreciate the efforts of resolution sponsors to streamline texts, review mandates and resource implications, and adjust resolution cycles where appropriate. We hope these practices will continue and help make the Committee’s work more focused and effective. Second, with regard to the Disarmament Commission, with regret that the Commission was unable to hold a formal session, particularly in the final year of its current cycle. Nevertheless, the discussions on working methods provided an opportunity to consider how the Commission can function more effectively. We appreciate the work of the Bureau and hope that the Commission can begin its new cycle on a stronger footing. Third, the Republic of Korea notes the meaningful discussions held in the Conference on Disarmament this year, including through high-level engagement earlier in the year. The conference remains an important forum for dialogue and exchanging views on international security and disarmament, bringing together a wide range of perspectives. We hope to see early resumption of its substantive work in the year ahead and remain committed to contributing to the effectiveness of the multilateral disarmament machinery. Lastly, The UNIDIR remains an indispensable partner in addressing the broad range of disarmament and international security challenges, particularly amid an increasingly complex global security environment. In this regard, we welcome the establishment of the Center of Excellence on AI, Peace, and Security and expect the Center to develop innovative tools to help address emerging challenges. The ROK has also actively collaborated with UNIDIR on other important activities. on other important initiatives, including those related to responsible use of AI in the military domain, space security, and youth engagement, contributing to knowledge sharing, capacity building, and multilateral dialogue. We look forward to further strengthening our partnership with UNITARE and advancing inclusive and substantive discussions. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Republic of Korea for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Italy. You have the floor.

Chair, Italy fully aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union. I would like to add a few remarks in a national capacity. The Conference on Disarmament remains the world's single and unique multilateral forum specifically mandated to negotiate disarmament agreements. Restoring its negotiating function is therefore a serious collective responsibility. In January 2025, during the Italian presidency, the Conference adopted by consensus decision CD/2443, establishing five subsidiary bodies, appointing their coordinators, and setting a calendar covering the entire session. It was the first time since 1996 that such a decision had been taken already in January. More than 30 meetings followed, allowing for substantive and interactive discussions across the city agenda. Above all, that experience demonstrated that even in an extremely challenging international environment, consensus remains possible. We therefore regret that in 2026 it was not possible to build upon that experience. Chair, for the fourth consecutive year, the participation of UN member states requesting observer status has been obstructed. Once again, in 2026, the Russian Federation opposed the participation of a significant number of European countries, including EU Member States and candidate countries. Italy is deeply concerned by this systematic attempt to exclude UN Member States from observing our work. Our position is clear: every UN Member State requesting observer status should, by default, be allowed to participate. Excluding states from our discussions makes this conference less open, less representative, and ultimately less credible. Each of us bears an individual responsibility for making multilateralism work. We must try and listen, commit, contribute, and converge. The consensus achieved this year within the GGE-Los demonstrates that this remains possible. Chair, Italy remains firmly committed to strengthening the multilateral disarmament architecture. We stand ready to discuss the idea of convening, at the appropriate time and under modalities to be agreed, a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament, SSOD-4. Within this architecture, the CDA has both the mandate and the tools to deliver concrete results. Our long-standing priority remains the commencement of negotiations on a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Progress is also urgently needed on legally binding measures addressing destructive anti-satellite testing, as well as on the security implications of emerging technologies and new types of weapons. Italy will continue to work for compromise, inclusivity, and concrete progress, with the objective of restoring the Conference on Disarmament to the negotiating role for which it was created. I thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Italy for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished Permanent Representative of Germany to the CD. You have the floor.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, Germany aligns with the statement just delivered by the European Union. The disarmament machinery and the agreements it has helped bring about are remarkable achievements. But even the finest machinery requires maintenance, and no machine can fulfill its purpose if its operating procedures prevent it from working. Germany continues to attach great importance to working for consensus on matters of substance. Arms control and disarmament affect the most fundamental interests of states, outcomes must command broad support. But we must distinguish between consensus on substance and the paralysis on procedure. The consensus rule should not be, as some seem to interpret it, an unlimited license for procedural obstruction. The ability to prevent progress cannot become the measure of success in multilateral diplomacy. This brings me to the Conference on Disarmament. The CD has an important role to play in arms control, disarmament, and non-proliferation negotiations. Its mandate remains as important as ever. Yet we must acknowledge that for three decades now, the Conference has been unable to fulfil its mandate. It even fails to begin substantive discussions, let alone negotiations. The way consensus is interpreted by some has clearly contributed to this situation. The Conference also falls short of the expectations of the General Assembly in terms of inclusivity. Year after year, the General Assembly calls for broader participation in the CD. Yet, year after year, more than a dozen UN Member States are being blocked from merely participating as observers, most of them by Russia. The CD's membership has not been enlarged since almost 30 years. This exclusion of countries further erodes the trust in this body. The substantial as well as procedural obstructions within the CD weaken the role and mandate of the CD as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum of the international community that it should be. It raises doubts on its future and its relevance in the multilateral disarmament machinery. But the relevance of the CD must be maintained. Its value, even though currently not being able to negotiate specific treaties, lies in its potential for substantive debates, thorough exchanges of positions and perceptions, and preparatory work for the day that the CD can assume its original mandate. In 2023, Germany and France bareheaded a campaign to revitalize the CD. We need further initiatives to bring the CD back to the forefront of international disarmament diplomacy. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished Permanent Representative of Germany to the CD. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Zimbabwe. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. Zimbabwe aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the non-aligned movement and to be delivered by the African Group, and we add the following remarks in a national capacity. Distinguished delegates, the United Nations disarmament machinery has floundered during the period under review with unprecedented hurdles, including a 2026 UNDC session which experienced paralysis and failed to enter into substantive discussions. Shortly thereafter, the 11th NPT Review Conference concluded without a consensus outcome for the third consecutive time. These developments were compounded by the long-standing institutional deadlock in the Conference on Disarmament. In the First Committee, fewer resolutions are being adopted without a vote, and our sessions are increasingly characterized by votes on individual paragraphs. This is therefore a moment for introspection. In this vein, Zimbabwe calls for the early convening of SSOD 4. We should undertake a comprehensive review of the disarmament machinery as a whole, including the UNDC, the Conference on Disarmament, and the First Committee. Zimbabwe underscores that there should be no erosion of the universality of disarmament bodies or diversion of negotiations to restricted and exclusive forums outside the United Nations framework. The disarmament machinery must continue to guarantee the full, effective, and equitable participation of all Member States. The ODA and the UNIDIR should prepare substantive background papers on agenda items or facilitate expert presentations on the subjects to be deliberated at sessions of the disarmament machinery. To increase awareness and expertise on disarmament and international security, we call for enhanced measures to provide comprehensive training and capacity building and a broader and widely available curriculum of disarmament and non-proliferation education, including advanced academic studies. Let me conclude, Chair, by reassuring you of Zimbabwe's unflinching commitment to contribute towards an efficient and effective United Nations disarmament machinery. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Zimbabwe for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Azerbaijan. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. Mr. Chair, disarmament has remained a central priority of the United Nations since its establishment, as evidenced by the first GA resolution, which addressed the control of atomic energy and elimination of atomic weapons. Over the past eight decades, multilateral disarmament efforts have contributed to the development of key international agreements and mechanisms to reduce risks to international peace and security. Nevertheless, heightened geopolitical tensions, persistent differences among states, and declining mutual trust continue to hamper progress in multilateral disarmament fora, making it increasingly difficult to achieve consensus on substantive issues. Mr. Chair, the Disarmament Commission remains a vital component of the international disarmament architecture, serving as a dedicated platform for substantive in-depth deliberations on key disarmament challenges with the aim of making recommendations to the GA. Regrettably, the Commission was unable to adapt its agenda of its substantive session this year and consequently concluded its cycle without substantive recommendations to the GA. We appreciate the efforts of the Chair and the Bureau to facilitate dialogue and seek common grounds despite the prevailing differences. It's our hope that the future session of the Commission will build on these efforts through constructive and inclusive deliberations with a view to producing practical recommendations on the issues before it. Mr. Chair, we commend the UNODA for its continued support of multilateral disarmament processes and its assistance to Member States in fulfilling relevant obligations and commitments. We also recognize the contributions of the UNID through its independent research, objective analysis, and efforts to facilitate informed discussions on the existing and emerging challenges to the international security. To conclude, Chair, strengthening the multilateral disarmament machinery requires renewed commitment to inclusive dialogue, mutual understanding, and cooperation among all states. Through sustained political will and constructive engagement, the disarmament machinery can fulfill its respective mandates more effectively and contribute to tangible progress in disarmament and international security. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Azerbaijan for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Nepal. You have the floor.

Mr. Chair, Nepal aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of NAM. The multilateral disarmament machinery established to advance disarmament and our collective security must remain responsive to an increasingly complex global security landscape. Its persistent inability to deliver meaningful outcomes stems less from institutional or procedural constraints than from the lack of genuine political will, trust, and commitment among member states. We must therefore demonstrate flexibility, understanding, and resolve to advance general and complete disarmament peace and sustainable development. Let us remind ourselves that true international peace and security cannot rest on expanding stockpiles of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. They depend on our determination to secure a world free of them. Nepal, therefore, calls for reinforcing multilateral disarmament machinery, bridging strategic differences, and addressing growing mistrust through dialogue and diplomacy. Our common objective must remain equal, indivisible, and comprehensive security for all States. Mr. Chair, the long-standing deadlock in the Conference on Disarmament continues to obstruct substantive negotiations.

We regret that this

year’s substantive session of the UN Disarmament Commission and the 11th NPT Review Conference failed to achieve tangible outcomes. Nepal calls for renewed political commitment to the NPT and the full, balanced, and effective implementation of its three pillars: nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation, and peaceful uses of nuclear energy. We underscore the urgency of commencing negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty and secure legally binding negative security assurances for non-nuclear states. nuclear weapons states. The convening of SSOD IV, as envisaged in the Pact for the Future and endorsed by successive General Assembly resolutions, is indispensable to reinvigorating multilateral disarmament efforts. Mr. Chair, the first substantive plenary meeting of the Global Mechanism on ICT Security demonstrates the value of inclusive dialogue in addressing emerging security threats. The UN Comprehensive study on nuclear weapon free zones and the independent scientific panel on the effects of nuclear war underscores the importance of evidence-based multilateral approaches. Regional disarmament efforts continue to complement global disarmament. As host of the United Nations Regional Center for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific, Nepal values its contribution to fostering dialogue on disarmament, particularly by strengthening the participation of women and youth in disarmament initiatives, who encourage scaled-up voluntary contributions to sustain its activities while urging broad co-sponsorship and consensus adoption of draft resolutions on the Centre item. Nepal remains steadfast in strengthening inclusive, effective, and result-oriented multilateral disarmament machinery towards a world free of weapons of mass destruction. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Nepal for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of China. You have the floor.

Mr. Chair, At present, the international security situation is becoming increasingly grave, multilateral disarmament mechanism faces complex challenges. This clearly demonstrates that the disarmament machinery does not operate in a vacuum, but is deeply influenced by the international security situation. Building a world of lasting peace and universal security is the strong aspiration of all peoples and shared responsibility of all nations. China wishes to put forward the following proposals. First, a correct vision of security must be upheld. The multilateral disarmament machinery is a platform for promoting common security, not a battleground for political confrontation. All countries should uphold a vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security, reject Cold War mentality and block confrontation. fully respect each other's legitimate security concerns, promote an equal and orderly multipolar world and inclusive economic globalization, and strive to break the security dilemma. Second, the authority and effectiveness of disarmament machinery must be safeguarded. We should uphold the authority of the multilateral disarmament machinery, including the First Committee of the GA, the Conference on Disarmament, and the Disarmament Commission, and continuously enhance their effectiveness. All parties should adhere to multilateralism, fully demonstrate political will, build mutual trust, and bridge differences through sincere dialogues and seek the broadest possible common ground on issues concerning security and development of mankind. Third, we must actively address risk and challenges in emerging fields. Emerging domains such as AI, cyberspace, and outer space have become new frontiers for human development, new focal points for strategic security, and new areas for global governance. Within the scope of their respective mandates, multilateral disarmament machinery can study and explore issues of global governance in these emerging fields and advance the process of international arms control and disarmament. China calls on all parties to firmly uphold and strengthen the status and role of multilateral disarmament machinery And we oppose unilateral approaches selectively applying rules as it sees fit. China stands ready to work with all parties to improve the existing multilateral arms control system and jointly promote a balanced, effective, and sustainable security architecture. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of China for her statement. The committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Iraq. to have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. We align ourselves with the statement of the Arab Group and with that of the Non-Aligned Movement, and we would like to make the following observations in our national capacity. We reiterate the central role of the Conference on Disarmament as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum. one that has historically contributed to the achievement of several major international instruments in this field. At the same time, the CD has been at a stalemate for more than two and a half decades as a result of the failure to reach a consensus on a comprehensive and balanced programme of work that addresses the concerns of all Member States, in line with its Rules of Procedure. This has prevented any tangible progress on the issues on its agenda. We therefore stress the need for Member States to demonstrate the necessary political will and flexibility to reach consensus on a programme of work and resume substantive negotiations within the CD. This will enhance its credibility and enable it to achieve concrete progress in the field of disarmament.

Mr. Chair, we stress

the importance of the role of the United Nations Disarmament Commission in strengthening multilateral dialogue on disarmament. We regret its inability to make progress in substantive discussions on a number of important topics during its most recent session. Efforts must be redoubled to overcome the stalemate and foster an enabling environment for substantive and constructive deliberations to produce practical recommendations that support international disarmament efforts and the maintenance of international peace and security. In conclusion, we look forward to the contribution of these deliberations to the achievement of consensus and to the strengthening of multilateral efforts aimed at addressing the concerns of all Member States. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Iraq for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Malaysia. You have the floor.

Mr. Chair, Malaysia associates itself with the statements delivered by NAM and ASEAN. Upholding and revitalizing the UN Disarmament Machinery is an urgent task, especially against a backdrop of escalating geopolitical tensions and strains on the multilateral system. The First Committee remains an indispensable universal forum for exchange of views and the adoption of resolutions and decisions on a broad range of disarmament and security issues. While we support efforts to optimize scarce resources and enhance efficiency, measures to streamline proceedings must not compromise the substantive depth, inclusivity, or political integrity of the Committee’s annual session. Malaysia will continue to engage constructively on proposals regarding working methods. Malaysia reiterates the importance of avoiding parallel processes that could lead to institutional fragmentation and duplication of efforts, while ensuring the inclusive participation of all Member States. Following the consensus adoption of the OEWG’s final report last year, we welcome the operationalisation of the permanent single-track global mechanism on ICT security. We are also encouraged by ongoing discussions within the OEWG on the prevention of an arms race in outer space in all its aspects. Malaysia hopes that States will collectively build on the deliverables achieved on both ICT security and outer space. with particular emphasis on the effective participation of developing countries in the evolving discourse. With regard to the Conference on Disarmament, Malaysia notes that the continued work of its subsidiary bodies, however, procedural discussions cannot substitute for substantive disarmament negotiations. We urge Member States to demonstrate genuine political will to adopt a balanced and comprehensive programme of work, enabling the Conference to overcome its prolonged impasses and fulfil its negotiation mandate. On the UN Disarmament Commission, Malaysia notes the conclusion of its 2024-2026 cycle. While achieving consensus on substantive recommendations concerning nuclear disarmament and emerging technologies remain difficult, the UNDC's deliberative mandate is essential. Malaysia remains committed to working constructively to revitalize this body as we approach its next cycle. Malaysia also acknowledges the wider contribution of the UN Regional Center for Disarmament for Peace and Disarmament, particularly the Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific, in advancing practical capacity-building and dialogue across our region. Let us redouble our efforts to strengthen the resilience and adaptability of the UN Disarmament Machinery in navigating the challenges at hand. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Malaysia for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Ireland. You have the floor.

Chair, Ireland aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union. At this time of growing geopolitical tensions and conflicts around the globe, the international disarmament machinery is under significant pressure, yet its importance has never been greater. Its functioning, effectiveness, and credibility remain essential to advancing international peace and security and preserving confidence in multilateralism. Chair, restoring the Conference on Disarmament to its original purpose, the negotiation of disarmament instruments, remains key. Decades of paralysis have unfortunately become the norm and a sense of disillusionment has taken hold. The Conference must demonstrate its continued relevance by engaging in substantive progress and the fulfilment of its core agenda. Ireland regrets that once again this year, observer requests were blocked, in particular by the Russian Federation. Such politicized actions undermine transparency, inclusivity, run counter to the spirit of multilateralism, and risk further eroding confidence in this body, already facing longstanding challenges. Ireland reiterates its longstanding support for the expansion of the membership of the CD. More than four decades after its establishment, the conference's composition does not reflect the diversity and realities of today's international community. Broadening membership would help strengthen the Conference's legitimacy and relevance, while ensuring that a wider range of perspectives can contribute to advancing multilateral disarmament objectives. Chair, Ireland reiterates the importance of meaningful deliberations at the UNDC. We regret that the Commission was unable to adopt its provisional agenda and was forced to conclude its work prematurely this year. Developing common understandings on emerging technologies in the context of international peace and security is critical, given their rapid evolution. We call on States to show flexibility and political will to resolve the impasse. We must also remain open to discussions on how disarmament institutions can be strengthened and modernized. Any reform efforts should be guided by a clear objective: enhancing the ability of the machinery to deliver meaningful outcomes. Ireland welcomes continued reflection on measures to improve efficiency, inclusivity, transparency, and sustainability across the disarmament architecture, without compromising substantive engagement, and achieving that balance, Chair, is key. Ireland highly values the work of UNIDIR and continues to support its independent, objective, and research-driven contribution to global disarmament discussions. We pay tribute to the implementation support units and secretariats that underpin many of our disarmament instruments. Despite regularly operating with limited resources, they make an indispensable contribution to treaty implementation. Ensuring predictable and sustainable financing for these bodies should remain a priority for us all. Chair, my full statement will be posted online. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Ireland for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Belgium. You have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We align ourselves with the statement delivered by the European Union, and we wish to deliver the following remarks in our national capacity. In the current context, there's an overriding need to preserve fora which allow us to negotiate. At stake is the effectiveness of the disarmament machinery. Preservation of these spaces also require that they be adapted when they are mired in inertia, which prevents them from fulfilling their primary function. The CD has a unique position in the international security architecture, and yet its persistent inability to adopt a program of work and to fulfill its negotiations mandate, which has been the case for more than 30 years, is profoundly concerning. We call upon all Member States to demonstrate the necessary political will in order to break this impasse. Our priority remains launching immediately negotiations on a treaty prohibiting the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices in accordance with the agreed-upon mandate. We remain particularly concerned by the lack of inclusivity of the conference. The composition of the Conference has not been expanded for more than 30 years, and the recurrent demands for participation as observers continue to be unjustifiably blocked. largely owing to the action of a single Member State. This is unacceptable. This erodes trust in multilateralism and strips numerous States from the opportunity to participate in this work. At a time of budgetary constraints and discussions and debate about the reform of the United Nations, the international community is rightly calling for accountability and results. For us, it is evident that the Conference, as it currently stands, is failing to fulfil its mission. Therefore, in the absence of progress, The number of days of meetings allocated, as well as resources allocated to it, need to be significantly reduced. There is a similar observation vis-à-vis the Commission on Disarmament, whose track record has also been limited in recent years. Furthermore, we support efforts to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and operations of the First Committee, and we refer to additional suggestions which we set out during the organizational session. Mr. Chair, we remain committed to the rule of consensus, which is the linchpin when it comes to legitimacy of our work, and yet this principle cannot become a tool for inaction or obstruction. Consensus needs to be striven towards in good faith, in a spirit of compromise. We call upon all Member States, therefore, to engage constructively and to prioritize seeking common solutions in the various disarmament fora. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Belgium for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished Permanent Representative of Jamaica, speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. I do have the honor to speak on behalf of the 14 Member States of the Caribbean Community. CARICOM reaffirms its steadfast commitment to multilateralism as the foundation for advancing disarmament, non-proliferation, and arms control. At a time of heightened international uncertainty, effective multilateral institutions are essential if we are to make real progress in disarmament. CARICOM notes with concern the continuing challenges facing the UN Disarmament Commission, particularly those affecting agreement on its agenda and the conduct of substantive deliberations, which prevented the Commission from completing its three-year cycle in 2026. We recognize the differing perspectives that Member States bring to these discussions, and encourage continued engagement to enable the Commission to discharge its mandate effectively. We commend the Bureau of the Commission for its dedicated efforts to advance discussions on working methods. CARICOM also takes note that the 2026 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons did not conclude with a consensus substantive outcome. We express our sincere appreciation to the President of the Conference, Ambassador Viet, and to all delegations for their commitment and perseverance. We believe these experiences offer valuable lessons on the importance of sustained consultation, mutual understanding, and political commitment. In that spirit, CARICOM encourages stronger coordination and cooperation among the three components of the disarmament machinery: First Committee, Conference on Disarmament, and the UN Disarmament Commission. CARICOM regrets the long-standing impasse in the Conference on Disarmament and encourages renewed efforts to enable it to fulfil its role as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum. We underscore the importance of timely agreement on programmes of work so that substantive discussions may proceed without delay. CARICOM regards consensus as an important means of building confidence and securing broad support for multilateral outcomes. We acknowledge the legitimate security concerns of every State. while emphasizing that procedural differences should not prevent these bodies from fulfilling their agreed mandates. The First Committee plays a vital role as a forum for addressing disarmament and international security priorities of concern to the international community. We believe its effectiveness is best served by constructive and focused engagement, and by respect for its established mandate. In this regard, CARICOM encourages continued attention to complementarity with other specialized forums so that the Committee’s collective efforts remain well directed. The purpose of the disarmament machinery is to provide effective multilateral processes through which States can address shared security challenges. CARICOM therefore supports working methods that promote substantive engagement, transparency, inclusivity, and practical results. I thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished Permanent Representative of Jamaica, speaking on behalf of CARICOM. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Cameroon. You have the floor.

Mr. Chairman, threats to international peace and security are myriad, but multilateral mechanisms for disarmament are finding it difficult to result in progress to meet these challenges. And this is the paradox which we are encountering. We have permanent institutions for dialogue, and yet we are unable to transform these exchanges into tangible results. For Cameroon, the challenge is not related to the establishment of new institutions, but to allow existing mechanisms to fulfill their mandates effectively and efficiently. The First Committee, the Disarmament Commission, the UN Disarmament Conference, distinct but complementary functions, and but the same reality is reflected. Improvement of procedures cannot replace political will of states. Cameroon believes effectiveness of these mechanisms hinges on three dimensions. First, preservation of their legitimacy through respect for mandates, rules which apply, as well as the sovereign equality of states, second. enhancement of their effectiveness and efficiency in order to ensure that discussions result in clarification of positions, identification of divergencies and convergencies, and the preservation of future compromise, even when an immediate agreement is beyond reach; and third, guaranteeing equitable and meaningful participation of all States in order to ensure that concerns and and concerns of developing countries are given, are addressed. Universality of multilateralism is not only measured by the presence of states around the table, but also is reflected in their ability to contribute to decisions related to collective security. Mr. Chairman, we propose, furthermore, we propose ensuring continuity of multilateral disarmament work by distinguishing between those components which are subject to an agreement where rapprochement of positions set out and outstanding issues and discussions. Structured documentation of these elements will help to sustain progress made as well as to set the stage for further discussions in a manner that is in accordance with mandates, procedures, and the consent of States without presenting as consensus-based those positions which are not, because when an agreement is not possible, the dialogue at least should help to create the conditions for progress. We need not to consider the absence of progress as a part of our institutions. We continue to believe that this situation is not a predetermined reality. We call for renewed collective commitment to substantive progress insofar as the vitality of our institutions is not just measured by their ability to bring States together in meetings, but rather their ability to bring them towards common ground. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Cameroon for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Slovenia. You have the floor.

Mr. Chair. Slovenia aligns itself with a statement delivered by the European Union and would like to offer the following remarks in its national capacity. Mr. Chair, disarmament, arms control, and non-proliferation are essential for international peace and security. The disarmament machinery therefore remains the cornerstone of our multilateral security architecture. While structures designed decades ago do not always match a security environment marked by record high number of armed conflicts, rising geopolitical tensions, and rapid technological development, it is the member states' responsibility to ensure their credibility and effectiveness. Let me first turn to the work of the Conference on Disarmament. The unique negotiating forum which has delivered a major breakthrough in unilateral disarmament remains deadlocked and unable to adopt a program of work. This stands in stark contrast to the international community's urgent disarmament work, including the negotiating of a fissile material cut-off treaty. We call upon member states to move the long overdue substantive work forward. Secondly, Slovenia regrets severe challenges of the city inclusivity, openness, and transparency. For the fourth consecutive year, and due to politically motivated objections, Slovenia, this year alongside 14 other UN member state, has been prevented from participation in the city. Such objections violate sovereign equality, challenge the core principles of multilateralism, and undermine the credibility of the entire disarmament system. We have a responsibility to reinvigorate and adapt the disarmament machinery to contemporary challenges, including through expansion of the city membership that would reflect the UN membership of today. And thirdly, Mr. Chair. The ongoing discussions on the UN reform, including the UN80 initiative, offer an opportunity to ensure that our disarmament machinery remains fit for purpose and in line with its existing mandate. Fit for purpose means a machinery that builds trust, fosters confidence, and upholds long-standing disarmament and non-proliferation obligations. It means a machinery that is inclusive, accessible, and open to all. In line with the Women, Peace and Security Agenda, we advocate for the full, equal and meaningful participation of women and recognize the valuable contributions of youth, civil society, scientific community and academia. The United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research is also uniquely positioned to support this work. And finally, it means a machinery that is capable of responding effectively to evolving security challenges, including those posed by emerging technologies, threats to outer space security, and autonomous weapons system. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Slovenia for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. You have the floor.

Mr. Chairman, Amid the swiftly deteriorating situation in the area of international security, it is exceedingly important that we step up the constructive work of all elements of the disarmament triad, the First Committee, the UN Disarmament Commission, as well as the Conference on Disarmament. The international community needs to pay particular attention to the policy of Western states, leveraging multilateral disarmament fora for the advancement of their own ambitions without taking into account the interests of other Member

States.

A clear example of the manifestation of destructive trends is the operations of the CD. This year, the above-mentioned countries torpedoed the discussion on Russia’s proposed decision regarding the modalities for its establishment of subsidiary bodies of the Forum and thereby obstructed the organization of a substantive discussion there. Furthermore, attempts were undertaken to not address the substantive work on the issue of preventing an arms race in outer space. Such actions reflect the unwillingness of Western colleagues to deal with implementation of tasks assigned to this forum, the decisions of the first special session on disarmament, specifically the conduct of negotiations on crafting international legally binding instruments on arms control and disarmament. We believe that the CD, owing to its unique status as a single negotiating fora for disarmament, is in a position to make a meaningful contribution to improvement of the international security situation. The updated Russian-Chinese draft treaty on preventing an armed the placement of weapons in outer space and the use of force or threat of a force against space objects, as well as the Russian initiative to develop an international convention to combat acts of chemical and biological terrorism remain relevant. We regret that this year, due to the position of one state, the UNDC session was unable to continue its scheduled discussion of substantive agenda items and concluded without agreement being reached on recommendations. We expect that States will demonstrate sufficient political will and flexibility when agreeing upon the UNDC agenda for the next three-year cycle, which allow for the impeded commencement of the Forum activities in 2027. The desire of certain States to use the First Committee for the promotion of their own politicized agendas and to exert pressure on undesirable countries, coupled with attempts to optimize, so to speak, the Forum's working methods, is resulting in increased confrontation and growing mistrust, and this is clearly evidenced by the significant increase in the number of votes on UN General Assembly resolutions and their individual paragraphs last year. We hope that the right lessons will be drawn from the experience of the First Committee and the 80th session of the General Assembly. The full version will be posted electronically. Thank you.

Distinguished representative of the Russian Federation for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished Permanent Representative of France to the Conference on CD. You have the floor.

While France aligns itself with the statement made by the European Union, we wish to add the following comments in our national capacity: France is committed to disarmament fora. These provide an essential framework for substantive discussions that can pave the way for negotiations. The Conference on Disarmament is the main multilateral body responsible for negotiating disarmament treaties, it is today paralyzed. The procedural deadlock it has faced for several years over the issue of observer states undermines collective ability to engage in dialogue and tackle issues that pertain to our collective security. However, France remains convinced that the Conference on Disarmament is still today a relevant and essential forum for strategic dialogue. It is our collective responsibility to overcome the current impasse and to continue our efforts towards a positive, pragmatic, and ambitious agenda. The Conference on Disarmament must, as soon as possible, launch negotiations on the most mature issue for which a mandate already exists, that is, the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty, the FMCT. France is fully engaged in the ongoing discussions on UN system reform as part of the UN80 process. Together with Germany, we have presented tangible proposals to improve the effectiveness of the First Committee. I will here name a few: 1) reducing the time allocated to statements; 2) limiting the number of resolutions to those that introduce substantive changes; and 3) reducing the number of segments and the overall duration of the First Committee session. France also wishes to express its concern regarding the financial fragility of disarmament fora. This fragility has persisted for several years. We reiterate that partial or late payments of national contributions imperil the sustainability of disarmament conventions. Finally, France wishes to reiterate its long-standing support for the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, UNIDIR. It is essential that we preserve the autonomy of this institution. It allows us to develop collective expertise in the field of disarmament. Chair, I thank you.

I thank the distinguished Permanent Representative of France to the CD for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Philippines. You have the floor.

Thank you.

The Philippines aligns itself with the statements delivered by ASEAN and NAM. The first special session on disarmament was held in 1978, precisely to revitalize the disarmament machinery. Almost 50 years later, the call for revitalization remains as relevant and urgent as ever. The protracted impasse on substantive and procedural matters across all components of the disarmament machinery is symptomatic of heightening geopolitical tensions and strategic competition. compounded by entrenchment of nuclear doctrines, rapid developments in emerging technologies in outer space, and diminishing adherence to international law. Only through a renewed commitment to multilateralism, constructive engagement, and political will can we revitalize the disarmament machinery. We continue to attach importance to the work of the First Committee as an inclusive and comprehensive deliberative body representing the collective will and aspirations of the international community in all matters of disarmament and security under the scope of the UN Charter. At the same time, the UN Disarmament Commission, as a specialized deliberative body, remains an important organ for in-depth and focused discussions on issues of common interest. We support its continued work on nuclear disarmament and emerging technologies. We likewise encourage the Conference on Disarmament to jumpstart long-overdue negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty and negative security assurances, among others, while ensuring inclusivity in its discussions. A stumbling block in any of these complementary and mutually reinforcing bodies is a stumbling block in our collective progress toward disarmament. We support a closer re-examination of the disarmament machinery and its working methods, including through the possible convening of a fourth special session on disarmament. We also hope to address issues related to inclusivity, capacity building, avoiding redundancies and duplication of efforts, improving our working methods, and supporting the equal and meaningful participation of developing countries with small delegations in the disarmament process.

Ultimately, Chair, we need to figure out how to break negotiation

deadlocks without them being contingent on improvements in the security environment or resolution of protracted disputes. Finally, we thank the tireless efforts of the Office for Disarmament Affairs, including the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific, for supporting the work of our disarmament bodies as well as supporting States in the implementation of the relevant treaties. Thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Philippines for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of South Africa. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chairperson. South Africa associates with the statement delivered on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. While it is valid to acknowledge that the Conference on Disarmament and the UN Disarmament Commission were established to provide a focused negotiation and discussion forum, respectively, on matters pertaining to international security and disarmament, these critical parts of the machinery have not discharged their mandate. mandate for decades. It is important to reflect on the inability of the Conference on Disarmament to fulfill its mandate, let alone adopt a program of work in 2026. The establishment of subsidiary bodies can encourage discussions between member states, but have not brought us closer to the negotiation of a new multilateral disarmament agreement. The continued impasse is not sustainable and diminishes the credibility of the Conference, and will increasingly affect the relevance and stature of the CD. The revitalization of the body will have to include an expansion of membership to establish as broad a group of states as possible. South Africa will continue to call for the CD to return to its role as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating body of the international community. Member States have a choice to make, that is, we can be overtaken by events taking place outside the CD, or we can begin an inclusive process of negotiation that takes into account the effects of new technologies in the context of traditional international security debates. Chairperson, the Disarmament Commission, as a deliberative body in the disarmament machinery, is uniquely placed to find much-needed common ground. We regret that this year we were unable to adopt an agenda on substantive work. The work would have provided a practical platform to discuss the role of new technologies on weapons systems and the implications of modern warfare. Despite these challenges, my delegation is encouraged by the work of the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research and would like to commend the Institute for conducting quality, independent research and convening timely discussion on issues within the field of disarmament. In conclusion, Chairperson, our delegation calls for a gender perspective in disarmament and international security debates. discussions. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of South Africa for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of India. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. India remains committed to multilateralism and the ideals contained in the UN Charter. It is clear that only a reformed UN, in particular a reformed Security Council, can effectively discharge mandated functions. India attaches high priority to the UN disarmament machinery established under SSOD I, the triad of the Conference on Disarmament, the First Committee, and the UN Disarmament Commission. These remain the ideal forums for deliberation and negotiation on disarmament and international security. Chair, India values the Conference on Disarmament as the world’s single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum with the mandate, membership, and rules to negotiate legally binding instrument. While the Conference was unable to adopt a decision on work this year, India values the substantive deliberations and remains ready to work with other Member States on all the agenda items. Chair, as the UN’s main deliberative body on disarmament, the Disarmament Commission plays an important role, bringing together the full UN membership for dialogue and deliberation on arms control and disarmament issues. It has adopted several important guidelines and recommendations over the years. While the Disarmament Commission was unable to successfully conclude its work this year, we acknowledge that the Commission contributed to deepening deliberation on common understanding relating to emerging technologies in the context of international security. The utility of the forum should not be undervalued. Chair, India continues to look forward to the convening of SSOD IV to take stock of progress and revitalize the disarmament machinery. We value the important work and publications of UNIDIR. India also attaches great importance to disarmament education. The sixth and the latest edition of our fully funded annual Disarmament and International Security Affairs Fellowship was held in January this year. With 40 diplomats from 38 countries, our largest cohort yet, Chair, the First Committee mandated by SSOD 1 brings together the entire UN membership to address questions of international peace and security. While we are facing a turbulent global security environment, India hopes that the First Committee will advance the pursuit of collective and pragmatic solutions. We stand ready to contribute to this process and to work with fellow Member States towards our shared objectives. I thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of India for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Switzerland. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. This session of the First Committee has once again underscored the importance and indeed the magnitude of the challenges that have yet to be overcome for disarmament. We need to, therefore, work on the basis of existing mechanisms. That's crucial. We wish to underscore the following points. We wish to support efforts to strengthen the effectiveness of our committee. We welcome the measures instituted this year. We're of the view that others should buttress them, namely, first of all, in terms of the periodicity of resolutions. or practices in terms of the right to reply, these should be reviewed. We should review the modalities of the next session in order to facilitate the participation of delegations and to do everything we can to move back towards consensus. My second point: we remain concerned by the difficulties affecting the disarmament mechanisms established by the SSOD I. For 30 years now, the Conference on Disarmament has not been able to discharge its negotiating mandate, and disarmament instruments established over this period were negotiated in other fora. And this disarmament machinery is facing important and significant gridlocks regarding the participation of non-member states, despite the fact the agenda affects all UN member states. Regarding the disarmament Commission, the results here remain scant. We need to pay full attention to the functioning of this mechanism. My third point: we wish to underscore the scope of UNIDIR and the contributions they make to disarmament. There is great trust in this Institute. Its membership is growing. This year, the establishment of the UNIDIR Centre of Excellence on Artificial Intelligence underscores the Institute's ability to evolve to provide a response to emerging challenges. In this context, we We wish to underscore the fact that the independence of the Institute was fully retained during the UNHCR reform. This must continue so that the Institute can discharge its mandate. We intend to continue our efforts alongside all Member States in order to strengthen multilateral bodies and their ability to overcome disarmament challenges. We will continue to strive to ensure that Geneva remains at the heart of these efforts. I thank you for your attention.

I thank the distinguished representative of Switzerland for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Algeria. You have the floor.

Mr. Chair, Algeria aligns itself with the statements of NAM and the Arab Group. We thank Pakistan and Senegal for their briefings earlier today, respectively on behalf of the Conference on Disarmament and the Commission on Disarmament. The preservation and effectiveness of the UN disarmament machinery remain a shared objective. The primary obstacle to progress is not the mechanisms themselves, but the lack of political will, particularly regarding nuclear disarmament. Algeria would like to highlight three key points. First, we reaffirm the central role of the Conference on Disarmament as the sole multilateral negotiating body on disarmament. The adoption of a programme of work in 2009 under Algeria's presidency, and previously in 1998, after an 11-year gap, demonstrate that agreement is possible when political will exists and when no efforts are spared for consultations. Since 2009, the Conference has regrettably been unable to adopt a new, balanced and comprehensive programme of work. It must do so by consensus as a matter of priority, including through the early establishment of another committee on nuclear disarmament, while fully respecting its rules of procedure. It is unfortunate that the positive momentum generated in recent years could not be sustained this year. Second, the Disarmament Commission remains an essential deliberative body. We note with concern that obstruction regarding its provisional agenda prevented it from commencing formal work and concluding the 2024-2026 cycle. We urge everyone to demonstrate the necessary flexibility so that a formal and substantive session can take place in 2027. Third, Algeria reiterates its firm support for convening the fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament, or SSOD IV. In light of escalating global tensions and emerging security challenges, SSOD IV is urgently needed to revitalize multilateral efforts and address modern threats, We welcome the endorsement of the open-ended working group's reports and recommendations, and stress the need to advance consultations on the next steps. The existing framework for UN disarmament activities was established through previous special sessions and can only be updated and strengthened through a dedicated new special session. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Algeria for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished Permanent Representative of the Netherlands to the CD. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. In addition to the statement delivered by the EU, I would like to make the following remarks in my national capacity. Chair, Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates, I’d like to start with a short quote. Frustration over the impasse in the CD has led some to contemplate the possibility of suspending or even dissolving the Conference, should it not be able to deliver results in the foreseeable future." This could have been said today, but it was actually said 20 years ago, in 2006, by the then Secretary General of the Conference on Disarmament, on the occasion of the 1000th plenary meeting of the CD. Opinions differ on what is the foreseeable future, but I want to recall that we have had our 1798th plenary meeting on September 9th. All the time in between, the CD has not delivered on its negotiating mandate. Chair, this is not to say that the CD is without any value or that we should abolish it. But let us be transparent to the outside world on what we can and cannot achieve, because upholding the disarmament architecture remains a worthy goal. We stand firm to defend existing treaties, convention, and agreements. And at the same time, there must be space for frank discussions on what new norms, principles, and rules are needed in novel and emerging domains. The NALAN therefore calls upon the membership of the CD to make it fit for purpose and relevant again. This includes improving its inclusivity by admitting all those non-members who apply to participate as observers in the work of the Conference, and to resolve outstanding membership requests, some of which have been pending for decades. The relevance, transparency, and credibility of the Conference are at stake. And it's high time to enrich the conference's discussions through additional perspectives, regional insights, and expertise. Moreover, instead of budgeting for 24 weeks per year, let us, in line with UN80, streamline the CD and limit its annual sessions as long as we don't agree to negotiate. This will make us more efficient, and will also free up capacity. within UNODA and within our own delegations to address what needs to be addressed. I thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished Permanent Representative of the Netherlands to the CDE for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Thailand. You have the floor.

Chair, Thailand aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement and ASEAN. Peace and security remain the fundamental purpose of the disarmament machinery, yet this machinery operates within a deeply fragmented geopolitical landscape. Further constrained by severe budgetary cuts, this year, the UN Disarmament Commission could not adopt its agenda. The NPT Review Conference again ended without an outcome, and the Conference on Disarmament has not negotiated a treaty in three decades. To restore its effectiveness, Thailand offers three points. First, meaningful participation in the UNDC and the CD must be encouraged, and political will renewed. Thailand reaffirms the UNDC as a specialized deliberative body, and the CD as a single multilateral negotiating forum. We call for flexibility to overcome the procedural impasse at the UNDC in its new cycle, and for the CD to adopt a comprehensive and balanced program of work. Only through sustained and open dialogue can we bridge current divides and establish verifiable disarmament and arms control agreements. Second, the core values of this armament must be upheld and compliance with obligation strengthened, including under Article VI of the NPT. Thailand views the NPT, the CTBT, and the TPNW as mutually reinforcing. We call for the universalization of NPT and the TPNW and the early entry into force of the CTBT. Regional initiatives can also drive global progress. As the depository of the Bangkok Treaty, Thailand urged all nuclear weapon states to sign its protocol without reservations, while the ASEAN Regional Forum continues to foster confidence-building and dialogue. Third, the machinery must keep pace with technology. As technology outpaces regulation, bridging scientific expertise and policy making is essential. Thailand supports the meaningful participation of academia, technical experts, and UNIDIA, whose insight help ensure meaningful human control over the use of force in the context of emerging technologies, in according with international law. We regret that the UNDC could not deliberate on emerging technologies this year and hope it will do so in the next cycle. In conclusion, Thailand stands ready to work with all delegations for disarmament machinery that is inclusive, upholds legal obligations, and keeps pace with technological change. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Thailand for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Portugal. You have the floor.

Portugal aligns with the statement of the European Union and wishes to make a few remarks in its national capacity. Before delving into the intergovernmental disarmament machinery, allow me first to talk about the work carried out by secretariat bodies. Portugal wishes to express its gratitude for the excellent work carried out by UNODA and UNIDIR. as well as by non-UN organizations, such as the IAEA, CTBTO, and OPCW. In a world of greater tension and increasing mistrust, the robustness of independent work is crucial. States must continue to strengthen the independence of these organizations. Coming back to the intergovernmental machinery, Portugal wishes to make three points. First, inclusivity. Despite applying to become a member of the Conference on Disarmament in 1993, and having since then participated as an observer in the work of this body, Portugal can no longer attend this forum. Indeed, together with other Member States, Portugal has been blocked from being an observer for the fourth year in a row. due exclusively to political reasons. This is a concerning sign of lack of inclusivity in the single negotiating body related to disarmaments. Inclusivity also means enriching our intergovernmental work with expertise from civil society, academia, and the private sector. This has worked well in BMS 9 with the recently created OETG, And we hope it can work too in the global cyber mechanism. Second, results. We cannot afford to let disarmament become the paralyzed strand of work at UN as discussions advance on development or human's right for. The outcome of the GGE on laws should impel us to overcome polarization and achieve concrete results. Third, efficiency. In the spirit of UN80, we must continue pursuing a reflection on our methods of work, both here at the First Committee as well as in the CD and the UNDC. We must become more agile and more transparent. For example, the fact that rights of reply are longer than national statements constitute a particular point of unlevelled playing field for the great majority of the membership. Chair, inclusivity, results and efficiency are our recommendations to modernize the disarmament machinery and

I thank the distinguished representative of Portugal for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Pakistan. You have the floor.

Chair, the disarmament machinery established by SSOD I remains fundamentally sound in its design, rules, and methods of work. It has delivered landmark instruments whenever the political will existed. Its recent output has fallen short of expectations. This is hardly surprising. The last remaining bilateral nuclear arms control agreement expired this year. Wars have spread, and mistrust among major powers has deepened. In such an environment, expecting breakthroughs on issues that directly engage national security is challenging. Calls to revitalize the machinery often presume that the problem lies in its architecture or procedures. This is an oversimplification. The obstacle is political, not procedural. States negotiate on the basis of their threat perceptions and security imperatives, and no change in working methods can override those calculations. Nor is the answer to be found outside established forums. Initiatives pursued without consensus and without all stakeholders fragment the machinery and produce outcomes that lack universal ownership. Chair, Pakistan has the honor to preside over the CD during the final part of its 2026 session. The experience reaffirmed our conviction that the CD remains indispensable. It is the sole multilateral negotiating forum, and the only one where all militarily significant states sit together. Its consensus rule guarantees that agreements reflect the security interests of all. While the CD has not negotiated in recent years, its substantive work has built convergence on several issues. most notably negative security assurances, which are ripe for negotiation. What is lacking is not ideas, but the willingness to address the legitimate security concerns of all states rather than advance cost-free proposals for a few. Pakistan, in its role as the current CD President, has tabled the resolution on the report of the conference and seeks the support of all delegations. Chair, The UN’s financial constraints have placed new demands on the machinery. Pakistan supports efficiency and has itself biennialized two of its traditional resolutions. But rationalization must strengthen, not dilute, the substance of our work, and must not become a pretext for sidelining the priorities of developing countries. Pakistan can support a call for convening the fourth special session of the GA on disarmament, but it will only succeed if it reaffirms the foundational consensus of SSOD I and addresses the shortcomings that have prevented its implementation. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Pakistan for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Brazil. You have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Brazil remains firmly committed to strengthening the United Nations disarmament machinery, which was established by the first special session on disarmament in 1978. However, I must acknowledge that its effectiveness and credibility are increasingly undermined by institutional paralysis, outdated working methods, and a persistent lack of political will. The Conference on Disarmament has failed for decades to fulfill its negotiating mandate. Its consensus rule has become an instrument of obstruction and virtual veto, rather than of agreement. Brazil believes that a serious reassessment of its working methods is long overdue. This should encompass the excessive reliance on consensus even for procedural decisions. The UNDC faces equally troubling challenges. Its inability to conduct substantive deliberations in 2026 and to properly close its triennial cycle further illustrates the fragility of the machinery. Procedural disagreements must not prevent Member States from addressing urgent disarmament priorities. The First Committee must also reflect critically on its own functioning. Growing polarization, competing initiatives, and increasingly contentious voting patterns risk undermining its capacity to promote collective action. Brazil supports efforts to rationalize our agenda, avoid duplication and fragmentation, and strengthen coherence among multilateral disarmament processes. Yet, institutional reform alone will not suffice. No procedural arrangement can substitute for genuine political commitment to multilateralism and international cooperation. The disarmament machinery must serve the security interests of all States. It should not merely accommodate the strategic preferences of a few. Brazil stands ready to engage constructively in efforts to restore its effectiveness, legitimacy, and capacity to deliver concrete results. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Brazil for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Indonesia. You have the floor.

Chair, Indonesia aligns itself with the statements delivered on behalf of NAM and ASEAN, and wishes to add the following in our national capacity. Inclusive multilateralism remains essential to advancing disarmament and international security. Yet as nuclear risks increase and disarmament commitments weaken, disarmament machinery continues to struggle to deliver meaningful results. This is an urgent call for its revitalization. More than institutional adjustments, we must move beyond a system that perpetuates a hierarchy of nuclear haves and have-nots towards a shared security through its elimination. No state can reliably control nuclear risk, yet all bear their consequences. Chair, the gap between political commitments and collective action is clear across our disarmament machinery. This is evident from the 2026 NPT Review Conference, which for the third consecutive time ended without consensus on a substantive outcome. Indonesia continues to call for the full, effective, and non-discriminatory implementation of all three NPT pillars and concrete, measurable progress of all past commitments. We also underscore the complementarity of the NPT, TPNW, CTBT, and nuclear-weapon-free zones. Indonesia is also concerned that the UN Disarmament Commission could not agree on its substantive agenda in 2026, which prevents progress on recommendations concerning nuclear disarmament and emerging technologies. It must resume substantive deliberations and fulfill its inclusive consensus-building mandate. The Conference on Disarmament also remains at a stalemate. Its subsidiary bodies could not be re-established in 2026. We call for their restorations and agreement on a programme of work that enables substantive negotiations. Chair, breaking this cycle requires renewed political commitment and more effective working methods, including meaningful participation of non-members, civil society, and scientific experts. Stronger coordination among disarmament bodies, while respecting their distinct mandates, should translate deliberations into concrete actions. Institutional paralysis must never justify indefinite possession of nuclear weapons and other WMDs. Ultimately, The credibility of our disarmament machinery must be measured not by the numbers of meetings that we have convened, but by the concrete progress that we make towards a world free from nuclear weapons and other WMDs. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Indonesia for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Cuba. You have the floor.

We align ourselves with the statement made by Indonesia on behalf of NAM. We oppose attempts to erode the disarmament architecture, to weaken its negotiating mechanisms and to underscore the role of the UN in this domain. The effective functioning of disarmament machinery, the machinery that was designed at the SSOD I, requires that each and every one of its components be able to fully discharge the mandate that has been entrusted to it. We regret the fact that in the third year of the current cycle of work of the Disarmament Commission, It was not been possible to adopt its substantive program of work. Instead, we were compelled to proceed through informal discussions. It is particularly concerning to note that in a context of growing tensions and risks in the sphere of disarmament and non-proliferation, we were not able to even make progress in organizing work in a substantive and structured way. This lays bare the lack of necessary political will to overcome differences and discharge the mandate entrusted to the Commission. The persistent inability of this body to make progress cannot become the new normal, and it cannot become acceptable. The international community requires multilateral mechanisms that are able to effectively and without selectiveness broach current challenges in the disarmament domain. It is vital that Member States demonstrate flexibility and the necessary political will to overcome this state of gridlock and allow the Commission to fully discharge its mandate. Chair, the Conference on Disarmament is the sole multilateral negotiating forum within the sphere of disarmament. It remains also in a state of gridlock without substantive progress in negotiations. This protracted paralysis is incompatible with the urgency of current challenges and weakens the credibility of disarmament multilateral mechanisms. We once again appeal for the preservation, strengthening of the Conference on Disarmament. Its rules of procedure must be protected, as must its working practices, including consensus. This is a basis of its functioning. Member States must demonstrate necessary political will to overcome differences and to allow us to begin substantive discussions on disarmament matters without delay. The situation facing the Disarmament Commission and the UN Conference on Disarmament is not an isolated phenomenon. It reflects a weakening of the trust between states and growing pressure on the international norms which for decades have sought to limit the most devastating effects of war. All components of our disarmament machinery must be able to discharge their respective mandates and effectively foster progress. in the sphere of disarmament, with full respect for international law and the UN Charter. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Cuba for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Greece. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair.

My country fully aligns with the statement delivered by the European Union and has the following remarks in its national capacity. At a time when the international disarmament and non-proliferation architecture is under strain, we are obliged to make any effort to uphold the integrity and relevance of the UN Disarmament Machinery. A central element of the disarmament machinery is the Conference on Disarmament. The Conference has produced important international instruments which remain important pillars of the international security architecture. We regret the continuous inability of the Conference to agree on its programme of work. This stalemate prevents the Conference from fulfilling its mandate and entering into substantive negotiations. We call on all CD members to support practical measures to improve the work of the Conference and to enable substantive progress. Mr. Chair, Greece believes that it is time to seriously consider the expansion of CDS membership in order to enhance its representativeness and better reflect today's geopolitical realities. We echo all those who note with concern that the draft resolution and the report of the Conference on Disarmament does not adequately recognize the challenges to maintain inclusivity at the Conference. In particular, we regret that, again this year, it was not possible for the CD to resolve the issue of the continued exclusionary practices against the requests by interested States to participate as observers to the Conference, including my country. Finally, Greece commends the important work of other elements of the disarmament machinery, including UNODA and UNIDIR, and stands ready to continue cooperating with them. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Greece for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Austria. You have the floor.

Mr. Chair, Austria aligns with the statement delivered by the European Union. In times of uncertainty, effective global disarmament machinery is more necessary than ever. And yet, the gap between what our institutions must deliver and what they actually achieve continues to grow. The Conference on Disarmament has produced no substantive negotiated outcome since the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. The Disarmament Commission concluded another three-year cycle without substantive recommendations. The third consecutive failure to reach an outcome at an NPT review conference should be a wake-up call to all of us. Chair, the question is not whether reform is needed, but whether we are prepared to act. The UN 80 Reform Agenda provides an opportunity we must seize. Austria's commitment to these institutions is precisely why we insist that they must function. Preserving them cannot mean that we accept the paralysis of our disarmament machinery. We must examine working methods and address the misuse of procedural rules and consensus, particularly to exclude UN Member States from meaningful participation, as we see in the CD. And dear colleagues, we can start here, in our first committee. Austria supports present proposals for further streamlining, right of replies, in order to ensure that we have enough time for substantive debate. Efficiency alone is not enough. Reform must also enable progress. And our discussion therefore must be informed by scientific evidence and experience of those directly affected. We therefore advocate for meaningful participation by civil society, academia, and other stakeholders. Integrating gender and diversity considerations also strengthens our work, and we highlight the importance of the Joint Statement on Gender. It is in our shared security interest to strengthen our institutions, uphold established norms, fully implement our treaty obligations, and shape the future of multilateral disarmament. So reform is not about weakening our institutions, but it is about enabling them to finally fulfill their mandates. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Austria for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished Permanent Representative of Spain to the CD. You have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Spain aligns itself with the statement made by the European Union. We staunchly defend a multilateral system rooted in the United Nations Charter and in international law. In view of the deteriorating situation of international security and in view of attempts to replace the current international order with one based on might is right, that we have a wide network of disarmament, non-proliferation, and arms control treaties, that is a normative legacy that must be preserved and strengthened. The Conference on Disarmament has a crucial role to play as an international negotiating forum for a disarmament treaty. The time has come for this conference to overcome its current gridlock. It must agree upon a programme of work, negotiate treaties, including the fissile material cut-off treaty, and it must cease to use the rule of consensus of this forum as a veto. If progress along this path is not made, it will lose relevance precisely when the increasing seriousness of the challenges we face demands an active institution which is able to offer results. Moreover, we must strengthen transparency in the way its budget is managed. Let us not forget that that budget comprises contributions of all States here represented. Some of these States have asked to be observers, others have requested for years now, unsuccessfully, to become members. Over the last four years, the access of 12 countries from the European Union and other three associated countries as observers has been consistently vetoed by one member. We are gravely concerned by the fact that inclusion is systematically being discarded in favor of a principle that is exclusion based on the alleged politicization that these countries are supposedly going to bring to the work of the body. We firmly support the admission of all countries asking to be observers. We hail their contribution to this body with their ideas and positions. We also support the UN80 reform, including the quest for greater effectiveness and greater streamlining of the work of the First Committee. However, at the same time, we reiterate the importance of preserving and nurturing multilingualism in disarmament fora. This multilingualism is the very core of everything the UN represents. We oppose this being sacrificed on the altar of supposed budgetary efficiencies that should and must indeed be achieved elsewhere. Chair, this statement will be submitted on the appropriate online forum in its longer form. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished Permanent Representative of Spain to the CDE for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Saudi Arabia. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. We align ourselves with the Non-Aligned Movement and the Arab Group, and we'll make the following observation in our national capacity: One, the disarmament machinery of the United Nations produced important legal instruments and guiding principles that have served humanity by supporting international cooperation and dialogue. and by working to reduce the causes of international tensions that affect international peace and security. Accordingly, increasing the efficiency of this machinery remains a common objective of the international community.

Two, we stress the need for the

expansion of the membership and the empowerment of the Conference on Disarmament as the sole multilateral disarmament negotiating forum to enable it to fulfil its role as expected. With regard to the United Nations Disarmament Commission, the sole specialized universal deliberative body in the field of disarmament, we value its consideration of the issues of nuclear disarmament and new and emerging technologies in the context of international security. However, we regret the failure of the Working Group on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation to adopt any recommendations in the recent years.

We hope that this

situation will be rectified through the final year of the Commission's substantive cycle by enabling it to reach a substantive outcome in the field of disarmament. Three, we recognize the valuable work of UNIDIR and stress the need to take concrete measures to guarantee equitable geographical representation among its staff and within its groups of governmental experts and other groups of experts. We also stress the importance of defending multilingualism in the work of the United Nations and the disarmament machinery. This guarantees the effective participation of all and contributes to improved outcomes. Multilingualism should not be sacrificed for budgetary reasons. It is therefore important to explore innovative means to preserving it. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Saudi Arabia for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of the United States. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. All of us deserve a United Nations designed to face the challenges of today. Chief among those is the maintenance of international peace and security, and as such, the global disarmament machinery must be made more effective, more efficient, and more fit for purpose. Over the past year, the UN80 Initiative has moved from diagnosis to action. We must remain focused on adjustments that will allow us to deliver results on our highest shared priorities and do so without wasting our citizens' resources. The United States initiated discussions on the periodicity of First Committee resolutions in 2025. We commend those states that prioritized efficiency and reduced the frequency of their resolutions And we call again for all sponsors to conserve resources spent on translation, document processing, and reports. Annual resolutions should be the exception, not the norm. Earlier this year, the General Assembly adopted Resolution 8251 on strengthening the UN system, agreeing that member states will review the frequency with which agenda items, resolutions, and decisions are considered, taking a more strategic and streamlined approach. 2025 demonstrated that with focused planning, we can optimize our calendar and reduce the overall time needed for first committee activities. The United States regrets this process did not fully carry over into 2026, but we expect such improvements will be implemented in 2027. We urge all states to recognize that more time meeting does not necessarily lead to more results. Chair, the United States continues to question the relevance of the UN Disarmament Commission, a body that meets for three weeks annually yet achieves little. To demonstrate utility, the next session should focus on a single core topic: nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation. Only after it delivers a tangible outcome should it consider additional topics. The United States further urges that the session be shortened and shift from annual to biannual meetings. We welcome efforts from UNODA to align resources with arms control, risk reduction, and nonproliferation priorities. We encourage improvements in operational efficiencies, resource optimization, streamlined decision-making, and transparency. We appreciate information that has been shared regarding the finances of the Conference on Disarmament, and we look forward to an additional briefing later this year to give all CD members access to this information. We continue to urge sharper focus for the CD as well, with key nuclear priorities at the forefront. UN80 calls us to be bold in reform efforts, and we encourage all delegations to embrace this approach to our work in the months and years ahead. Thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of the United States for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Egypt. You have the floor.

Mr. Chairperson, Egypt supports a well-resourced and effective United Disarmament Machinery. The current stalemate is a reflection of the lack of political will by some States, and is not necessarily due to defects in the machinery itself. The Conference on Disarmament failed to adopt a balanced and comprehensive programme of work for over 26 years. There is also a need to ramp up the work of the United Nations Disarmament Commission, which witnessed another setback this session through its failure to convene substantive discussions in Working Groups 1 and 2. While we appreciate ideas to streamline discussions within our First Committee, for us, real reform necessitates political will, which means allowing substantive and in-depth discussions in areas and topics where they really matter. We welcome the role of the UN Institute for Disarmament Research and the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters. We reiterate our call for more financial independence and support for UNIDIR. We appreciate the valuable contributions of non-governmental organizations and other stakeholders in support of the disarmament machinery. taking into consideration the intergovernmental nature of the relevant processes, as well as the applicable rules of procedures. Egypt supports further efforts to enhance and to ensure balanced female representation and geographic equity in the work of the disarmament machinery, including at UNODA, UNIDIR, and the Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament, and the Group of Governmental Experts. Lastly, Egypt notes with appreciation efforts led by Member States, mostly by countries from the Global South, to avoid duplication and ensure coherence of discussions and outcomes under a single track, as seen in the areas of outer space and cybersecurity particularly. These endeavours contribute to the preservation of the credibility of and building trust within the SUTARMA machinery. Thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Egypt for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Maldives. You have the floor.

Every stalled negotiation carries a cost. It delays essential efforts to reduce threats, build trust, and prevent conflict. Small states bear the consequences of arms races and conflict, even when we have no part in driving them. Our institutions must be able to deliver real progress. Their credibility depends on turning shared commitment into practical results. The Maldives reaffirmed the importance of First Committee, the United Nations Disarmament Commission, and the Conference on Disarmament. Strengthening our work requires political will, effective coordination, and meaningful participation. The MOLD is therefore called for progress in three areas. First, overcome the deadlock in disarmament negotiation. We urge members of Conference on Disarmament on build on progress made through its subsidiary bodies in 2025, agreed on and implement a balanced and comprehensive program of work, and return to substantive negotiation. We must also restore effectiveness of United Nations Disarmament Commission. Its inability to agree on agenda in 2026 demonstrate how procedural disagreement can prevent and substantive progress. Second, ensure that small state can contribute effectively. Capacity building support for you. UNDO and regional center remain essential. Third, ensure that our institutions can respond to emerging technology. State must be able to assess these risk and shape appropriate response before harmful practices become established. The model support the full, equal, and meaningful participation of women in disarmament, discussion, and decision-making. For the Maldives, strengthening disarmament machineries means ensuring that every state can help shape our sovereign future and collective security. We must equip our institutions to deliver on commitment we make. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Maldives for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of El Salvador. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. El Salvador reaffirms its staunch commitment to multilateral disarmament machinery under the UN umbrella. At a time of growing international tensions, we require a disarmament machinery that is able to respond to the realities of our time. However, we must recognize that its functioning is beset by significant difficulties. The protracted absence of substantive results within a number of our bodies and the difficulties faced to achieve consensus, including on issues necessary to organize our work, must prompt us to reflect seriously upon how to revitalize this machine and preserve its relevance. With this in mind, El Salvador particularly regrets the situation that was faced this year by the UN Disarmament Commission. The Commission is the only deliberative universal forum specialized in matters of disarmament. It has the important responsibility of issuing recommendations for the consideration of the General Assembly. El Salvador attaches particular value to this mandate and has sought to actively contribute to its work. Consequently, we regret the fact that during its 2026 session, the Commission was unable to achieve consensus to formally adopt the agenda for its substantive session. This situation is particularly regrettable because the cycle that concluded in 2026 had made it possible to hold substantive discussions on majorly important issues. El Salvador had the importance of presiding during this cycle over the Working Group II on Recommendations to Promote Common Understandings on Emerging Technologies in the Context of International Security. During its work, delegations and experts were able to exchange views on a vast range of technological developments and to explore areas of common ground. Our experience confirms that the Commission has particular value as a space for universal dialogue and the gradual establishment of common understandings. As such, we should preserve its ability to discharge its mandate. The response to the difficulties faced by the Commission must not be to resign ourselves to its paralysis. Rather, on the contrary, it must be the opposite. Our answer should be to seriously assume the responsibility of reforming and revitalizing it. Thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of El Salvador for her statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Peru. You have the floor.

Peru as a country in the United Nations Center for Peace Development Latin America and the Caribbean, UNLIRAC, we wish to point to the role that this center plays within the multilateral disarmament machine as the operational arm of the United Nations in this region. Since its inception in 1987, UNLIRAC has contributed to the effectiveness of the institutional disarmament framework. This through technical, legal, and normative assistance being provided to member states, particularly in terms of the control of small arms and light weapons, munitions, and explosive devices. Its work is an example of multilateral cooperation is effective in the face of some of the most pressing challenges facing the region. Transnational organized crime is one of those. In a context in which criminal networks benefit from the illicit trafficking of weapons, UNLIREC plays a decisive role because it builds national capacity to tackle the illicit circuits that fuel drug trafficking, illegal mining, and other forms of transnational crime. We underscore the contribution UNLIREC makes to the Central American roadmaps and that of the Dominican Republic. and of Haiti and the Andean community. These roadmaps establish national and regional priorities and link them up with disarmament frameworks. These results demonstrate the importance of preserving effective disarmament machinery that is able to respond to the needs of all states, including with scant resources. In this spirit, Peru has adopted has agreed to more than double its contribution to UNLIRIC. This will go from 30,000 to some 65,000 dollars a year. That reaffirms our commitment to UNLIRIC's sustainability. We encourage member states and international partners to retain and increase as far as they can their contributions, that is their voluntary contributions, to UNLIRIC. These are vital to preserve UNLIRIC's operational capacity on behalf of GRULAC. Peru has the honor of presenting the draft resolution on UNLIREC. It reaffirms its mandate and its role as a bridge between disarmament, sustainable development, and citizen security. We reiterate our appeal to Member States to support this resolution and to continue consolidating international disarmament machinery. UNLIREC is a crucial linchpin of this architecture for peace, stability, and multilateral cooperation in the region. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Peru for his statement. The committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom and Great Britain. You have the floor.

Chair, our disarmament machinery has produced the frameworks that underpin global stability. It has helped states to turn dialogue into deliverables and competition into cooperation. It has created an architecture that remains resilient to this day, but which is operating under increasing strain. The UK thanks this year's Presidencies for steering the Conference on Disarmament and welcomes the substantive discussions held across its agenda. These exchanges underline the CD's continued value as a forum for dialogue on core disarmament issues. At the same time, we regret that Russia blocked observer state participation again, undermining the inclusive, transparent engagement needed to rebuild trust. To preserve and strengthen the disarmament architecture, we should build on the value of substantive exchanges at the CD and use the full range of available formats flexibly. We have formal and informal meetings, expert briefings, and other formats can all support more focused engagement and practical progress. We also need to strengthen the CD’s engagement with other relevant Geneva-based organisations, such as the ITU. As we move into next year’s cycle, we urge all members to convert substantive exchanges into a balanced programme of work and negotiations. Chair, this year’s UN Disarmament Commission showed both the strains on multilateral disarmament diplomacy and member states’ commitment to preserving its institutions. The UK supports efforts to make the UNDC more efficient, focused and impactful, while preserving its consensus-based and inclusive character. Here, at First Committee, we should also continue to improve how we work. This is not about limiting debate or discussion on important disarmament issues, but about recognising the demands of an increasingly packed disarmament calendar. The UK welcomes the efficiencies implemented at this year’s session and encourages efforts to build on this next year, including by reducing time allocated to rights of reply. We should continue to challenge ourselves on the periodicity of resolutions, and any requests for Secretary General reports should be purposeful, proportionate, and mindful of existing resources. I’d also like to add those thoughts in the room that have said we really appreciate the excellent work of UNIDIR and our colleagues at UNODA. Chair, our disarmament machinery is imperfect, but indispensable. Its effectiveness depends not on its design alone, but on the political will Member States invest in it. We should work together to protect, strengthen, and use it as our best vehicle for lasting progress. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom for her statement. The committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Liberia. You have the floor.

My alarm movement has set out this year's record. Liberia will hide what it means for a small state.

When a tear review

conference ends without an outcome, and a disarmament commission and the Conference on Disarmament cannot do their work, Those with the least power lose the assurance place to be heard. Liberia does not see these hurdles as a reason to walk away. Between 1990 and 2003, Liberians signed more than a dozen peace agreement before the Accra Agreement finally took place. Each collapse was costly, but abandoning the talks will have cost far more. The problem was never the process. It was the will of those who had the ultimate decision. As the president of the conference observed, today's impasse reflects political condition more than procedure. Restoring that will call for practical steps in three ways or areas. First, build on the consensus that remains. This year, the group of governmental experts elected autonomous weapons. existing agreed by consensus on elements of a possible instrument, and the Conference on Disarmament adopted its annual report. These gains are modest, but they show that agreement is still within reach. Liberia supports the draft resolution on the report of the Conference and of the Disarmament Commission, and hopes the former will again be adopted with our vote. We urge members of the conference to agree on a program of work that restores its negotiating role. Second, Liberia supports reform under the UN aid initiative and the Bureau's effort to use time well. But efficiency must strengthen delivery, not distance the machinery from those it serves. As proposals to integrate UNITAD into the Office for Disarmament Affairs And to quote, locate the regional centers, research independence and proximity to the few must be preserved. Liberia therefore supports the draft resolution on the Regional Center for Peace and Disarmament in Africa. Ten, if efficiency must not cost inclusion, smaller delegation must be able to participate fully. This year. 33 non-member states asked to join the work of the conference, only 18 could be invited. The machinery is also stronger when women take part meaningfully and young people who are tomorrow's negotiators are engaged today. In conclusion, Mr. Chair, the machinery is only as strong as the will of the states that use it. Liberia will continue working with all dedication to keep these forums open and productive. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Liberia for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Nigeria. You have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Nigeria reaffirms its unwavering commitment to multilateralism as the cornerstone of international disarmament efforts. We underscore the importance of preserving and strengthening the United Nations disarmament machinery, particularly the Conference on Disarmament, the United Nations Disarmament Commission, and the First Committee itself, as an independent platform for advancing international peace and security. We remain concerned that persistent political division and the lack of consensus continue to impede meaningful progress within these institutions. Nigeria believes that effectiveness of the disarmament machinery depends not merely on institutional reform, but fundamentally on renewed political will, constructive engagement, and respect for established mandates and agreed working methods. Nigeria underscored the central vital contribution to capacity building, combating illicit arms trading, and addressing Africa involving security challenges. We strongly support adequate, predictable, and sustainable resources for its operation, that's the operation for Africa Center for Disarmament, and then as well as the continued annual consideration of resolution concerning the United Nations Regional Center to ensure sustained oversight, accountability, and responsiveness to regional priorities. Nigeria further emphasizes the importance of equitable geographical representation, transparency, and inclusivity across the United Nations disarmament architecture, including UNODA and relevant expert mechanisms, while avoiding unnecessary duplication to mandate and process. Mr. Chair, Nigeria remains convinced that a credible, inclusive, and effective disarmament machinery is essential to restoring confidence in multilateralism. We therefore call upon all members to translate political commitment into practical cooperation, guided by consensus, mutual respect, and our shared responsibility to advance a safer and more peaceful world. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Nigeria for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Iran. You have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. My delegation aligns itself with the statement delivered by Indonesia on behalf of the NAM. Disarmament issues closely linked to national security must be addressed through transparent, inclusive, and consensus-based processes within the machinery established by the SSOD-1. Its established mandates and methods remain valid and don’t require revision. The paralysis of the UN disarmament machinery stems not from deficiencies in its procedures or institutional arrangements, but from the persistent lack of political will among certain nuclear-weapon States and their allies to advance nuclear disarmament, their unwillingness to engage based on equality and mutual respect, and their attempts to instrumentalize multilateral mechanisms for political purposes. The continued deadlock in the CD caused by the refusal of certain Western states to engage in substantive negotiations, and the numerous negative votes cast by the US and the Israeli regime against First Committee’s resolutions advancing disarmament, expose this persistent pattern of opposition that continues to undermine the effectiveness of the UN disarmament machinery. The US recent obstruction of the adoption of the UNDC’s agenda further illustrates this pattern of conduct. Likewise, the organizational reforms envisaged under the UN80 initiative must not divert attention from a fundamental issue: the chronic delays in the payment of assessed contributions by the Organization’s largest contributor, which are a major factor behind the current liquidity crisis. We express concern over the United States’ so-called compliance report, which relies on unilateral, biased, and politically motivated assessment of other States’ compliance and undermines the authority and technical integrity of the IAEA and OPCW. We are equally concerned that this year’s U.S. draft resolution turns compliance into an instrument of political pressure and double standard. Equitable geographical representation within UNODA and disarmament expert groups must be ensured. Reducing the number of experts for financial savings risks undermining the credibility of their outcomes. In this context, we strongly deplore the host country's refusal to issue visas to an Iranian representative scheduled to attend the meeting of the First Committee and to an Iranian fellow participating in this year’s UN Disarmament Fellowship, thereby preventing the latter from attending the Fellowship’s final segment in New York. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Iran for his statement. The Committee will now hear from the distinguished representative of Libya. You have the floor.

Chair, I'm taking the floor in my national capacity. We reiterate the fact that we endorse the position of the Arab Group, the African Group, and the Non-Aligned Movement. We reaffirm that the universality of the NPT is crucial. The elimination of nuclear weapons in the Middle East also is an absolute priority that cannot be called into question. UN disarmament mechanisms are based on the SSOD1 held in 1978, we call for us not to succumb to the temptation of circumventing or restructuring these principles or the temptation of straying beyond them. Here, we reiterate our support for the holding of an SSOD4 to respond to growing threats facing international security today. We deplore the total gridlock seen in the work of the Disarmament Conference. It is unable to hold its negotiations. This gridlock is the result of the lack of political will on the part of certain States. We categorically reject all attempts to impose new obligations regarding disarmament to the detriment of the fundamental goal, namely the total elimination of these weapons. We belong to both the Arab region, the African region, and the non-aligned group. As such, we welcome the role played by the Disarmament Commission. To conclude, we warn against increased polarization and international cooperation. These have negative repercussions on the effectiveness of our international mechanisms and fritter away their resources. We wish to see a fairer international regime, one where peace reigns. one where all the sovereignty of States is respected. I thank you.

Wish delegates, we have exhausted the time available for this meeting. The Committee will reconvene this afternoon at 3:00 PM in this conference room, when we will hear any remaining statements on disarmament machinery. At 5:30 today, the Committee will hold its award ceremony for the 2026 United Nations Disarmament Fellowship certificates. Should the Committee conclude its consideration of the cluster on disarmament machinery early today, and taking into consideration rights of reply and the award ceremony, we will begin the third and final phase of its work, namely, action on all draft resolutions and decisions submitted under agenda items, where we will hear general statements and explanation of vote before the vote on proposals submitted under cluster one, nuclear weapons. Let me be clear, no voting will take place today, only statements. The meeting is adjourned.