Closing Statement by Stephen Matthias
Head of the U.S delegation to the CCW-GGE

Geneva,
January 18, 2008

Thank you Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, let me begin by thanking you for your willingness to chair these important negotiations and for the highly effective manner in which you have conducted our first round of negotiations this week.  My delegation feels that these negotiations have gotten off to a promising start and that is in no small part due to your efforts and those of your team. 

I would also like to extend my thanks to the other delegations participating in these meetings.  We have been struck by the constructive spirit in which most delegations have approached our discussions this week.  We have no doubt that these negotiations must confront difficult issues on which delegations have a wide range of opinions.  However, my delegation is encouraged by the tone of the discussions so far, and we are optimistic that if all delegations continue to approach the issues in this way, that we will be able to move toward a new Protocol to the CCW addressing the issue of cluster munitions this year.

In particular, I would like to thank the Russian delegation for taking on the task of chairing the working group that was asked to work toward a consolidated definition of the terms “cluster munition” and “submunition.”  This was by no means an easy task, as several delegations had offered widely-differing definitions.  We now have a consolidated draft text of these definitions that we think will provide a very helpful basis on which to continue our work in the future.  Although this text contains a number of brackets, we believe it represents the views of most of the states participating in these negotiations.  We believe it is a significant step forward and will be useful to the GGE as we continue with our negotiations.

Mr. Chairman, I made a statement on the U.S. delegations’ substantive position on these negotiations yesterday.  Today, I would like to offer a few thoughts on how we see the process as we go forward.  First, we think it will be useful to have as many delegations as possible submit ideas in writing before or during the April session.  Second, we hope that delegations will spend the time between now and April refining their positions in light of what they have heard here this week.  If these two things happen, we hope that we can have an even more detailed exchange of views on the concepts that might be included in the new instrument in the next session.  We also hope that we can all begin to do some creative thinking about how to bridge some of the differences that we have identified this week and have them available by the April meeting.

Our hope is that you, Mr. Chairman, could use the various written submissions you receive, as well as the interventions by delegations this week and during our week of negotiations in April to come up with an outline or a chairman’s draft prior to the negotiations in July.  We think the July session will be critical to making substantial progress on these negotiations this year.  We believe that it will be important at that stage to be working from a text that starts from a realistic and informed assessment of where consensus may be possible.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you again for all of your efforts before and during this week that have made our first round of negotiations a success.  The U.S. delegation looks forward to continuing our work on these important issues and to reconvening here for the next round of negotiations in April.