Financing the NPT Review Process Working paper presented by the United States of America to the second session of the Preparatory Committee Geneva In recent years, the financial cost of the NPT regime has grown alongside the number of States Party. Recent NPT meetings uniformly have exceeded their estimated budgets, and the UN Secretariat has made clear its expectation that NPT expenses will continue to rise. It is in the interest of all States Party to address this growing, mutual concern. There are, of course, a number of means through which to control conference costs. One obvious measure would be an agreement by States Party to rely on digital audio files as a record, rather than on hard copy summarized records, for all future NPT meetings. States Party also could, on a voluntary basis, adopt administrative practices whose implementation, over time, would reduce conference costs. Examples would include voluntary limits on speaking time, and on the length of both official conference documents and national working papers. Any of these steps immediately would reduce interpretation, translation, and publication expenses. We encourage States Party to initiate an informal dialogue through which to identify similar measures for Parties to consider following on a voluntary basis. Finally, States Party should review the NPT Scale of Assessments (NPT/CONF.2005/51), which has basically remained static for some two decades. Two Parties, the United States and Japan, bear a combined assessment of 47.035 percent. No other Party bears an assessment running into double digits. The existing imbalance in the financial obligations of States Party is evident when individual contributions are compared. This list – which represents 2005 assessments -- is clearly not consistent with the relative scale of many Parties’ economic capacities, nor with any plausible differential of benefits received from the NPT regime:
As one can see from this table of assessments, the estimated $1,369,300 cost of the 2008 PrepCom, for instance, translates into no more than between $13 and $124 each for 69 States Party, and between $136 and $12,461 for 70 more. In other words, some 130 countries, more than 70 percent of States Party, each pay less than one percent of the total cost. To rectify the existing imbalance of financial burdens and thereby ensure the continued financial health of the review process, the United States proposes that the 2010 Review Conference consider and adopt a revised Scale of Assessments for the NPT that would take effect upon the conclusion of the 2010 review cycle. Every State Party thus will have ample time to study the existing Scale and consider a new national assessment that reflects its current economic vitality, consistent with the principle of mutual respect for the equal sovereignty of States. The United States believes that the NPT is an important component of the broader global nonproliferation regime, and deserves firm and generous support from all States Party. We are not proposing to reduce the amount we pay to support the regime, but we feel that fundamental principles of equitable allocation require that others provide support more consistent with their economic capabilities and the degree to which all States Party derive critical benefits from the NPT regime.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||