050514 NPT再検討会議における日本政府の作業ペーパーの概要
開催中のNPT再検討会議で日本政府代表団が提出したはずの作業ペーパーが国連事務局側のミスで配布が遅れたというニューズ（朝日新聞5/13夕刊)が出ていましたが、その英文テキスト（とくにエルバラダイの「多国間核管理構想」MNAに関連する部分の抜粋）を改めてご紹介します。町村外務大臣の一般演説(5/2)と作業ペーパーの仮訳は、先日(5/7)配信済み。
ちなみに、この作業ペーパーのパラ53で、（日本のように）真面目にIAEA保障措置を受け入れている国の原子力活動についてはMNAは影響しないという趣旨を明らかにしています。全体的に、MNA構想を支持しつつ日本の核燃料サイクル防衛のため予防線を張っている感じです。ご参考まで。（以下の情報提供：シグナスＸ−１氏）
--KK
********************************************************************
ＮＰＴ再検討会議の文書は、http://www.un.org/events/npt2005/documents.html
に載っていますが、確かに日本のワーキングペーパーは２１と２２番です。
NPT/CONF.2005/WP.21. Further measures
to strengthen the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Twenty-one
Measures for the Twenty-first Century: Working paper submitted by
Japan
NPT/CONF.2005/WP.22. Working paper of Japan
■
日本の文書、提出後１週間各国に配られず ＮＰＴ会議 （朝日新聞 2005年05月13日16時15分）
国連本部で開催中の核不拡散条約（ＮＰＴ）再検討会議で、日本の核不拡散政策について包括的に説明した作業文書が、提出後約１週間たなざらしにされ、各国に配布されないままになっていたことが分かった。１１日以降、国連軍縮局のＮＰＴ公式サイトにようやく掲載されたが、一番のりを目指していた代表団は落胆している。
作業文書は、会議の論議を進める上でたたき台となるよう、政府の立場や主張を説明したもの。日本は開会間もない４日、計２点を英語で提出した。「文書番号１番を目指した」（関係者）ものだった。
しかし、各国の文書が次々と国連の公式サイトに掲載され始めたが、日本の文書は載らなかった。代表団は会場で、日本文書のコピーを配ったりしていたが、１１日になって、やっと公式サイトに掲載された。
中国が直前に６本の文書を出すなど、他国が先んじていた可能性もあるが、理由は不明。「事務が追いつかなかったのでは」（日本代表団のメンバー）との見方もある。
なお、NPT/CONF.2005/WP.22.
Working paper of
Japanの中で、核燃料サイクルのマルチラテラル・アプローチ(MNA)に関しては、以下のように記載されています。
(d)
Multilateral Approaches to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle
50. Japan shares the
view that the international nuclear non-proliferation regime
urgently needs
to be strengthened in order to maintain and improve the peace and
stability
of the international community. A strengthened regime is also vital
for
improving the security environment of Japan, which is directly faced with
the
threats posed by the nuclear programmes of the Democratic People’s
Republic of
Korea. With regard to Multilateral Approaches to the Nuclear Fuel
Cycle, Japan
appreciates the intensive efforts made by the International
Expert Group to produce
a report on the issue.
51. The Multilateral
Nuclear Approaches report, in order to maintain that
momentum, suggests five
possible approaches and recommends that attention be
given to them by the
IAEA member States, by the IAEA itself, by the nuclear
industry and by other
nuclear organizations. Japan strongly believes that if further
consideration
is to be made by the international community on that issue, the
following
points, which were not sufficiently discussed by the International
Expert
Group, owing partly to its limited mandate, should be fully
discussed.
52. First, careful examination is necessary on how the
Multilateral Nuclear
Approaches can contribute to the strengthening of the
international nuclear
non-proliferation regime. In particular, it is
necessary to examine very thoroughly
whether and how the Multilateral Nuclear
Approaches will actually contribute to
solving the issues of countries that
have already violated their international
obligations on non-proliferation,
or of countries of proliferation concern that may
fall in violation in the
future.
53. Second, it is also important to examine whether the
Multilateral Nuclear
Approaches will not unduly affect the peaceful uses of
nuclear energy by a
non-nuclear-weapon State that carries out nuclear
activities with the confidence of
the international community by faithfully
fulfilling its Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons obligations
and by ensuring high
transparency of its nuclear activities. The Multilateral
Nuclear Approaches should
not affect the peaceful uses of nuclear energy by
such a non-nuclear-weapon State,
particularly when the State has ratified and
is fully implementing both its
comprehensive safeguards agreement and
additional protocol, and, as a result, has
been accorded a conclusion from
the IAEA secretariat that there was no indication
of diversion of declared
nuclear material placed under safeguards or of undeclared
nuclear material
and activities for the State as a whole.
54. Finally, more study needs to
be undertaken on how the Multilateral Nuclear
Approaches can actually
guarantee supply of nuclear fuel and services, given the
fact that the supply
of nuclear fuel and services can easily be affected by the
international
political situation and is therefore unpredictable by nature. Of
particular
importance is the issue of how the IAEA could be an effective guarantor
of
nuclear fuel and services under such circumstances.
55. Japan strongly
believes that if the international community agrees to continue
the
discussion on the Multilateral Nuclear Approaches, the above-mentioned
points
should be addressed and thoroughly examined.