Apparently, there was a "non-slide" presentation about the objectives of the proposed treaty.
And some "non-conclusions."
Manon Ress has the latest.
According to her:
The chair did not want "too many to speak" but had to let India make its statement. Asking for clarification, India describe how the list of matters did not reflect agreement and was just a list of matters that have been discussed for years. According to the mandate, only matters where agreement was reached should be listed.HK
The plenary ended on that note. People here are puzzled. If you only point to agreement (on or off the record it seems), the non-conclusions might end up very very short. Would that mean that this meeting did not really happen? Like a non-meeting?
No comments:
Post a Comment