The 2000 NPT Review
Conference (RevCon)
14 April - 19 May 2000, New York
Presentations By
Non-Governmental
Organizations (NGOs)
Universality & Nonproliferation: The Case of the Middle East
Presenter: Mr. Bahig Nassar, Arab Coordination Center of NGOs
To be read by:
Mr. Richard Salvador, Pacific Islands Association of NGOs
Mr. President, Distinguished Delegates,
We are grateful for your kind presence at
this session to exchange views on matters of special concern to all of
us. Among the many acute issues you will deal with is the question of
nuclear weapons proliferation and the necessity of ensuring the
universality of the NPT to prevent such proliferation. Allow us to
discuss this issue in relation to the Middle East region.
Mr. President,
In the twenty-first
century new types of nuclear weapons free zones (NWFZ) will need to be
established different from those established in the twentieth century.
Instead of NWFZs established in regions already free from nuclear
weapons to ensure non-proliferation, these nuclear weapons free zones
will be established in regions where states which possess nuclear
weapons are located. Their aim will be nuclear disarmament as well as
nuclear non-proliferation. The Middle East is one region where a NWFZ of
this kind will be needed.
However, a unique
characteristic of the Middle East is the fact that nuclear weapons are
possessed by only one party in the region, Israel. As a consequence, a
deadly threat is posed to the security of other countries in the region
and to their people. Under these conditions, it is impossible to
establish durable peace and sustainable security in the region.
Moreover, the other countries are asking themselves what leverage they
have to induce Israel to join negotiations in good faith for a middle
East Free from nuclear weapons? These circumstances result in the
continued danger that a race to acquire weapons of mass destruction
could eventually escalate in the region if Israel’s nuclear weapons
are not eliminated.
Mr. President,
There is no region in the
world similar to the Middle East where the lack of universality of the
NPT, due to the presence of a single nuclear weapons state that is not
party to the NPT, is so tightly interconnected to the potential for
further proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass
destruction. In the Middle East, a commitment by Israel to eliminate its
nuclear weapons, to abide by all provisions of the NPT, and thus to
accept the principle of its universality are essential to the prevention
of proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass
destruction. Israel already has acquired an arsenal of nuclear weapons
almost equal to that possessed by a big power, the United Kingdom.
Therefore, halting further production of Israeli nuclear weapons will
not be enough to ensure nonproliferation unless such a step will be part
of a legally binding commitment to finally eliminate these weapons.
Aware of this critical
situation countries of the region have sought alternatives to reduce
these dangers. Since 1974, the U.N. General Assembly annually has
adopted resolutions, proposed by Egypt, on the dangers of nuclear
proliferation and on the need for a NWFZ in the Middle East. When
information about the production of chemical weapons by some Middle East
states became public, Egypt called in 1990 for a Middle East free from
both nuclear weapons and any other weapons of mass destruction. In this
manner, the process of nuclear disarmament and the broader process of
nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction would be combined to
achieve peace and security for all. Israel has refused to implement any
of these resolutions.
Mr. President,
The dangers have been
further augmented of late. The U.S. has declared its strategy of
counter-proliferation to prevent non-nuclear weapons states hostile to
its policies from acquiring weapons of mass destruction and their
delivery systems by using military force combined with nuclear
deterrence. The U.S. has threatened to implement this strategy against
several countries while Israel’s nuclear arsenal remains intact. With
the exception of North Korea, all countries threatened by the new U.S.
policy are located in the Middle East. This policy already has resulted
in military action by the United States, including the U.S. raid on a
factory in Sudan, on the basis of little if any evidence, and the Desert
Fox attacks on Iraq, both conducted in 1998 without the assent of the
international community.
Only political, not
military solutions can lead to a secure future for all parties
concerned, and a route to a political solution is available. A key step
on this path is to make all parties accountable within the NPT regime, a
framework which Israel today remains outside. The main elements of this
political solution have been incorporated into the Resolution on the
Middle East adopted by the NPT Review and Extension Conference in 1995.
Your responsibility at this 2000 NPT review conference is to seek
practical steps leading to its implementation.
Mr. President,
The Resolution on the
Middle East together with the decisions on the Principles and Objectives
and on the strengthening of the review process are part of the bargain
which led to the extension of the Treaty. Without the implementation of
this resolution and these decisions in good faith, the bargain will be
undermined and the entire edifice of the nonproliferation regime could
collapse. This possible course of events should be prevented.
The Resolution on the
Middle East stresses in one package the universality of the Treaty
together with nuclear disarmament and nuclear nonproliferation.
It urges all states
without exception to accede to the Treaty and to place all nuclear
facilities under the full scope of the International Atomic Energy
Agency safeguards.
It stresses the necessity
to free the Middle East from all weapons of mass destruction and their
delivery systems and for all parties to refrain from taking any measures
that preclude the achievement of this objective. It calls upon states
party to the Treaty to exert their utmost efforts to transform the
Middle East into a zone free from nuclear weapons and other weapons of
mass destruction.
To achieve these goals we
propose that the subsidiary body established by the Conference evaluate
the causes for lack of implementation of the Middle East Resolution and
seek ways to ensure its implementation in the future. We ask the
subsidiary body:
A. To recommend measures
to encourage Israel, the only Middle East state that has refused to join
the NPT, to accede as soon as possible to the Treaty and to accept IAEA
full scope safeguards.
B. To urge States party
to the Treaty, particularly the nuclear weapons states and above all the
United States, to refrain, in compliance with NPT Article I, from
transferring, directly or indirectly or by any means, any material,
instrument, or technology which can be used to produce nuclear weapons
or their delivery systems, to any country which does not accede to the
NPT and abide by its provisions.
Due to the lack of
progress on implementation of the Resolution on the Middle from the 1995
NPT Review and Extension Conference, it is essential that an ongoing
mechanism be established to monitor future compliance with the
Resolution.
Distinguished Delegates,
We wish you every success
in your work.
Convener: Mr. Bahig Nassar, Arab
Coordination Center of NGOs, Cairo, Egypt
|