Official Records
General Assembly
Fiftieth session
First Committee
15th meeting
Tuesday, 7 November 1995, 3 p.m.
New York
Chairman: Mr. Erdenechuluun ……………………….. (Mongolia)
The meeting was called to order at 3.15 p.m.
Agenda items 57 to 81 (continued)
Consideration of draft resolutions submitted under all disarmament and international security agenda items
The Chairman: I call on the representative of Egypt to introduce draft resolution A/C.1/50/L.10.
Mr. Elaraby (Egypt): As this is my first statement following the tragic assassination of the Prime Minister of Israel, Mr. Yitzhak Rabin, I should like to convey to the delegation of Israel the deepest condolences of the delegation of Egypt. The peace camp in the Middle East has lost a courageous champion. The whole world has expressed the hope that the assassination will add momentum to the peace process and will make the supporters of peace more determined. This message was clearly conveyed by President Mubarak to the world leaders gathered at the funeral when he said:
President Mubarak continued:
It is my pleasure to introduce the draft resolution on agenda item 66. This item was inscribed in the agenda in 1974, at the request of Iran with the support of Egypt, and Egypt has traditionally sponsored the draft resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East. The draft for this session is contained in document A/C.1/50/L.10 of 3 November 1995.
The atmosphere prevailing in the Middle East today requires that the efforts of the international community to enhance the peace process through the early establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region and to take all possible steps towards the eventual realization of a Middle East free of all weapons of mass destruction be harnessed and consolidated. In this context, it should be recalled that President Mubarak was the first to launch an initiative on the question of freeing the Middle East of weapons of mass destruction —doing do in April 1990. The establishment of such a zone would undoubtedly generate the necessary conditions for enhancing peace and stability in the region.
For many years, Egypt has conducted extensive consultations with all regional partners, as well as with extraregional parties involved in the Middle East peace process. Egypt has submitted several proposals in all relevant forums, at the regional and international levels, with a view to advancing specific arrangements that could contribute to the realization of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region. The latest of these initiatives was in the framework of the multilateral Middle East peace process, where we presented several proposals, in the context of the Working Group on Arms Control and Regional Security, concerning provisions and elements related to the establishment of such a zone.
I find it necessary to recall here that for many years — since 1980, in fact — all the parties and all members of the General Assembly, including Israel, have accepted the principle of establishing the zone. Year in and year out, the draft resolution is adopted by consensus. The position adopted by Israel throughout these years has been that such a zone could be established only through direct negotiations between the parties concerned. We were happy to accommodate this position, and direct negotiations began more than three years ago in the context of the Working Group on Arms Control and Regional Security.
However, up to now all efforts to achieve meaningful results have been unsuccessful. Israel blocked any serious consideration of the issue, holding it hostage to certain preconditions revolving round the undefined notion of “peace and reconciliation” with all the States of the region. We sincerely hope that this proposition is not a delaying tactic and that all the parties will be able to work together to achieve the establishment of the nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.
In order to clarify this point further, allow me to address four specific issues: first of all, the time-frame. My delegation believes that the negotiations of the Arms Control and Regional Security Working Group should be directed towards a comprehensive examination of all the related aspects of establishing the zone. We accept the argument that the required examination of modalities may prove to be time-consuming, but the point to be emphasized is the initiation phase. This phase is now — and not, as the representative of Israel said a few days ago in the First Committee:
The second point is the relation between peace and security. Our position on this point is that total and comprehensive peace requires taking into consideration in a reciprocal manner the legitimate security concerns of all the parties — and not, I repeat not, the concern of one party at the expense of other parties. In this respect, I should like to stress that the security concerns of the Arab States, as a result of the existing Israeli unsafeguarded, and, I would add, aging nuclear capabilities, are far greater than any Israeli security concern with respect to the Arab States.
The third point is the territorial scope of the nuclear-weapon- free zone, and this is a point of great importance. Who are the parties concerned? The answer to this question emanates from the scope of application of Security Council resolution 242 (1967), in which the Council called on the parties to work out security arrangements together. That resolution was addressed to the States involved in the 1967 hostilities. It is generally recognized that Iran is within the geographical definition of the Middle East region. However, it has to be pointed out that the territorial scope of such a zone could not be artificially extended to include many countries that are beyond the well-established definition of the Middle East.
The fourth point is the relation to the peace process. My delegation maintains the view that establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East is one of the prerequisites for a successful peace process. The establishment of such a zone should be an integral component of the peace equation.
In this context, we are ready to consider what was stated by the Secretary-General in the last paragraph of his report on this agenda item:
It is for this reason that the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons devoted a special resolution to the Middle East, as a clear indication of the serious concern of these States over the situation in our region, resulting — as stated in operative paragraph 3 of that resolution adopted at the 1995 Review and Extension Conference — from
The decision stated further, in operative paragraph 5:
Regrettably, and notwithstanding the aforementioned developments, and notwithstanding also the principles and provisions of relevant and successive General Assembly resolutions since 1974, the establishment of the zone remains unrealized. We, in turn, ask how many more years, and how many more resolutions, do we need to implement the initiative to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East?
We note that since 1980 this resolution has been adopted both in the First Committee and in the General Assembly by consensus. Consensus, no doubt, entails a commitment to work on the basis of the resolution and not to present differing interpretations to block its practical implementation. The so-called “step-by-step approach” — beginning with confidence-building and security measures, establishing peaceful relations and, after establishing peaceful relations, in due course complementing the process by dealing with conventional and non-conventional arms control where appropriate — is not acceptable to the Arab States. There is a need for mutual consideration of the priorities, with a view to achieving lasting peace in the Middle East.
In introducing this draft resolution, which is an updated version of last year’s resolution, the delegation of Egypt exercised the utmost self-restraint and refrained from adding new paragraphs reflecting the concerns to which I have alluded in the course of this statement.
Our objective, and our most sincere hope, is to maintain the existing consensus on the establishment of the nuclear-weapon-free zone, thus allowing more time for the reconsideration of positions. Lest I be misunderstood, by “more time” we mean the next few months — and I will refer to this in a moment.
All the concerned parties within the Middle East region, that is, Iran, Israel and the Arab States, should engage seriously, and without any further delay, in negotiating the practical arrangements for the establishment of the nuclear-weapon-free zone within the forthcoming year.
Let me add that this year the First Committee is going to adopt a draft resolution with an annex on the African nuclear-weapon-free zone. In that draft resolution, there is more than one reference to the importance of achieving as soon as possible another zone free from nuclear weapons in the Middle East. The hope of my delegation is that as we are adopting this year the resolution on the African zone, we will be able by next year to adopt a resolution on the Middle East zone, and I think the political atmosphere is very auspicious. If we have the will, we shall be able to undertake this very important task.
/…
The meeting rose at 4.40 p.m.
Document Type: Meeting record
Document Sources: General Assembly
Subject: Arms control and regional security issues
Publication Date: 07/11/1995