Nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East – First Cttee debate – Press release (excerpts)

Fifty-fifth General Assembly

First Committee

12th Meeting (PM)

TEST-BAN MONITORING SYSTEM, NUCLEAR-WEAPON-FREE MIDDLE EAST,

AMONG ISSUES DISCUSSED IN FIRST COMMITTEE GENERAL DEBATE

/…

Bahrain’s representative said that, despite the end of the cold war a decade ago, disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation had been a source of disquiet for the human race.  States were still divided between those that developed, manufactured and possessed nuclear weapons and those that sought to do so.  Clearly, regional and international security were closely linked.  Security and stability in the Middle East and the Arab Gulf required confidence-building among the political entities there.  Creating a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East could go far towards achieving that goal.  Similarly, the representative of Saudi Arabia championed the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones around the globe, which had been based on a belief in peaceful co-existence as a step towards a nuclear-weapon-free world.  Real peace should be founded on trust and good intentions between the countries of a region, and not on the possession of or threat of use of nuclear weapons, or attempts by one country to impose its will on others.  The Israeli policies, including its unsafeguarded possession of nuclear weapons, had contradicted its declared pronouncements for peace, he said.

/…

Statements

/…

SALAH ALI HASAN HELAL AL-MALKI (Bahrain) said that, despite the end of the cold war a decade ago, disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation had been a source of disquiet for the human race.  The negative implications of those weapons had threatened security and peace on the planet.  States were still divided between those that developed, manufactured and possessed those weapons and those that sought to do so.  The international community had been focused upon the gravity of such weapons.  World leaders had called for an international conference to examine ways to minimize the risks posed by nuclear weapons.

He said that nuclear disarmament negotiations should be accorded the highest priority, because of the catastrophes that those could cause.  Countries that possessed weapons of mass destruction should realize that they had many more than were required for security and deterrence.  That should impel the global community to redouble its efforts, in order to provide a less dangerous environment.  Regrettably, the nuclear-weapon States were still unable to muster the political will to reach agreements that would reduce their nuclear arsenals, as a first step towards the elimination of all weapons of mass destruction.  He hoped an agreement would soon be reached to hold a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament.

He said that, undoubtedly, regional and international security was closely linked.  Thus, security and stability in the Middle East and the Arab Gulf required confidence-building among the political entities there.  Creating a nuclear-weapon-free zone there could achieve that goal.  Israel’s refusal to accede to the NPT and to place its nuclear installations under full-scope IAEA safeguards had presented a serious imbalance and posed a grave risk to regional security.  Moreover, it had compromised the universality of the NPT, despite the fact that more than one-quarter of a century had elapsed since its entry into force.

That represented a “blatant flouting” of the international community’s political will, he said.  Nonetheless, its calls had gone unheeded.  What Israel had achieved by using light weapons against defenceless citizens and against a Palestinian child had provided crystal clear evidence of abuse by Israel’s internal forces.  Israel’s force was not defensive or designed for deterrence only; it was destructive and could be used at any time.

/…

FAWZI BIN ABDUL MAJEED SHOBOKSHI (Saudi Arabia) said that his country had been one of the first to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention and the NPT.  It had also refrained from producing nuclear weapons or allowing a third party to place nuclear weapons on its soil.  His country had actively participated in the 2000 NPT Review Conference and had adopted a positive position towards efforts to reach a total ban on nuclear weapon tests.  It had also participated in the Executive Council of the Chemical Weapons Convention.  

He said that the successful establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones in certain parts of the world had resulted from cooperation among the countries involved and their belief in peaceful co-existence as a positive step towards ridding the world of nuclear weapons.  The Middle East, regrettably, was not free from nuclear weapons, because Israel still refused to adhere to calls not to develop, produce or test them, despite invitations from the following:  United Nations; International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); the Non-Aligned Movement; and the Organization of the Islamic Conference.  Israel refused to join the NPT or subject its nuclear facilities to IAEA safeguards.

The Israeli position contradicted its declared pronouncements for peace, he said.  Real peace should be founded on trust and good intentions between the countries of the region, and not on the possession of or threat of use of nuclear weapons, or attempts by one country to impose its will on others.  Those policies would not only increase regional instability, but also threaten international peace and security.  Accordingly, he called upon Israel to immediately join the NPT, as urged by the General Assembly and the Security Council.  In addition, all Israeli nuclear activities should be subjected to the guarantees of the IAEA, until the Middle East was free from all weapons of mass destruction.

He said his country supported transparency in armaments as one of the means by which to consolidate international peace and security.  In that regard, the United Nations Register for Conventional Arms represented a first attempt to deal with transparency globally.  Unfortunately, more than half of the Member States had continuously declined to provide data to the Register.  Their fears should be dealt with effectively and in a manner that guaranteed international participation in the Register.  He agreed with the League of Arab States that an expanded Register — which included data on advanced conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, and advanced technology with military applications — might make it more balanced and less selective.  That enlargement could attract more participants.

/…

* *** *