“The 2010 NPT Review Conference Outcome
and Nuclear Disarmament”
Presentation by
Dr. Sameh Aboul-Enein
Minister Plenipotentiary and Deputy Head of Mission
of Egypt to the UK
Diplomatic Academy of Vienna
26.11.2010
Sameh
1
Let me begin on a personal note by saying that I am really delighted to
be back in Vienna after so many years. In this respect I wish to extend
my thanks and deep appreciation to the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna
and its distinguished scholars, for inviting me in my personal and
academic capacities, to discuss the outcome of the 2010 NPT review
conference and the central issue of the M.E Nuclear free zone.
The NPT and the 2010 Review Conference
Ladies & Gentleman,
Distinguished presence
I wish to underline at the outset of my presentation that the NPT
remains the only international instrument that not only seeks to prevent
the proliferation of nuclear weapons but also embodies a firm legal
commitment to eliminate these weapons.
The May NPT review conference was convened at a historical
juncture. We all witnessed and welcomed the emergence of new
leaderships announcing with determination and stronger political will,
their commitment to the total elimination of nuclear weapons, and
achieving the goal of a world free from nuclear weapons. This was
also matched by support from public figures, intellectuals, and by civil
society, in both Nuclear and Non-Nuclear Weapons States, aimed at
achieving the goal of a world free from nuclear weapons.
The 2010 NPT Review Conference represented a real window of
opportunity to build on previous commitments - and to take concrete
steps to achieve progress towards a nuclear weapon free world. The
responsibility to achieve that lies with all of us - nuclear and nonNuclear Weapon States, including a substantial contribution from civil
society.
2
Egypt as chair of both the Non-Aligned Movement and the New
Agenda Coalition in 2010 succeeded in capitalizing on this positive
environment through an open, all-inclusive and transparent process of
negotiations and consultations which allowed it to crown its efforts by
success.
Negotiations in the conference covered a wide range of issues that
were of crucial importance to the Treaty’s credibility and effectiveness
on one hand, and to the security and aspirations of States parties on
the other. Three forward looking action plans on nuclear disarmament,
nuclear non-proliferation and the inalienable right to peaceful uses of
nuclear energy were negotiated and agreed. These action plans
reaffirmed the critical importance of achieving the universality of the
Treaty and putting into action an effective process to implement the
1995 resolution on the Middle East.
It is worth recalling here that historically we already witnessed
complete nuclear disarmament by a number of States. Key successes
included; South Africa's historic decision to dismantle its nuclear
weapons programme and join the Treaty, decisions by Brazil and
Argentina to roll back their nuclear programmes and create a
bilateral verification agency, in addition to the decisions by Belarus,
Kazakhstan, and Ukraine to transfer nuclear weapons back to Russia
after they seceded from the Soviet Union.
The actions by these States to give up nuclear programmes and
weapons deserve greater recognition and acknowledgment, as they
set an excellent example for other States with weapons and military
nuclear programmes to follow.
For this purpose, the NPT should be strengthened and ideas on its
institutional development should be examined. In this respect we
should seriously consider establishing an NPT Universality
Adherence Support Unit to consult everyone, and address directly the
3
mechanisms that will bring the three states outside the treaty into the
NPT regime as Non-Nuclear Weapon States.
More than ten years ago, the foreign ministers of seven countries Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and
Sweden - joined together to form the cross-regional New Agenda
Coalition with the aim of giving fresh impetus to the efforts to achieve
progress in nuclear disarmament.
In 2000, the new agenda coalition was instrumental in the success of
the Review Conference of the NPT through its proposal on nuclear
disarmament which enabled the conference to adopt the 13 practical
steps as part of its outcome. The need for such energy is as strong as
ever today. In post 2010 NPT, a revitalized New Agenda Coalition
working closely with the Nuclear Weapon States, will positively
contribute towards the implementation of agreed practical steps.
The New Agenda Coalition consistently calls for a world envisaged by
the NPT— a world in which nuclear weapons have no role. Its
philosophy is that the world will be safe from nuclear danger and the
proliferation of nuclear weapons only when they are eliminated and we
can be sure they will never be produced or used again. The Coalition
approaches nuclear disarmament via three key principles, namely
irreversibility, transparency, and verifiability. Those three principles
have to apply to all efforts if we are serious in our endeavour of
working to achieve a nuclear weapons free world.
One of the fundamental outcomes of the 2010 Review Conference was
that the nuclear-weapon States are now to report nuclear disarmament
steps to the Preparatory Committee of the NPT in 2014. The 2015
Review Conference will then take stock and consider the next steps for
the full implementation of article VI of the treaty.
4
The Middle East
Let us now turn our attention to the Middle-East. The Middle East
should be at the heart and centre of all this nuclear disarmament
effort and activity, because it is particularly vulnerable to nuclear
proliferation. The 1995 Resolution on the Middle East, adopted by
the NPT Review and Extension Conference, recognized the region's
special status, as did the Final Document of the 2000 NPT Review
Conference. Insofar as it pertains to the NPT, particularly its review,
implementation and universality, the 1995 Resolution on the Middle
East focused on achieving the following three clear objectives:
1.
2.
3.
The establishment of a nuclear free zone in the Middle East.
The accession to the NPT by states in the region that have not yet
done so.
The placement of all nuclear facilities in the Middle East under
full-scope IAEA safeguards.
A we know, the 2010 final document did not include all elements
proposed in the plan of action presented by the Non-Aligned Movement
on the total elimination of nuclear weapons, and the comprehensive
working paper presented by NAM on all three pillars of the Treaty and
on the implementation of the 1995 Resolution .
Let no-one doubt the importance of the implementation of the 1995
Resolution, not only for the Middle East, but also to the survival of the
non-proliferation regime itself into the future.
The adoption of an action plan that pushes towards the implementation
of the 1995 resolution reopens the chance for progress and for the
survival and development of the regime.
Our negotiations and exchanges at the 2010 NPT Review Conference
resulted in a Middle East document that emphasized a process leading
5
to the full implementation of the Resolution. To this end, the Conference
endorsed the following practical steps, namely:
1. The UN Secretary-General and the co-sponsors of the 1995
Middle East Resolution, in consultation with the States of the
region, will convene a Conference in 2012, to be attended by all
States of the Middle East, on the establishment of a Middle East
zone free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass
destruction, on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at by
the States of the region, and with the full support and
engagement of the Nuclear-Weapon States. The 2012
Conference shall take as its terms of reference the 1995
Resolution on the Middle East.
2. The Appointment by the UN Secretary-General and the cosponsors of the 1995 Middle East Resolution, in consultation
with the States of the region, of a Facilitator, with a mandate to
support implementation of the 1995 Resolution by conducting
consultations with the States of the region in that regard and
undertaking preparations for the convening of the 2012
Conference. The Facilitator will also assist in implementation
of follow-on steps agreed by the participating regional States at
the 2012 Conference. The Facilitator will report to the 2015
Review Conference and its Preparatory Committee meetings.
3. The Designation by the UN Secretary-General and the cosponsors of the 1995 Middle East Resolution, in consultation
with the States of the region, of a host Government for the 2012
Conference.
4. Additional steps aimed at supporting the implementation of the
Resolution, including that the IAEA, OPCW and other relevant
international organizations will be requested to prepare
background documentation for the 2012 Conference, regarding
modalities for a zone free of nuclear weapons and other
weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems, taking
into account work previously undertaken and experience
gained.
6
5. Consideration of all offers aimed at supporting the
implementation of the Resolution, including the offer of the
European Union to host a follow-on seminar to that organized
in June 2008.
6. The Review Conference emphasized also the requirement of
maintaining parallel progress, in substance and timing, in the
process leading to achieving total and complete elimination of
all WMD in the region, nuclear, chemical and biological.
The 2010 Review Conference reaffirmed that all States Parties to the
Treaty, particularly the Nuclear-Weapons States and the States in the
Middle East, should continue to report on steps taken to implement the
Resolution, through the United Nations Secretariat, to the President of
the 2015 Review Conference, as well as to the Chairperson of the
Preparatory Committee meetings to be held in advance of that
Conference.
The Conference further recognized the important role played by civil
society in contributing to the implementation of the Resolution and
encouraged all efforts in this regard.
Looking forward from here, universality of the NPT is critical to
regional and global security, because States remaining outside the
Treaty fundamentally weaken it by undermining the benefits of
membership for their neighbours and by maintaining nuclear
programmes that constitute a continuing nuclear danger to their
neighbours and the rest of the world.
In this respect, the 2010 NPT conference reaffirmation of the
importance of Israel’s accession to the Treaty and the placement of
all its nuclear facilities under IAEA comprehensive safeguards,
confirms the continued resolve of the States Parties to the NPT to
pursue the 1995 and 2000 commitments in this respect.
7
It is also very important at this stage to examine other examples of
Nuclear-weapon-free zones. Nuclear-weapon-free zones in Latin
America and the Caribbean (established by the Treaty of Tlatelolco),
the South Pacific (Treaty of Rarotonga), Southeast Asia (Treaty of
Bangkok), and Africa (Treaty of Pelindaba) have all progressed
through similar stages as they have come into force. These steps can
be summarized as:
1. Prenegotiation phase (outlining principles and preferences
that assist common understanding of the parameters the zone
would take);
2. Negotiation of a treaty text (targeted negotiations based on
formulating a legally binding text);
3. Setting agreed verification models and the role of the IAEA;
4. Entry into force (signing and ratifying);
5. Institution building and additional accessions; and
6. Step-by-step implementation of all treaty commitments,
maturity of the treaty and regime, normalization; entry into
assumed “normal behaviour”.
We can derive a lot of experiences from these steps and build on them
for the Middle East.
8
The Nuclear Zero
Success in preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons at both the
regional and global levels depends, at some fundamental level, on the
ability to make a credible and compelling argument that they are
neither necessary nor desirable, that whatever advantages they
confer are outweighed by the costs. It is, however, difficult to sustain
this argument when the large and powerful States that possess
nuclear weapons proclaim that such weapons provide crucial security
benefits.
For the vision of zero to be credible, the permanent members of the
UN Security Council should take the lead at an early stage both at the
international and regional level including the Middle East. We have
recently seen the link between disarmament and non-proliferation
explicitly acknowledged by several key statesmen: This is to be
warmly welcomed.
Ultimately, the only normative environment for successfully
promoting non-proliferation is one in which nuclear weapons are
universally regarded to be illegal, illegitimate, and immoral. That is,
to inhibit nuclear proliferation, it is essential not only to devalue
nuclear weapons but also to delegitimize them. That is why we
examined in the 2010 NPT Review conference the need for a Nuclear
Weapons Convention for the total elimination of nuclear weapons
within a specified framework of time.
We must now keep the momentum generated by the Review
Conference. We must keep our eyes on the goal - the elimination of
nuclear weapons and the assurance that they will never be produced
or used again. This will require at some stage the active negotiation
of a nuclear weapons convention, as called for by the UN General
Assembly, and recently endorsed by the UN Secretary General. This
is the logical conclusion to the current campaigns for global zero,
9
and all States including the ones in the Middle East need to engage
seriously with this project.
The Nuclear Weapon States have committed themselves in the 2010
Review Conference to accelerate concrete progress on steps leading
to nuclear disarmament. Some of these steps are:
1. Rapidly moving towards an overall reduction in the global
stockpile of all types of nuclear weapons;
2. Addressing the question of all nuclear weapons regardless of
their type or their location as an integral part of the general
nuclear disarmament process;
3. To further diminish the role and significance of nuclear
weapons in all military and security concepts, doctrines and
policies;
4. Discuss policies that could prevent the use of nuclear
weapons and eventually lead to their elimination, lessen the
danger of nuclear war and contribute to the nonproliferation and disarmament of nuclear weapons;
5. Consider the legitimate interest of Non-Nuclear-Weapon
States in further reducing the operational status of nuclear
weapons systems in ways that promote international stability
and security;
6. To Further enhance transparency and increase mutual
confidence.
To abolish nuclear weapons, leadership by the United States and
Russia is imperative. The Conference on Disarmament (CD) in
Geneva still has a special role that it can play in nuclear
disarmament. It is a unique forum that includes the P-5 plus the nonNPT members. The conference should immediately establish an
appropriate subsidiary body with the mandate to deal with nuclear
disarmament at both the international and regional levels as agreed
upon in the action plan of the 2010 Review Conference.
10
Nuclear Weapons States need to act in a way that demonstrates they
have the necessary transparent and credible political commitment to
carry through their agreed and required undertakings.
Before I conclude, I want to recall parts of the final statement of
Egypt on the 28th May 2010, in which the following priorities in the
run-up to the next Review Conference in 2015, were identified:
1. Realizing the full and prompt implementation of nuclear
disarmament commitments by Nuclear Weapon States, aiming
at the total elimination of nuclear weapons by 2025.
2. Pursuing continued and dedicated efforts to realize, at the
earliest possible time the universality of the Treaty as a key
requirement for its effectiveness, and the global realization of
its objectives.
3. Prompt commencement of negotiations on a Nuclear Weapons
Convention, as the route to realizing a world free from nuclear
weapons by the year 2025.
4. Commencement of negotiations on a legally binding instrument
to provide Non-Nuclear Weapon States with global,
unconditional security assurance against the use or threat of
use of nuclear weapons, pending the realizing of the total
elimination of nuclear weapons.
To conclude , In April 2009, in a speech in Prague, the president of
the United States reconfirmed his intention to seek a world “without
nuclear weapons”. In Cairo two months later, President Obama
defused the charge of double standards that has been levelled at the
Nuclear Weapons States throughout the 40-year history of the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and he said , I quote: “No nation
should pick and choose which nation holds nuclear weapons”. That’s
why I strongly reaffirmed America’s commitment to seek a world in
which no nations hold nuclear weapons.” End of quote.
The Middle East is no exception in this respect. Any double standards
will only produce instability and encourage those who seek to
11
challenge the NPT regime itself, and that will only increase the risk of
conflict and nuclear proliferation. It is time to implement the 1995
M.E. resolution to get out of the present bottleneck.
The NPT is a potentially powerful instrument to reach that end. At the
2010 Review Conference, after a long pause, the parties showed signs
of using this potential. The 2010 conference has laid the building
blocs for a constructive engagement by all concerned parties to
establish a nuclear-weapon free zone in the Middle East.
The time has come for serious people from all political perspectives
to engage in thoughtful and transparent negotiations, with the clear
objective of eliminating nuclear weapons on an agreed target date.
Civil society also has a key role to play in this respect.
Once again, I thank the distinguished academy for this opportunity. I
have presented to the academy some of my recent relevant
publications (attached) and I welcome any questions.
Thank you
12