Establishment of a Zone Free of Nuclear
Weapons and all other Weapons of Mass
Destruction in the Middle East
Dr. Sameh Aboul-Enein
15 December, 2011
Wilton Park, UK
Questions raised by Wilton Park to be addressed:
 First: What are the implications of the Arab
Spring on the pending 2012 Conference ?
 Second: What progress has been made on the
implementation of the final document on the
2012 Conference ?
 Third: What challenges have been overcome
and what hurdles still remain? The way
forward: practical and technical issues.
First: Implications of Arab Spring
 The “Arab Spring” will have a significant effect not only on domestic
issues, but also on foreign policy and disarmament.
 Arab governments will become more accountable to their people and
foreign policy will become more in line with domestic aspirations and a
reflection of popular sentiments.
 Public opinion will play a more significant role in formulation of
foreign policy (elections - role of youth – different political parties).
 The parliament will be an important variable in foreign affairs (Arab
and National Security Committee).
 Political and security issues will be at the forefront of foreign policy
issues in the Arab World in which nuclear issues are expected to receive
considerable attention:
 Israel’s non adherence to the NPT.
 Establishment of a Zone Free of Nuclear Weapons in the Middle
East.
 Encouragement of the peaceful uses of nuclear programs.
Second: Progress of Implementation of the ME Plan of Action &
Challenges Faced
 Achieved:



Selecting the facilitator
Determining the host government
Launching initial consultations by the Facilitator with regional
countries and the 3 co-sponsors.
 Mandate of Facilitator
As refered to in Para (7b) of the Middle East Action Plan, the
facilitator of the 2012 Conference, appointed by the SecretaryGeneral of the United Nations and the co-sponsors of the 1995
Resolution, has a mandate to:
 Support implementation of the 1995 Resolution by conducting
consultations with the States of the region in that regard and
undertake preparations for the convening of the 2012
Conference.
 Assist in implementation of follow-on steps agreed by the
participating regional States at the 2012 conference.

Report to the 2015 Review Conference and its Preparatory
Committee meetings in 2012, 2013, and 2014.
Progress of Implementation of the ME Plan of Action &
Challenges Faced (cont.)
 Facilitator to take stock of the following:

NPT Documents
Text of the NPT
1995 Review Conference Principles and Objective for Nonproliferation and Disarmament
1995 Resolution on the Middle East
2000 Review Conference Final Document
2010 Review Conference Final Document
2010 Review Conference Action Plan on the Implementation of the 1995 Resolution

GA Resolutions on a NWFZ in the ME
Establishment of a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone in the Middle East, Selected Resolutions
from 1974-2010

IAEA Resolutions
Modalities of Application of Agency Safeguards in the Middle East, 1989
Application of IAEA safeguards in the ME, Reports by Director General, 1993-2011

Free Zones Models
Treaty of Tlatelolco
Treaty of Rarotonga
Treaty of Bangkok
Treaty of Pelindaba
Treaty of Central Asia
Progress of Implementation of the ME Plan of Action &
Challenges Faced (cont.)
 Partially Achieved:
Preparatory team helping facilitator formed but not yet in full functioning in
terms of establishing contacts with States of the region.
 Facilitator visited capitals/UN seats (New York – Geneva – the Hague Vienna - London).
 Facilitator to conduct regional visits (December 2011).
 Remaining Tasks:
 Determining date of Conference.
 Participation:
 Participating regional states as referred to in Para 7b of the Action Plan.
 Nuclear Weapon States.
 Determining the geographic scope in accordance to the Middle East
definition used by the IAEA as elaborated by the UN Secretariat Paper
presented to the NPT 2010 Review Conference.
 Observers could include: Relevant international organizations / European
Union / Representatives of other regional verification models (EURATOM
& ABACC) / Representatives from other regional WMD free zone treaties
(Tlatelco, Raratonga, Pelindaba, and Bangkok, Central Asia).
 Financing:
 From host government
 Other interested states (some Arab states have already pledged).
 United Nations Fund (Modalities need to be developed).

Third: The Way Forward
Challenges & Practical, Technical Issues
 I would like to share with you some of my ideas concerning the 2012 Conference and
the process it will launch:
 Terms of Reference: The Conference has clear terms of reference as defined by
the Action Plan adopted by the NPT 2010 Review Conference. These terms of
reference build on all relevant NPT documents which include the 1995, 2000,
and 2010 NPT Review Conference Final Documents. Other relevant documents
could include resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly, and
resolutions adopted by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Treaties and
experiences of other regional nuclear free zone such as the Tlatelco, Raratonga,
Pelindaba, Bangkok, Semiplanitisk Treaties could be used for guidance.
 Background Documentation: It is important to start the background
documentation taking into account work previously undertaken and experience
gained by IAEA, OPCW, and BWC Implementation Support Unit. There is a
need to identify and contact the other relevant international organizations.
 Vienna Forum: With a view to taking the process forward, the following
constructive proposals, made at the Vienna Forum, could be taken into
consideration by the Facilitator: Continue working towards the establishment
of a NWFZ in the Middle East / Take stock of the importance of declaratory
policy, in particular, declarations of good intentions could be a first step to
brake the current stalemate / Make the best and most constructive use of every
opportunity on the international agenda /Identify specific and practical
confidence building measures.
Third: The Way Forward
Challenges & Practical, Technical Issues (cont.)
 2012 Outcome: The Conference should launch a negotiating
process that would lead to the establishment of a zone free of
nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction in the
Middle East. The Conference should not be viewed as a "one time
event" but rather the beginning of a process that should culminate
in the adoption of a legally binding treaty text. There is merit in
exploring the possibility of establishing a mechanism/secretariat to
follow up on the outcome of the 2012 Conference.
 Verification: The Conference should address the issue of
verification and identify the role of the IAEA and other relevant
organizations within such a zone.
 Institution Building: The Conference should address the issue of
building a necessary relevant mechanism/entity to uphold such a
zone free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass
destruction.
Third: The Way Forward
Challenges & Practical, Technical Issues (cont.)
 Universality: It is important to establish a universality adherence support unit to
directly address the mechanisms that would bring Israel into the NPT as a non
nuclear weapon state as it remains the only state in the Middle East non party to
the NPT. The accession of all remaining states in the region to other
conventions related to other weapons of mass destruction can then take place.
 Fissile Material Treaty: Addressing the issue of a fissile material ban treaty in
the Middle East including the destruction of stocks.
 Contribution of NGO’s: As per para 10 of the action plan which recognizes the
important role played by civil society in contributing to the implementation of
the 1995 resolution and encourages all efforts in this regard. There is a possible
role from centers such as BASIC (Malta) – Landau Network (Como, Italy) –
Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (Vienna)- Wilton Park (London).
 Nuclear Roll Back: It is worth recalling that key successes included South
Africa's historic decision to dismantle its nuclear weapons and join the Treaty,
decisions by Brazil and Argentina to roll back their nuclear programs and create
a bilateral verification agency, and 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 programs and
weapons deserve greater recognition and acknowledgment, for they set an
excellent example for other states with weapons and military nuclear programs
to follow.
South African Dismantlement Model







Technical Steps
South Africa dismantled the six completed gun type devices at
Armaments Corporation of South Africa Ltd (ARMSCOR) under
controlled and safe conditions;
It melted and recasted the Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) from these
six devices as well as the partially completed seventh device and
returned it to the Atomic Energy Corporation (AEC);
It decontaminated the ARMSCOR facilities fully and returned severely
contaminated equipment to the AEC.;
Additionally, it converted the ARMSCOR facilities to conventional
weapon and non-weapon commercial activities;
It destroyed all hardware components of the devices as well as technical
design and manufacturing information;
The Government joined the NPT, signed the Comprehensive
Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA and submitted a full and
complete national initial inventory of nuclear material and facilities, as
required by the Safeguards Agreement.
South Africa completed the termination of the Pelindaba Y Plant.
Conclusion
 I believe that the 2012 Conference process should be inclusive to include a
more genuine and candid interaction about nuclear disarmament,
dismantlement, nuclear roll back, transparency, accountability, and
verification. There has not been such an interaction for many years and all
opportunities that exist to make this happen should be utilized.
 Representatives of civil society and academic institutes, who can inject
valuable information and perspectives as well as build bridges between our
communities, should be invited to help foster trust and better
understanding in the build up to this process.
 Achieving a nuclear weapon free zone in the Middle East will help achieve
the international objective of reaching global nuclear disarmament. It will
help in achieving the international initiative of “global zero” as well as
Article VI of the NPT.
 It is imperative that all States parties to the NPT, particularly the nuclearweapon States and the States in the Middle East region, continue to report
on steps taken to implement the 1995 Resolution on the Middle East,
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.
Thank you
Sameh Aboul Enein