Celia Reynolds
ACSIS Conference Report
June, 2009
Beyond Oil: Prospects for Multilateral Nuclear Energy
Cooperation in the Middle East
Responding to growing concern about climate change, the international
community is avidly pursuing alternative energy resources. Nuclear energy offers one
solution to climate change challenges, but it engenders concerns regarding technological
security, safety, and proliferation. To address these concerns, the Arab Institute for
Security Studies (ACSIS) hosted an international forum on Nuclear Proliferation and
Nuclear Energy in the Middle East in Amman, Jordan from June 22-24, 2009. The
organizers hoped to foster a dialogue on how to introduce expanded nuclear energy
capabilities to the Middle East in a manner consistent with the rights of Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty (NPT) signatories to employ peaceful nuclear technology, while
simultaneously mitigating the threats of nuclear proliferation.
ACSIS is a regional organization based in Amman, Jordan and has two primary
missions: to nurture efforts towards world peace, and to help maintain global security.
ACSIS invited the Center for Global Peace and Conflict Studies (CCPACS) to participate
in this forum based on the complementary nature of their respective missions. Given my
research interests on nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, CGPACS generously
funded my participation as its representative, which enabled me to establish the
groundwork for a future working relationship with ACSIS and develop professional
contacts to help facilitate my research agenda.
Currently, the nuclear energy industry is relatively underdeveloped in most of the
Middle East, barring such notable exceptions as Israel and Iran. However, the current
economic crisis and climate change have prompted 13 of the 23 states in the region to
express interest in peaceful nuclear energy programs. Jordan, for instance, has expressed
interest in using nuclear energy to power desalinization plants and to decrease its
dependence on foreign oil imports. As NPT signatories (except Israel), all states in the
region are guaranteed the right under Article 4 of the treaty to pursue such interests;
however, the region’s political conflicts coupled with the dual-use nature of some nuclear
technology have caused some international apprehension regarding such technology
development in the region. Cognizant of these tensions and mindful of practical
economic interests, participants—from both inside and outside the Middle East—
proposed multilateral strategies for addressing the region’s nuclear energy needs while
discouraging nuclear proliferation. Proponents of multilateralism usually addressed three
general, yet overlapping realms: peaceful nuclear cooperation, nuclear non-proliferation
efforts, and arms control and nuclear disarmament efforts. The remainder of this
summary addresses the highlights from each of these discussion topics.
Suggestions regarding peaceful nuclear cooperation in the region focused on two
proposals: the establishment of a multilateral nuclear fuel cycle and the establishment of
an international fuel bank. A multilateral nuclear fuel cycle would benefit the region by:
(1) promoting regional relations and security; (2) enabling smaller and poorer countries to
utilize otherwise economically untenable nuclear technology; and (3) being more cost-
effective than individualized nuclear energy industries. Pre-existing arrangements
elsewhere, such as URENCO and Euratom, served as models for this type of cooperative
agreement. Furthermore, design recommendations encouraged multilateral
representation at all levels of facility operations and management to foster “social
monitoring” that would help mitigate proliferation risks.
Conversely, proponents of an international fuel bank implicitly encouraged the
region to pursue more limited nuclear capabilities. These proposals suggested that the
region rely on the international market and mature nuclear industries elsewhere to meet
its nuclear fuel needs. Such a route would be more economical because countries could
focus primarily on reactor construction, rather than all portions of the nuclear fuel cycle.
Design recommendations for these proposals called for both international control of the
fuel bank—most likely undertaken by the IAEA—and for locating the fuel bank in a
politically neutral country to address concerns about fuel supply reliability.
Although most speakers favored some type of multilateral nuclear cooperation, debate
surrounding both of the aforementioned proposals exposed the need for greater
clarification of NPT language. Specifically, some world leaders have suggested that
technologies like uranium enrichment, fuel reprocessing, and nuclear waste disposal pose
significant proliferation risks, while other leaders see any effort to limit development of
such technologies as tantamount to nuclear apartheid. Until all NPT signatories reach a
consensus on what constitutes “sensitive nuclear technology,” this will remain a
contentious issue and an obstacle to nuclear cooperation.
While advocating for peaceful nuclear cooperation, the conference also focused
on efforts to enhance regional nuclear non-proliferation efforts. Multiple discussions on
this topic focused on establishing a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone in the Middle East
(NWFZ-ME). Presenters from both South America and Africa shared the experiences
that their respective regions have had in designing NWFZs, and emphasized that creating
a successful NWFZ requires a great deal of trust-building between regional neighbors.
Other discussions revealed a general consensus that both Iran and Israel’s nuclear
programs are detrimental to the NWFZ-ME efforts, but participants differed on the level
of threat they posed. Those who viewed Iran as the greater threat expressed concern
about the effect of Iranian nuclear weapons acquisition on the region’s balance of power.
Speakers most concerned about Israel expressed dismay over the unsafeguarded and
ambiguous nature of its program. Furthermore, the Western world’s apparent disinterest
in addressing Israel’s program status reinforced some participants’ judgment that the
United States implicitly favors a regime of nuclear apartheid for the region. Lastly, the
speakers also encouraged other significant non-proliferation efforts, such as the entryinto-force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), the successful negotiation of a
Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT), the strengthening of IAEA safeguards, and the
strengthening of export controls.
Finally, conference participants also encouraged multilateralism in arms control
and disarmament efforts. There was a general consensus that global nuclear disarmament
was a laudable and potentially achievable goal in light of President Obama’s June 2009
speech in Cairo, Egypt that reemphasized America’s commitment to this long-term goal.
However, the many remaining obstacles tempered this optimism. For example, Israel’s
official ambiguity regarding its nuclear arsenal was reiterated as a major concern. A
healthy debate also ensued over which outcome the region should pursue first: arms
control and disarmament goals or resolution of the region’s various political conflicts.
While no consensus was reached, the debate clearly highlighted that achieving either of
these goals would require better communication between the regional members. Other
multilateral efforts towards arms control and disarmament that participants advocated
included: (1) negotiating a ban on all short- and medium-range ballistic missiles to
diminish the utility of nuclear weapons at the regional scale; (2) dismantling
decommissioned nuclear weapons in the US and Russia in hopes of encouraging others to
emulate such behavior; and (3) ensuring sufficient employment opportunities for former
nuclear weapons scientists to discourage the sale of nuclear expertise on the black
market.
Despite the topic’s complexity, this forum accomplished its primary goals. Over
the course of this three-day event, a robust and mutually respectful debate transpired
regarding how nuclear energy could become a larger part of the Middle East’s future
overall energy strategy while adhering to the principals promulgated by the NPT. As the
conference concluded, participants expressed a dedication to continuing this dialogue at
all levels and exhibited a renewed commitment to establishing an NWFZ-ME.