MIDDLE EAST NUCLEAR WEAPON-FREE ZONE: A ROLE FOR ASIAN STATES
COMMENTARY ARCHIVES, 16 Jun 2009
The North Korean nuclear test, instability in nuclear-armed Pakistan, the growth of Iran’s nuclear enrichment and its potential for creating nuclear weapons have come together to make the relation between nuclear arms and security a major concern of all States. Is there a specific role that the States of South-east Asia could play in creating a Nuclear-weapon Free Zone in the Middle East?
All the States of South-east Asia vote positively for the UN General Assembly resolutions calling for a Nuclear-weapon Free Zone in the Middle East. Such a resolution was first introduced by Egypt and Iran in 1974 and a largely similar resolution has been adopted each year by consensus since 1980.
Are these resolutions a “feel good” habit or is the world community advancing slowly toward building such a nuclear-weapon free framework? One close observer has called for a much faster pace. Mohamed ElBaradei, the Director General of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has repeatedly called up Iran and Israel in particular to create a nuclear-weapon free zone in the Middle East. He indicates that time is short and has stressed that a peace agreement between Israel and its Arab neighbours “must be reached in parallel with a security agreement in the region based on ridding the region of all weapons of mass destruction.”
The hazards of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East have existed since Israel developed its “bomb in the basement” and was widely discussed in the early 1980s after Israeli forces destroyed the French-built nuclear reactor near Baghdad in June 1981. (1).
The concept of nuclear-weapon-free zones has been an important concept in disarmament and regional conflict reduction efforts. A nuclear-weapon-free zone was first suggested by the Polish Foreign Minister Adam Rapacki at the United Nations General Assembly in October 1957 — just a year after the crushing of the uprising in Hungary. The crushing of the Hungarian revolt by Soviet troops and the unrest among Polish workers at the same time showed that the East-West equilibrium in Central Europe was unstable with both the Soviet Union and the USA in possession of nuclear weapons, and perhaps a willingness to use them if the political situation became radically unstable. The Rapacki Plan, as it became known, called for the denuclearization of East and West Germany, Czechoslovakia and Poland.
The Plan went through several variants which included its extension to cover the reduction of armed forces and armaments, and as a preliminary step, a freeze on nuclear weapons in the area. The Rapacki Plan was opposed by the NATO powers, in part because it recognized the legitimacy of the East German state. It was not until 1970 and the start of what became the 1975 Helsinki Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe that serious negotiations on troop levels and weapons in Europe began. While the Rapacki Plan never led to negotiations on nuclear-weapon policies in Europe, it had the merit of re-starting East-West discussions which were then at a dead point.
The first nuclear-weapon-free zone to be negotiated — the Treaty of Tlatelolco — was a direct aftermath of the Cuban missile crisis of October 1962. It is hard to know how close to a nuclear exchange between the USA and the USSR was the Cuban missile crisis. It was close enough so that Latin American leaders were moved to action. While Latin America was not an area in which military confrontation was as stark as in Europe, the Cuban missile crisis was a warning that you did not need to have standing armies facing each other for there to be danger.
Mexico under the leadership of Ambassador Alfonso Garcia-Robles at the UN began immediately to call for a denuclearization of Latin America. There were a series of conferences, and in February 1967 the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America was signed at Tlatelolco, Mexico. For a major arms control treaty, the Tlateloco was negotiated in a short time, due partly to the fear inspired by the Cuban missile crisis but especially to the energy and persistence of Garcia-Robles and the expert advice of William Epstein, then the U.N.’s Director of Disarmament Affairs. The Treaty established a permanent and effective system of control which contains a number of novel and pioneering elements as well as a body to supervise the Treaty.
On 8 September 2006, the five states of Central Asia — Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan signed the treaty establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone. The treaty aims at reducing the risk of nuclear proliferation and nuclear-armed terrorism. The treaty bans the production, acquisition, deployment of nuclear weapons and their components as well as nuclear explosives. Importantly, the treaty bans the hosting or transport of nuclear weapons as both Russia and the USA have established military airbases in Central Asia where nuclear weapons could have been placed in times of crisis in Asia.
The treaty was signed at Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan which was the main testing site for Soviet nuclear tests. Between 1949 and 1989, some 500 nuclear tests took place at Semipalatinsk leaving a heritage of radioactivity and health problems. A non-governmental organization “Nevada-Semipalatinsk” was formed in the 1980s of persons in the USA and the USSR who had lived in the nuclear-weapon test areas. Its aim was to work to abolish nuclear weapons and to push for compensation for the persons suffering from the medical consequences of the tests. Thus, Rusten Tursunbaev, the vice President of “Nevada-Semipalatinsk” could say “The signing of the agreement on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia is a remarkable, unbelievable moment and event — not just for Central Asia, but for the whole world.”
It is an unfortunate aspect of world politics that constructive, institution-building action is usually undertaken only because of a crisis. The growing pressure building in the Middle East could lead to concerted leadership for a Middle East nuclear-weapon-free zone. The IAEA has the technical knowledge for putting such a zone in place. (2). Now there needs to be leadership from within the Middle East states as well as broader international encouragement.
During the negotiations in the 1960s within the UN’s main disarmament-negotiating forum — then the Eighteen Nation Committee on Disarmament (ENDC), the Ambassador of Burma, U Maung Maung, played an active role in promoting what became the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) (3).
Maung Maung is an example of leadership from a small State with no nuclear ambitions but who saw himself as a spokesperson for the common good. Who will be the U Maung Maung for a serious start on a Nuclear-weapon free Middle East?
(1) -Shai Feldman. Israeli Nuclear Deterrence: A Strategy for the 1980s (New York: Columbia University Press, 1982)
-Louis Rene Beres (ed.). Security or Armageddon (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1985)
-Roger Pajak. Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East (Washington, DC: The National Defense University,1982)
(2) Michael Hamel-Green. Regional Initiatives on Nuclear-and WMD-Free Zones (Geneva: United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, (2005)
(3) Mohamed Ibrahim Shaker. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: Origin and Implementation (New York: Oceana, 1980)
_________________________
Rene Wadlow, Representative to the UN, Geneva, Association of World Citizens.
This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 16 Jun 2009.
Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: MIDDLE EAST NUCLEAR WEAPON-FREE ZONE: A ROLE FOR ASIAN STATES, is included. Thank you.
If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.
Read more
Click here to go to the current weekly digest or pick another article:
COMMENTARY ARCHIVES: