A CADEMIC P EACE O RCHESTRA M IDDLE E AST P OLICY B RIEF F OR THE M IDDLE E AST C ONFERENCE ON A WMD/DV S F REE Z ONE N O . 5• D ECEMBER 2011 Nuclear Weapon Free Zones and the Nuclear Powers Lessons for a WMD/DVs Free Zone in the Middle East Roberta Mulas T he proposal to create a zone free of weapons of mass destruction(WMD) and delivery vehicles(DVs) in the Middle East has been on the table of the international community for several decades now. Still, a substantial breakthrough on the issue has yet to materialize. In 1974, Egypt and Iran first introduced in the United Nations General Assembly a resolution to establish a nuclear weapon free zone(NWFZ) in the region. From that time, it has been discussed every year and since 1980 it has received approval by consensus. In 1990, the proposal was extended by then Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak who called for the elimination of all weapons of mass destruction. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty(NPT) has taken up the issue at its 1995 Review and Extension Conference, where the parties decided that progress should be made in the NPT context despite the absence of Israel. The country, now the only Middle Eastern state that is not a member to the treaty, endorses the objec­tives of a NWFZ, but only once regional peace has been established. This stance clashes with the positions of Egypt and other Middle Eastern states, which signed the NPT in the hope they could pressure Israel to join the treaty and to disarm. 1 The Middle East Conference as a Forum for a WMD/DVs Free Zone Fifteen years after the 1995 resolution, the lack of progress on the Middle Eastern WMD/DVs Free Zone has led Arab countries to ask for implementation of concrete steps towards this goal at the 2010 NPT Review Conference. The meeting’s Final Document, approved by consensus, mandated for 2012 a regional conference to discuss the establishment of a zone free of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons including their delivery systems. All countries of the Middle East together with the nuclear weapon states(NWS) are called upon to attend the Conference. As cosponsors of the 1995 resolution the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia have a special role. 2 For example, they were responsible, together with the UN Secretary General and in consultation with regional states, for appointing a Facilitator and a host country. This was accomplished in October 2011, when it was made public that Ambassador Jaakko Laajava of Finland would take up that role and his government would host the 2012 Middle East Conference(MEC). The Middle East is not only one of the most conflict-ridden regions of the world, but also a difficult case from an arms control perspective. It includes one state with a nuclear arsenal, as well as others that are believed to hold nuclear aspirations or to have held them in the past. Moreover, there is a strong belief that biological and chemical weapons are part of some regional arsenals and missile programs abound. In conjunction with the poor record of progress in the peace process, the situation seems intractable. Nonetheless, these diffi­culties point out the urgency to make progress on the elimination of such armaments. To break the current impasse, the motivations of regional states need to be rethought and a framework in which all parties have a net gain in security needs to be developed. This task is even more urgent given the fast-approaching Abstract The proposal to establish a zone free of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery vehicles in the Middle East poses a variety of challenges. One is the attitude nuclear weapon states are likely to adopt towards the prospective zone. In the past these states played a crucial role in ensuring the success of nuclear weapon free zones(NWFZs) as they can provide the parties to those treaties with negative security assurances, i.e. legal guarantees against nuclear attacks. An analysis of their behavior vis-à-vis existing NWFZs will help to identify a pattern of issues that have proved problematic in the past. The nuclear powers wanted to retain certain prerogatives in the NWFZs: freedom of the seas, transit rights, testing, bases, and security arrangements. This P OLICY B RIEF will show how these issues might apply to the Middle Eastern case. It aims at underscoring the importance and quandary of nuclear powers in the creation of a WMD/DVs Free Zone in the Middle East. Discussions on this topic are scheduled for 2012, as agreed by the last Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Thus, clarifying concepts and presenting ideas which address this issue is a useful exercise. 