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 . 1• D ECEMBER 2011 How to Make the Middle East Conference Happen, Successful, and Sustainable A Conceptual Framework for a Track II Expert Group’s Contribution Bernd W. Kubbig, Christian Weidlich, and Roberta Mulas I n the context of the 2010 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) the international community has endorsed the objective of holding a Conference in 2012(see Box No. 1). Its subject is the establishment of a zone free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction(WMD) in the Middle East, 1 covering also biological and chemical weapons as well as their delivery vehicles(DVs). This gathering is to be attended by all states of the region. The envisaged zone is to be designed on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at. It would be convened by the UN Secretary-General and by the co-sponsors of the 1995 Resolution – the U.S., Russia, and the UK – in consultation with the Middle Eastern countries. The Facilitator and the host government were selected in October 2011: Finnish Under-Secretary Jaakko Laajava and the government in Helsinki, respectively(see P OLICY B RIEF No. 6 by Bernd W. Kubbig, Roberta Mulas, and Christian Weidlich). The Facilitator has the mandate to prepare the convening of the 2012 event and to assist in implementing the follow-up steps agreed upon by the participating regional states at the Conference. The time of preparation for the envisaged gathering is characterized by politically and socially diverse turmoil throughout the entire Middle East(metaphorically called‘Arab Spring’,‘Autumn’ or even ‘Winter’) with uncertain foreign policy consequences for the region and beyond. The Middle East Conference as an Opportunity For a Track II project such as ours, the Middle East Conference is an important opportunity to provide timely ideas, concepts, and background information. This explains why the emphasis of the future activities within the A CADEMIC P EACE O RCHESTRA M IDDLE E AST (APOME) will be on that planned Conference. 2 Of course we are aware of the fact that Track II and Track I initia­tives are in many respects fundamentally different, but they can at times be similar and even overlap. Our efforts consist of organizing a cycle of workshops to be held over the next years at which the“academic players” discuss relevant MEC-related topics. These discussions are the basis for the series of P OLICY B RIEFS , which will be made available for the actors in the region, the United Nations, the embassies, and especially for Ambassador Laajava and his staff. Against that backdrop, this P OLICY B RIEF outlines the contribution of the P EACE O RCHESTRA to making the MEC happen, successful, and sustainable. We present a conceptual framework that will guide our efforts and which at the same time is an offer to the relevant parties. Abstract The Middle East Conference(MEC) envisaged by the international community for 2012 is to discuss the establishment of a zone free of weapons of mass destruction and of their delivery vehicles(WMD/DVs). For a classical Track II project like the A CADEMIC P EACE O RCHESTRA M IDDLE E AST , this is a historic opportunity to provide timely ideas, concepts, and background information for the relevant addressees in the region, the UN and the embassies, and especially for the Facilitator, Finnish Ambassador Jaakko Laajava and his staff. The security dilemma as a starting point and the presented Cooperative Security Concept as a way of lowering this dilemma with an important role of a forum such as the MEC – these are the vital components of the entire cycle of O RCHESTRA workshops over the next years and the basis for discussion and publi­cation of our series of P OLICY B RIEFS . Three guiding questions will be addressed: first, how can the political will be created to make the MEC happen, successful, and sustai­nable? Second, under what circumstances can the crucial decision-makers be induced to adopt a cooperative security approach? Third, how to outline an incremental reduction path culminating in a WMD/DVs Free Zone in the Middle East? 