Egypt exits non-proliferation meeting
Posted: 02/05/2013 Filed under: Gulf and Middle East Security, Jenny Nielsen, Non-Proliferation | Tags: 2013 PrepCom, Arab League, Egypt, Geneva, MEWMDFZ, non-proliferation treaty, NPT 1 Comment »
By Jenny Nielsen, Research Analyst, Non-proliferation and Disarmament Programme
Egypt has walked out of talks on the Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) this week, over the slow progress on the establishment of a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East (MEWMDFZ).
The unprecedented move presents a serious headache for the non-proliferation regime. Announcing his delegation’s withdrawal from the Preparatory Committee to the 2015 NPT Review Conference (2013 NPT PrepCom) on Monday, Egyptian Ambassador Hisham Badr warned that despite being a strong supporter of the NPT regime, Cairo was dissatisfied with the international community’s ‘lack of seriousness’ in establishing an MEWMDFZ and ‘very concerned about the ramification of the non-fulfilment of commitments on the credibility and sustainability of the NPT regime’.
An A-Z of the NPT preparatory committee
Posted: 23/04/2013 Filed under: Jenny Nielsen, Non-Proliferation | Tags: non-proliferation, NPT, nuclear, nuclear disarmament, preparatory committee, prepcom, RevCon, review conference, treaty Leave a comment »
Putting back the Doomsday clock
By Jenny Nielsen, Research Analyst, Non-proliferation and Disarmament Programme
Acronym alert! Until 3 May, the Second Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) for the 2015 Review Conference (RevCon) of the parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) will be meeting at the United Nations (UN) in Geneva.
Still with us? The following alphabetical lists provides a flavour of what can be expected at this two-week gathering of states parties to the cornerstone of the nuclear non-proliferation regime.
Agenda
Unlike some previous PrepComs (e.g. 2007), this session already has one – which should avoid procedural delays.
Boycott?
The Arab League considered boycotting this year’s committee after the 2012 Helsinki conference on the establishment of a Middle East WMD-free zone was postponed. Arab states will now attend, but remain unhappy about the lack of progress on an MEWMDFZ.
The debate about Trident
Posted: 20/03/2013 Filed under: Alexa van Sickle, Europe, Non-Proliferation | Tags: debate, disarmament, foreign policy, NPT, nuclear deterrent, Trident nuclear weapons system, Trident replacement Leave a comment »
By Alexa van Sickle, Assistant editor
It was, several older colleagues told me, one of the most thought-provoking discussions they had heard at the institute. With Britain’s ageing Trident nuclear deterrent in the news again – as defence cuts bite and a divided coalition government reviews the options for a replacement system – four of the United Kingdom’s most respected former civil servants came to Arundel House last week and delivered a one-and-half-hour masterclass in nuclear policy.
Closing the deal with Iran
Posted: 06/08/2012 Filed under: Andrew Parasiliti, Gulf and Middle East Security, US | Tags: Iran, non-proliferation, NPT, nuclear, nuclear talks, P5+1 Leave a comment »
Saeed Jalili, of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and the West’s chief nuclear negotiator Catherine Ashton at talks in Moscow in June
By Andrew Parasiliti, Executive Director, IISS-US; Corresponding Director IISS-Middle East
There could yet be a deal over Iran’s nuclear programme between Iran and the P5+1 (the permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany; led in talks by the EU). The endgame, however, needs to be transparent: a comprehensive package that includes sanctions relief in return for Iran’s closing the nuclear file. Diplomacy with Iran should be seen as a process, with benchmarks and objectives, like any other high-stakes negotiation. These benchmarks would include a compromise on Iran’s right to enrichment; agreement on the latest fuel-swap proposal; a strategic pause in both Iranian enrichment and further sanctions; Iran’s involvement in regional security dialogue, including on Syria; and sanctions relief as a clear outcome for Iranian cooperation.
Hoping for a zone of goodwill in the Mideast
Posted: 05/07/2012 Filed under: Gulf and Middle East Security, Mark Fitzpatrick, Non-Proliferation | Tags: Iran, Israel, MEWMDFZ, Middle East, non-proliferation, NPT, WMD-free zone Leave a comment »
By Mark Fitzpatrick, Director, Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Programme
BEIRUT, Lebanon, 4 July – An IISS workshop in this sun-kissed capital showed that the decades-long cold war between Iran and Saudi-led Gulf Arabs has again heated up, this time over Syria. But one issue on which those nations see common cause is the goal of a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons (hereafter, simply the ‘Zone’). If it ever came to pass, the Zone would resolve Riyadh’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear programme and Tehran’s grievances about being held to a standard that is not applied to Israel. And since the Zone is such a far-off goal, nobody need be too bothered today about the intrusive inspections and other sensitive compromises that would need to be made for it to be implemented.
Believing in a Mideast WMD-free zone
Posted: 04/05/2012 Filed under: Gulf and Middle East Security, Mark Fitzpatrick, Non-Proliferation | Tags: Egypt, Iran, Israel, MEWMDFZ, Middle East, non-proliferation, NPT, WMD-free zone Leave a comment »
By Mark Fitzpatrick, Director, Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Programme
Sometimes you never know what you think about an issue until you start putting pen to paper.
Last November, the United Nations Association of the UK (UNA-UK) asked me to write a briefing report on the issue of establishing a Middle East Zone free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. (This mouthful is usually abbreviated as MEWMDFZ, or sometimes simply called the ‘zone’.) The paper would be the second in a UNA-UK series on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. Part of the organisation’s ‘Towards Zero‘ programme, the paper seeks to raise awareness ahead of a conference being organised later this year by Jaakko Laajava, Finland’s under secretary of state for foreign and security policy, in support of the zone goal.
My initial reaction was to wonder whether there was anything new to say on the subject, given that the zone has been on the international agenda since 1974 and is as distant now as it was then. I also confess to having harboured some initial cynicism about whether the 2012 conference would contribute to the goal of a zone, or indeed whether it would even be held, given the differences among the key players.
