Ambassador Mohamed I Shaker, Chairman of the Board particpated in the UN Thematic Debate on Disarmament on 19 April 2010 by sending his written speech . The cloud of volcanic ash covering Europe prevented Ambassador Shaker to attend this important meeting.
the text of the paper as fololws ;
Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General, Member States, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Today s meeting is taking place at an important unique juncture. We have just had a summit in Washington on nuclear security preceded few days before by the New START Agreement between the United States and Russia as well as the new US Nuclear Posture Review. We are also heading in a few days to the 8th NPT Review Conference next May after a constructive and fruitful preparatory work. These are unprecedented accumulated events in the area of nuclear security, nuclear disarmament and non proliferation. It should augur well for future endeavours in the area of nuclear disarmament and non proliferation. I strongly believe that the UN General Assembly should continue to move forward to encourage and strengthen multilateral commitments regarding all weapons of mass destruction, exploring opportunities for further disarmament, non proliferation and international cooperation in promoting peaceful nuclear cooperation.
Having said this, we are still under the spell of the Thirteen Practical Steps adopted by the 2000 NPT Review Conference and this should prompt us to look further into the future to live up today to the challenge of dealing with what is left of the Thirteen Practical Steps and I must admit it is quite a lot. Just to cite few examples, the entry into force of the CTBT with only nine States left whose ratifications are badly needed for such a crucial step. Also a Cut - Off of fissionable material for military purposes is before the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva where I hope that a convention on the non - use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States should also be negotiated, a high priority.
Such major steps will require great dedication, vision, policy decisions, and definitely keeping the momentum.
Let me turn to specific issues regarding the region I belong to, the Middle East, being the only panelist from that region in today s meeting , the region has been for many years in favour of the establishment of a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction . Without going into the long history of the establishment of such a zone, there is real hope to move one important step forward in achieving that goal, and that is by implementing the Middle East Resolution adopted at the 1995 NPT Extension and Review Conference as integral part of the package that allowed the extension of the duration of the NPT indefinitely. Otherwise, it would have been difficult if not impossible to reach consensus on the Extension of the NPT.
It is now suggested to convene a negotiating conference, well prepared, to negotiate the establishment of a zone free of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, as well as the possibility of appointing a coordinator(s) or commission to prepare well for such a conference. This would be an important step not only from a procedural point of view but as a serious indication that the implementation of the 1995 Middle East Resolution is well on its way. We have an excellent recevoir of agreements on nuclear-weapon-free zones around the world which should facilitate the task of the anticipated negotiating conference. More importantly, the political will of the major parties of the region to go ahead with such a task is needed and is of primary importance, especially on the part of Israel and Iran whose adherence to such a zone would certainly be required. Their capabilities in the nuclear field are sources of great concern and instability not only in our region but in the world at large. Israel, in particular, is known to have developed nuclear –weapon capabilities and has refused so far to adhere to the NPT.
Closely connected with the nuclear-weapon-free zone, if it were to be really effective, is the issue of the internationalization or regionalization of the nuclear fuel cycle. Such a cycle could be very well intertwined with the zone either initially or later on as a follow up to its entry into force.
There are many advantages that can be achieved by adopting such a course. The former Director General of the IAEA Dr. Mohamed El Baradie was in favour of multilateral approaches to the nuclear fuel cycle, including its internationalization, or "the regionalization" of the cycle s sensitive nuclear technologies. There is a consensus building up in favour of such internationalization.
The building up of such a cycle would require great coordination, political will and a gradual buildup. It s not going to be easy, especially in our part of the world. It would need in particular the support of the major powers which happen to be major supplier States in the field of nuclear technology and material..
In Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in 2007, the Arab States decided to coordinate and cooperate in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy through the Arab Atomic Energy Agency located in Tunisia, which will require funding and restructuring of this Agency in a way that will allow it to undertake such a difficult task.
The benefits of the regionalization of the nuclear fuel cycle could be summarized as follows:
1. Every individual State participating in the cycle would have a say in one way or another in the operation or the running of such an enterprise instead of depending entirely on the goodwill or good faith of a supplier of nuclear material, equipment and fuel.
2. Economies of scale
3. Effective international control by the IAEA would be better guaranteed and streamlined in a multinational context
4. Each party to the cycle would be checking on the others, thereby strengthening non-proliferation norms
5. In the long run, bridging the gap between the developed and the less developed countries in nuclear technology, thus maximizing the equality of all participants and in taking together decisions that affect their well being and economic development
6. As an Arab, I hope that a closer Arab cooperation and coordination in the nuclear field could be a prelude to a sort of an Arab Union. In Europe, today The (EU), it all started with the establishment of Euratom and the Steal and Coal Union which led to the Common Market, the European Community and then the EU . We have a lot to learn from the European experience which is a vivid example for our dreams to come true.
The internationalization of the nuclear fuel cycle could also be one constructive solution to the Iranian nuclear problem, instead of imposing further sanctions or resorting threats to threat of attacks on its nuclear facilities. The internationalization or the regionalization of the sensitive technologies including enrichment facilities in Iran could allow others in the region to be partners with Iran in managing the facilities and taking decisions together without having access to the sensitive technologies sense. One of the advantages of being stakeholders in such an enterprise would be to check on each other strengthening important norms as well as reaping the benefits of such a venture, especially that some Arab States have plans to invest as well in nuclear power. Such cooperation would engender stability in the region and build up trust and confidence among nations of the region.
In the area of peaceful nuclear cooperation and assurances of supply we are showered by so many initiatives, Russian, British, and German, just to cite a few, including as well the idea of establishing a nuclear fuel bank. These initiatives constitute multiple choices for users or recipients assuring them the supply of fuel or / and Low Enriched Uranium (LEU). In order to make it easier for the users to decide for themselves which offer is more convenient to their needs, it is quite important to formulate guiding principles as yardsticks that would allow them to make their choices. As a former President of the UN Conference for the Promotion of International Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy (UNCPICPUNE) which was held in Geneva 1987, I had difficulty in reaching agreement on a set of principles that should have guided us in peaceful nuclear cooperation. The deliberations of that conference should be revisited, and maybe in the framework of the next NPT Review Conference in a couple of weeks. Such principles can be renegotiated may be in a special working group very similar to the one which negotiated the set of principles and objectives of non proliferation that were agreed upon in the 1995 Extension and Review Conference as part of the package that allowed the extension of The NPT indefinitely. Let us not forget that, the NPT itself was also negotiated on the basis of five principles adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1965 (Res.2028(xx). They should continue to guide us as well in assessing the implementation of the NPT.
I believe that new principles emanating from the 2010 Review Conference would allow the opportunity for a real dialogue between suppliers and users which has been lacking. Guidelines worked out by the suppliers are usually introduced without consultations with the users. This practice should be changed.
Mr. President, these are the few remarks I wanted to make, and I am grateful for giving me this opportunity to speak on major issues of our time.
