DYB2011-Part-II-web

Disarmament resolutions and decisions listed by chapter
made, the Arab Group continued to believe that the NPT was the cornerstone of the
non-proliferation regime and disarmament. The Arab States supported a nuclearweapon-free
zone in the Middle East and attached great importance to the balanced
activation of the three NPT pillars. The creation of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in
the Middle East was a prerequisite to establish peace and stability in the region for
future generations.
The Arab Group demanded that the international community reiterate its
commitment to implementing the resolution on the Middle East adopted at the
1995 NPT Review Conference. The parties to the Treaty should fully assume their
responsibilities for implementing that resolution in full. They also stressed the
importance of pressuring Israel to accede unconditionally to the NPT as a non-nuclearweapon
State and to submit all its nuclear facilities to IAEA monitoring. They called
on all Member States to participate positively in the 2012 conference and to work to
make the conference a milestone on the path to freeing the Middle East of all nuclear
and other weapons of mass destruction.
In explanation of vote before the vote, Poland, which also spoke on behalf of the
European Union (EU), said that they intended to vote in favour of the draft resolution.
The EU had always been fully committed to the establishment in the Middle East of a
zone free of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems, and supported in
particular the convening of a conference in 2012 for that purpose. It regretted that the
draft resolution was not sufficiently comprehensive, in that it did not address all the
nuclear proliferation challenges in the region.
The draft resolution also did not mention the serious proliferation risks related
to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear and ballistic programme. It noted with grave
concern the recent developments of the Iranian nuclear programme, as reflected in the
latest IAEA report, and shared the Agency’s increasing concerns about the possible
military dimension of the Iranian nuclear programme.
Regarding the Syrian Arab Republic, the EU was seriously concerned about the
conclusion of the IAEA Director General, in his May report to the Board of Governors,
that the destroyed building at the Dair Alzour site was very likely a nuclear reactor.
The EU urged the Syrian Arab Republic to urgently remedy that non-compliance.
The following two States, which intended to vote against the draft resolution,
took the floor before the vote:
• The United States believed that the draft resolution failed to meet the
fundamental tests of fairness and balance, and confined itself to expressions
of concern about the activities of a single country. A glaring omission was the
lack of reference to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s violation of IAEA safeguards,
obligations under the NPT and the relevant Security Council resolutions, as well
as its failure to cooperate fully and transparently with the Agency. It reiterated
the United States’ support of universal adherence to the NPT and to a Middle
East free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction. It
highlighted its readiness to work with others to build the confidence necessary to
ensure the success of a regional conference in 2012 on the zone’s establishment,
pointing out that the conference must be conducted in a constructive and
unbiased way.
285