When Egypt launched an initiative in the early 1990s to establish a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East, the initiative met with indifference, particularly from the US and the West. In the wake of the 1995 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) revision conference, the UN issued a resolution to convene an international conference in Helsinki to prepare the arrangements for the nuclear-free zone. The UN appointed a facilitator to prepare for the conference. At the last moment the US frustrated the conference on the pretext that the time “was not suitable”. When the P5+1 reached in June 2015 an agreement with Iran on its nuclear programme, the US president, who was desperate to reach the agreement, strongly supported it, arguing that it would ensure the security of the region. We responded that the Middle East would not be secured while a certain country, Israel, maintains a monopoly on nuclear weapons, with an arsenal of between 200 and 400 nuclear warheads, refusing to join the NPT or place its nuclear facilities under the supervision and the inspection of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In April 2015, during the NPT revision conference, Egypt, supported by Arab countries, introduced a draft resolution renewing its initiative to establish a zone free from nuclear and other mass destruction weapons. The US, UK and Canada frustrated the resolution. In May 2015, the Arab League convened a conference to discuss the repercussions of the nuclear agreement with Iran on Arab national security. In the discussion we appealed to Arab diplomacy to change its approach of raising the nuclear-free zone in international forums and NPT revision conferences. We argued that it was time for Arab diplomacy to put this issue on the agenda of strategic dialogue with the US, emphasising that the absence of a weapons of mass destruction free zone constitutes a threat to the whole region. In this context, we raised the issue of the Israeli nuclear reactor in the Naqab desert, neighbouring Egypt, and the existential and environmental threat it poses given its age (finding origin in the early 1960s) and operation without international inspection. Indeed, this is not only our concern. It is of concern inside Israel. Recently, the debate was renewed with the anniversary of the disaster in Chernobyl 30 years ago. An Israeli professor, Auzi Iven, revealed more than 1,500 deficiencies in the Israeli reactor and called on the Israeli government to close the reactor to avoid a similar disaster. Meanwhile, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that experts from Dimona, another Israeli reactor, expressed misgivings on possible nuclear emissions from the reactor during a conference on nuclear issues. We again appeal to concerned institutions to address this issue and its potential threat or else we may awake one morning with another Chernobyl on our borders. In late March 2016, the US convened a summit in Washington on nuclear security. The US president renewed the promise he gave when he received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009. We again appealed to the president that it is inconceivable to expect a world free of nuclear weapons while a strategic region like the Middle East remains threatened by the monopoly of a single country — Israel — and its assured nuclear arsenal. The writer is a former ambassador.
