Sauce for the gander
UN disarmament institute head Patricia Lewis tells Dina Ezzat that non-proliferation applies not only to Iraq
The US administration often argues that the main reason behind launching war in Iraq is to force the sanctions-crippled state to disarm. The legitmacy of this argument is widely questioned, particularly in view of ongoing weapons inspections. As far as many US critics are concerned, the issue of disarmament cannot be properly approached through the use of armed force -- or in a selective fashion.
"Disarmament is primarily a global issue, not just a regional issue," argues Patricia Lewis, director of the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR). "So when there is a problem with the global disarmament situation, this is reflected in the regional situation."
Lewis does not spare the world's five nuclear powers her wrath, arguing that failure by countries such as the United States and Britain to honour their commitments to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is as dangerous as Iraq's failure to comply with UN disarmament resolutions. Pursuing real disarmament, argues Lewis, means a "holistic approach" that allows for the reform of the current disarmament regime.
Lewis was in Cairo last week to take part in a joint Arab League-UNIDIR seminar, which aimed at exploring efforts to make the Middle East a region free of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly at the end of the two-day seminar, Lewis maintained that while "Iraq has to disarm and tell the world about what it did with its weapons of mass destruction", this commitment to disarmament should be equally demonstrated by the five prominent members of the nuclear club; the US, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom also have to "fulfill their disarmament commitments, which they have not been doing". She added that when at least two of these five countries -- the US and Russia -- are openly discussing developing new nuclear weapons, then this has an impact on nations throughout the world.
Lewis is equally concerned about India and Pakistan, which established their nuclear capabilities in 1998 and since then have almost started war. "India and Pakistan are talking about nuclear weapons as being necessary for their security, which means that what we have here is a reevaluation of nuclear weapons that shifts the balance of disarmament," says Lewis. This, she adds, has a direct impact on the Middle East. The reason for concern, she argues, is that if WMDs become an acceptable way of improving national security, then a region with obvious instabilities, such as the Middle East, is likely to show increased interest in these weapons.
"Only one country in the Middle East -- Israel -- is not party to the NPT," Lewis notes. The UNIDIR director admits there is real concern over Israel's nuclear capabilities and further anxiety that Iraq -- a signatory of the NPT -- has not been faithful to the terms of this treaty. In other words, argues Lewis, "The NPT in the Middle East is under attack from both within and without. This is combined with the fact that a large number of the Middle Eastern countries -- about 12 -- have not signed the chemical and biological weapons ban treaties." This, she adds, "puts the Middle East in a very unstable situation".
For Lewis, the disarmament situation -- or armament, as the case may be -- in the Middle East is a clear indication that the disarmament programme is not universal. And the question, she said, is "where do we go from here?"
For the purpose of globalising disarmament, Lewis argued that it is not enough to address Iraq, given the legal loopholes used to target that country. Under Chapter VII of the UN charter, Iraq has to disarm. But other countries such as North Korea do not come under Chapter VII authority, yet it is obvious that they too must disarm. "This is the dilemma faced by the international community," says Lewis.
"Requiring a country to comply with Chapter VII is a very unusual step," suggests Lewis. "The UN Security Council is now debating whether it would use force to disarm Iraq. At the same time, there are other countries such as North Korea that are failing to comply with the non-proliferation regime, and this is an extremely urgent situation." Lewis added that international law "has to be upheld, but it has to be upheld vis-à-vis the whole system". If not, the credibility of the entire system comes into question.
Asked whether or not there is any situation that might justify the use of WMDs by the US and its allies during a possible war in Iraq, Lewis said that this constitutes "a serious dilemma". "Iraq has to disarm. Chapter VII means enforcement -- the use of force -- but again, the impact of war is unpredictable." In fact, she notes, "we don't even know what a war will achieve" in terms of disarmament -- in Iraq, or the rest of the Middle East.
Lewis does not necessarily subscribe to either the optimistic American view that war will bring about true disarmament, or the view held by the anti-war camp who fear that the situation may get out of hand and spill over to other regions in conflict. "At the end of the day, some countries may say that if you have nuclear weapons, you will not get attacked. This may encourage a number of countries to quickly develop weapons of mass destruction."
Furthermore, Lewis is not convinced that there is any pressing need for the use of force against Iraq. "We know that it is a disgrace for the inspectors to have to go through what they have been going through," she said. "But we also know that the case of urgency has not been made against Iraq."
Reassessment of the non-proliferation regime is advocated by Lewis. "In view of the new realities in today's world, the US has already taken the lead in rethinking the system," she said. "It is now up to the rest of the international community to join the US in this important exercise."
As for making the Middle East a WMD-free region, Lewis said that this target is a long-term objective. The issue of Iraq has to be sorted out; the issue of Israel has to be sorted out; and there has to be a political settlement in the Arab-Israeli conflict. The issue with the Middle East is not only legal, but it is primarily a matter of awareness. It is with the aim of fostering this awareness that the UNIDIR is working closely with the Arab League.
