newsletter · 09:30–10:15 plenary session 2: opening speech [open] chair:marie muller...

N E W S L E T T E R

Volume 43 � Number 2 � December 2006

issued by the Council of the PugwashConferences on Science and World Affairs

Nobel Peace Prize 1995

56th Pugwash Conference, Cairo, Egypt, October 2006

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

TO THE PUGWASH COMMUNITY: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

56th Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs:A Region in Transition: Peace and Reform in the Middle EastCairo, Egypt, 11–15 November 2006

CONFERENCE STATEMENT of the Pugwash Council (in English and Arabic) . . . . . . . . . 3

MESSAGES OF WELCOME: Mohamed Kadry Said and M.S. Swaminathan . . . . . . . . . 14

CONFERENCE SCHEDULE AND WORKING GROUPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

OPENING SPEECH: H.E. Ahmed Aboul Gheit, Minister of Foreign Affairs . . . . . . . . . 18

KEYNOTE ADDRESS: Amr Mousa, Secretary General, League of Arab States. . . . . . . 20Prospects of Peace, Change and Regional Cooperation in the Middle East

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, M.S. Swaminathan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

56TH PUGWASH CONFERENCE WORKING GROUP REPORTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

REPORTS ON RECENT PUGWASH WORKSHOPS

Pugwash Meeting no.319 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503rd Bariloche Regional Pugwash WorkshopBariloche, Argentina, 26-27 May 2006

Pugwash Meeting no. 321 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59Pugwash Netherlands Workshop on New Challenges to Human Security:Wageningen, Netherlands, 16-18 June 2006

Pugwash meeting no. 323 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6425th Workshop of the Pugwash Study Group on the Implementationof the Chemical and Biological Weapons Conventions:Towards a Successful Outcome for the Sixth Review ConferenceGeneva, Switzerland, 18-19 November 2006

SPECIAL SECTION: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

Islam and the West: The Sacred Realm—Domain of New Threats and Challenges

By Bas de Gaay Fortman, from the 56th Pugwash Conference, Cairo, Egypt

NATIONAL PUGWASH GRUOPS

German Pugwash Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

REPORT FROM INTERNATIONAL STUDENT/YOUNG PUGWASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

OBITUARIES: Amnon Pazy, Alvin Weinberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Members of the Pugwash Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

Calendar of Future Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inside back cover

PugwashVolume 43 � Number 2December 2006

Editor:Jeffrey Boutwell

Research Assistant:Erin Blankenship

Design and Layout:Anne Read

Printing:Cardinal PressFredericksburg, Virginia

COVER: Temple of QueenHatshepsut, Luxor, Egypt

Photo: Jeffrey Boutwell

To the Pugwash Community

not been the case. The failure of the 2005 NPT Review

Conference, concern over nuclear activities in North

Korea and Iran, what to do about Israel, India and Pak-

istan being non-NPT states, and only modest success

towards controlling and eliminating excess fissile material

all over the world, all point to the work that remains to be

done to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons.

Yet, there have been recent successes. Libya was per-

suaded to give up its nuclear weapons program and rejoin

the international community. In late 2006, the Six-Party

talks on North Korea achieved a long-awaited break-

through that holds out the prospect of North Korea aban-

doning its nuclear weapons program. And international

diplomacy continues to seek a resolution of ambiguities in

the Iranian nuclear program.

Perhaps more significantly, new voices are being added

to those advocating the reduction and elimination of

nuclear weapons. In a noteworthy editorial published on 4

January 2007, a bipartisan group consisting of George

Schultz, Henry Kissinger, William Perry and Sam Nunn

forcefully advocated—for the first time for each of them—

the case for the total elimination of nuclear weapons. It is

not stretching the imagination to say that for Joseph Rot-

blat, who espoused a nuclear-weapons-free world from the

very first days of Pugwash, the thought of being joined by

four stalwarts of the US foreign policy establishment

would have come as welcome, and perhaps shocking,

news indeed.

It will be to that end—to laying out concrete steps that

can be taken in the near future to achieving the elimina-

tion of nuclear weapons—that Pugwash will celebrate its

50th anniversary in July 2007 with a workshop on Revi-

talizing Nuclear Disarmament held at Cyrus Eaton’s

Thinker’s Lodge in Pugwash, Nova Scotia. Twenty-five

international specialists will work together in the joint

Pugwash-Middle Power Initiative workshop to propose

substantive policy recommendations that can reinvigorate

the international movement toward faster reductions and

the ultimate elimination of all nuclear weapons.

The Nuclear Threat on the 50th Anniversaryof the Pugwash Conferences

The year 2007 marks the 50th anniversary of the Pugwash

Conferences on Science and World Affairs. Little could the

original 21 participants at the July 1957 meeting in Pug-

wash, Nova Scotia have imagined that, fifty years later, the

Pugwash organization would have convened over 320

workshops, symposia and conferences on major security

issues, have national groups and representatives in more

than 50 countries around the world, and have been hon-

ored with the 1995 Nobel Peace Prize.

Little could they also have imagined how the threat

posed by nuclear weapons would be so radically changed

by global events, for both better and worse. It certainly

would have defied their imagination to know that the US

and Soviet Union managed to survive three more decades

of the Cold War without ever using nuclear weapons,

despite stockpiles that rose from 5,000 in 1957 to more

than 70,000 by the mid-1980s. Also, beginning with Presi-

dents Reagan and Gorbachev, the first two US and Soviet

leaders who could envision a nuclear weapons-free world,

the US and USSR (then Russia) have substantially reduced

their nuclear forces—by almost two-thirds—to some

36,000 today.

Of course, 36,000 warheads (11,000 of these are on

operational, short-alert status) remains an absurdly high

number, out of all proportion to any security threat the US

or Russia might face. Moreover, there exist about 1,000

nuclear warheads in the arsenals of the seven other exist-

ing nuclear weapons states (China, UK, France, Israel,

India, Pakistan, and North Korea), most of whom reside

in conflict-prone areas of the world.

Then there is the post-9/11 world of international ter-

ror threats and scenarios for terrorist use of nuclear

weapons that are likely beyond imagining for our original

Pugwash participants of 1957.

While all of the above should greatly concentrate the

mind of the international community in moving forcefully

to reduce and eliminate nuclear weapons, sadly this has

Pugwash Newsletter, December 2006 1

Bari, Italy. Various national Pugwash groups will also be

holding commemorative events to both celebrate the ori-

gins of the Pugwash Conferences in July 1957 and to help

mobilize policymakers and the public toward the common

goal of eliminating nuclear weapons as the most cata-

strophic threat facing humanity.

Acknowledgments

For continued support of the Pugwash Newsletter and the

Pugwash Conferences, we are grateful to the Italian

National Research Council, the German Research Society,

the Russian Academy of Sciences, the John D. and Cather-

ine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation

of New York, the Ploughshares Fund, and the Ford Foun-

dation (the latter especially for its support of the Cairo

conference).

Jeffrey Boutwell, Editor

56th and 57th Pugwash Conferences onScience and World Affairs

The Pugwash community would like to warmly acknowl-

edge the efforts of Mohamed Kadry Said and all his col-

leagues in the Egyptian Pugwash Group for their superb

efforts in organizing the 56th Pugwash Conference on Sci-

ence and World Affairs—A Region in Transition: Peace

and Reform in the Middle East, that was held in Cairo,

Egypt from 10-15 November 2006. The conference was

marked by a stimulating array of plenary and panel ses-

sions on topics ranging fromWMD in the Middle East to

The Prospects for Iraq and The Israeli-Palestinian Peace

Process to Islam and the West (full coverage of which can

be found on pp. 3–49).

In October 2007, Pugwash will continue its commem-

oration of its 50th anniversary with the 57th Pugwash

Conference, Prospects for Disarmament, Dialogue and

Cooperation in the Mediterranean Region, taking place in

2 Pugwash Newsletter, December 2006

Tribute to Jo Rotblat, Cloud Cliff Bakery and Café, Santa Fe, NM.(WITH PERMISSION OF WILLEM MALTEN)

ThePugwash Council, meetingduring the 56th PugwashConference held in Cairo,

Egypt, from 10-15 November 2006,expresses its grave concern over theescalating violence in the MiddleEast, which tragically has grownmore pervasive and deadly in recentmonths.The war between Israel and

Hezbollah in Lebanon, the upwardspiral of violence between Israelisand Palestinians in Gaza and theWest Bank, and the violent insur-gency and sectarian fighting in Iraq,have produced a humanitariantragedy of nearly unprecedented pro-portions for the region, with civiliansthe overwhelming victims. Coupledwith the ongoing insurgency inAfghanistan and the continued threatposed by terrorism to regional statesand the international community, thepicture is bleak indeed.Also of concern is the nuclear fac-

tor in the region—the presence ofIsraeli nuclear weapons and uncer-tainty over Iran’s nuclear program.Increased tension in Northeast Asiaand the recent nuclear test by theDPRK have introduced new securitychallenges in that part of the world.The nuclear non-proliferation

regime is under stress from otherareas as well—by the failure of theNPT Review Conference in 2005, the

And the ‘summer war’ between Israeland Lebanon witnessed the indiscrim-inate use of violence and weaponryagainst civilians, by both sides. Civil-ians are also suffering in the resur-gence of violence in Afghanistan, andin continued sporadic outbreak of ter-rorist acts in the region.The region is witnessing a massive

failure of political will to deal withthese inter-related crises. The Pug-wash Council calls on the interna-tional community to help jump startthe Israeli-Palestinian peace process,with the 2002 Arab peace initiative apositive starting point. We also urgedirect talks between the United Statesand Iran and Syria that could lowerthreat perceptions and increaseregional stability. In Iraq, politicaldialogue between the Iraqi parties isneeded at the same time as foreigninfluences are greatly reduced. Twocrucial imperatives in all these discus-sions will be the need to include alllegitimate and duly elected parties inthe talks, and the related need toavoid long-standing double standardsin how all parties are treated.Especially worrisome in a region

plagued by rising religious, sectarianand political strife is the nuclearquestion. We urge an early resolutionbetween the international communityand Iran over that country’s nuclearprogram and the resumption of full

demonstrable lack of progress bythe major nuclear weapons statesin reducing and eliminating theirweapons, and the ever-present threatof terrorist acquisition of nuclearmaterials.In a global world order skewed

by the dictates of the “internationalwar on terrorism”, where unilateral-ism and disdain for collective securityare used to trump the rule of law andmulti-lateral approaches to meetingbasic human security needs, the riskof conflict escalating out of control,to include the possible use of nuclearweapons, remains high.

The Urgency of theMiddle East Crisis

The Pugwash Council believes imme-diate steps are needed to prevent evenmore violence that could spreadthroughout the region, and that theMiddle East crisis must be dealt within a comprehensive manner by theinternational community.More than three years of sectar-

ian, political and terrorist violence inIraq have claimed at least 150,000Iraqi lives, as well as the deaths andwounding of thousands of coalitionand Iraqi military and security per-sonnel. The decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict is intensifying,especially in and around Gaza, withcivilians the overwhelming victims.

56th Pugwash Conference on Science and World AffairsA Region in Transition: Peace and Reform in the Middle East

18 November 2006, Cairo, Egypt

CONFERENCE STATEMENT OF THE PUGWASH COUNCIL


P U G W A S H M E E T I N G N O . 3 2 2


Pugwash Meeting No. 322

scope IAEA and Additional Protocolsafeguards.Pugwash continues to advocate

the goal of a Middle East free ofweapons of mass destruction, whilerecognizing that improved regionalstability and a lessening of hostilerhetoric and threat perceptions arenecessary to move in that direction.In the interim, we urge those MiddleEast states that have not yet signedand/or ratified the Chemical and Bio-logical Weapons conventions to do soat the earliest opportunity.

Strengthening Nuclear Non-Proliferation

The nuclear test carried out by theDPRK in October 2006 presents anadditional challenge to the entireframework of the Nuclear Non-Pro-liferation regime. The PugwashCouncil believes that a combinationof Six-Party negotiations and directUS-DPRK talks are needed to reducetensions in the region, provide secu-rity assurances that can reduce incen-tives to acquire nuclear weapons, andpave the way for the DPRK to returnto the Nuclear Non-ProliferationTreaty as soon as possible.Action to reinvigorate the non-

proliferation regime must also betaken by the five initial nuclear-weapons states (US, Russia, UK,France and China). We call for earlyentry into force of the Comprehen-sive Test Ban Treaty and the start ofnegotiations for a verifiable FissileMaterial Cut-Off Treaty. The Pug-wash Council also recommends thefollowing:

• The US and Russia should go wellbeyond the Moscow Treaty andimplement deep cuts in theirnuclear weapons, to levels in thehundreds, instead of the absurd

number of 10,000+ weapons thatcurrently exist in each country.

• All nuclear weapons states shouldmove immediately to the de-alert-ing of their nuclear forces and theadoption of nuclear no-first-usepolicies.

• As the UK Trident nuclear weaponssystem is nearing the end of itsoperational life, the UK govern-ment has a unique opportunity tolead the way towards the total abo-lition of nuclear weapons. The Pug-wash Council strongly recommendsthat the UK decides not to renew,renovate or replace its nuclearweapons.

• The US and NATO should com-plete the withdrawal of all US tacti-cal nuclear weapons based inEurope, while Russia should greatlyreduce the tactical nuclear weaponsbased on its territory.

• Given recent policies of the US gov-ernment to more seriously investi-gate the feasibility of spaceweapons, the time is now to pre-serve space as a weapons-free sanc-tuary as we approach the 40thanniversary in 2007 of the OuterSpace Treaty.

• And most urgently, there remainsthe need for rapid action to controland/or eliminate the still substantialstockpiles and sources of highlyenriched uranium (HEU) aroundthe world that could provide themeans for a catastrophic terroristnuclear attack.

Renewed interest in civiliannuclear power, driven by concernsover global climate change, high oilprices, and the need for diversifiedenergy sources, brings with it seriousconcerns over the proliferation rami-

fications of building a new genera-tion of nuclear power plants andenrichment and reprocessing facili-ties. Preventing plutonium-based fuelcycles is of special importance.Options for the multilateral controlof nuclear fuel cycles could also helpstrengthen the barrier between civiland military nuclear programs.Controversy over the proposed

US-India nuclear cooperation agree-ment is especially instructive in thisregard. While the sharing of bestpractices and proliferation-resistanttechnologies is desirable, the prece-dent of nuclear cooperation betweenan initial nuclear weapons state suchas the US and a non-member of theNPT could undermine future non-proliferation efforts.Additionally, the Pugwash Coun-

cil believes that constructive workshould be started by like-mindedStates to identify the legal, politicaland technical requirements for theglobal elimination of nuclearweapons. As recommended by theMiddle Powers Initiative, theseefforts would be a contribution to theNPT process and could provide theframework for eventual negotiationsfor a Nuclear Weapons Conventionprohibiting and eliminating suchweapons.The ultimate goal is to declare

nuclear weapons illegal and immoraland move toward their total elimina-tion. To repeat our message from thePugwash Conference in Hiroshima inJuly 2005—as long as nuclear wea-pons exist, they will one day be used.

An Alliance of Civilizations

Meeting in Cairo, we are acutelyaware of how a concept such as the“clash of civilizations” can bothover-simplify and polarize debateover international security.



Given deep religious and politicalfissures running through theArab/Islamic world and the West,simplistic notions of a Manichean“clash of civilizations” prevent theemergence of vitally needed coopera-tive solutions for resolving theworld’s major political and securitychallenges.As is painfully apparent by the

failure of unilateral military solutionsto solve what are fundamentallypolitical problems—whether by theUS and UK in Iraq or by Israel inLebanon and the Gaza Strip—theinternational community needs adecisive new approach to the manylong-standing issues in need of politi-cal resolution in the Middle East,including the Israeli-Palestinian con-flict; stability for Lebanon; an end tothe tragic political, sectarian and ter-rorist violence in Iraq; engagementwith Syria and Iran in promotingregional security cooperation; secur-ing Afghanistan’s future in the face ofthe recent upsurge of Taliban-inspired violence; and generally pro-moting the growth of democraticgovernance and civil society through-out the region.Broad promotion of human secu-

rity, no less than the fight against ter-rorism in all its aspects, must dependon the rule of law, multilateral coop-eration, the principles of equity andcompromise, and respect for democ-ratic processes. Also needed is therealization that the nation state intoday’s world—no matter how bigand militarily powerful—can only beeffective when it works throughregional and international organiza-tions and frameworks to promote thesecurity of its citizens.In that regard, the Pugwash

Council welcomes the election of thenew United Nations Secretary Gen-

eral, Ban Ki-moon, who will takeoffice in January 2007 and who willneed renewed support from all quar-ters in promoting the reforms andefficiencies necessary in the UN for itto deal effectively with the broadrange of security and societal chal-lenges facing us.These challenges, of course,

extend far beyond the Middle East.From central Asia to the Far East,and throughout African and LatinAmerica, civil and sectarian violenceand instability present major chal-lenges to the international commu-nity.A recent major Pugwash initiative

on the Kashmir conflict, for example,is one area where there is reason forhope that a transformation can occurin Indian-Pakistani relations that willreduce the likelihood of future con-flict. Pugwash has also been recentlyinvolved in efforts to promoteregional peacekeeping in East Africaand in strengthening the capabilitiesof the African Union for conflictmediation and peacekeeping.Elsewhere, in the Caucasus and

central Asia as an example, effectivecooperation among regional andinternational organizations presentsthe best chance for resolving con-flicts, rather than unilateral action,pre-emption, or excessive use of mili-tary force. New modes of coopera-tion are needed between NATO andthe CSTO (Collective Security TreatyOrganization), as well as between theEuropean Union and NATO, regard-ing potential cooperation in peacesupport and in any future crisis.More broadly, genuine human

security will only be possible if theinternational community aggressivelyaddresses its fundamental compo-nents, most notably equitable accessto food, water, healthcare, education,

and economic opportunity. Given thechallenges posed by global climatechange and the HIV/AIDS pandemic,concerted international action andincreased resources targeted on theseproblems are needed as well.When judged by the objectives of

the UNMillennium DevelopmentGoals announced in 2000, the tragicreality is that human security for theworld’s peoples is woefully deficient.The majority of world’s population isconfronted daily with unacceptabledeprivations in their access to basichuman necessities. While the promiseof new technologies and the sustain-able use of resources offers hope,such benefits will depend on a basicPugwash credo: that scientistsremember their responsibility regard-ing the beneficial applications of theirwork in promoting true human secu-rity for all individuals, and to carrythat message to the public, govern-ments, and international institutions.

� � �

At the 56th Pugwash Conference inCairo, the above and other themeswere addressed by speakers includ-ing: His Excellency Ahmed AbulGheit (Foreign Minister of Egypt),Amr Mousa (Secretary General,League of Arab States) and HamidAnsari and Aly El-Samman, whojointly gave the Dorothy HodgkinMemorial Lecture with their conver-sation on Islam and the West, with aresponse from Alexey Vasilyev ofRussia.Conference participants also were

greeted by IAEA Director General,Mohamed El Baradei, via a videomessage. Other conference speakersincluded Amb. Mohammed Shakerand Gen. (ret.) Mohamed Kadry Saidof Egyptian Pugwash, and Prof. M.S.Swaminathan of India and Prof.

Muhammed Ali Mosque of the Saladin Citadel of Cairo.

� � �

The 56th Pugwash Conference,A Region in Transition: Peace andReform in the Middle East, wasattended by more than 180 partici-pants from over 40 countries, includ-ing 30 International Student/YoungPugwash participants, and was heldat the Conrad Cairo Hotel in Cairo.

Contact:Dr. Jeffrey Boutwell,Executive DirectorPugwash Conferences onScience and World Affairs1111 19th Street, NW Suite 1200Washington, DC 20036Phone: 1-202-478-3440Email: [email protected]\

Rotblat, who shared the Nobel PeacePrize with Pugwash in 1995. Duringthe conference there was a special trib-ute to Sir Joseph, including the screen-ing of a short video with excerptsfrom the memorial meeting that washeld in London in December 2005 atthe Royal Society.It is in memory of Jo’s unflagging

optimism and faith in humanity thatthe Pugwash Council calls on thegovernments and the peoples of theworld to accept the tremendousdiversity in religious faith and politi-cal persuasion that exists in the inter-national community in order to worktogether constructively to resolveconflict and improve the human con-dition, for all.

Paolo Cotta-Ramusino of Italy, thePresident and Secretary General,respectively, of Pugwash.The conference also included a

wide array of panel discussions onMiddle East security, nuclear disar-mament, and Kashmir (see www.pugwash.org for a full list of confer-ence events). Pugwash is grateful tothe Ford Foundation, Friedrich EbertStiftung, the Ploughshares Fund, theEmbassies of Denmark and Norway,the Al-Ahram Center, and the Gov-ernment of Egypt, for their supportof the conference.This 56th Pugwash Conference in

Cairo was the first since the death, inAugust 2005, of the organization’s co-founder and past President, Sir Joseph



CONFERENCE STATEMENT OF THE PUGWASH COUNCIL(in Arabic)


Iwould like to begin with express-ing my great happiness for ourpresence here today and for open-

ing together the 56th PugwashAnnual Conference, “A Region inTransition: Peace and Reform in theMiddle East”.Ever since I joined the Pugwash

Council in 2002, I have been dream-ing about hosting this conferencehere by the shores of the Nile. Andtoday, this dream has finally cametrue, and there was no way this couldhave happened without the decisionof the Pugwash Council, the enthusi-asm of all participants who showedup today, and the massive support ofthe Egyptian Government and manyother institutions to which I expressdeep gratitude.Having this conference in this

particular time, and under this verytitle, is a brave response to all the dif-ficult transforming conditions facingtoday the whole world in general andthe Middle East in Particular. Itshows that the Pugwash is alwaysthere to assume its responsibilities inthe right place and the right time. Iam proud that this room hosts todayfriends from 45 countries, interna-tional organizations and non-govern-mental institutions; they have all

Finally, I would like to express mydeep and sincere gratitude to all thefoundations and institutions that sup-ported us financially and morally. Iwould like to thank here the EgyptianMinistry of Foreign Affairs, Al-Ahram Foundation, Al-Ahram Cen-ter for Political and Strategic Studies,Ford Foundation, Friedrich EbertFoundation, the Danish Embassy, theNorwegian Embassy, the Light andSound Company. It would have beenimpossible to host this conferencewithout the support of these organi-zations.I wish also to thank the Pugwash

President, its Secretary General, itsExecutive Director and administra-tion for the unlimited support theygiven to us.I will not forget at the end to

express how much I admire all thework done by the OrganizationCommittee members and the crewthat helped me with all dedication.Once more, I hope you all have a

successful conference and a happystay in Egypt.

Mohamed Kadry SaidMaj.Gen.(ret.) Dr.Head of the Organization CommitteePugwash Council Member

thankfully responded to our invita-tion despite the distance, the barriersand borders. I wish you enjoy yourpresence in Egypt, the Mother of theWorld as many call it, and I look for-ward for your positive and construc-tive participation during the confer-ence sessions.The Organization Committee

(OC) has exerted all possible effortsfor this conference to come out in themost successful manner. However, wedo express our sincere apologies forany difficulties that some pf youmight have encountered; and weespecially apologize for any problemsthat occurred to some of you withEgypt’ entry visa. Our conferencewill start today and it will proceeduntil next Wednesday night. Duringthis time, all members of the Organi-zation committee will be happy tohelp you and work on any problemyou might face during the conference.There will always be an OC memberguiding you to work groups, to mealsand to all social occasions. We havealso prepared a Computer Roomwith internet access in an attempt tomake life easier for all of you. I hopeyou cooperate with us in followingsecurity regulations and the timeagenda of the conference.


MESSAGE OF WELCOMEMOHAMED KADRY SAID


MESSAGE OF WELCOMEPROF M S SWAMINATHAN

violent pathway of bringing aboutthe desired change. In contrast, vio-lence has always bred violence.In the beginning of the 21st Cen-

tury not only this region but thewhole world is in a state of transitionin terms of ecology, economics,ethics, equity and political discourse.Many of the problems of this regionhave their roots elsewhere and can-not be viewed in isolation. The chal-lenge before us is the fostering of aculture of conversation and consen-sus building, in the place of con-frontation and conflict. I am confi-dent that this conference which hasalso the participation of a large num-ber of young people who have tobecome the torch bearers of peaceand harmony, will contribute in asmall way to peace and progress inthis region so rich in history, art, cul-ture and music.The task is big; the challenges are

daunting and the obstacles are many,but in my view, the Pugwash philoso-phy is similar to the one expressed byNobel Laureate Mother Teresa, whenshe said, “My work may be a drop inthe ocean, but the ocean would beless without that drop”.May this conference end by

adding several drops to the ocean ofpeace and everlasting happiness inthis beautiful region of the Blue Nile.

Prof M S SwaminathanPresidentPugwash Conferences onScience and World Affairs

tile crescent region has been an agri-cultural paradise. Personally, I amhappy to be back in Cairo and Egyptsince my association with this greatcountry started nearly 40 years ago.I was associated with the setting upof the Egypt National Rice ResearchInstitute at Sakha. Also I have beenassociated as a Trustee with thefamous Bibliotheca Alexandrina,which has been restored to its pristineglory thanks to the vision and effortsof Her Excellency Madam SuzanneMubarak, the First Lady of Egyptand Dr. Ismail Seregeldin the Librar-ian, who was recently honored in my

country with the prestigious JamnalalBajaj Award for spreading the Gand-hian values of peace and harmony inthis region.2006 marks the centenary of the

birth of the non-violence movementinitiated by Mahatma Gandhi inSouth Africa in 1906. All the majorachievements of humankind duringthe 20th Century, like the end ofcolonial rule in my country and else-where, the end of apartheid, MartinLuther King’s Civil Rights Move-ment, Corazon Aquino’s EDSA revo-lution in the Philippines leading tothe end of Marcos’ dictatorship, theend of the Cold War and the break-up of the Berlin Wall have all beenaccomplished through the non-

May I add my words of wel-come, as President of thePugwash Conferences on

Science and World Affairs, to all thedistinguished participants who havegathered here from 45 countries,bound by a common determinationto work for a world free of weaponsof mass destruction in general, andnuclear weapons in particular. I wishto express our sincere gratitude to theGovernment of Egypt and to Pug-wash Council Member, GeneralMohamed Kadry Said and his won-derful team of organizers for theiruntiring efforts to make this impor-tant conference a memorable andvaluable experience.Nobel Laureate Naguib Mahfouz

referred to the uniqueness of thisregion in the following words.“I am the son of two civilizations

that at a certain age in history formeda happy marriage. The first of these,seven thousand years old is thePharaonic civilization; the second,one thousand four hundred years old,is the Islamic civilization”.Referring to the growing violence

in the human heart, Naguib Mahfouzsaid, “The real malady is fear of life,not of death”.We miss today Nobel Laureate

Naguib Mahfouz and Nobel Laure-ate Jo Rotblat. They both will remaineternally as affirming flames in themidst of the sea of despair we seearound us and guide us to the rightpath.This region is rich in both Cul-

tural and Biological diversity. Agri-culture was born in this region withthe domestication of wheat and bar-ley nearly 10,000 years ago. The fer-



Referring to the growing violence

in the human heart, Naguib

Mahfouz said, “The real malady

is fear of life, not of death”.


CONFERENCE SCHEDULE / WORKING GROUPS

Saturday 11 November

from 07:00 Breakfast in the Conrad C Room (on thelobby level)

08:30 Registration outside of the Nile Room(Plenary Hall)

09:00–9:20 PLENARY SESSION 1: Introduction &Welcome [Open]Mohammed Shaker, Mohamed Kadry Said,Paolo Cotta Ramusino, MS Swaminathan

09:30–10:15 PLENARY SESSION 2: Opening Speech[Open]Chair:Marie MullerH.E. Ahmed Aboul Gheit, Minister ofForeign Affairs

10:30–11:15 PLENARY SESSION 3: Keynote Address[Open]Prospects of Peace, Change and RegionalCooperation in the Middle EastChair: Abdel Monem SaidAmr Mousa, Secretary General, League ofArab States

11:15–11:45 Coffee break outside the Plenary Hall

11:45–13:00 PLENARY SESSION 4 [Closed]Chair: Gabriel BaramkiReport of the Secretary General PaoloCotta-Ramusino

13:00–13:30 Remembering Jo Rotblat, including film byIsabel Pisano [Open]Chair: Jeffrey Boutwell

13:30–13:45 Recorded message from Dr. Mohamed El-Baradei

13:45–15:00 Buffet lunch in the BBQ area on the 3rd

floor

15:00-16:45 PLENARY SESSION 5 : Panel Session[Closed]Middle East Security Frameworks andDemocratic DevelopmentsChair: Charlotta SparrePanelists:Mohamed Abdulla Al-Rumaihi(Qatar), Mohamed Kadry Said (Egypt),Riad Malki (Palestine)

16:45-17:30 Coffee break outside the plenary session

17:30-18:30 Working groups meet in parallel sessions

19:15 Leave the hotel (lower level “grouping”door) at 19:15 sharp for the “DiplomaticClub”

20:00 Reception hosted by the Ministry of ForeignAffairs at the “Diplomatic Club” in TahrirSquare. Speech by Naela Gabr, ShortResponse byMS Swaminathan

Sunday 12 November

from 07:00 Breakfast in the Conrad C Room (on thelobby level)

09:00-11:00 PLENARY SESSION 6: Panel Session[Closed]Prospects for IraqChair: Amb. Abdel Raouf El-ReedyPanelists: Ibrahim Bahr Alolom (Iraq),Steven Miller (USA), Mahmood Vaezi (Iran)

11:00-11:45 Coffee break outside the Plenary Hall


13:30- 15:00 Buffet lunch in the BBQ area on the 3rd

floor


16:45-17:15 Coffee break outside the working groupsessions


20:00 Dinner in the Nile Room

Evening Meeting of PC with National Groups inCleopatra Room

Monday 13 November

09:00–11:15 PLENARY SESSION 7: Panel Session[Closed]Lebanon, Palestine, Israel: how to re-startdialogueChair: Steve MillerRiad Kahwaji (Lebanon), Riad Malki(Palestine), Ron Pundak (Israel), SamirShawa (Gaza), Henry Siegman (USA)


11:45–13:30 Dorothy Hodgkin Memorial Lecture [Open]Chair: Paolo Cotta-RamusinoIslam and the West: A Conversationbetween Hamid Ansari and Dr. Ali ElSamman, with response by Alexey Vasiliev



CONFERENCE SCHEDULE / WORKING GROUPS, CONTINUED

13:30–14:30 Buffet lunch in the BBQ area on the 3rd

floor

14:30–16:00 Working Groups meet in parallel sessions

16:30 Leave hotel for Sound and Light Show(dress warmly)

18:30-19:30 Sound and Light Show

20:00 Dinner at Mena House Hotel

Tuesday 14 November

09:00–11:30 PLENARY SESSION 8: Panel Session[Closed]Peace Process in Kashmir: Lessons LearnedChair: Amitabh MattooSajad Lone (India), Mirwaiz Umar Farooq(India), Talat Masood (Pakistan),Mehbooba Mufti (India), Nirmal Singh(India)

11:30–12.00 Coffee Break outside the Plenary Hall

12:00-13:15 PLENARY SESSION 9: Panel Session[Closed]Nuclear Power, Security andNonproliferationChair: Tom CochranAly Islam (Egypt) / Bozorgmehr Ziaran(Iran)

13:15-14:15 Buffet lunch in the BBQ area on the 3rd

floor

14:30 Leave hotel for the Egyptian Museum

20:00 Conference Banquet in the Nile Room atConrad Hotel with Lecture by ZahiHawass: Recent Discoveries on thePyramids and the Valley of the Kings(Moderator:Mohamed Kadry Said)

WORKING GROUPS ROOM

1. Nuclear Non Proliferation and Nuclear Disarmament Nile 3

2. WMD in the Middle East and the establishment of WMD-free zone(s) Nile 2

3. Prospects for the Peace Process in the Middle East Nile 1

4. Islam and the West Nefertiti

5. Governance, Democracy and Reforms in the Middle East Isis

6. Non-Military Threats to Security Cleopatra

Wednesday 15 November

9:00–11:00 PLENARY SESSION 10: Panel Session[Closed]WMD in the Middle EastChair: TBAWa’el Al-Assad (Jordan), Emily Landau(Israel), Saideh Lotfian (Iran)

11:00-11:30 Coffee break outside the Plenary Hall

11:30-12:30 PLENARY SESSION 11: PresidentialAddress, MS SwaminathanChair: Francesco Calogero [Open]

12:30-13:30 Buffet lunch in the BBQ area on the 3rd

floor

14:00- 16:00 PLENARY SESSION 12: Panel Session[Open]The Next Agenda for Nuclear DisarmamentChair: Amb. Mohamed ShakerSergei Batsanov (Russia), Rebecca Johnson(UK), Sverre Lodgaard (Norway), CarlosSersale di Cerisano (Argentina)


16:30–19:00 Reports from the WG and the IYSPConferenceChair: Goetz Neuneck

19:00–19:30 Closing of the Conference

20:00 Dinner in the Nile Room

Evening Meeting of PC with ISYP in Isis & Nefertitirooms

Thursday 16 November

PC Meeting and departure of participants



ADDRESSH.E. AHMED ABOUL GHEIT

Minister of Foreign Affiars, Egypt

Cairo and the Nile River.

Iwould like at the outset toexpress our pleasure and extendour welcome to the Pugwash

Movement for convening its 56thannual Conference in Egypt.I wish to seize this opportunity to

express Egypt’s appreciation for therole assumed by the Pugwash Move-ment and its Executive Committee intheir efforts towards non-prolifera-tion of nuclear and other weapons ofmass destruction, as well as their rolein maintaining international peaceand security.The efforts of Pugwash since its

establishment in 1957 have been asource of appreciation and admira-tion by members of the internationalcommunity and all international andregional organizations and institu-tions. The award of the Nobel PeacePrize to the Pugwash Conferences in1995 was a coronation of the Move-ment’s efforts over the past fifty years.Your conference this year

more than two decades ago that thepiling of arms and the use of militaryforce would not resolve conflicts. Itwas Egypt who had realized thatnegotiations were the only way toattain the cherished peace.Inspired by this conviction, Egypt

has spared no effort to achieve com-prehensive and lasting peace betweenArab countries and Israel, and tostrive for building confidencebetween the Palestinians and theIsraelis in order to pave the way forthe resumption of negotiations. Egyptalso invites the influenced interna-tional powers, the United Nationsand the Quartet to shoulder theirresponsibilities, fairly and squarely.Besides her leading role in achiev-

ing peace in the Middle East, Egypt ismaking rapid strides in the reformprocess undertaken by the region.Egypt assumes a special responsibilityin advancing modernization efforts inthe Middle East. She has set an exam-ple of positive interaction with inter-national variables and of comprehen-sive reform at political, economic andsocial levels. In the field of economicreform, the liberalization of theEgyptian economy has removedmany obstacles that had stood in thepast against the achievement of pros-perity and overall economic develop-ment. The efforts towards economicdevelopment have been linked upwith a persistent drive in the domainof political and economic reformswith a view to entrenching democ-

addresses the challenges of peace andreform in the Middle East. As youknow, the Middle East region isgoing through a delicate phase,which calls for the mobilization ofthe efforts of the entire internationalcommunity towards resuming thepeace process. The internationalcommunity should move aheadsteadily to achieve the goal we havelong been striving for, namely estab-lishing just and lasting peace in theregion. This in turn requires address-ing the core conflict in the region:The Arab-Israeli conflict. The Pales-tinian people are still suffering underthe yoke of a brutal occupation thatkills their elderly people, men,women and children, and deprivesthem of the basics of a decent life.The choice of Egypt as the venue

for the Pugwash Conference hasgreat significance. It was Egypt wholed the course of peace in the MiddleEast. It was Egypt who had realized


discussions of various internationaland regional issues. I am equally cer-tain that those discussions and delib-erations will contribute to advancingnew and creative ideas and insights,which can be built upon in order toaddress the transitional phasethrough which the international com-munity in general and the MiddleEast in particular are passing. I hopethat the outcome of the Conferencewill once again signal the perils ofnuclear proliferation in the MiddleEast as well as ways and means ofcoping with them without infringingupon the legitimate rights of non-nuclear states to benefit from thepeaceful applications of atomicenergy. I hope that the outcome willalso contribute to projecting thenecessity for resolving the regionalproblems, in the context of regionaland international cooperation thataims at confirming the legitimateright of the Palestinian people toestablish their independent state; theattainment of Iraq’s independence,and stability in Lebanon. There is adire need to liberate the Middle Eastfrom the practices of coercion andoccupation so that the region canforge ahead towards a new phase ofits history, characterized by a com-prehensive renaissance to be imple-mented by governments, hand inhand with an enlightened civil societyaware of the value of its responsibili-ties.I wish you every success and reit-

erate our sincere welcome to you inEgypt, hoping that you will have theopportunity, during your stay in ourancient city, Cairo, to visit some of itstourist and religious landmarks andto feel the harmony between its age-old history, its ambitious present andits promising future.

In the field of disarmament andnuclear non-proliferation, Egypt hasbeen keen on setting an example of aresponsible state that abides by therules of international legitimacy.Egypt has thus acceded to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in theearly eighties. She still spares nopains to achieve its universality, espe-cially in the Middle East where all itscountries have adhered to the NPTwith the exception of one country.Such an anomaly undermines thecredibility of the Treaty and obligesEgypt and the other Arab countriesto make the NPT universality in theMiddle East a central issue in theNPT Review process.Egypt has also been at the fore-

front in presenting a number of ini-tiatives related to the Middle Eastsuch as the initiative which she co-sponsored with Iran at the UnitedNations in 1974 on making the Mid-dle East a zone free from nuclearweapons. President Hosni Mubaraklaunched an initiative in 1990 on theestablishment in the Middle East of azone free from all weapons of massdestruction. Despite the numerousinternational efforts in the fields ofdisarmament and nuclear non-prolif-eration, it is indeed regrettable thatthose efforts have stalled becausenuclear powers have shirked theirresponsibilities by not taking serioussteps towards nuclear disarmamentand by their continued reliance onnuclear weapons as part of their secu-rity ideology. Such a situationadversely affects that non-prolifera-tion regime and encourages othercountries to seek possession ofnuclear weapons to safeguard theirsecurity.I am confident that the proceed-

ings of this Conference will witnessobjective, profound and enlightened

racy, enhancing respect for humanrights, and fairly distributing the ben-efits of development.As you are aware, the Middle East

region has recently seen severalreform initiatives. We deem it neces-sary that such initiatives should heedthe views of the peoples of the MiddleEast who place the Palestinian issue atthe peak of their priorities. The con-tinuation of occupation and theabsence of progress towards establish-ing an independent Palestinian statefeed the feelings of despair and injus-tice vis-à-vis the double standards ofthe international community. Suchfeelings provide a fertile ground forbreeding extremist thoughts, whichpull the strings of the despicable ter-rorism. The reform efforts in theregion cannot succeed under contin-ued occupation or through constantthreats to use military force. Weequally believe that the success of thereform process is organically linked tothe success of the developmentprocess based on a comprehensivenational perception of the challengesfaced by each society according to itseconomic and social conditions, andits cultural specificities.Egypt is looking forward to a

Middle East free from all threats toits stability and progress; a MiddleEast free from the occupation by onecountry of another; a Middle Eastwhere all peoples enjoy their inde-pendence within safe boundaries; aMiddle East immune to political ter-rorism, religious extremism and eth-nic chauvinism; a Middle East inwhich there is no place for nuclear orother weapons of mass destruction,and no room for military ideologiesthat specify a role for those weaponswhich threaten humanity as a whole.Such is the Middle East for whichEgypt is working with her partners.




PROSPECTS OF PEACE, CHANGE ANDREGIONAL COOPERATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST

H.E. AMRE MOUSSASecretary General of the League of Arab States

It gives me pleasure today to standamong a distinguished gatheringof international and regional

experts concerned with internationalpeace and security and disarmamentissues. I also would like to expressmy sincere thanks to the PugwashConference on Sciences and WorldAffairs for holding this annual con-ference for the first time in the Mid-dle East region and for inviting theLeague of Arab States to participatein this annual event. It also gives methe opportunity to listen to yourcomments and also to interact withthis distinguished audience about thecurrent issues not only in the MiddleEast but also the global and interna-tional situation.The global challenges that have

been created are raising a lot of diffi-culties for us in the Middle East andin many other regions around theworld. I must say that thinking ofhow to address such an expert audi-ence in matters of peace and disarma-ment, in matters pertaining to inter-national relation and regional politicsI prepared some notes which I willtry to go through as quickly as I canin order to allow enough time forinteractive discussion.The world today is facing chal-

lenges emanating from serious policiesand I will numerate some of them.First is the vision that considered

the victory in the Cold War as theend of history. If this is the end it

be condemned and combated. But theperil lies in that it acquired a loosedefinition thus became prey to sub-jective political considerations.The fifth point deals with the

prevalence of policies based on dou-ble standards: partiality to injusticeand foreign military occupation andother negative trends. Calling fordemocracy, insisting on democracythen rejecting its outcome when itdoes not conform to one side’s needsor interests. Calling for free trade andconcurrently applying protectionlaws. Preaching human rights andadopting laws that decidedly curtailcivil liberties. These policies based ondouble standards are creating realhavoc in international relations.The following point is about

abandoning or discarding principlesof international law, in internationalrelations and attempting to submitthose principles to political whimsand interests.Last but not least the clash of civi-

lizations, which is just an euphemismfor confrontation between the Westand Islam.Ladies and Gentlemen,This is in my view some of what

we, the international community, doexperience at this very critical stage,which makes it all the more difficultto entertain the possibility of creatinga stable world order in the foresee-able future—an order based on therespect of international law, attaining

would be catastrophic indeed. His-tory never ends. On the Contrary, wesee dynamic changes, we are witness-ing what I may call and others alsomay call Intifada against the postCold War, the post-9/11 neo-conserv-ative policies. Many of their theoriesare being seriously and successfullychallenged.The second point is the principle

of the use of force in internationalrelations. As we have seen in therecent years the use of force was usedbased on systematically fabricatedinformation not innocent from belli-cose considerations. Mounting worldwide opposition to such policy hasbecome too strong to ignore.The third point concerns the issue

of globalization as a new frameworkfor international relations or interna-tional interaction. This is a drasticand in my opinion a welcomed devel-opment, save for that it discountsmany of the interests of the develop-ing nations and not enough attentionis given to their views. Many of thedeveloping societies see in globaliza-tion an attempt to subjugate them toconcepts that run counter to theirinterests and which do not commandinternational consensus. This led toan increasingly confused world and ageneral concern about the status ofinternational relations.The fourth point deals with ter-

rorism which no doubt is the enemyof progress and is a plague that must


Amr Mousa, Abdel Monem Said, Paolo Cotta-Ramusino.

with the 21st century and its fairrequirements.In addition to this, the agenda of

the League of Arab States and collec-tive Arab work is topped with anever-mounting priority regardingreform and modernization: trans-parency, accountability, full respectof human rights and to follow asocial, economic and human develop-ment process.We are talking about, discussing,

enacting, and adopting resolutions toguarantee active intercourse withgovernments to ensure reform of oursocieties. This has already beenreflected in the basic document ofReform adopted by the 2004 TunisArab Summit based on a proposalfrom the Secretary General of theArab League. Progress on its imple-mentation may be slow in an area,turbulent in another, but there is nodoubt that the wheel of change is inmotion and it cannot be stopped.I want to say that I sincerely bene-

fited from the UNDP Arab humandevelopment reports and the deficitsit outlined which have to beaddressed efficiently. We have to, nomatter what, continue the process ofreform because no issue, no crisisshould affect this process of reformand modernization of Arab societies.Having said that, this process will

not divert or affect our commitment toachieve a just solution to the Palestin-

The policy pertaining to the socalled clash of civilizations whichadopted the Arab and Muslim worldsas the prime target thus rousing angryemotions and confusion on all sides.Let alone the confusion and insta-

bility reigning in Darfur/Sudan and inSomalia as well as other perils in dif-ferent parts of the Middle East region.Ladies and Gentlemen,I move now to another priority

issue in the Middle East. Reform inthe Arab world is a must. It is a pri-ority item on the agenda of the ArabLeague. We are taking it seriously.However, the present discourse onreform and change in the region hasbecome similar to a culture of jargondiscourse. We are constantly subju-gated to a plethora of terms: thebroader Middle East, the greaterMiddle East, neighborhood policy,moderate states, rogue states, theTroika, the Quartet…etc. Here Iwould like to comment: We really donot understand or appreciate the con-tents of such expressions or the poli-cies behind them—of any honestapproach of consensus building andresult oriented policies rather thansedating ones.Never the less, this does not sug-

gest that the people of this region areunaware of the fact that they need tochange, to develop their societies andto exercise positive self-criticism. Weneed to look forward and link up

a just regional peace, let alone build-ing societies on solid pillars ofdemocracy, respect of human rights,ensuring good governance and exe-cuting national and regional develop-ment programs.If such a situation is not properly

and quickly addressed and read-dressed the world may suffer a gen-eral state of chaos…a globally violentand angry one…Mr. ChairmanDistinguished audience,The Pugwash Conference this time

is taking place in the heart of the Mid-dle East and the center of the Arabworld. This region is in major tur-moil. I am afraid I am stating theobvious, it is also the truth. Yes, it hasbeen in trouble since the colonial era,through the two world wars and thecold war, but never has it been in suchan extremely threatening situation,thanks, if the expression is correct, tothe ill-perceived policies concerning inparticular the following points:One, is the policy concerning Iraq

which made it the example not to fol-low and which helped unleash a verydestructive sectarian confrontationthat does not seem to abate, at leastin the foreseeable future, with nega-tive repercussions, regional and inter-national.The second is the policy concern-

ing Palestine and the Arab-Israeliconflict which became so biased as tohand over to one party to the conflictthe whole file of the settlement in theMiddle East in order for her to deter-mine the fate of the peace process, ie.To kill it.The policy concerning regional

security, in particular the nuclear file…to address the Iranian file whileignoring and ensure ignoring theIsraeli nuclear file. An untenable andunconvincing policy indeed.



nuclear arms race in the region andthe world.Finally , as the conference is also

dealing with the issue of “Islam andthe West”, it is evident that there isneed to define what is it that wereally want to address, what is reallythe core issue of divergence. Is there aclash of civilizations or is it a clashwith Islam? We have to diagnose theproblem correctly in order to dealwith it. But to move around in circlestalking about clash of civilizationsetc. will lead us no where.The theory that emerged after the

so-called war called the situation aclash of civilizations, I say that thecurrent clash is between the West andIslam or I should say between theextreme wing in the west and theextreme wing on the other side. Thisled to a very shaky international situ-ation and wars and bloodshed in theregion and I believe that the SecurityCouncil has to come in at this stage.The theory of the clash of civiliza-

tions has produced a situation threat-ening or constituting a threat to inter-national peace and security andcannot be left to universities andsymposiums. It has to be addressedand seriously debated in the SecurityCouncil or else it can get out of handwhich seems to be happening.Ladies and Gentlemen,As you embark on your discus-

sions over the next couple of days,these were some thoughts I wanted toshare with you, which I hope will beuseful contributions to the proceed-ings of this Conference and the com-mon vision we aspire to and yourwillingness to engage one another inexchanging ideas in a spirit of frank-ness capable of enhancing regionaland international dialogue and coop-eration.Thank you.

Ladies and Gentlemen,Amidst the increasing concern

and the accumulating tension at theinternational and regional levels, inparticular because of the Arab-Israeliconflict and the situation in Iraq,there remains an issue that concernsall of us relevant to nuclear arma-ment, non proliferation and nuclearenergy to which I alluded earlier inmy introduction.We look forward to a comprehen-

sive approach to these issues on aregional basis through the properhandling of the nuclear file in theMiddle East.I believe that the present nuclear

situation in the region will contributeto creating a state of polarization thatcannot last for long. And from thispodium I call for international supportto the Arab initiative to transform theentire Middle East into a zone free ofall weapons of mass destruction.As for peaceful uses of nuclear

energy, The Council of Ministers ofthe Arab League have called upon theArab States to speed up their entryinto the age of peaceful uses ofnuclear energy under internationalmonitoring as long as they have allacceded to the NPT and are abidingbuy its provisions.I hope you will all agree that the

present non-proliferation regime suf-fers from a legitimacy crisis stemmingfrom the lack of political will. Thestark example for this crisis is theefforts exerted by nuclear states todevelop new generations of nuclearweapons which are in contradictionof their commitments towards disar-mament within the NPT treaty.Partial and selective approaches

do not only represent a clear contra-diction in international policies, butalso weakens the prospects of successin containing and preventing a

ian problem and to end the Arab—Israeli conflict on the basis of Land forPeace. This is the point for stabilityand reform to progress in the region.We are concerned about attempts tostall these hopes. We have done all wecan regarding the Arab Initiative ofBeirut launched in 2002 in which weoffered to end the Arab—Israeli con-flict and normalize relations withIsrael within the context of mutualcomprehensive implementation of allobligations on both sides and reachinga settlement through political negotia-tions based on the relevant SecurityCouncil resolutions and on the princi-ples agreed upon.But this was—it seems—not

enough for Israel’s appetite whichappears to be banking on what it seesin the infamously biased position toits favor, an opportunity to grab whatit can.Yes, of course Israel is seizing the

opportunity and in the opinion ofmany in Israel peace is not in herinterest and that when it succeeds inpushing away the possibilities ofpeace, it is in her benefit.Not only does it depend totally

on this biased policy, but it alsothought in Tel Aviv and in otherregions across the oceans that theArab World is in a state of weaknessand that Israel must seize this oppor-tunity to impose on the Arabs what-ever settlement, and that the Arabswill accept it to save face. I want tosay here that the notion of a weakArab world that would accept animposed settlement is totally misled.A strong Arab world will not accepta lame settlement and a weak Arabworld cannot afford to accept iteither. Only a fair balanced settle-ment can gain approval and accept-ability. Nobody can dare accept any-thing otherwise.




A WORLD IN TRANSITION:TOWARDS A BETTER COMMON PRESENT

PROF M S SWAMINATHANPresident, Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs

AttheWorld Climate Confer-ence held in Nairobi, Mr.Kofi Annan referred to cli-

mate change induced by anthro-pogenic factors as the most seriousamong weapons of mass destruction.The Pugwash Movement has rightlyincluded major non-nuclear threatsto human security within its agenda.Extreme social and gender inequity,damage to basic life support systemslike land, water, biodiversity and cli-mate, as well as pandemics likeHIV/AIDS have become importantamong such threats. At the sametime, the nuclear peril has assumedan alarming dimension with the pro-liferation of Nuclear Weapons Statesand with the possibility of the emer-gence of nuclear weapon groups andindividuals. It is therefore obviousthat we must concentrate on theheartland of the Pugwash agenda andat the same time give due considera-tion to the other serious threats topeace and human wellbeing. In thisaddress I shall briefly cover bothaspects.The World Commission on Envi-

ronment and Development, popularlyknown as the Brundtland Commis-sion, titled its report presented in1989 as “Our Common Future” tostress that irrespective of politicalfrontiers, our ecological fate is inter-twined. In my presidential address atthe IUCN (World Conservation

nations in the Middle East; thisshould end if peace is to prevail

• Promote understanding and appre-ciation of diversity and pluralismamong human societies, particu-larly in the areas of religious andpolitical beliefs

• Just peace with Palestine is thecornerstone of peace in the MiddleEast. A serious consideration of theArab initiative launched in Beirut in2002 may provide a basis for multi-stakeholder dialogues ending in anagreement which would mark awin-win situation for all the coun-tries in the region, and which couldlead to a new Global PoliticalOrder characterized by the replace-ment of fear with friendship.

This year represents the Cente-nary of Mahatma Gandhi’s move-ment for a peaceful resolution of con-flicts. This movement known asSatyagraha (fight for truth and justicebased on the principle of non-vio-lence) began a century ago in SouthAfrica when Gandhi was thrown outof a first class compartment outsidethe Pietermaritzburg Railway Stationjust because he did not have a whiteskin. When we look back over the20th Century, some of the remark-able achievements of humankindcame from the adoption of the princi-ple of non-violence in the resolutionof internal and external conflicts.

Union) general conference held inPerth, Australia in January 1990, Imentioned “There can be no happycommon future, without a bettercommon present”. For all of us, thepresent is a living reality. The futureholds both threats and possibilities. Ifwe ignore the present and allow therich-poor, gender, genetic, digital andother divides to grow, there will be nopeace. This is why the achievement ofthe UNMillennium DevelopmentGoals, particularly in the areas ofhunger and poverty elimination andenvironment protection, areextremely important. UNMDG’s rep-resent a Global CommonMinimumprogramme for peace and security.The major theme for the Cairo

Conference is “Peace and Reform inthe Middle East”. The followingbasic guiding principles have emergedfrom the discussion.

• There can be no peace without jus-tice; confidence in fair play is essen-tial for ending a hostile mind-set

• Fear of each other is the enemy ofprogress; creating the substrateconditions essential for buildingtrust is the first step for meaningfuldialogues

• Avoid double standards—partisan-ship is the root cause of distrust,and the enemy of progress; todaybig powers are adopting doublestandards in their dealings with


MS Swaminathan, President, Pugwash Conferences.

• All nations with nuclear weaponsshould adopt a legally mandatorypolicy of “no first use”, by 2007

• Respect commitments to NuclearNon-Proliferation Treaty (NPT),ratify Comprehensive Test BanTreaty (CTBT), conclude an equi-table Fissile Materials Cut OffTreaty (FMCT), and end allresearch relating to the develop-ment of new nuclear weapons.Ensure that no nation sabotages thesuccess of the NPT Review Confer-ence of 2010

• Conclude a Nuclear Weapons Con-vention outlining a time frame forgetting to Zero by 2020

• Avoid prospects for nuclear terror-ism and adventurism by eliminatingall unsecured nuclear fissile mater-ial and by implementing the con-crete steps proposed by Pugwashfor the elimination of highlyenriched uranium; otherwise, thereis risk of nuclear weapons individu-als/ groups emerging in addition tonuclear weapons states

• Because of the multi-dimensionalthreats posed to human security byclimate change, and the consequentneed for reducing green house gasemissions, interest and investment innuclear power plants are growing.The civilian uses of atomic energyare likely to grow. Hence, the UNmay convene an International Con-ference on the Civilian Uses ofAtomic Energy, with particular ref-erence to nuclear power. Such a con-ference should develop an agreedCode of Conduct to ensure that thenon-military use of nuclear fuelsdoes not get abused, and to furtherstrengthen safeguards and theinspection and monitoring capacityof IAEA, to prevent the unsecuredproduction of fissile materials

effort should be made to stress thefutility of wars in solving disputes.General Dwight D Eisenhower, afamous war leader, made the follow-ing remarks as President of theUnited States on August 16, 1953,“Every gun that is made, every war-ship launched, every rocket signifiesin the final sense, a theft from thosewho are hungry and are not fed, fromthose who are cold and are notclothed. The world in arms is notspending money alone. It is spendingthe sweat of its labourers, the geniusof its scientists, the hopes of its chil-dren”. Quite often in history, men ofwar become the most ardent messen-gers of peace, since they know morethan others that wars only lead tomore wars.In my address at Hiroshima last

year, I had made a few suggestions forworking towards a nuclear peril-freeworld. Based on the discussions atthis conference, I would like to pro-pose a road map for achieving thisgoal consisting of seven major steps:

Some examples are:

• Freedom from colonial rule in theIndian sub-continent (M K Gandhi)

• End of Apartheid in South Africa(Nelson Mandela)

• US Civil Rights Movement (MartinLuther King)

• End of Marcos Dictatorship in thePhilippines (Corazon Aquino)

• End of Cold War and Fall of BerlinWall (M Gorbachev)

In contrast, violence has alwaysbred violence. We see it now in theMiddle East, in Afghanistan and insome parts of Africa. Violence hasnot solved any problem but spreadsanger, hatred and the desire forrevenge. How can the world get backto the principles of Gandhi, MartinLuther King, Nelson Mandela andMother Teresa in solving disputes?This is the real challenge of today.This is particularly a challenge for thePugwash movement during its 50thAnniversary next year, when a major



assessment is essential in all develop-ment programmes particularly thoserelating to rural areas. The loss oflivelihoods in villages leads to theunplanned migration of the asset-lesspoor to towns and cities resulting inthe proliferation of urban slums.Urban slums again become the breed-ing grounds for violence, crime andspread of HIV/AIDS and other dis-eases. Therefore, agricultural pros-perity is essential for peace and secu-rity in predominantly rural nations.For example in India, 70 percent ofthe population still remains in ruralareas where the main occupation iscrop and animal husbandry, fisheries,forestry, and agro-processing. In con-trast, hardly 3 to 4 percent of thepopulation depends on agriculturefor their economic wellbeing inindustrialized nations. Industrializedcountries should hence view tradenot mearly in monetary terms but inits human dimension.Another important threat to

human security arises from the spreadof invasive alien species. The SARSepidemic and the avian influenzacaused by the H5N1 strain in poultryare recent examples of the harm thatmay arise from such invasive species.It has become important to ensurethat every nation has a well developedbiosecurity system. Sanitary and phy-tosanitary measures also needstrengthening in developing countries.Biosecurity is also essential to safe-guard innocent civilians who maybecome victims of bio-perils andharmful Genetically Modified Organ-isms (GMOs). As far as GMOs areconcerned, every nation has todevelop a National BiotechnologyRegulatory Authority capable ofensuring the safe and responsible useof genetic manipulation techniques atthe molecular level. Such an Author-

sent US Defence Secretary, RobertGates, mentioned in a talk at DesMoines on October 16, 2006 on theoccasion of the World Food Day, thatCIA monitors the status of crop pro-duction in different parts of theworld, since potential hunger hotspots are breeding grounds for civil-ian unrest. Where hunger rules, peacecannot prevail. He thus includedhunger and deprivation among theseeds of terrorism. (This talk wasbefore he was designated as theDefence Secretary of USA and whenhe was President of the Texas A &MUniversity).Gandhi traced the roots of hunger

to unemployment and the consequentlack of the purchasing power essen-tial for economic access to balanceddiet. He thus stressed the point,“where there is work, there is moneyand where there is money there isfood”. This relationship betweenhunger and employment is an exceed-ingly important one since the world isnow witnessing job-less economicgrowth. Job-less growth is joy-lessgrowth to the hungry. The DohaRound of Negotiations of the WorldTrade Agreement is being referred toas the development round. If thisconcept has to become operational, itis essential that a Livelihood SecurityBox is inserted in the agreement.Such a box should contain provisionsfor the imposition of quantitativerestrictions on imports by countrieswhere 50 percent or more of the pop-ulation depend upon agriculture fortheir livelihood security, wheneverthere is clear evidence that suchimports will destroy local jobs orlivelihoods in rural areas. Import offood by predominantly agriculturalcountries will have the same impactas importing unemployment. There-fore, a livelihood security impact

• Democratic systems of governanceare fast spreading in the world,which involve the holding of freeand fair elections periodically. Itwould be useful to develop a Pug-wash 50th Anniversary Appealwhich calls upon all political partiesin every country to include in theirnext election manifesto, a firmcommitment to work for speedynuclear disarmament and for thesuccess of the 2010 NPT ReviewConference. Public opinion ulti-mately shapes political action indemocratic countries

• Introduce into school curriculainformation relating to the conse-quences of the use of nuclearweapons in Hiroshima andNagasaki in August 1945, so as tobring home the immediate and longterm disastrous impact of a nuclearwar. Without a nuclear peril literacymovement, the climate for eliminat-ing nuclear weapons and endingnuclear proliferation cannot be gen-erated. Enlist the support of themass media in launching a sustainedmovement for public understandingof the grave perils ahead. “If youcannot, there lies before you the riskof universal death”, to quote fromthe Russell-Einstein Manifesto.

Non-Nuclear Threats toHuman Security

I would now like to refer briefly toPugwash’s role in fighting non-nuclear threats to human security.The first among them is hungerwhich affects now nearly one billionchildren, women and men in ourplanet. The Roman PhilosopherSeneca, articulated the threat ofhunger to human security in the fol-lowing words “A hungry person lis-tens neither to reason nor religion,nor is bent by any prayer”. The pre-





ity should assure the public as well asthe political leaders and mass mediathat risks and benefits are being mea-sured in an objective and transparentmanner. Molecular genetics providesuncommon opportunities for not onlyproducing new vaccines and drugs,but also crops with built-in resistanceto biotic and abiotic stresses. There-fore, developing countries in particu-lar should take advantage of frontiertechnologies including biotechnologyand information, and communicationtechnology for the purpose of achiev-ing accelerated food, nutrition, healthand livelihood security.Population rich but land hungry

countries like China and India haveno option except to produce morefood grains and other agriculturalcommodities per units of land andwater under conditions of diminish-ing per capita availability of arableland and irrigation water, and ofexpanding biotic and abiotic stresses.Such a challenge can be met only byharnessing the best in frontier tech-nologies and blending them with tra-ditional ecological prudence. Ecotech-nologies for an Ever-green revolutionshould be the bottom line of the strat-egy to shape the future of food pro-duction. Conservation farming andgreen agriculture (i.e., agriculturebased on ecotechnologies like inte-grated pest management, integratednutrient supply, scientific land careand water management, etc.) are thepathways to an ever-green revolution.

Making Hunger History

• In 2001-03, there were 854 millionundernourished people in theworld—820 mn in the developingcountries, 25 mn in the transitioncountries and 9 mn in the industri-alized countries

• In the Asia and Pacific, the numberof undernourished has reverted toan increasing trend over the latterpart of the decade, although theprevalence has continued todecline. The Asia and Pacific has68% of the developing world popu-lation and 64% of its undernour-ished

• In the near East, North Africa andSub Saharan Africa, the number ofundernourished have increased.The greatest challenge is in the SubSaharan region with one in threepeople lacking access to sufficientfood. (State of Food Insecurity inthe World, 2006, FAO).

It is now possible to end hungerthrough concurrent attention to foodavailability, access and absorption inthe body. The national strategy formaking hunger history should payattention to both food and non-foodfactors. Non-food factors like cleandrinking water, environmentalhygiene and primary education andhealth care are equally important.Lack of access to clean drinkingwater is a major cause of diarrheaand intestinal infections. But for theoral rehydration therapy, mortality ofchildren from diarrhea will be high. Itis the duty of every country to makesure that at the minimum the UN

Millennium Development Goal ofreducing hunger and poverty by halfis achieved by 2015.

Bridging the Divides

Starting with the industrial revolu-tion in Europe triggered by the inven-tion of the Steam Engine in 1780 byJames Watt, technology has been animportant factor in the rich-poordivide. If technology has enlargedeconomic, social and gender dividesin the past, the challenge now is toenlist technology as an importantinstrument for achieving social andgender equity. If technology is toserve this purpose, access to it mustbe based on the principle of socialinclusion. The Antyodaya or unto thelast principle of Mahatma Gandhi isthe pathway for inclusive economicgrowth. While Intellectual PropertyRights are important for givingincentives for investment and innova-tion, we should ensure that discover-ies of great importance to humanfood and health security are availableto every one who will benefit fromthem. Access to such technologiesshould not be based only on thecapacity of the individual to pay.There must be a provision inNational Laws for compulsory licens-ing of rights in the case of drugs andcrop and animal strains which areimportant for the poor.Modern ICT is a powerful tool

for bridging the gender and knowl-edge divides. Such technologies com-prising the integrated use of the inter-net, cable TV, community radio andthe cell phone should be brought tothe service of the poor, on the princi-ple of a last mile and last person con-nectivity. ICT can serve as the motherfor ending all divides and hence ititself should not become one more ofthe divisive factors.

It is the duty of every country

to make sure that at the

minimum the UN Millennium

Development Goal of reducing

hunger and poverty by half is

achieved by 2015.



5th Pugwash Conferenceon HIV/AIDS

In recent years, the Pugwash move-ment has expanded its definition ofthreats to human security to includeHIV/AIDS. Five conferences havebeen held so far to deliberate on thesubject. The last one was held at theM S Swaminathan Research Founda-tion in Chennai, India in April 2006.Some of the figures relating to the

HIV/AIDS pandemic are frightening:

• Over 11000 new HIV infectionsoccurred each day in 2005

• More than 95% are in low andmiddle income countries

• About 1500 are in children under15 years of age

• About 10000 are in adults aged 15years and older of whom:over 50% are among womenover 40% are among young people(15-24)

The 5th Pugwash Conference onHIV/AIDS held at the M S Swami-nathan Research Foundation, Chen-nai, India, from 7-9 April 2006focused on the theme “Sharing ofExperiences, What Works?’. 52 par-ticipants from 8 countries partici-pated.Experts from “first wave” coun-

tries where the epidemic struck firstand with great intensity (e.g. SouthAfrica, Kenya and Uganda) and thosefrom “second wave” countries wherethe epidemic threatens to spiral outof control (e.g. India) came togetherto exchange successful and replicablestrategies for the prevention, manage-ment and mitigation of HIV andAIDS.Based on the experience gained in

Africa and India, the following basicrequisites for success in control mea-sures were identified:

• Political support and commitment

• Recognizing HIV as potentialthreat to development

• Discussing sexuality and behaviouropenly

• “Coming out” reduces stigma

• Free supply anti-retroviral drugs tothe needy

The recent tragic trial of five Bul-garian nurses and a Palestinian doc-tor in Libya on the suspicion ofinfecting children with HIV is anindication of the fear and emotionattached with this dreaded disease.Pugwash will have to introduce san-ity and objectivity in dealing with thisand the other serious health pan-demics.I mentioned earlier that climate

change possess a great threat tohuman security.

The available data bring out thefollowing scenario:

• All countries will be affected by cli-mate change, but the poorest coun-tries will suffer most

• Average temperatures could rise by5° C from pre-industrial levels if cli-mate change goes unchecked

• Warming of 3° or 4° C will result inmany millions more people beingflooded. By the middle of the cen-tury 200 million may be perma-nently displaced due to rising sealevels, and more frequent floodsand drought

• Warming of 4° C or more is likelyto seriously affect global food pro-duction

• Warming of 2° C could leave 15-40% species facing extinction

Economics of Climate Change:According to the calculation of SirNicholas Stern of UK (October2006), the following will be the costof containing damage to climate:

• Climate Change could cause theGlobal Economy almost $7 trillionby 2050—equal to a 20% fall ingrowth—if no action is taken ongreen house emissions

• Taking action now could cost just1%—$350 billion—of Global GDP

Kyoto Protocol

• The Kyoto Protocol to the Frame-work Convention on ClimateChange was negotiated by over 100countries in December 1997

• The agreement would require 38industrialised countries to reducethe emissions of six major green-house gases by 5.2 percent duringthe 2008-2012 period

• The Kyoto Protocol follows the1992 Framework Convention onClimate Change, which establishedthe objective of stabilizing atmos-pheric concentrations of green-house gases “at a level that wouldprevent dangerous interference withthe climate system”

Unfortunately, the Kyoto Protocolis yet to be implemented inspite ofthe growing awareness of the dangersof inaction.

Carbon Trading

• Terrestrial carbon sequestration is aviable, readily available approachfor offsetting fossil fuel emissionsby enhancing the carbon stored insoils, vegetation and long-livedproducts

• Credits or offsets can come fromreductions or removals (sequestra-tion)

“But no bridge that science mightbuild across the gaps between richand poor is strong enough to with-stand the force of violence and war.If science is to reach its full potentialand draw on the great minds fromevery country, we must do more toend and prevent conflict. Scientiststhemselves have a key role to playhere, too. The Pugwash Conferencemovement, launched by the Russell-Einstein Manifesto of 1955, broughtRussian and Western scientiststogether for more than 40 years todevelop common understandings ofthe dangers of nuclear war and waysof reducing them, and in recent yearshas constructed a strong dialoguebetween North and South on theproblems of development. “Lab-to-lab” cooperation also helped to laythe groundwork for cooperativenuclear disarmament and arms con-trol between Russia and the UnitedStates after the Cold War. Peace mak-ing and peace building should neverbe the exclusive preserve of diplo-mats and politicians”.May I conclude by quoting Sir

Joseph Rotblat, who was the veryembodiment of the spirit and missionof Pugwash for 50 years.“Let me remind you that the basic

human value is life itself, the mostimportant of human rights is theright to live. It is the duty of scientiststo see to it that, through their work,life will not be put into peril, but willbe made safe and its qualityenhanced”.Let us make 2007, which marks

the Centenary of Gandhi’s Satya-graha, and the 50th Anniversary ofPugwash, a significant milestone inthe quest for a world of peace andharmony within humankind, andbetween humankind and nature.

Mission and hence we mustredouble our efforts in the area

• Canadian Pugwash Group,Pugwash Peace Exchange and thePugwash Park Commission willcommemorate the 50th anniversaryof Pugwash by organizing a work-shop on Revitalising Nuclear Disar-mament from July 5-7, 2007 atThinkers Lodge, Pugwash. This pro-vides an occasion for the issue of aPugwash Appeal to all the politicalparties in the World and to all themembers of the UN stressing theimportance and urgency of univer-sal and total nuclear disarmament

• Initiate a Strategic Planning Exer-cise to strengthen the catalytic roleof Pugwash in promoting mutualtrust and dialogue.

• Provide a platform for partnershipamong like-minded organizationsleading to the birth of a globalalliance for a World free ofweapons of mass-destruction

• Promote a Media Coalition for abetter public understanding of theperils of status quo in the resolutionof chronic disputes, with prioritygoing to justice to Palestine.

• Assist in establishing in associationwith Pugwash National Groupsand International Student/ YoungPugwash a Global College ofJoseph Rotblat Fellows who willbecome the torch bearers of thePugwash mission

• In cooperation with UNESCO, getthe Russell—Einstein Manifestoincluded in school text books allover the World.

The Secretary General of theUnited Nations Mr. Kofi Annan in aGuest Editorial in Science (7 March2003) made the following significantremarks:

• The Structure of the carbon marketsystem is being developed

• There are a number of uncertaintiesand risks associated with the car-bon market at present. There is aneed for a carbon trading systembased on real, verifiable credits

Global warming and associatedevents like sea level rise and the morefrequent occurrence of tsunamis neces-sitate anticipatory efforts in developingbioshields and genetic shields whichcan mitigate the impact of sea waterinundation and temperature rise.

50th Anniversary of Pugwash

We are sorry we are missing Jo Rot-blat at this meeting. I would like toquote a couple of sentences from hisspeech while accepting the NobelPeace Prize along with Pugwash inDecember 1993.“I do not believe that the people

of the world would accept a policythat is inherently immoral and likelyto end in catastrophe…We have tomove forward from a now outdatedsecurity system based on nucleardeterrence and alliances, to one basedon cooperation and allegiance tohumankind”.2007 marks the 50th Anniversary

of the Pugwash Conferences on Sci-ence and World Affairs initiated at ameeting held in Thinker’s Lodge, Pug-wash village, Novo Scotia, Canada atthe invitation of Sir Cyrus Eaton. Thefamous Russell-Einstein manifestowas commended to the inhabitants ofPlanet Earth on that occasion. Iwould like to suggest that the activi-ties we may consider for commemo-rating the 50th Anniversary of thismovement for a nuclear peril freeworld may include the following:

• A Nuclear Peril Free World consti-tutes the heartland of the Pugwash




WORKING GROUP REPORTS

There was practically unanimousconcern that the global nuclear

non-proliferation and disarmamentregime is in profoundly bad shapeand faces its greatest crisis since theend of the Cold War, if not since theadvent of the nuclear era. The 2005Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)Review Conference has been an out-spoken failure and little to virtuallyno progress has been achieved withregards to the many dimensions ofthe global nuclear arms controlprocess. Particular concern wasexpressed about the fact that thedebate on the advisability of having anuclear weapons option seems to bere-opening in at least some of thenon-nuclear weapon states.Yet it was recognized that oppor-

tunities exist to revert to the processof stimulating both horizontal andvertical nuclear non-proliferation anddisarmament. Among the openingsavailable is notably the negotiation ofa Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty(FMCT). A view was expressed thatat least some of the states that havealready ratified the ComprehensiveTest Ban Treaty (CTBT) could con-sider a further step by announcingunilateral entry into force of theCTBT for them, on an individualbasis, thus committing themselves to

in the current geopolitical situation asimple return to form and agenda ofthe superpower dialogue of the 1970sand 1980s was hardly possible, andthat the latest negative developmentsin the area of outer space securitywould additionally complicate effortsto reduce their large numbers ofnuclear weapons.It was also suggested that, mean-

while, all other nuclear-weapon statesshould address the issue of their pos-session of both strategic and non-strategic nuclear weapons. The com-pletion of the withdrawal of USnuclear weapons deployed in Europeand a reduction of tactical nuclearweapons in Russia could constitutevaluable incremental steps towardsmore general and significant disarma-ment measures. The discussion in theUnited Kingdom concerning futureoptions in light of the expecteddecommissioning of the current Tri-dent system could be taken as anopportunity to raise public awarenessregarding the inhumanity of nuclearweapons, and to consider the possi-bility for such a nuclear weapon’spower to adjust to new securityrequirements and threats by reducingthe reliance on nuclear weaponry oreven by phasing them out completely,thus offering an example for othernuclear weapon states.The group addressed the likeli-

hood that non-state actors might notonly aspire to destroy a major city inthe world, but could do so easily byfabricating a crude nuclear explosivedevice when in the possession of a

behave as if the Treaty has alreadyentered into force, and act accordingto all obligations the Treaty involves.The need to proceed energeticallywith thorough preparations for thenext NPT Review Conference in2010 with the view of ensuring itssuccessful outcome was also stressed.The group was reminded that the

United States and Russia, still by farthe two largest possessors of nuclearweapons, should lead the nuclearnon-proliferation and disarmamentprocess. Among the measures pro-posed for the renewal of the disarma-ment process, the view was expressedthat the United States and Russiashould, as first priorities, take theirnuclear weapons off hair-trigger,eliminate the launch-on-warningoption from their nuclear militarystrategies, implement a paralleldecrease in operational readiness oftheir strategic forces, and openlyexclude—along with other nuclearweapon states that have not yet doneso—any first use of nuclearweaponry. There were calls on theUnited States and Russia to immedi-ately start negotiating a new strategicarms reduction treaty that may sig-nificantly reduce the deployment ofnuclear weapons. However, therewere also comments to the effect that

Working Group 1 ReportCo-Conveners: Francesco Calogero and Sergey BatsanovRapporteur: Bob van der Zwaan

Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Nuclear Disarmament


Carlos Sersale di Cerisano, Rebecca Johnson, Mohamed Shaker,Sverre Lodgaard, Sergey Batsanov.

nium enrichment, ratify the Addi-tional Protocol, cooperate with itsassociated inspections, and to offerfull cooperation with the IAEA. Atthe same time, a view was expressedthat insisting on suspension of ura-nium enrichment activities as a pre-condition for negotiations may leadto a loss of time, and a more effectiveapproach could be an agreement ofIran not to expand in any way, forthe duration of negotiations, its cur-rent nuclear activities, and ensurethat such a freeze could be verified bythe IAEA. In any case, it is importantto stimulate mutual confidence build-ing in the region and to avoid anydestabilizing action that may compli-cate the search for both short-termand long-term solutions, includingany provocative and inflammatoryrhetoric language.A number of participants share

the view that the recent nuclear testby the DPRK constitutes a seriousset-back in global efforts to preventnuclear proliferation. Still, it isbelieved that a renewal of negotia-tions in the 6-party framework is notonly necessary but could generate abasis to come out of the presentdeadlock between the government ofthe DPRK and the other 6-partygroup members. It also has to be rec-ognized that the DPRK faces multiplesecurity threats, including but notlimited to the absence of a formalpeace agreement with the UnitedStates, and that the present US for-eign policy and nuclear strategy arenot beneficial for advancing a solu-tion to the current impasse or allow-ing the establishment of a sustainableand peaceful co-existence betweenthe DPRK and the United States. TheDPRK should be given the confidencethat its survival is not in any wayunder threat, and ought to be pro-

under international safeguards asperformed by the IAEA.It was noted that while states may

have different views as to whetherover the past two decades Iran hasjust failed to fully live up to its safe-guards agreements with the IAEA ormore broadly with its obligationsunder the NPT, the main objectiveshould be to find a just andendurable solution, based on Iran’scontinued adherence to and compli-ance with the NPT. Several partici-pants emphasized that possible penal-ties deriving from such failuresshould be commensurate with theviolation committed, as well asapplied consistently and in a non-dis-criminatory way. The need to avoiddecisions that could undermine thecredibility of the IAEA and theUnited Nations Security Council wasemphasized. The complex securitysituation in the area, including theassumed possession of nuclearweapons by Israel, was also men-tioned. While Iran’s inalienable rightto undertake peaceful nuclear activi-ties was not questioned, a number ofparticipants called for an immediatecommencement of negotiations toaddress the concerns of all sidesinvolved. Several participants heldthe view that Iran should be inducedto temporarily suspend sensitive fuel-cycle-related activities such as ura-

sufficient amount of fissile material,in particular highly enriched ura-nium. In order to prevent terroristgroups from exploding such anuclear device in the near future, oralternatively a radioactive dispersalbomb, the need to deny them accessto any fissile or radioactive materialwas emphasized, hence the urgentneed to ensure that all this materialbe effectively accounted for and con-trolled on a global basis, that asmuch of highly enriched uranium beeliminated as quickly as possible, andthat the use of highly enriched ura-nium in research and naval nuclearreactors be phased out.The group discussed whether the

recent US-India nuclear deal, whichfundamentally transforms the rela-tionship between these two countries,represents a challenge to the disarma-ment and non-proliferation regime,and could motivate other countries toproceed in their attempts to producesensitive nuclear material and acquirenuclear weapons. Yet it was observedthat with or without this deal, Indiawould most likely proceed with theproduction of weapons-purpose fis-sile material anyway. Positive aspectsof the US-India nuclear deal can bediscerned as well, since India‘s civilnuclear plants, constituting abouttwo thirds of its total number ofnuclear facilities, would be brought



Working Group 2 ReportCo-Conveners: Wa’el Al Assad (Jordan) and Lynn Eden (USA)Rapporteur: Arthur Petersen (Netherlands)

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in the Middle Eastand the Establishment of a WMD-Free Zone

The goal of a weapons of massdestruction (WMD) free zone in

the Middle East has been repeatedlyaffirmed by all states involved as wellas the international community at thehighest political levels and has beenincluded in many important docu-ments. In the working group, we hadparticipants from China, CzechRepublic, Egypt, Finland, Germany,Greece, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Japan, Jor-dan, Lebanon, The Netherlands,Norway, South Africa, Sweden,Turkey, UK and USA; all participatedas individuals and not as representa-tives of their countries. First, the pre-sent situation of WMDs in this regionwas reviewed and the history ofattempts to promote a WMD-freezone was assessed. Subsequently, the

relationship between WMD-freezones and comprehensive securityframeworks was evaluated. Finally,some concrete proposals for stepsforward were put on the table.

Present situation of WMDs in theMiddle East and risks for furtherproliferation

The non-proliferation regime is ingreat danger of eroding, particularlyin the Middle East. This constitutes aconsiderable concern and the workinggroup acknowledged that the differ-ent issues related to WMDs in theMiddle East cannot be discussed inisolation of the region’s political envi-ronment, security requirements, andthreat perceptions. Given theentrenched positions of the different

value attached to the possession ofnuclear weapons in one of the nuclearweapon states is likely to stimulatethe proliferation of nuclear weaponprograms in other nations. Convincedthat the world would be much saferwithout the continued existence ofnuclear weapons, and that the pres-ence today of excessive numbers ofthese weapons in the arsenals of sev-eral countries continues to impose anunacceptable threat to the survival ofmankind, a number of participantsreiterated that all states possessingnuclear weapons should commenceplanning for security without theseweapons, and start outlawing themthrough a wide range of joint practi-cal and incremental measures.

regime of inspection be implemented.There is urgent need for a new nuclearregime and innovative approachesdesigned to take into account the tech-nical, political, institutional, and legaldimensions of the entire nuclear fuelcycle, notably in order to reduce therisks associated with nuclear prolifera-tion and terrorism.While it may be difficult to dem-

onstrate on the one hand, a direct andintrinsic correlation between a lack ofprogress in global disarmamentefforts, and the proliferation ofnuclear weapons on the other, deval-uing the importance of possessingnuclear weapons is likely to stimulateworld-wide nuclear non-proliferationefforts. Inversely, any increase in the

vided with adequate security guaran-tees to this effect, notably by theUnited States. In this context an ideawas put forward that revisiting thelessons learned from the resolution ofthe 1962 Cuban Missile crisis couldbe useful. The commitment to denu-clearize the Korean Peninsula shouldbe adhered to, and the DPRK shouldagree to verifiably renounce once andfor all the possession of nuclearweapons, as well as recommit itself tothe NPT and Additional Protocol, inexchange for the provision of appro-priate safety guarantees it desires.It was noted that the civil use of

nuclear energy continues to beseverely troubled by the problemsassociated with radioactive waste,nuclear proliferation, and reactoraccidents; further, many countriestoday, nuclear energy is experiencingunfavorable conditions in terms ofeconomics and public acceptance.While nuclear power cannot consti-tute the panacea for the problem ofclimate change, it is increasingly con-sidered as capable of contributing tothe alleviation of this global chal-lenge, while its use continues to bebeneficial for providing nationalenergy security and avoiding local airpollution. An increasingly likelyrenewed interest in the use of nuclearenergy for the production of electric-ity and a declared intention by manycountries to expand or initiatenuclear electricity production, neces-sitate further transparent and fairinternationalization of both thefront-end and back-end of thenuclear fuel cycle, as well as arenewed emphasis on risk reduction.To this extent it was proposed that

the role of the IAEA in providingextended guidance to national regula-tors should be strengthened, and auniversal, mandatory international





parties, the approach that should nowbe taken is a step-by-step approachwith elimination of WMDs from theMiddle East as its ultimate goal.Several countries in the Middle

East (here defined as the Arab coun-tries plus Israel and Iran) are knownor suspected to possess or be develop-ing nuclear, chemical and/or biologi-cal weapons. The lack of signature orratification of particular arms-controlagreements may serve as a first indi-cator for the possible presence of pro-grammes related to Weapons of MassDestruction (WMDs). In the workinggroup, assessments were presented ofthe stages the various WMD-relatedprogrammes have reached. Thesepresentations included programmeson the delivery of such weapons bymeans of missiles. Before the groupentered into a discussion of the con-crete steps that could be taken, par-ticular attention was paid to theIsraeli and Iranian nuclear files.Israel is not a party to the Non-

Proliferation Treaty (NPT) nor theBiological and Toxin Weapons Con-vention (BTWC), and has signed butnot ratified the Chemical WeaponsConvention (CWC). Based on anassessment by the Center for Nonpro-liferation Studies, Israel is estimatedto have about 100-200 nuclearweapons (NWs). These weapons weredeveloped in response to existentialthreats. Even though existentialthreats do not seem realistic at themoment, the Israeli leadership stillwants to hold on to the weapon.Israel has not used its NWs as aninstrument of coercion in its interna-tional relations, but this may changeif Iran or other countries developnuclear weapons too.Iran is a state party to all three

WMD treaties mentioned and is con-sidered not to possess NWs. Still, the

Iranian nuclear programme is a causeof concern to the international com-munity. The International AtomicEnergy Agency (IAEA) has not yetbeen able to fully clarify Iran’snuclear history. Since Iran’s nuclearprogramme was discussed at the Pug-wash Workshop on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament heldin Amsterdam, June 7-8, 2006, therehave been some further develop-ments. Members of the SecurityCouncil are currently discussing asanction resolution, since Iran is stillcontinuing its enrichment activities. Itdeserves mentioning here that theIranian nuclear programme currentlybeing monitored by the IAEA is stillin its early stages; if the number ofcascades is not increased significantly,it will take several years before Iranwould be capable of producingweapons-grade material in usefulquantities. Furthermore, we mustremember that Article IV of the NPTas well as its negotiating historyclearly indicate that uranium enrich-ment is not banned from any nuclearprogramme as long as it is for peace-ful purposes only and occurs withinthe framework of the NPT. Iran hasnot accepted enrichment suspensionas a precondition for entering intonegotations with the internationalcommunity. Some participantsargued, however, that Iran somehowneeds to regain the trust of the inter-national community and that oneway of doing this was to temporarilysuspend its enrichment activities. Thegeneral opinion of the working groupwas that the United States and othercountries should engage Iran diplo-matically and politically to addressinternational concerns that Iran hasnot fully clarified for the IAEAaspects of its nuclear history.

History of the attempts to promoteWMD/NW-free zones in theMiddle East

The positions regarding a WMD/NW-free zone in the Middle East seem tobe deadlocked at the moment; theyare as well known as they areentrenched, as was also reflected insome of the discussions of the work-ing group. The original proposal for aNuclear Weapons Free Zone (NWFZ)in the Middle East was made by Iran,backed by Egypt, in 1974. In 1990,Egypt proposed to expand the pro-posal to establish a zone free ofWMDs. In dealing with NWs, chemi-cal weapons (CWs) and biologicalweapons (BWs), we should retain thedistinctions between these weapons.There is a significant difference inscale of mass destruction betweenNWs on the one hand and BWs andCWs on the other hand. Furthermore,these weapons have different interna-tional legal regimes associated withthem. In this sense the establishmentof a WMD-free zone can also beregarded as the end result of havingall parties sign, ratify and adhere tothe existing arms-control agreements.The goal of a WMD-free zone in

the Middle East has been affirmed bythe Security Council, member statesof the NPT and Israel. It has been atopic of discussion at countless con-ferences and seminars. The rhetoric,however, is far from the reality. Else-where in the world, NWFZs havebeen successfully negotiated andadopted, but the difference with sucha zone for the Middle East is that thestates in existing NWFZs did notpossess or seek NWs and mainlywanted to keep other countries’ NWsaway from their own territories.The current deadlock on negotia-

tions towards a WMD-free zone inthe Middle East is a direct result of



substantively different starting posi-tions. The position of the Arab statesis that Israel’s nuclear capabilities aredestabilising and their inclusion fromthe beginning in the negotiations is aprecondition to peace and security inthe region. Israel’s position is that theestablishment of peaceful relations,reconciliation, mutual recognitionand good neighbourliness, and com-plementary conventional and non-conventional arms control measuresconstitute preconditions for establish-ing a NWFZ and achieving the visionof a WMD-free zone. These appar-ently polar opposite positions arewhat led to the breakdown in 1995of the Arms Control and RegionalSecurity (ACRS) talks within theMiddle East Peace Process.In general, it seems that the con-

cept of a WMD-free zone was largelyused by some of the parties involvedfor other political and diplomaticpurposes. The question that liesahead is whether all countries arereally willing to deal with the prob-lem in a serious fashion.

The relationship between WMD-freezones and comprehensive securityframeworks

There are obvious connectionsbetween the achievement of compre-hensive peace and security, on theone hand, and disarmament towardsa WMD-free zone, on the otherhand. This implies that the twoobjectives of a framework for peaceand security and a WMD-free zoneshould be treated simultaneously. Weshould move from the entrenchedpositions that pose preconditions and‘think outside the box’. There waswide (though not unanimous) agree-ment among the working group par-ticipants that what is needed is arenewed effort in regional security

dialogue. There was less agreementon whether such a dialogue shouldstart with ‘soft security’ issues in thebeginning and progress towardsWMDs later, or the ‘hard security’issue of WMDs should also be dis-cussed from the start, but it was clearthat only a step-by-step approachwould be feasible. It was proposedthat one of the first steps to be takenis to constrain the rhetoric by politi-cal leaders, for example the rhetoricby Israeli politicians on settlementpolicies and by Iranian leaders on thelegitimacy and right to existence ofIsrael. In cases where there seems tobe wide public support for such state-ments within countries, leaders beara special responsibility to engage indialogue with leaders from adversar-ial states. For any progress to bemade towards a WMD-free zone theperceptions of security by differentparties in the Middle East will needto change. Recent developments withrespect to nuclear programmes in theMiddle East mean that indeed thesecurity calculations made by thecountries in the region may change.

Some steps forward towards aWMD-free zone in the Middle East

Instead of being little more than arhetorical device, a WMD-free zonein the Middle East is an idea whosetime has now come. For the first timea plausible argument can be madethat it is in the direct security interestof all countries in the region, includ-ing Israel, to pursue this objectiverather than trying to deal with thecomplexities, instability, risks andexpense of multifaceted proliferationin the Middle East. Once this newcalculation comes to be more widelyaccepted, then one of the key strate-gic conditions will be met, making itmore possible to start real talks than

at any time since Iran and Egypt firstproposed a NWFZ in the MiddleEast in 1974. Even so, negotiationswill be tough and politically demand-ing, and no-one should be surprised ifthey take a long time and include setbacks before there is any chance ofsuccess. In any case, preconditionsneed to be set aside.The general feeling in the working

group was that to reach agreementon new steps towards a WMD-freezone, new initiatives at different lev-els of diplomacy are direly needed. ATrack II initiative was proposedunder the name ‘Council for SecurityCooperation in the Middle East’(CSCoME, which would be pro-nounced ‘sis-com’), modelled afterthe Council for Security Cooperationin the Asia Pacific (CSCAP, which ispronounced ‘sis-cap’). This initiativeenvisions a non-governmentalprocess for multilateral security dia-logue in the Middle East. The work-ing group focused much of its discus-sion on the desirability of a Track I.5initiative, sanctioned by governmentsand involving both governmentalrepresentatives and experts fromnon-governmental organisations.Potential sponsors of Track II andTrack I.5 initiatives could be Japan,one or more of the Scandinaviancountries, the New Agenda Coali-tion, or the Seven Nation Initiative.Also negotiations should begin—per-haps first starting with the relativelyuncontentious issues—at the inter-governmental level (Track I). It is ofutmost important to have a platformwith seminars and workshops atsome level of institutionalisationwhere the crucial issues related toWMDs can be discussed among thedifferent parties involved.So what are the steps that could be

taken to make the region move closer

Working Group 3 ReportCo-Convenors: Galia Golan (Israel) and Riad Malki (Palestine)Rapporteur: Erzsébet Rózsa (Hungary)

Prospects for the Peace Process in the Middle East[This Report was prepared by the Rapporteur as her summary of the working groupdiscussions, and does not necessarily reflect the views of all working group participants.]

Theworking group had 5 sessionson the political repercussions of

the war and the present opportunitiesfor promoting peace and security inthe region, the Palestinian situation,the Israeli situation and the Lebanese

situation respectively, and the role ofthe international community. On thewhole the mood of the sessions waspessimistic although it becameslightly less so by the end of thediscussions.

fuel cycle are desirable. With respectto energy policies and agreements inthe Middle East more in general, itwas suggested that it would be moreprofitable and desirable for countriesin the Middle East to invest in renew-able energy instead of nuclear energy.With respect to the adoption of newagreements at the global level, allcountries have a responsibility to signand ratify the CTBT and to proceedwith and conclude negotiations on aFissile Materials Cutoff Treaty(FMCT) that bans the further pro-duction of weapons-grade fissilematerial and should include Israeland Iran (both countries agreed in1998 on the mandate for the FMCT).Finally, ballistic missiles were identi-fied to constitute an issue that shouldbe dealt with by a regional treaty.To conclude, all states within and

without the Middle East should beurged to work towards the establish-ment of a zone free of Weapons ofMass Destruction and to enter intodiscussions regarding the modalitiesof such a zone within a comprehen-sive peace and security framework.Some specific steps can already betaken, as was outlined in this report.

Pelindaba. A proposal was made inthe working group that Israel shoulddeclare that it will behave ‘as if’ itwere a member of the NPT (this wasFrance’s policy up to 1992, when itacceded to the Treaty) and shouldjoin the Nuclear Weapons Statesmoratorium on the production ofweapons-grade fissile material.National and international exportcontrols on WMD and WMD-relateditems should be strengthened. It wasproposed that all countries should beurged to sign and ratify the Addi-tional Protocol to their safeguardsagreements with the IAEA.(3)Negotiation of new agree-

ments: There is a continuing need forscientific and technical studies intothe possibilities to further strengthenthe IAEA safeguards system. Twoexamples of existing regional institu-tions—EURATOM and ABACC—were discussed and a Middle EastCouncil for Controlling AtomicEnergy (MECCAE) was proposed.Given the likely expansion of nuclearenergy in the Middle East and theconcerns that materials may bediverted into military programmes,regional agreements on the nuclear

to the establishment of a WMD-freezone? Above all, the conditions needto be developed for such a zone andexisting legal arrangements need to bestrengthened. This can be done inthree parallel ways, varying from rela-tively easy to relatively difficult:(1) Enhanced co-operation and

Confidence and Security BuildingMeasures (CSBMs): Enhanced co-operation between all parties in theregion can be considered in the areaof public health, including epidemio-logical surveillance, diagnostic mea-sures, training and planning on pre-paredness, or in the areas offirefighting, earth quakes, landshiftsand water. It was proposed thatwithin the mentioned frameworks fordiscussions more difficult issues canalso be discussed. For instance, theparticipation in existing CSBMs ofWMD treaties can be promoted andnew CSBMs can be proposed thatcreate more transparency on WMDsand deal with notification of materi-als, missiles and agents. Also the par-ties could participate in joint semi-nars on their military doctrines andthe role that WMDs play in these.There could be mutual inspections ofmilitary exercises and visits to mili-tary headquarters. As other areas ofco-operation that may require sepa-rate agreements it was proposed thatEgypt and Israel develop a mutualenvironmental protection system tomonitor leakages from nuclear facili-ties, and—even going further—thatEgypt and Israel start a programmeof mutual and reciprocal visits tonuclear sites within both countries.(2) Application and implementa-

tion of available agreements on non-proliferation and arms control: Allthe parties involved in the AfricanNuclear Weapons Free Zone shouldbe encouraged to ratify the Treaty of



government employees, then to thebreakdown of the government.Ghaza has become a prison.Unemployment reached 80%. Israelwithholds some 500 million USD inVAT and taxes. Over 300 people,most of them women and childrenwere killed. 46 thousand Palestiniansapplied for permission to expatriatefrom Ghaza and the West Bank yetonly 10 thousand were granted it.Hamas realized that it would be

the first and last opportunity to forma working government unless theychanged themselves. But there is alsoa realization among Fatah that this isthe opportunity to come back togovernment. A national unitygovernment, therefore, is a mutualinterest of both and may become amutual survival government, whichcould control further politicalprocesses in Palestine. The questionwas raised if such a national unitygovernment means that futureelections will be excluded.It is as yet not clear who the

members of the new government willbe, but the candidates will notnecessarily be party members. It isunderstood that Mahmoud Abbasmust have received enough guaranteefrom the international communitythat in the case of a national unitygovernment, the embargo would belifted. It was concluded that theUS/Israel/Europe have won this battleof wills, however, there wasadditionally much pressure from theinside, by President Abbas and thePalestinian people.Hamas interprets the victory as

God’s will and a reflection of the willof the people. At the beginning theytried to minimize the effects of theinternational boycott by turning toArab and Islamic countries tocompensate for lost revenues, but

The Lebanon war has moved theArab-Israeli confrontation to a newlevel: it proved that a military fight isno longer an answer and raisedquestions for Israel about its ownmilitary might.The war demonstrated the the

linkage between the conflicts in theregion, including the connectionbetween the Israeli-Palestinianconflict and Lebanon-Syria-Iran. Forsome, the Palestinian issue is the coreissue, but for others, like the US, thecore issue is instead Iran,subordinating the Palestinian issue.There was a perception that the

Lebanese war did not leave muchspace for a new opening in the issue,since Israel’s military was unable tosucceed completely in its goals,leaving the Israeli leadership too weakto make any concessions towardpeace.The Bush administration has had

6 years of deeply establishedbehaviour, rejecting Clinton’sapproach of being involved. The maineffect of 9/11 was to push the USAand Israel closer to each other thanever before. In spite of the recentchanges in the Congress, Bush willremain skeptical about the effects ofdiplomacy and will refuse to talk to„bad guys”. The DemocraticCongress will not be enough tochange Bush’s set rules.

Discussion of the Palestinian scene

In January the elections in thePalestinian territories were free anddemocratic and went without anyproblems. People were enthusiasticand turned out in great numbers.However, the results were notaccepted by either the US or Israel, orin the end by Europe. All aid wasstopped which led first to the generalstrike by the 160 thousand

General discussion of chancesfor peace

In recent months the situation in theMiddle East in general and in theIsraeli-Palestinian context inparticular have been deterioratingfast. The embargo imposed on thePNA has had a very negative impact.The Arab states keep silent perhapsdue to incapability, the Europeans areignoring the conflict, and the Israeli-Palestinian issue ranks only about 6thor 7th on the Bush administration’sagenda, its focus being increasinglySouthwest Asia. While it is wrong tolook at the Israeli-Palestinian conflictas the main cause of all the problemsover the region, it does figure directlyor indirectly in most issues.Although the Arab peace initiative

(2002 Beirut) is generally considereda solid foundation for negotiations bythe Arab political elites, in the eyes ofIsrael and also of the Arab street itwill not lead to a solution. Theelements of peace are clear: the end ofoccupation including settlements;1967 borders as basic lines; a fairsolution to the Palestinian refugeeproblem and recognition of the rightof return on the basis of internationallaw and UN resolutions. The warbetween Israel and the Hezbollah mayhave created an opportunity in thesense that it put the Arab-Israeliconflict back on the internationalagenda. Some Israeli leaders, for thefirst time, say they might consider theArab peace plan.One of the biggest repercussions

of the war is the disclosure of thedivision among the Arab countriesbetween moderates (i.e. those tryingto make peace) and non-committants.While there were differences amongthe Arab states in the past, theytended to show a unified profile onthe Palestinian issue.



Samir Shawa, Henry Siegman, Steven Miller, Riad Kahwaji, Riad Malki.

without a policy. The logical firstoption for a government policy couldbe talking to Syria, yet this is unlikelyin spite of the fact that even influentialmembers of the Israeli govnernmenthave raised the idea. At the momentthe US would not support such a plansince it is unwilling to have pressuretaken off Syria. The other optioncould be talking to the Palestinians,but it is not clear if Olmert wants toopen any peace track at all.Nevertheless, the war demonstratedthe regional implications of theconflict and, therefore, the preferredoption could, should, be acomprehensive approach, includingboth Syria and the Palestinians,perhaps the Arab League Peace plan.

Discussion of the Lebanese andSyrian secene

In Lebanon the political situation israpidly changing, tension is extremelyhigh and there is a threat of a civilwar. While it is a conciliatorydemocracy, the anti-Syrian camp hasa less than 2/3 majority in theParliment, but a 2/3 majority in thecabinet. The withdrawal of theHezbollah and Amal ministers fromthe government is seen as a signal toSyria and later a possibility will begiven for the ministers to come back.The general assumption is that in

the war the US/Israel/West faced theHezbollah/Syria/Iran axis. Syria stillhas a lot of connections in Lebanon.Hezbollah, though established byIran, has in the past years acted on itsown. The Lebanese government hastried to move Hezbollah out of thisaxis. Hezbollah did not want to go toa full-scale war with Israel, it waspreparing for a situation in which theUS and Iran confront each other andthen Hezbollah would act. SinceHezbollah has been increasingly

and exposed the Israeli government’sinablity to defend its citizens fromattacks both from Lebanon andGhaza. Though, in spite of the lackof trust and the widening gapbetween the government and thepopulation, the stock exchange is atits highest peak ever. It was assumedthat the trauma of not being able torely on the army may have been afactor in the use of force in Ghaza toregain confidence.For some years now the Israeli

public has supported a two-statesolution: 60-70% would be ready togive up the settlements and 50%would be ready to share Jerusalem.Yet, because of the failure of the Osloprocess and Camp David, the no-partner idea emerged, which led tounilateralism. With the elections thisbecame a government policy,including the future unilateraldelineation of the border.The war in Lebanon changed the

situation. The conclusion was thatunilateralism (unilateral withdrawal)was dead: either because if withdrawalis completed without an agreement,there is no security guarantee; orbecause withdrawal as such isconsidered a mistake. But sinceKadima was founded on unilateral-ism, now the government is left

when that was not a viable optionthey introduced a new tactic callingfor sacrifices. While people wereinitially passionate about it, theirseriously deteriorating livingcircumstances made them increasinglychange their minds about Hamas’ability to govern. In the end the livingconditions of the Palestinians will bethe decision-makers over Hamas.It was noted that while usually

only Fatah is mentioned as analternative to Hamas, the people whostayed away from the elections (outof the 1.8 million 1 million voted)mostly did so because they werefrustrated by the options. The idea ofan option like that taken by Sharonwas raised, namely that MahmoudAbbas with young and „clean”elements of Fatah and with theprisoners and Marwan Barghouticould form a new party in order towin the next elections.The prisoners’ document was

there at the beginning of nationalunity negotiations, but Hamasamended the original ten points byadding three, so the end agreementreached differs in many aspects.Israel has no prospects and no

vision, the Israeli government is onlyconcentrating on survival. The warwas a deep shock for the population



Working Group 4 ReportCo-Conveners: Claire Galez, Mahmood VaeziRapporteur: Siddiq Wahid

Islam and the West

Preliminaries

As last year, the group was com-posed of a wide spectrum of

people representing both Islam andthe West. In addition, this year therewere representatives from a diverserange of people from within theIslamic world. This enriched the dis-cussion further.The Group began by debating the

appropriateness of the title for itsdeliberations; namely, the relationsbetween “Islam and the West”. The

primary objections to this terminol-ogy were: (i) that neither of the twoentities is monolithic and so neededto be deconstructed (ii) that to positIslam and the West as mutuallyexclusive was not correct as there isalso the question of Islam in theWest, (iii) that in recognition of thefact that there has been constructivecontact between the two throughouthistory, the discussion should per-haps be confined to the relationshipbetween “political Islam” and the

and the UNSC permanent members.Taking this idea further the possiblerole of the UN was raised in acomplex manner: it was discussedthat the UN should make up acommission which would organizeand oversee an internationalconference, monitor the situation andthe implementation on the ground,and mandate an international force.The exact mandate, form,

functions and scope of such aninternational force is as yet unclear,but the Palestinian side would haveno objection to accepting such a forceas an interim measure. In fact, theyhave studied such an option carefullyin the past two years. Israel for itspart has already agreed to thirdparty/international forces’involvement at the Refah cross-borderpoint (Egyptians) and UNIFIL-2 (inLebanon), though not on its ownterritory. This agreement could be animportant precedent.

Discussion of the internationalcommunity

With regard to the role of theinternational community there was ageneral understanding that withoutstrong, high level, comprehensiveinternational involvement the conflictcannot be solved. Since the stage-by-stage approach has failed, rather apackage deal should be pursued. Asto the question of who constitutes theinternational community, theweakness of Europeans and theirsubordination to the US wasmentioned. For Russia, which tries toreassert itself as an internationalplayer, the Middle East is a field foreconomic and military cooperationopportunities, though its ownMuslimpopulation offers other incentives.The role of the Arab League or theArab countries as part of theinternational community was raised.The Arab countries could propose aregional conference with theparticipation of the Arab states, Israel

considered a Shiite political party, itsaim was to reestablish its resistancemovement identity. The capture andkilling of Israeli soldiers fit into thispattern. Hezbollah wanted to repeatthe 2004 soldier-prisoner exchange.After the war Hezbollah is exhaustedand considers UNIFIL a force toprotect them and give them thechance to pull out and re-group northof the Litani River. Yet, it is theirbiggest interest that the mandate ofUNIFIL not be extended to become apeace enforcement force. If there isanother war, it will most probablyconcentrate on the Bekaa Valley.However, rearming will not be easy:the sea and the air-space is undercontrol, as are the borders. At thesame time the Lebanese army isexperiencing a boost in popularity. Inthe next few years 0.5 billion USDwill be invested in the armament ofthe Lebanese army.Hezbollah started a very

successful campaign to regainpopularity: they financially helpedfamilies to rebuild their houses,started a PR campaign claiming thatGod was on their side, justifying theirwar, and accused the Lebaneseleadership of conspiracy with the USand Israel against the Shiites inSouthern Lebanon.Syria’s priorities are regime

security, gaining internationallegitimacy, a role for Syria in theregion and the return of the GolanHeights, which would establishBashar al-Asad as a leader. While theSyrian military intelligence has aninterest in de-stabilizing Lebanon,there are circles that want to negotiatewith the US; in this context even theidea of a roadmap was raised. Thereis a general desire in Syria to avoid—if possible—the disclosure of namesinvolved in the Hariri killing.





political leadership of the West and(iv) that the dichotomy is asymmetri-cal as one term represents a civiliza-tion and the other a geographicregion.After a brief discussion, Group

members conceded that these werenot mere semantic differences, that itwas important to understand that thetitle had its limitations. So we pro-ceeded with some key assumptions.These were: (a) that we should notconfine ourselves to discussing onlythe definition and concede that thereference, broadly, meant the currentclimate of confrontation between“Islam” and the “West” and withoutprejudice to the positive contactsbetween the two; (b) that there wasnot only a debate between Islam andthe West, but within Islam and withinthe West, and that the two debatesare related; and (c) that it would bedifficult to confine the discussion toonly one segment of Islam or of theWest.Four key propositions, with views

for and against them, dominated theagenda of the debate within thisGroup. These were as follows:

• That religion and State should beseparated in the public realm

• That the confrontation between thetwo is one of a “clash of civiliza-tions”

• That efforts to marginalize womenfurther aggravates relationsbetween the two

• That education was central andcritical to bridging the gap thatexists between Islam and the West

It might be pointed out that thesefour points were not stipulated a pri-ori; they emerged from the discus-sions. Under these headings, however,the group discussed many other

related issues and ideas. I haveattempted to include as many of theseas possible in this Report.

Separation of Religion and State

There were three sets of opinions,cutting across denominational andgeographic lines, on this issue. Somefelt very strongly that the two mustbe separated, that the introduction ofreligion into the political arena hadbred violence throughout history.Others felt that although this may bedesirable, it was difficult to do practi-cally and yet others argued that sucha separation cannot be made and thatIslam reserved the right to implementan Islamic State. This portion of thediscussion was one that might bedescribed as a discourse on “politicalIslam”. Otherwise put, it was a dis-cussion on the right or wrong of poli-tics using the idiom of religion.The discussion heard mention of

the concept of ijtehad, or contextualinterpretation of laws and decreesand of the implications of the plural-ity of the Muslim umma, community,for a pan-Islamic Islamic “nation”.Briefly, the points made were: thatthe idea of ijtehad needed to beunderstood and used properly, thatthe geographically wide distributionof Islam over fourteen centuries madethis evident, and that Islam came intothe world with a bill of politicalrights, and so is a social force. Duringdiscussions on this issue, it waspointed out that rights did come withduties and that perhaps this was notbeing discussed enough. What, inother words, is meant by exercise ofdemocracy? This was apropos of adiscussion of the possibility of having“fundamentalist” groups gain powerthrough the ballot. The point beingmade was that in such cases it wasimportant to ensure that laws

exclude the possibility of the “end ofdemocracy”.One participant in the discussions

posited the idea of giving space to“the sacred realm” in our lives. This,it was explained, is a reframing of thearchitectural distinction between pri-vate, public and sacred realms. It wasmentioned that the latter could act asa bridge between the first two,although it was a distinct realm of itsown. Discussion of this yielded that itimplied an alliance of religions assuch to come up with a solution tothe increasingly antagonistic politics,and perceived or real threats toidentity.

Clash of Civilizations or of Interests

The above discussion introduced theneed for a “dialogue between civiliza-tions”, a concept emanating fromIran and, after a ten year gap since itspronouncement, also from the authorof the clash theory. A majority of theGroup members felt that it was inap-propriate to describe the confronta-tion between the West and Islam asone of a clash of civilizations; that amore helpful term might be one of aclash of interests, defined as the willto monopolize sources of energy. Itwas noted that both the “West” and“Islam” were undergoing internalchange and that what was neededwas a mutual recognition of this,which would enhance the “culturaldialogue”.There was substantial discussion

as to whether Islam was compatiblewith notions such as secularism andmodernity. Several participants wereat pains to argue that Islam was notagainst such notions. One participantcited the possibility of Islam having a“secular vision” and mentioned theworks of Jamal ad-din Afghani asone Muslim reformer who could be



used as a starting point on this issue.Others argued that Islam was not inopposition to modernity and that itwas more a question of oppressiveapologists amongst the ruling classwithin Muslim societies who alsocontributed to the problem.Several members pointed out that

ultimately it was a clash of intereststhat was fueling the confrontationbetween Islam and the West. TheWestern powers, over the period ofthe better part of a century, had rec-ognized the importance of oil and gasin the modern world. This was con-centrated in the Middle East, CentralAsia and other lands that are over-whelmingly Muslim. It was in theinterest of the West that they con-tinue to control these lands. Thus, itwas argued, that the present climatewas a consequence of political andeconomic injustices and must beaddressed in that context.

Education

This morning I had the opportunity,and the privilege, to meet with TheGrand Mufti of Egypt, Sheikh AliGom’a. Both of us agreed that one ofthe major problems facing the Mus-lim world was divisiveness and a lackof consensus on some of the basics ofthe religion. I asked him two ques-tions in connection with it. (i) Whatis the cause of it? (ii) What could bedone to remedy the situation? Hisanswers to both questions were briefbut assured: The cause was lack ofeducation. The remedy was educa-tion.This, I might report, was also the

thrust of the argument in our Group.In a sense it was one of the threads,the other being gender issues which Ishall discuss presently, that wasrepeated throughout our discussion.The Group was also of the opinion

that there was a degree of educationthat was also required in the Westabout Islam, and vice versa. Therewere many dimensions to this: theMuslim cleric needed to educateWestern educated Muslims about thereligion, the traditional Muslimneeded to be educated about theworld at large, the West needs educa-tion about Islam and so on.Although we did not have time

to discuss this question in its details,the members of the group discussedthe need for the education of bothIslam and the West, starting at thevery beginning of a child’s education.A “K through 12” approach wasadvocated by one member. Thereare models of this already being donein North America; these need to bestudied, enhanced and used in otherparts of the world. The point wasalso made that the use of traditionaleducational institutions and religiousauthorities was critical to counteringthe violent reactions to perceived orreal political and economic injusticesin the Islamic world.

Women in Islam

Similar to the question of education,awareness of gender imbalance alsoconstituted a thread through the dis-cussions. In this connection severalspecifics were discussed ranging froma discourse on the degree of veiling(ranging from a simple head scarf tothe hijab to the naqab) to the critical-ity of educating young mothers. Itwas also pointed out that using vari-ous means, women continued to bemarginalized in insidious and danger-ous ways.Several of the participants

pointed out that many women werewearing the veil willingly, and werenot necessarily forced to do so. How-ever, what troubled them was that the

trend was to not permit women tohave a choice in the matter and thatthere was an increased propensity todictate to women what they couldand could not do. For example, itwas pointed out that much of thiswas happening for the first time inthe history of Egypt and that therewas a need to study as to why itwas the case.

Other Topics of Discussion

The discussion was helped by the pre-sentation of several papers and byway of concluding this report I wouldlike to present brief summaries of thepapers. They ranged from “case stud-ies” on Islamicization in Pakistan andSomalia, the implications of this phe-nomenon and its linkages with vio-lence. In both papers the thrust of theargument was that the United States’time worn policies that argued forcivilizational superiority, the legiti-macy of supporting dictators andunilateralism were a primary cause ofthe problems confronting these twocountries.The Group was presented a

paper that analyzed the theoreticalworks of individuals such as theMuslim reformer JamaladdinAfghani who has argued that Islamwas severe in its strictures againstviolence, and the English writerBrunt, who argued against the imper-ial exploitation of religion to furtherits objectives. Both points, it wasargued, needed to be explored in thecontext of the confrontation betweenIslam and the West.The members of Group 4 also

benefited from a paper on the impor-tance, simultaneously, of a theoreticalunderstanding of how dialoguesbetween civilizations take place andthe need for a set of practical princi-ples to be employed if such a dia-

Working Group 5 ReportConvener: Anissa HassounaRapporteur: Kayhan Barzegar

Governance, Democracy and Reform in the Middle East[This Report was prepared by the Rapporteur as his summary of the working group dis-cussions, and does not necessarily reflect the views of all working group participants.]

Overview

Governance, democracy andreforms have a long background

in the Middle East as this regionserved as the emerging hub of sophis-ticated governance systems, advancedways of life, human rights anddemocracy to human civilizations.Yet despite the historical back-ground, due to the existing cultural,religious and societal characteristicsof Middle Eastern countries on theone hand and the continued interestsof foreign powers which in turnbrought about the complexities of thenature of power and politics in theregion on the other, the process ofreform and democratization havebeen delayed or often failed.Throughout the past one hundred

years the processes of democratiza-tion and reform have had ups anddowns in the region but neverstopped as people of the region havealways expressed their will and inter-ests in advancing democracy andreforms. The issue of advancing

democratization in the Middle East isa political, more than a cultural, reli-gious or economic issue. At present,the region is undergoing a transition,with diverse national identities expe-riencing their own national ways oftransformation according to theirspecific political, cultural and eco-nomic features. Because of its richhistory, the region has the potentialfor advanced democratic activitiesand reform.Generally speaking, in Group

Five two basic assumptions were dis-cussed on the internal and externalfactors which restricted the democra-tization process and reform in theMiddle East:

Internal constraints

On the issue of domestic constraints,democratization, reforms and goodgovernance are processes whichrequire some initial prerequisites: agovernments’ accountability andresponsiveness in providing an openpolitical atmosphere, transparency,diversity in the power structure, the

notion needs to be questioned anddebated if we are to have a true dia-logue

• That this can be detected in cam-paigns of a kind of ‘demonization’of the adversary that creates a pho-bia about them be it Islam, NorthKorea or China

in reporting on conflicts that couldbe interpreted as one between“Islam and the West”

• Need to find a solution to the Pales-tinian problem which is fraughtwith dangers in that direction.

• That there is a notion of a sort of‘imperial imperative’ at work; this

logue were, indeed, to take place. Inthe former case, there are two waysof exchange between civilizations: (i)that cultures and civilizations border-ing each other have frontiers whichallow a natural seepage of ideas andmaterial culture; (ii) yet there is also aneed for conscious exchange betweenneighboring civilizations to makeconscious, methodical and scholarlyendeavors to find mutual points ofagreement. The paper concluded byendorsing the 1998 Tehran Declara-tion on the details of the principlesfor such a dialogue as the basis forfostering a culture of dialogueamongst the nations of the world.

Conclusions

The discussions did not seek to find aconsensus. However they did entailseveral observations, inter alia, as towhy the world seemed dangerouslypoised precisely, to “clash” ratherthan talk, fragment rather than unite.

• There is no hesitation to declare awill to power, its accumulation inquantity and quality, in the name of‘national interest’

• Despite intense discussions about a‘new world order’ following the col-lapse of the Soviet Union, thatmen-tality has continued and indeed,may be what fuels the confrontationbetween Islam and the West

A start to correcting the mutualalienation of Islam and the Westwould be to work toward a greaterunderstanding of the above trendsand either neutralizing them or head-ing them off. Towards this too therewere a few observations:

• Efforts must be made to prevent theexploitation or distortion of reli-gion in political discourse

• Must improve the role of the media



and economic development. Thelack of a powerful middle class anda market economy will delay theprocess of democratization.

• Emphasizing human security issuesin the region will help advancedemocracy and reform in theregion. Accordingly, paying dueattention to the demands andrequirements of the masses is ofgreat importance in this process.

• In the Arab world there are differ-ent models of democratizationwhich must operate according tothe cultural, societal, geographicaland economic characteristics ofeach society.

• The role of the streets and winningthe vote of the masses has a signifi-cant effect on the democratizationprocess. This has been demon-strated in Lebanon, Palestine andthe new Iraq.

• Democratization and reforms willonly occur in an environmentwhere powerful political structuresand institutions coexist with NGOsand the private sectors.

• In many countries of the region therole of religion and ideology isincreasing. The existence of conser-vative and fundamental founda-tions is considered one the mainobstacles of democratization andreform. In case they do not getinvolved in the democratic processaccording to the agreed upon rulesof criteria.

• On the issue of the new Iraq,although the process of democraticactivities is moving slowly, giventhe past suppressing legacy of theBaathist regime, occurrence of newpolitical developments accompa-nied by several elections is a mile-stone in Iraq’s process of transfor-mation.

Undoubtedly, democratization andreform require a peaceful atmospherebased on mutual trust within thepolitical-cultural spectrum, elites andmasses, and governments andnations. Yet the lack of them is noexcuse for not working towardspolitical reform and respect ofhuman rights.

Causes of Delay or Failure

• Although democracy has globalfeatures and values, the presence ofdiverse identities and their differentdemands and expectations from thedemocratization process requiresapplying specific approaches ofadvancing democracy in theMiddle East.

• The existence of wars, crises andthe subsequent grounds of mutualdistrust have had harmful effects onthe democratization process andreforms in the region.

• Establishing security and stabilityare the most prominent elements ofdemocratization and reform in theregion. The democratizationprocess requires a peaceful andcalm atmosphere.

• Given the traditional and religiousnature of Middle Eastern communi-ties, achieving democratizationrequires preserving a balancebetween demands and expectationsof the traditional and modern seg-ments of the communities.

• Imposed, immature, and directeddemocratization can lead to frustra-tion; it also gives justification for apower structure detrimental tonascent democracies. The result hasbeen disappointment, frustration,and indifference in taking part infuture elections.

• Democratization requires simulta-neous attention to political reforms

rotation of power, dealing with cor-ruption, enhancing powerful mid-dle–class and market-economy, estab-lishing confidence-building amongvarious political-cultural spectrums,building civil society and politicalinstitutions, human rights andwomen rights, culture of toleranceand equality, social and economicjustice, etc., and generally the simul-taneous application of political andeconomic developments are amongthe prerequisites of democratizationprocess. In this sense, a lack or weak-ness of the abovementioned charac-teristics delayed attempts towarddemocratization in the past severalyears. Chief among them are govern-ment’s irresponsibility in providingan appropriate atmosphere and thenecessary grounds for holding com-prehensive and fair elections.

External Factor

At the same time, because of contin-ued foreign interests, the occurrenceof wars and political crisis in theMiddle East, efforts toward thedemocratization process in the regionhave been delayed or often failed dur-ing the past years. Accordingly, warin Iraq, Lebanon and the Gaza Stripempowered extremist activities,extended violent movements, pro-vided the grounds for a new kind ofconflict economy and most notablyextended distrust among nations andstates that contradict advancingdemocratic movements. The presenceof foreign occupation forces is at bestjustifying violent activities in theregion. As history demonstrates, nonation in the region accepted any for-eign involvement in its internalaffairs in the long-run. As the resultof conducting war, preserving secu-rity and stability has become the firstpriority of the regional communities.





Human security encompasses ahost of issues that together form

the basis for guaranteeing each personsafety at the societal, community andindividual levels. Millions of peopleworldwide are affected by some formof human insecurity. Infectious andparasitic diseases annually kill 17 mil-lion people; 25 million people areinternally-displaced persons, includ-ing 5 million in Sudan alone; 1 mil-lion people in Zambia’s population of11 million are HIV-positive; and only2.3% of the fresh water on Earth ispotable. The primary elements of eco-nomic, food, health, environment,

personal, community and politicalsecurity all comprise the broaderunderstanding of human security.This definition shifts the focus awayfrom a state-centric and military-strategic emphasis on security to aninterdisciplinary and people-centricapproach that embraces notions likeempowerment and participation.The working group discussed vari-

ous aspects of human security, focus-ing on the specific areas where Pug-wash’s diverse group of experts canmake a difference. Drawing on arecent workshop held in the Nether-lands, the notion of security was seen

as broadening in scope and deepeningto include more levels of society, whileinvolving more stakeholders in theprocess. The human security approachhas been promoted by a number oftrend-setting commissions: The Inter-national Commission on Interventionand State Sovereignty, which pro-moted the “responsibility to protect;”the Ogata-Sen Committee; and therecent Human Security Commission.Three key elements will help us under-stand and expand the way that humansecurity can be operationalized:agency, or including the victims andpeople at risk in the process;discourse, which provides the lan-guage for promoting a human securityagenda; and governance, or designingmore comprehensive forms of gover-nance to deal with the issues at stake.

Science and ethics

Guidance with an ethical compass isintegral to our work. Science in the21st century will present diverse newthreats as well as ethical dilemmasfor scientists. Nanotechnology is aprime example of the conflict thatscience will face: although innova-tions offer us more powerful ways tolive, travel, and communicate, detrac-tors fear that the limited scope ofknowledge of this field could causenew problems for humanity. Scien-tists historically have been wary ofconfronting uncertainties because offear of public backlash. By extendingscience’s outreach and increasing thepublic’s participation in debatesabout the role of science and technol-ogy in society, scientists can developeffective ways to address these ethicalissues. Pugwash can use its broadapproach to bridge gaps to assess thesocietal and ethical consequences ofresearch, and also ways to cooperatewith existing ethics in science pro-

Working Group 6 ReportCo-conveners: Marie Muller (South Africa) and

MS Swaminathan (India)Rapporteur: Christine Rovner (USA)

Non-Military Threats to Security

Future Steps

• The promotion of democracy at themass level in order to increase cul-ture of tolerance, flexibility, refor-mation, and human developmentshould have priority as it will bal-ance different layers of societies andincrease common interests amongnew generations.• On the global scale, advancingdemocratic movements in the regionrequires the international commu-nity to support NGOs, the Middle-Class, private sectors and mostimportantly, integrating the region’seconomy into the world system.• There should be a convergencebetween different regional andglobal perceptions of transforma-tion and reforms; this requiresestablishing communication net-works that illustrate diverse per-

spectives to empower the conceptof collective interest.• The role of the young generationand women in advancing democra-tic activities should be encouraged.Accordingly, plans to educateyoungsters to create new concep-tions of democratic cultures shouldbe promoted in the region.• Future discussions of elections andother political transformationprocesses should include represen-tatives of most, if not all partners,concerned for more constructivedebate and outcome.

• The Middle East civil societyactivists should adopt a more posi-tive approach towards identifyingthe outlines of the model they thinkis in conformity with their cultureyet not contradictory with the inter-national basis of democracy.



grams at UNESCO and ICSU.Incorporating the study of ethical

dilemmas into university curricula isan effective way to influence scien-tists in their formative years. In addi-tion, publication of Pugwash’sDorothy Hodgkin Memorial Lectureseries would offer young scientists acompass on social responsibility inscience. Speaking up on the protec-tion of whistleblowers is a specificway that Pugwash can help promotescience and ethics in the wider soci-ety. Pugwash should also promoteequal access to new technologies forall sectors of society so that sociallyresponsible outcomes are availableto everyone.

Health threats, includingHIV/AIDS and nutrition

Human security is greatly shaken bythe global phenomenon of HIV/AIDS.Following the international onset ofthe virus, we are now seeing theeffects of HIV/AIDS on political,social and economic spheres in “firstwave” countries in Africa; soon wewill see the cumulative impact onthese societies from the death toll onyoung people, child-rearing by grand-parents, and a lost labor force.Other epidemic diseases diminish

human security globally, particularlymalnutrition and diarrhea, whichoften contribute to the spread ofother viruses. Malnutrition compro-mises drug therapies for HIV, raisesthe infection rate of tuberculosis, andreduces the survival rate frommalaria. Diarrhea kills more childrenworldwide than malaria, HIV/AIDS,and tuberculosis combined. However,these other epidemic diseases are notproperly addressed since they affectprimarily the developing world anddo not have a recognizable championfor their causes.

The human security impact ofthese diseases, particularly HIV/AIDS,cannot be understated. Police andmilitary personnel are infected, whichdiminishes their forces and inhibitscooperative security efforts whenHIV-positive personnel cannot workin other countries. Medical costs andlost productivity also contribute to asignificant threat to economic secu-rity. Social security is compromisedwhen affected individuals are cast outof their communities, realize discrimi-nation, and leave behind young chil-dren who may be infected withHIV/AIDS themselves. Securitization,which elevates issues like HIV/AIDSinto security threats, raises awarenessamong government leaders and thepublic, and also encourages civil soci-ety to take a role in defining the prob-lem and finding effective solutions.Securitization’s greater emphasis onhuman security threats can betterintegrate civil society into the securitysector, but risks providing a govern-ment justification for their claim onnational resources.While education has helped

reduce the spread of HIV somewhat,the “ABCs” promoted in Africa—Abstinence, Be faithful, Condom-ize—are not working to stem the epi-demic. Governments and religiousleaders are also undermining educa-tion efforts. Pugwash’s diverse baseof experts could help develop a new,effective language for HIV/AIDS edu-cation. In addition, gender inequali-ties must be addressed to combat, forexample, the “machismo” mindsetamong promiscuous men.Technological innovations offer us

ways to discover correlations betweenhealth problems and economic, social,environmental, and other factors.Geographic Information Systems(GIS) can map disease outbreaks and

analyze their relationship to the othergeographical factors around them toidentify new threats and facilitatemanagement of the problem. Whilecorrelation of this data does not nec-essarily determine causality, this sys-tem offers a way to discover otherpotentially related factors that shouldbe investigated further. Pugwash’sbroad approach would help improvethe identification of health problemsand offer new research areas to corre-late to health issues. However, thisinnovation requires weighing therisks and benefits—particularly inrelation to privacy concerns—of col-lecting personal data for sharing in acollective database.

Other considerations includingwater resources, agri-biotech andfood security

Water is already a source of interna-tional conflict and is the greatestresource at risk in the Middle Eastregion. Inequity in water use world-wide was highlighted as a key sourceof tensions, and the need to strike abalance between different countries’approach to water use and conserva-tion was noted. Although future con-flicts loom, including unarmed dis-putes or clashes at the subnationallevel, water may be used effectively asa means of cooperation as well.Regional approaches to improvewater security are needed, as well ascomprehensive national efforts toharvest rainwater, develop desalina-tion programs, and recycle water.Supply, access, and demand all are

issues that need to be solved for foodsecurity. Genetically-modified foodsare not uniformly accepted by states,which causes problems for effectivetrade and food aid delivery around theworld. Pugwash can make a usefulcontribution by making connections

Participantsvulnerable populations. Pugwashshould continue the study group onhuman security to incorporate theprevious series’ themes of interven-tion and sovereignty in light of the2005 United Nations doctrine on the“responsibility to protect.”Human security issues require

Pugwash’s continued attention toidentify emerging threats and poten-tial solutions in these areas outside ofthe traditional security sphere. Whilethis year the group focused on health,food and water issues, many otherhuman security concerns can beaddressed using Pugwash’s broad andinterdisciplinary approach. Forfuture Pugwash conferences, we rec-ommend that this working group’stitle and mission both reflect the keyhuman security issues at play so thatthe group’s work may be focused onuseful, interdisciplinary dialogue. Thegroup’s call for papers should includetopical issues and policy develop-ments in human security, and theagenda should be shaped well inadvance so that contributions fromPugwash members may be inter-linked more easily. In this way, Pug-wash’s work will continue to demon-strate our commitment to address allaspects of global security.

Dr. Sadek Abdelaal, Founder and Chair-man, PeaceDiatrics Society, Cairo, Egypt;Pediatrician, Cairo University, Children’sHospital

Gen. (ret.) Mansour Abu Rashid, Chair-man, Amman Center for Peace andDevelopment, Amman, Jordan

Amb. (ret.) Ochieng Adala, Member,Pugwash Council; Senior Program Offi-cer, Africa Peace Forum (APFO), Nairobi,Kenya

Amb. Wa’el N. Al-Assad, Director, Disar-mament &Multilateral RelationsDepartment, League of Arab States,Cairo, Egypt

Dr. Adel Mohamed Ali, Lecturer inNuclear Law and Nuclear Non-Prolifera-tion, Nuclear Law and Nuclear Regula-tions Dept., National Center for NuclearSafety and Radiological Control, AtomicEnergy Authority of Egypt, Cairo

Mr. Mishal Al-Kuwari, Secretary to theAssistant Foreign Minister H.E. Mr.Mohamed Al-Rumaihi,Oatar

H.E. Mr. Mohammed Al-Rumaihi, Assis-tant Foreign Minister for Follow-upAffairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs,Doha,Qatar

Dr. Ibrahim Bahr Alolom, former Minis-ter of Oil, Baghdad, Iraq

Dr. Athem Alsabti, Professor of Physicsand Astronomy at the University of Lon-don Observatory / University CollegeLondon; International Relations Officerfor the Iraqi Academy of Science

Amb. Mohammad Hamid Ansari, Chair-person, National Commission forMinorities, New Delhi, India; Chairman,Working Group I of Prime Minister ofIndia’s Round Table on Jammu and Kash-mir

Prof. Gabriel Baramki, Consultant to thePalestinianMinistry of Higher Education,Ramallah; President, Palestinian Councilfor Justice and Peace

Mrs. Haifa’ Baramki, Freelance Consul-tant in Education &Management,Ramallah, Palestine; President of the

between food security and conflict, forexample by emphasizing that foodshould not be used for political coer-cion. However, in order to effectivelyraise awareness and identify emergingthreats, more expertise within Pug-wash is required as food security is arelatively new issue for the organiza-tion. Promoting access to the neces-sary technologies for developing coun-tries can help them mitigate food,health and water security risks.

Conclusion

Pugwash has a successful history ofmaking significant contributions onhuman security matters. A series ofworkshops organized by the SouthAfrica chapter of Pugwash hasbroadened understanding of HIV/AIDS across nationalities and disci-plines. The group’s work assisted aresearch investigation that showed nocorrelation between low seleniumintake and the occurrence of HIV/AIDS. In addition, the series hasspurred a new project, now under-way, to address gender issuesendemic to the spread of HIV/AIDS.Another successful Pugwash series onintervention and sovereigntyaddressed the responsibility of gov-ernments and the international com-munity to protect the human rights of



Cairo Conference Participants.

Participants continued

Information Systems & Computing,Brunel University, Uxbridge Middlesex,UK

Dr. Nihal Fahmy, Adjunct Professor,American University in Cairo, Egypt

H.E. Mr. Abdulla Fakhroo, MinisterPlen., Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Doha,Qatar

Mr. Mirwaiz Omar Farooq, Chair, AllParties Hurriet Conference (APHC), Sri-nagar, Jammu & Kashmir, India

Mrs. Maha Fattah-Hassan, Writer &Analyst, and Senior Columnist &Writer,Akhbar el Yom Newspapers, Cairo,Egypt; Member, Council on Foreign Rela-tions

Dr. Eric T. Ferguson, Secretary of Pug-washNetherlands; Consultant on Energyand Development, MacFergus bv, Zeist,Netherlands

Prof. John Finney, Professor of Physics,Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Univer-sity College London, UK

Prof. Bastiaan (Bas) de Gaay Fortman,Chair in Political Economy of HumanRights, Faculty of Law, Utrecht Univer-sity, Monsignor Willy Onclin Professor ofComparative Canon Law, Catholic Uni-versity Louvain, and Emeritus Professorof Political Economy, Institute of SocialStudies, The Hague, Netherlands, TheNetherlands

Prof. Georg Frerks, Professor of ConflictPrevention and Conflict Management,Centre for Conflict Studies, Utrecht Uni-versity, The Netherlands; Professor ofDisaster Studies, Wageningen University;Chairman, Pugwash Nederland

Ms. Claire Galez, Director, Centre forSouth Asian Studies (CSAS), Geneva,Switzerland; Research Associate, Centrefor Asian Studies (Geneva University—GIIS/GIDS)

Prof. Galia Golan-Gild PhD, Professor ofGovernment, Interdisciplinary Center(IDC), Herzliya, Israel; ProfessorEmerita, Department of Political Science,Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Pugwash Executive Committee; Professorof Mathematical Physics, University ofMilan, Italy

Dr. Parvin Dadandish, Researcher andLecturer, International Relations Univer-sity, Tehran, Iran

Ms. Merav Datan, Political Advisor,Mediterranean and Middle East, Green-peace International

Ms. Nicola Davies, Peace & Disarma-ment Campaign Coordinator, GreenpeaceInternational

Prof. Nola Dippenaar, Health Consultant(Health Insight), Pretoria, South Africa

Prof. Lynn Eden,Member, PugwashCouncil; Associate Director forResearch/Senior Research Scholar, Centerfor International Security and Coopera-tion (CISAC), Freeman Spogli Institutefor International Studies (FSI), StanfordUniversity, Stanford, California; USA,Co-Chair U.S. Pugwash Group

Prof. Hassan El- Hayawan, Professor ofBusiness Administration, Faculty of Com-merce, Ain- Shams University, Cairo,Egypt; Board Member, Pugwash Egypt;Director, Marketing and Business Devel-opment, IT Ventures

Amb. Abdel Raouf El-Reedy,Cairo,Egypt

Dr. Amany El-Taweel, Senior Expert, Al-Ahram, Cairo, Egypt

Prof. Wimal Epasinghe, Advisor to thePresident of Sri Lanka on ScientificAffairs, Colombo, Sri Lanka

Prof. Emeritus. Yair Evron, Tel-Aviv Uni-versity (TAU), Israel

Maj. General (Ret) Dr. Esmat Ezz, formerMember, Pugwash Council; retired Pro-fessor, Military Medical Academy, Cairo,Egypt; and formerly: Director, ScientificResearch Branch, Egyptian ArmedForces; Director, Technological Promo-tion System, Giza

Dr. Inas Ezz, Lecturer on InformationSystems & Computing, Sadat Academyfor Management Sciences, Cairo, Egypt;Visiting Research Fellow, Department of

YWCA Ramallah Branch; Chairperson ofthe Board of Trustees of PANORAMA(Palestinian Center for the Disseminationof Democracy & Community Develop-ment)

Dr. Kayhan Barzegar, Assistant Professorof International Relations, Islamic AzadUniversity (IAU), Science and ResearchCampus; Editor-in-chief, Journal of Lawand Politics; Senior Research Fellow,Center for Scientific Research and MiddleEast Strategic Studies, Tehran;

Mr. Omar BashirMohamed, NationalDirector, Somali Studies Center (SSC),Mogadishu, Somalia; and Team Leader,Center for Peacemaking and ConflictStudies, Somalia

Amb. Sergey Batsanov, Director, GenevaOffice of International Pugwash; Mem-ber, Pugwash CBW Steering Committee;Senior Consultant, Geneva Centre for theDemocratic Control of Armed Forces(DCAF)

Dr. Jeffrey Boutwell, Executive Director,Pugwash Conferences on Science andWorld Affairs, Washington, DC, USA;Member, Pugwash Council

Dr. Adele Buckley, Chair, Canadian Pug-wash Group; Vice President, Technology& Research, Ontario Centre for Environ-mental Technology Advancement(OCETA), Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Prof. Francesco Calogero, Member, Pug-wash Council; Professor of TheoreticalPhysics, University of Rome “LaSapienza”, Rome, Italy

Col. (ret.) Pierre Canonne, Member, Pug-wash Council [formerly: Senior Lecturer,Disarmament and Arms Control, Univ.Marne-la-Vallés/Paris, France

Dr. Thomas B. Cochran, Director,Nuclear Program, Natural ResourcesDefense Council (NRDC), Washington,DC, USA

Prof. Paolo Cotta-Ramusino, Secretary-General, Pugwash Conferences onScience and World Affairs; Member,




Dr. Ayman Khalil, Center for Research onArms Control and Security (CRACS),Amman, Jordan

Mr. Sardar Abdul Qayyum Khan,Supreme-Head of All Jammu and Kash-mir Muslim Conference; Ex-President/Prime Minister of Azad Jammuand Kashmir, Pakistan

Dr. Mustafa Kibaroglu, Associate Profes-sor (non-proliferation, arms control &disarmament matters), Bilkent University,International Relations Department,Bilkent, Ankara, Turkey

Kim Il-Bong, Secretary-General, KoreanNational Peace Committee (KNPC),Pyongyang City, DPR Korea

Prof. Yoshiko Kurita, Professor of MiddleEastern History, Department of History,Faculty of Letters, Chiba University,Japan

Dr. Emily Landau, The Jaffee Center forSecurity Studies, Tel Aviv, Israel

Dr. Francesco Lenci, National ResearchCouncil (CNR) Research Director, Pisa,Italy; President-Elect (2003-05) and,starting September 2005, President of theEuropean Society for Photobiology;Member (Elected), CNR General Scien-tific Council

Mr. Li Guofu, Senior Research Fellow,Director of Division for South Asia, Mid-dle East and African Studies, China Insti-tute of International Studies (CIIS), Bei-jing, China

Mr. Sverre Lodgaard, Director, Norwe-gian Institute of International Affairs(NUPI), Oslo,Norway

Mr. Sajad Gani Lone, Chairman, Jammu& Kashmir Peoples Conference, Srinagar,J&K

Prof. Saideh Lotfian, Member, PugwashCouncil; Associate Professor of PoliticalScience, and Associate Dean forResearch, Faculty of Law and PoliticalScience, University of Tehran, Iran

Dr. DmitryMakarov, Executive Director,International Center for Strategic andPolitical Studies, Moscow, Russia

Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan;Chairman of Mashal Books; independentdocumentary filmmaker for popularizingscience in Pakistan; activist for peace andsocial reform; Member of PermanentMonitoring Panel on Terrorism of theWorld Federation of Scientists

Mr. PaulHorsman, Peaceful EnergyCampaign Co-ordinator, RainbowWar-rior Middle East Project, GreenpeaceInternational, Amsterdam,Netherlands

Mr.HouHongyu, Chinese People’s Asso-ciation for Peace and Disarmament(CPAPD), Beijing, China

Ahmed Ibrahim, Hhead of Defense andSecurity Division in the African Union(AU)

Mr. Happymon Jacob, Lecturer, Depart-ment of Strategic & Regional Studies,University of Jammu, J&K, India

Dr. Rebecca E. Johnson, Executive Direc-tor, The Acronym Institute for Disarma-ment Diplomacy, London, UK

Mr. Jon Yong Jin, Korean National PeaceCommittee (KNPC), Pyongyang City,DPR Korea

Dr. Venance Journé, Researcher, NationalScientific Research Council (CNRS),Paris, France

Dr. Riad Kajwaji, Chief Executive Office,Institute for Near East & Gulf MilitaryAnalysis (INEGMA), Dubai, UAE

Gen. Jehangir Karamat, recently retiredAmbassador of Pakistan to the UnitedStates; Member Advisory Council, Insti-tute of Public Policy, BeaconhouseNational University; Member, Board ofGovernors, Islamabad Institute of PolicyResearch

Ms. Salome Katia, Executive Secretary,The Great Lakes Parliamentary Forum onPeace—AMANI Forum, Nairobi, Kenya;Organizing Secretary, Women Educa-tional Researchers of Kenya; Ph.D Candi-date, University of South Africa

Dr. Tadahiro Katsuta, Researcher, Gradu-ate Schools for Law and Politics, TheUniversity of Tokyo, Japan

Prof. Dr. rer. pol.Tim Guldimann, onleave from the Swiss Foreign Ministry,teaching at the University of Frankfurt,Germany, formerly: Swiss Ambassador inTehran (1999-2004); Head of the OSCEMission in Croatia, Ambassador 1(997-99); Head of the OSCE Assistance Groupin Chechnya, Ambassador (1996-97)

Amb. AhmedHaggag, Secretary Generalof Africa Society, Cairo, Egypt; NationalCoordinator of Capacity Building inHuman Rights (with the UNDP); Mem-ber: Egyptian National Council onHuman Rights, Institute of African Stud-ies, Cairo University, African GovernanceInstitute, Dakar, Senegal; Advisor to thePresident of the Union of African Jour-nalists

Prof. KarenHallberg, Member, PugwashCouncil; Professor of Physics, BalseiroInstitute, Bariloche, Argentina; ResearchFellow, National Council of Science andTechnology, Centro Atomico Bariloche

Dr. Tom BørsenHansen, External Lec-turer, Center for the Philosophy ofNature and Science Studies, University ofCopenhagen, Denmark; Member, Execu-tive Committee, International Networkof Engineers and Scientists for GlobalResponsibility (INES)

Dr. DavidHarries, Executive Director,Master of Arts Programme in Securityand Defence Management and Policy,Royal Military College of Canada,

Mrs. AnissaHassouna, Board Member &Treasurer, Egyptian Council for ForeignAffairs (ECFA), Cairo, Egypt; AssistantGeneral Manager, Misr Iran Develop-ment Bank; Treasurer, The Egyptian Pug-wash Society for Science and Interna-tional Affairs (under establishment)

Prof. RobertHinde, former Royal SocietyResearch Professor (now retired) [alsoformerly: Master, St. John’s College,Cambridge, UK; Hon. Director, MedicalResearch Council (MRC) Unit on theDevelopment & Integration of Behavior]

Prof. PervezHoodbhoy, Member, Pug-wash Council; Professor of NuclearPhysics, Department of Physics, Quaid-e-




Prof. Sergei Plekhanov, Associate Profes-sor, York University, Toronto, Ontario,Canada

Dr. Ron Pundak, Director-General, ThePeres Center for Peace, Tel Aviv, Israel

Prof. Ramamurti Rajaraman, EmeritusProfessor of Theoretical Physics, Schoolof Physical Sciences, Jawaharlal NehruUniversity, New Delhi, India

Mr. Ri Kang Jin, Korean National PeaceCommittee (KNPC), Pyongyang City,DPR Korea

Senator Douglas Roche, O.C., Member,Pugwash Council; Chairman, MiddlePowers Initiative; Author, Lecturer;Member of the Senate of Canada

Mr. Roger Roffey, Research Director,Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI),Stockholm; Member of the Board,Swedish Pugwash Group

Dr. ErzsébetN. Rózsa, Senior Researcher,Teleki Institute Center for Foreign PolicyStudies, Budapest,Hungary; Professor atthe Kodolányi János University College

Ms. Christine Rovner, Executive Direc-tor, Student Pugwash USA, Washington,DC

Ms. Nihal Saad, Senior Political Corre-spondent and Director of Political Pro-grams, Nile TV Int’l, Cairo, Egypt

Mr. Nasser Saghafi-Ameri, Senior Fellow,Foreign Policy and International Rela-tions Department (FPIRD), Center forStrategic Research, Tehran, Iran

Dr. Abdel Monem Said, Director, Al-Ahram Center for Political and StrategicStudies (ACPSS), Al-Ahram Foundation,Cairo, Egypt

Maj.-Gen. (ret.) Dr. Mohamed KadrySaid, Member, Pugwash Council; Head ofMilitary Studies Unit and TechnologyAdvisor, Al-Ahram Center for Politicaland Strategic Studies, Al-Ahram Founda-tion, Cairo, Egypt

Prof. Mostafa-Elwi Saif, Professor ofPolitical Science, Cairo University, Giza,Egypt

Hon. MehboobaMufti, Member of Par-liament and President, Jammu and Kash-mir Peoples Democratic Party

Prof. MarieMuller, Chair of the PugwashCouncil; Dean, Faculty of Humanities,University of Pretoria, South Africa

Prof. GiuseppeNardulli, Professor ofTheoretical Physics, University of Bari,Italy

Ms. CarolNaughton, CoordinatorWMD Awareness Programme (WMDAP), London, UK

Dr. GötzNeuneck, Physicist, and Mem-ber, Pugwash Council; Head of the“Interdisciplinary Research Group Disar-mament, Arms Control and New Tech-nologies”, Institute for Peace Researchand Security Policy (IFSH), Hamburg,Germany

Prof.Nguyen Van Dao, Chairman of theScientific & Training Council, VietnamNational University, Hanoi, Vietnam

Dr. AlexanderNikitin, Member, PugwashCouncil; Director, Center for Political andInternational Studies (CPIS), Moscow,Russia

Mr.NiuQiang, Secretary General, Chi-nese People’s Association for Peace andDisarmament (CPAPD), Beijing, China

Muhammad M. Parray, Chief Spokesper-son of the Pradesh Congress Committee,Jammu and Kashmir,

Prof. Ashok Parthasarathi, Professor,Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi,India; Member, Governing Board, TheSouth Centre, Geneva

Mr. Matthias Peitz, Political Officer,European Commission Delegation to theState of Israel [formerly: Project Officer,Bertelsmann Foundation

Dr Arthur Petersen, Senior Policy Analystand Director, Methodology &ModelingProgram, Netherlands EnvironmentalAssessment Agency (MNP), Bilthoven,The Netherlands

Prof. Alan Pisano, Dept. of Engineering,Boston University, Massachusetts, USA

Dr. RiadMalki, Director General,Panorama, The Palestinian Center for theDissemination of Democracy and Com-munity Development, Ramallah, WestBank, Palestine

Amb .MiguelMarin-Bosch, Director,Mexico’s Diplomatic Academy, MexicoD.F.; Member, Pugwash Council

Lt.-Gen. (ret.) TalatMasood, Indepen-dent Columnist, Commentator and Ana-lyst, Islamabad, Pakistan

Prof. JiriMatousek, Professor of Toxicol-ogy, Masaryk University Brno, Faculty ofScience, EU Research Centre of Excel-lence for Environmental Chemistry andEcotoxicology, Brno, Czech Republic

Prof. AmitabhMattoo, Vice Chancellor,University of Jammu, Jammu, J&K, India

Prof. Alan H.McGowan, Chair, Science,Technology and Society Program, EugeneLang College, New School University,New York, NY, USA; Chair (voluntaryposition), Student Pugwash USA

Acad. Jorma K.Miettinen, Academicianand Emeritus Professor of Radiochem-istry, University of Helsinki, Finland;Emeritus Professor of Military Science,Institute of Military Science; President,Finnish Pugwash Group

Dr. StevenMiller, Director, InternationalSecurity Program, Center for Science &International Affairs (CSIA), HarvardUniversity, Cambridge, Massachusetts,USA

Prof. Ramaranka AndersonMogotlane,Vice Rector/Deputy Vice Chancellor, Uni-versity of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

Prof. TimMorrison, Illinois Institute ofTechnology, Chicago, IL, USA

Amb. Abdel RahmanMoussa, Consul-tant to the Minister for InternationalCooperation, Cairo, Egypt

Dr. RobertMtonga, Public Medical Prac-titioner & Peace Activist, InternationalPhysicians for the Prevention of NuclearWar (IPPNW), Lusaka, Zambia




Dr. Walter Scheuer, now retired [for-merly: Senior Project Manager (1989-93),Invap S.E. (a government-owned,advanced technology company); SeniorResearcher/Head of Department (1953-1989), Argentine Atomic Energy Com-mission]

Amb. Renato Carlos Sersale di Cerisano,Ambassador of the Argentine Republic toSouth Africa; Non-resident Ambassadorto Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe andnon-resident Ambassador-designate toMalawi, Mauritius and Mozambique(since March 2006) [formerly: Director ofInternational Security, Nuclear and SpaceAffairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs]

Amb. Mohamed Shaker, Vice Chairman,Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs(ECFA), Cairo, Egypt

Dr. El Sayed Shalaby, former Ambassadorand currently Executive Director, Egypt-ian Council For Foreign Affairs (ECFA),Cairo, Egypt

Dr. Rifat Shannak, Amman, Jordan

Mr. Samir Shawa, Chairman, Alhani Cul-tural Foundation, Gaza City, Palestine

Mr. Henry Siegman, U.S./Middle EastProject, Inc., New York, NY, USA

Dr. Nirmal Singh, BJP Representative,Jammu

Prof. Ivo Slaus, Member, Pugwash Coun-cil; Director, World Academy for South-east Europe Division; President, CroatianPugwash

on Farmers, Govt. of India; Chairman,MS Swaminathan Research Foundation,Chennai

Dr. Giancarlo Tenaglia, voluntary StaffMember, Pugwash Conferences on Sci-ence and World Affairs, Rome, Italy;Member, Italian Pugwash Group [for-merly: Safety Engineer, Energy, Environ-ment, & Technological InnovationResearch Center (ENEA)]

Dr. Mahmoud Vaezi, Deputy of ForeignPolicy Research, Center for StrategicResearch, The Expediency Council,Tehran, Iran [formerly: Deputy Ministerof Foreign Affairs]

Prof. László Valki, Professor of Interna-tional Law, Eötvös University, Budapest,Hungary; Head, NATO Information andResearch Center at Eötvös University

Acad. Alexey Vasiliev, Russian Academyof Sciences (RAS) Corresponding Mem-ber; Director, Institute for African andArab Studies, RAS; Editor-in-chief, Asiaand Africa Todaymonthly magazine;Chief of foreign policy experts underChairman of Council of Federation (Sen-ate) of the Russian Parliament, Moscow

Mr. PéterWagner, Research Fellow,NATO Information and Research Centre,Budapest, Hungary; Editor-in-chief, Kül-Világ journal [formerly: Ministry of Inte-rior, Department for EU and NATOCoordination]

Prof. SiddiqWahid, Vice Chancellor,Islamic University, Kashmir; MaharajaGulab Singh Chair Professor, Universityof Jammu, Jammu, J&K State, India

Ms. Carin AtterlingWedar, Lector, Theo-logical Faculty, University of Gothenburg;Secretary-General, Swedish Initiative forPeace, Security and International Rela-tions (SIPSIR), Stockholm; Member,Swedish Pugwash Group

Dr. DetlevWolter, Vice-President of theFirst Committee of the UN GeneralAssembly; Political Counsellor, GermanMission to the UN, New York, NY

Prof. Fernando de Souza Barros, Mem-ber, Pugwash Council; Professor Emeri-tus, Physics Institute, Federal Universityof Rio de Janeiro, Brazil;

Baroness Charlotta Sparre, Counsellor,Swedish Permanent Representation to theEU, Belgium, Brussels

Dr. Mark Byung-Moon Suh(Germany/South Korea), Member, Pug-wash Council; Senior Researcher andKorea Coordinator, Free University ofBerlin, Germany; President, Korean Pug-wash Group

Dr. Olga Sukovic, Freelance Consultanton Security and Disarmament matters[formerly: Consultant, UN Departmentfor Disarmament Affairs, New York; Sci-entific Adviser, Institute of InternationalPolitics and Economics, Belgrade,Yugoslavia

H.E. Ambassador Takaya Suto, Director,Center for the Promotion of Disarma-ment and Non-Proliferation, Japan Insti-tute of International Affairs, Tokyo,Japan; Member, Japan-Arab DialogueForum

Dr. Tatsujiro Suzuki, Visiting Professor,Graduate School of Public Policy(GRASPP), The University of Tokyo;Senior Research Scientist, Socio-economicResearch Center, Central Research Insti-tute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI),Tokyo; Co-Founder, Peace Pledge, Japan

Prof. M.S. Swaminathan, President, Pug-wash Conferences on Science and WorldAffairs; Chairman, National Commission



Panel Discussion: Peace Process in Kashmir.

Ms. Abeer Yassin, Researcher, Al-AhramCenter for Political and Strategic Studies(ACPSS), Cairo, Egypt

Yu Kyong-Il, Secretary, Korean NationalPeace Committee (KNPC), PyongyangCity, DPR Korea

Dr. Nicholas Zarimpas (Greece), Interna-tional Atomic Energy Association(IAEA), Vienna, Austria

Amb. Bozorgmehr Ziaran, Delegation ofthe Islamic Republic of Iran to theOPCW, The Hague, The Netherlands, E-mail: [email protected]

Dr. Aharon Zohar, Senior Consultant onnational planning to the National Plan-ning Administration, and Head of theconstruction of 11 Bedouin new towns;Consultant, Regional and EnvironmentalPlanning, Carmei-Yosef, Israel

Dr. Bob van der Zwaan, Senior ScientificResearcher, Energy Research Center oftheNetherlands

I N T E R N A T I O N A L S T U D E N T /

Y O U N G P U G W A S H

Mr. Almotaz Abadi, Engineer and DeputyDirector, Palestinian Water Authority(PWA), Ramallah, West Bank, Palestine,MSc student, Birzeit University

Mr. Peter Bebawy, Cairo, Egypt

Mr. Adam John Breasley, InternationalNetwork for Bioethics, Culture and Dis-ability, Melbourne, Australia; alsoinvolved in Beyond Nuclear Initiative and3CR Community Radio, Melbourne

Mr. László Csicsmann, Hungary

Ms. Aleksandra Dzisiów-Szuszczykiewicz(M.A.), PhD student, Department of Iran-ian Studies, Warsaw University

Dr. Inas Ezz, Lecturer on InformationSystems & Computing, Sadat Academyfor Management Sciences, Cairo, Egypt;Visiting Research Fellow, Department ofInformation Systems & Computing,Brunel University, Uxbridge Middlesex,UK


Ms. WakanaMukai, Doctorate Student,University of Tokyo Graduate Schools forLaw and Politics, Japan

Ms. SalmaNagy, Egypt

Mr. ZoharNavot, Israel

Mr. Nagappan Parasuraman, AsianBoard Member, InternationalStudent/Young Pugwash, Chennai, India;Research Assistant, M.S. SwaminathanResearch Foundation, Chennai, India

Mr. Juan Pablo Pardo-Guerra,Researcher, El Colegio deMexico (PRO-CIENTEC); Chair of the ExecutiveBoard, International Student/Young Pug-wash

Dr. Joelien Pretorius, Lecturer, Depart-ment of Political Studies, University ofWestern Cape, Belville, South Africa

Mr. Noam Rahmim, Assistant to CEO,Institute for Counter-Terrorism, Tel-Aviv,Israel; TA assistant

Mr. Benjamin Rusek, Research Associate,Committee on International Security andArms Control (CISAC), National Acad-emy of Sciences, Washington, DC, USA

Ms. Sebnem Udum, Turkey

Ms. UlrikeWunderle, PhD student, Uni-versity of Tübingen, SFB “Kriegser-fahrungen”, Germany

Mr. Moeed Yusuf, Consultant, EconomicPolicy, Sustainable Development PolicyInstitute, Islamabad, Pakistan; Regularcolumnist (freelance), The Friday Times;Consultant, Asian Development Bank,Innovative Development Strategies, Pak-istan; Visiting Faculty, Quaid-e-AzamUniversity, Pakistan

S T A F F

Claudia Vaughn, Jean Egerton, SandyIonno Butcher

Dr. AntoinetteHildering, Title: Ph.D.,LL.M., Director, MeerKeuze/Multiple-Choice, Arnhem, The Netherlands

Mr. Karim Kadry, Sales & ContractsSupervisor, Egyptian Drilling Company,Cairo, Egypt; Head, Egyptian StudentYoung Pugwash

Mr. Hussein Karakra, Head of Reinsur-ance Dept., Trust International InsuranceCompany, Palestine

Mr. Rian Leith, Lecturer in History,Department of Historical and HeritageStudies, Faculty of the Humanities, Uni-versity of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa;Lecturer, Department of Journalism,Tshwane University of Technology; ISYPBoard member (African Representative)

Mr. Eli Lipetz, Recent Graduate, Univer-sity of Western Ontario, London,Ontario, Canada

Mr. KareemMadkour, DevelopmentEngineer, Mentor Graphics, Cairo, Egypt;Msc Student Ain Sham University Facultyof Engineering

Ms. KateMarvel, PhD Candidate, Dept.of Applied Mathematics and TheoreticalPhysics, Cambridge University, UK;Research Scholar, Trinity College Cam-bridge [formerly: Teaching Assistant andResearcher, African Institute for Mathe-matical Sciences; Researcher, SmootGroup, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory]

Dr. Irna van der Molen, Senior Lecturer,Dept. Technology and Sustainable Devel-opment (T&SD), University of Twente,Enschede, The Netherlands [formerly:Researcher / junior consultant, GeoplanInternational (April 1996- May 1997);Researcher IDEM Consult (November1993- April 1996)]

Miss Immaculate DadisoMotsi, AssistantJunior Lecturer, University of Pretoria,South Africa; Research Assistant, Centerfor International Political Studies (CIPS)

Ms. NermineMounir, Project Coordina-tor, Dreamers of Tomorrow, Cairo, Egypt



TheThird Regional Workshop“Towards the Solution ofEconomic Inequity and its

Social Consequences in Latin Amer-ica” was held in San Carlos de Bar-iloche, Argentina, fromMay 26 to28, 2006, within the framework of aPugwash Study Group. This work-shop continued the work begun atthe two previous workshops of thesame name, held in 2003 and 2004.It covered 7 sessions on the subjectslisted in Appendix I at the end of thisreport.Like the previous workshops, this

one was organized byGrupo Bar-iloche para Ciencia y AsuntosMundiales (Grupo BACyAM) andheld thanks to the generous supportof Pugwash Conferences on Scienceand World Affairs, and the followingbusinesses located in Bariloche: Cen-tro del Copiado, Hayland Travel,Aerolíneas Argentinas (Barilochebranch) and Aerolínea LANArgentina (Bariloche branch). More-over, the Subsecretary for Science,Technology and Development of theMinistry for Production of theProvince of Rio Negro has granted asubsidy at present in an advancedstage of implementation.The workshop was attended by

during WWII, that the Germanswould not be able to make an atomicbomb, he was the only scientist whodecided to quit the project based onmoral reasons. On that occasion hesaid: I knew a little bit more thanother people about what was goingon. So I knew that it would begin anarms race and that the hydrogenbomb would come in. And then, forthe first time I became worried aboutthe whole future of mankind.Since then his life was devoted to

raise awareness of the consequencesof scientific research and the socialimplications of technological devel-opments, especially the enormousrisk of nuclear weapons.Together with several of the most

prominent scientists of that time, in1955 he signed the Russell-EinsteinManifesto which was the foundingdocument of the Pugwash Confer-ences for Science and World Affairs.Its last paragraph reads: There liesbefore us, if we choose, continualprogress in happiness, knowledge,and wisdom. Shall we, instead,choose death, because we cannot for-get our quarrels? We appeal ashuman beings to human beings:remember your humanity, and forgetthe rest. If you can do so, the way liesopen to a new Paradise; if you can-not, there lies before you the risk ofuniversal death.Ever since the first Pugwash con-

ference held in 1957, Jo has been itsmoral and executive leader, which led

19 participants, including one Brazil-ian, one Chilean, one Spaniard withextensive experience in Latin Ameri-can affairs, one Peruvian, oneVenezuelan and 14 Argentines, allspecialists in different socio-economicand scientific-technological disci-plines. Appendix II at the end of thisreport provides a mini curriculumvitae for each of them.The meeting was held in memo-

riam of Joseph Rotblat, Nobel PeacePrize 1995 and co-founder of Pug-wash Conferences on Science andWorld Affairs, who died on August31, 2005. Like thousands of otherpeople around the world, the orga-nizers of this workshop feel that thename Joseph Rotblat is a synonym ofdignity, unlimited dedication to thecause of world peace, uncompromis-ing intellectual honesty, lucidity,modesty, leadership, and many otherqualities. In his memory, Karen Hall-berg, as member of the BACyAMGroup remarked:“We are holding this meeting in

memoriam of Sir Joseph Rotblat, oneof the founders of the Pugwash Con-ferences and a man of Science andPeace. Jo was born in Warsaw in1908 and died in London in 2005after a life fully committed to nucleardisarmament and the social responsi-bility of science.The crossroads in his life came up

while he was one of the physicistsworking on the Manhattan Project atLos Alamos (USA). When it was clear

ReportBy Darío D’Atri andWalter Scheuer



Third Pugwash Workshop on Socio-Economic Inequity in Latin AmericaIn Search of Equity with DevelopmentSan Carlos de Bariloche, Argentina, 26–27 May 2006

Bariloche meeting participants.

in many Latin American countriesbetween 2002 and 2006, along withmajor processesof economic growth. It aims,

rather, to offer a compendium of theinterpretations and proposals pre-sented by different participants withregard to the core of the debate: howto tackle the problem of inequity.Finally, a list of the suggested

solutions is given. These are recipeswhich, far from embodying a com-plete strategy for tackling inequity,aim to provide examples of possibleactions that could be taken by gov-ernments, political parties, NGOsand other social and institutionalorganizations.

1. The blame and the ills

The fact that the three discussionworkshops on socio-economicinequity in Latin America organizedbyGrupo BACyAM coincided his-torically with the downfall of theWashington Consensus and the neo-liberal policies applied in the regionduring the 1990s, focused the debates

First and Second Regional Work-shops, theGrupo BACyAM and thepapers discussed during the work-shop itself, as well as those con-tributed by people who were invitedbut unable to attend due to previouscommitments, may be viewed atwww.bacyam.com.ar.The Third Regional Pugwash

Workshop “Towards the Solution ofEconomic Inequity and its SocialConsequences in Latin America” washeld with one main objective: towork out a list of concrete proposalsto complement the previous stages ofdiagnosis of the economic, social andinstitutional situation in Latin Amer-ica (Regional Pugwash Workshops 1and 2, held in Bariloche), and to pro-vide viable, valid alternatives andpaths towards solutions, in the faceof the critical and daily worseningscenario of inequity and deficientincome distribution that permeatesthe region.The Final Report does not focus

too much on the discussions regard-ing the changes which have occurred

the Nobel Committee to award him,together with the Pugwash Confer-ences, the 1995 Nobel Peace Prize<for their efforts to diminish the partplayed by nuclear arms in interna-tional politics and, in the long run, toeliminate such arms>.We hold this workshop in his

memory with the conviction that theideal of a peaceful world can only beachieved if it is based on the principleof equity and justice for allhumankind.”Within the framework of the

workshop, the activities carried outfor the general public and followedby extensive debate were (i) a roundtable on “Prospects of political-eco-nomic models in Latin America, inthe face of the new center-left forcestaking power”, with the participationof Aldo Ferrer, Jorge Katz, BernardoKosacoff, Francisco Sagasti and Bei-nusz Szmukler and (ii) a meeting on“The new Latin American politicalmap as from the governments ofChávez, Kirchner, Lula andMorales”, with former congressmanMario Cafiero and Enrique VilaPlanes as speakers. The first of theseevents was attended by about 140people, and the second by about 90people.

Introduction

The following text presents anoverview of the issues dealt with dur-ing the workshop. The text does notreflect the personal opinions of theauthors, but simply presents theissues that were discussed, the differ-ent points of view expressed and theproposals made. However, the way itwas done and the final product arethe exclusive responsibility of theauthors. Further information aboutPugwash Conferences on Science andWorld Affairs, the Study Group, the





on the profound social and economicchange brought on during democratictimes by the consolidation of unbal-anced, unfair patterns of wealth dis-tribution.The categorical diagnosis that

was the outcome of the two previ-ously held workshops is alreadyknown: during the 1990s, in most ofthe countries of the region arose a sit-uation characterized by the failure ofthe ideal of “wealth trickling down”;too much confidence in the discipli-nary role of the market; slowergrowth, with fiscal crisis and increas-ing external deficit; a drop in produc-tive investment; weakening of theinnovation system (foreign outsourc-ing or elimination of the capacity forgenerating technology at various lev-els); funding cuts and privatization ofhealth and education; labour reformsthat weakened the relations betweencapital and work in favor of capital;dismantling of the State; consolida-tion of oligopolic economies; disin-vestment in infrastructure andnational financial systems at the ser-vice of the concentration of wealth.At the same time, the analysis car-

ried out during the discussions heldin Bariloche included a special pointof attention regarding the “institu-tional problem”, i.e. the political andjuridical framework in which it waspossible to consolidate “pro-marketreforms”, which currently, in somecountries of the region, are undergo-ing thorough modifications whereas,in most of them, partial modifica-tions which imply an intent by thegovernment to moderate the man-dates coming from the market arebeing implemented. In this regard itwas pointed out that that institu-tional framework, defined largely byprocesses which concentrate deci-sion-taking in the Executive Powers,

or even by direct, discretional controlof the Legislative and Judicial Pow-ers, is essential in explaining whyprocesses of concentration and socio-economic inequity which were for-merly unthinkable have developed insuch a short span of time, with mostof them becoming structural.The rapid concentration of

wealth, it was said, came hand inhand with the access to power duringthe 90s of governments that were eas-ily influenced by the doctrinessummed up by theWashington Con-sensus.However, for this to happen,there had to be changes in the histori-cal workings of the Latin Americandemocracies, with an imbalance ofpower in favor of the executiveorgans and the uncritical support ofthe Legislative and Judicial Powers,functional to the neo-liberal or neo-conservative reforms.Nevertheless, the participants in

the latest meeting in Bariloche madea clear distinction between the timeof the outcome of the nineties’ crisis,back in 2001 and 2002, and the cur-rent geopolitical situation in themajor Latin American countries.Most of them are undergoingambiguous political processes,although in most cases they include,with varying intensity, some attemptsto revert the main economic, juridicaland political lines that were consoli-dated during the nineties.One of the key issues debated was

the association between governabilityand viability and fiscal balance. Dur-ing the 90s, the loss of governabilitywas directly associated to the fiscalcrisis. In contrast, for the last 3 or 4years, the opposite has happened—there has been an increase in govern-ability along with the recovery ofeconomic command as a result of ahealthy fiscal situation.

Far from a clear optmistic view,but certainly not as pessimistically asreflected by the Final Report on theFirst Workshop (Bariloche 2003), theparticipants in the Third Workshopplaced most of the blame or responsi-bility on the governments of theregion, as to smoothing the trend ofblaming only theWashington Con-sensus and external conditioning forall the ills affecting Latin America.

2. New diagnosis—reservedand hopeful

As stated above, the debates in theframework of the Third PugwashRegional Workshop focused on pro-ducing a list of recommendationsthat could be observed by govern-ments and private institutions. Thislist arose from the prior analysis ofcurrent macroeconomic contexts ofthe Latin American economies.These economies show a clear trendtowards primary production, inaccordance with biased investments,which are low anyway, aimed at lim-iting Latin America to the role ofprovider of raw materials.During the analysis, when the

macroeconomic factors conditioninginequity were broken down, thegroup focused its attention onArgentina. This may have been partlydue to the fact that the meeting wasbeing held in Argentina, but the mainreason was Argentina’s sorry recordof increasing inequity since the mid-70s. It was pointed out that the dif-ference between the wealthiest 10%of the population and the poorest10% increased from 12 times in1974 to 47 times in 2001 and 31times in May 2006. It was stressedthat this figure—which is but one ofthe scores of indicators outlining thecomplex scenario risen as a conse-quence of the inequitable distribution



of wealth—is scandalous to anyexternal observer of social reality inLatin America. However, it wasstated that this is merely a sample ofthe immediate, direct consequencesof the mid-70s decision to abandonthe incipient “welfare state” modelsand replace them with economic andinstitutional formats characterized bythe State not taking charge of respon-sibilities, unrestricted trade liberaliza-tion and lack of long-term policiesfor economic growth accompaniedby equitable development.Moreover, it is not surprising that

participants felt the need to do some-thing about the huge black hole ofsocial injustice, consolidated from themid-70s, when each State, in its owntime and following different patterns,entered into a process of continuousdismantlement, leaving aside its rolein the economy, as well as its duty ofruling among sectors, and ignoringthe most basic forms of social sup-port and organization. Participantsconsequently included suggestionsfocusing explicitly on this issue.Now, five years after the begin-

ning of the end of the most contro-versial phase of theWashington Con-sensus, the professionals at themeeting in Bariloche found most ofthe main countries in Latin Americaand the Caribbean having populistcenter-left governments. To varyingdegrees, these governments seem tohave common axes in policies thatattempt to re-found the presence ofthe State by establishing criteria tomoderate or assuage the harshesteffects of the rule of market laws.Nevertheless, it was noted, theseattempts are usually permeated withauthoritarian decision-taking which,encouraged by the present fiscal cir-cumstances of plentiful funding, aimmore at consolidating clientelistic

political models, which tend to repeatpatterns of inequality and concentra-tion of power, rather than fightagainst them. In practice, it was said,governments like those of Brazil,Argentina or Venezuela, which usedvery different models for overcomingthe crisis and putting an end to theneo-liberalism of the 1990s, haveallocated a large part of the surplusresources to setting up programs ofsocial welfare for the millions ofinhabitants who live below thepoverty and indigence lines, but theyhave advanced very little in imple-menting strategies for the sustaineddevelopment of their economies.The Pugwash regional workshops

organized byGrupo BACyAM noteda situation that implies a substantialchange in the position of these gov-ernments compared to what hap-pened up to the seventies. The macro-economic balance promoted by theWashington Consensus as thephilosopher’s stone of the new econ-omy, but which is in fact a rule ofthumb in the oldest of economybooks, is a prior condition whicheven the most populist or leftwing ofcurrent governments no longer deny.Moreover, it was noted that fortu-

nately, there is currently an aware-ness of the existence of a centralproblem consisting in the inefficiencyof resource allocation. During the90s in Latin America, public expendi-ture rose by 40%, in spite of whichpoverty and inequality increased.This points to the overbearing needfor reform both of the State and ofcivil institutions, in order to enablemore efficient resource allocation.In addition, it was highlighted

that because it is not realistic to thinkof models for the wealth distributionwithout macroeconomic sustainabil-ity, Latin America should try to work

out the answer to whether or not itscomfortable macro situation is a bub-ble, and consequently, whether tokeep current surplus as anti-cyclicfunds, or to use it to generate morefair socio-economic conditions, orwhether to seek a reasonable balancebetween the two alternatives. In thisregard, it was pointed out that if overthe next three or four years, LatinAmerica does not take advantage ofits current greater power of negotia-tion and movement provided by itscomfortable macroeconomic situa-tion, it runs the risk of losing thechance to launch programs for tech-nological and scientific development,educational reform, tax reform, andreform of the relations with foreigninvestors.From a strategic standpoint, in

political terms, it was said thatgrowth is unsustainable without arapid process of redistributive invest-ment to attend to the urgent needs oflarge sectors of society that do nothave time to wait for processes ofeconomic growth to become consoli-dated. Social inclusion is a tool forsustaining development and growth.

3. A window of opportunities

Beyond a certain pessimistic visionissuing from the diagnosis regardingthe extent to which indicators ofsocio-economic inequity in LatinAmerica have worsened, the overalltone of the debates at the Third Pug-wash Regional Workshop was one ofexpectation, as a result of what itsparticipants called a “window ofopportunities” at which the regionstands.There are unprecedented situa-

tions of fiscal surplus due to increas-ing prices of raw materials, comple-mented by national contexts in whichlessons have been learnt from the



financial crises of the 90s regardingthe risks of economies being too opento financial capital and with a tooovervalued currency.At the same time, the current

prevalent social consensus in LatinAmerica, which rejects the negativesocial and economic changes causedby the sudden withdrawal of theState, creates a political atmospherethat encourages governors to takeincreasingly pragmatic decisions.This has a twofold consequence,which has both a positive and a nega-tive side. On the one hand, LatinAmerican governors seem to be moreindependent than they were 10 yearsago regarding the policies inspired byorders from the International Mone-tary Fund, for example. On the otherhand, decision-taking has becomemore markedly centered on the Exec-utive Powers, leaving aside consensusand the role of political opposition.The sum of these factors seems to

create a potential scenario for changeand transformation, even if itrequires starting up a process ofpolitical consensus, which is not oneof the strong points of many of thepopulist, center-left governments.At the same time, taken as a

whole, the governments in the regionare acting in response to urgent situa-tions, which seem to hide a danger-ous inclination to consider the cur-rent international economic boom asa permanent scenario. At the Bar-iloche meeting, a warning was issuedregarding the risks involved for LatinAmerica in the event of an abruptchange of these circumstances (highcommodity prices and interest ratesthat are still low), which could giverise to a crisis like the one thatoccurred in Latin America in 1982.From a structural standpoint,

most governments have not yetlearned to consider what might hap-pen in the long term. Although theyare aware of the changes that arebeginning to become consolidated inthe productive structures of theirnational economies, they do little ornothing to direct those transforma-tions towards sustainable growthwith equitable development.

4. Proposals for action againstinequity suggested at the ThirdPugwash Regional Workshop

In accordance with its agreed uponagenda, the debates at the ThirdWorkshop produced an extensive setof proposals regarding the economic,social, institutional, and juridicalprofile of Latin America. The sugges-tions are based on a realistic view ofthe possibility of putting them intopractice. Although some of them maysound as idealistic, they aim to gener-ate viable structural changes which,let us acknowledge, are only begin-ning to arise in the minds of idealists.The following is a summary of

those proposals:• To adopt a criterion of “macro-economy for equitable develop-ment”, in contrast to a “macro-economy for stability and forpaying the foreign debt”, as a start-ing point for developing socio-eco-nomic programs which, within aframe of sustainable macro bal-ance, aim at redistributing incomeand achieving social equity.• To re-establish the essential role ofthe State as coordinator of thismodel of social organization, asprovider of public goods and asregulator of fair, democratic laborand labor union relations, sincewithout a “coordinating State” thepreceding proposal is not feasible:allocating resources and determin-

ing priorities cannot be left in thehands of the market.• To implement the development ofsocio-economic programs within aframework of international inser-tion, giving priority to fair, inclusivelocal growth, and avoiding the useof internationally successful modelswithout first carefully adaptingthem to the range of local condi-tions.• To apply juridical principles ofequity and proportionality, particu-larly when implementing the neces-sary tax reforms, in order to makethe tax collecting systems more effi-cient and fairer. This should includeas a priority the introduction ofboth a tax on financial income anda system for controlling capitalmovement.• To drop the erroneous assumptionthat social and economic inequitycan be countered by means of poli-cies that promote a culture of assis-tentialism, since this type of policydegrades the dignity of the peopleand keeps them in a permanent“under age” situation in theirstanding as citizens. On the con-trarory, to generate policiesaddressed to extensively includepopular sectors of Latin Americansociety, enabling them to take activepart in designing programs, pro-jects, productive units and mecha-nisms aimed at helping them over-come their situations of socialexclusion.• To encourage governments to pro-mote processes for regional andinternational insertion, particularlyMercosur and the South AmericanUnion, based on conditions andstrategies to guarantee fair tradeamong countries, the supportand/or developing of programs forsustainable economic growth and



the care of the environment. In par-ticular, to priorize the developmentof internal potentials, whethernational or Latin American (aimingat “being self-sufficient”).• To speed up the elimination ofmechanisms that condition nationaland regional policies through inter-national financial organizationsand globalized business enterprises,as well as to prevent the appearanceor consolidation of new condition-ing factors related to patents, trade,technology transfer and others.• To denounce bilateral agreementsthat the USA wants different coun-tries in the region to sign as a short-cut due to the failure of FTAA,because these agreements workagainst the balanced developmentof the region and hinder or ulti-mately block the horizontal rela-tions between countries in theregion.• To allocate a large proportion ofthe greater resources obtainedthrough tax reform to financingequitable redistribution programs.These programs should considerchanging aberrant aspects of taxstructures and of costs of services,which both benefit members ofhigher and middle social levels, tothe disadvantage of the poorerones.• To recreate the role of the State togenerate conditions that promotedomestic savings, which, inArgentina, give rise to 90 % of cap-ital accumulation (compared to 10% generated from foreign invest-ments). This would enable credit tobe provided to SMEs and compa-nies that are unable to access pri-vate financing systems, includingcredit management at subsidizedrates for developing productiveunits.

• To set as targets for the economicprograms, models of internationalinsertion aiming at drasticallyincreasing exportations per inhabi-tant. This implies: to redesign pro-duction models; to establish valuechains; etc., and, in particular, toretrieve local cultural values inorder to increase the basis of theexporting potential of Latin Ameri-can nations; to introduce State poli-cies aiming at increasing the addedvalue of exports; and to improveand/or to develop public institu-tions appropriate for the establish-ment of a unified Latin Americanexporting system.• To create the conditions of systemiccompetitiveness to generate theframework for a growth strategy.• To promote the knowledge aboutthe root and logic of foreign debtsas a conditioning factor for LatinAmerican societies, because there isa vested interest in hiding thisknowledge from society.• To use the juridical aspects of theforeign debt as the most efficientpolitical tool for mobilization andstruggle in order to eliminate for-eign debt, which conditions socio-economic development in LatinAmerica.• To include the issue of foreign debtsas a subject at all public universitiesin the region.• To develop social plans to enableaccess to minimum packages of“meritorious goods and services”,which are a universal priority, suchas potable water, education, elec-tricity, justice, health, urban sanita-tion, safety and housing. Meritori-ous goods and services cannot bemanaged using market criteria ifthere is to be social equity.• To introduce in the debate on socialand economic inequity in Latin

America the situation of native peo-ples, both regarding the state ofexclusion they live in and becauseof the different viewpoints theyhave for tackling issues such as thatof social equity. In terms of sustain-able development, it is essential toappreciate the excelling standpointsthat most native peoples have forovercoming issues such as environ-mental disputes, thanks to their dif-ferent understanding of the use ofnatural resources, private property,cooperative work, etc.• To encourage greater compliancewith the division of powers, inorder to moderate extreme presi-dentialism by increasing the role ofthe Legislative and Judicial Powersand reducing the weight of emer-gency decrees or their equivalents.• To recognize that the verticalism ofthe Executive Powers in most ofLatin American countries, and thesubordination of the Legislativeand Judicial Powers, are causedmainly by the repetition, withintheir sphere of influence, of powerstructures intrinsic to the tradi-tional patterns of political parties.These traditional patterns shouldbe thoroughly improved by elimi-nating “blanket” ballots, redefiningthe way in which parties arefunded, introducing mechanismsfor effective citizen participation indefining each party’s governmentprogram, etc.• To devise measures to ensure thatjudges at every instance have, at thehighest level that can be demandedfor their position, appropriate qual-ifications, honesty, sensitiveness tosocial issues, knowledge about thesocio-economic, cultural and politi-cal situation of the area in whichthey act, as well as a strong, provenidentification with national legisla-

Appendix I: Agenda

Opening session:a. Evolution of the neo-conservativemodel: crisis of the “Consensus of Wash-ington”

b. Analysis and perspectives of economicmodels in view of the arrival to power ofcenter-left forces in Latin Americancountries.

First session:Comparative analysis of different econ-omy legislations being applied in devel-oped nations vs. those being applied inLatin America, including internationalregulations about commerce and patents.Particularly, effects on the scientific andtechnological fields.

Second session:Brief diagnosis—with emphasis in theidentification of specific factors, negativeand positive—regarding some questions ofsocio economic iniquities in Latin Amer-ica: present situation in areas of incomedistribution, unemployment and justice.

Third session:Concrete and viable proposals aimed atreverting the conditions described aboveregarding questions of socio economiciniquities in Latin American in areas ofincome distribution, unemployment andjustice.

Fourth session:Concrete and viable proposals geared tointroduce or modify in Latin Americancountries rules/proceedings/regulations toimprove the level of their institutions, par-ticularly the capabilities of their members,the fairness of their procedures and theefficiency in their functions.

Fifth session (a):Concrete and viable proposals of ways toenhance the adoption or improvement ofmeasures appropriate to reduce levels ofcorruption and political patronage inLatin America.

Fifth session (b):Concrete and viable proposals of ways toenhance in Latin America the develop-ment of transparent and well informedgrass-roots organizations and of commu-nication channels between citizens andgovernment.

able to gain access to the best uni-versities, which are public.• To make political, economic andsocial ruling elites realize that thereis a direct relationship betweenlocal scientific and technologicalknowledge and the socio-economicdevelopment of nations.• To rise to the status of State policy,all those policies aimed at promot-ing scientific and technologicalresearch in Latin American coun-tries, in order to prevent successivegovernments from changing them.In particular, to encourage largeinternational private companies totransfer their investments inresearch and development fromtheir headquarters to the LatinAmerican branches, in order to takeadvantage of the lower costs and atthe same time, encourage local sci-entific and technological growth.• To encourage the creation of techni-cal and university courses con-nected to productive processes,such as technical careers, engineer-ing and similar curricula.• To set up patronage schemes forscientific and technological devel-opment, similar to those alreadyexisting for cultural activities, basedon tax benefits for those who makecontributions.• To plan the creation and gradualdevelopment of an integrated LatinAmerican system for science, tech-nology and innovation in order to,without diminishing existing orfuture national systems, aim at ahigh quality level and graduallyeven out the scientific, technologi-cal and innovative capacitiesamong the countries in the region,initially focusing their activities ona few specific fields.

tion and international agreementson human rights.• To integrate the organs in charge ofselecting judges and the externalcontrol of the Judicial Power insuch a way as to prevent them frombeing dominated by political oreconomic power or by the judicialcorporation.• To set up a regional Latin Americanjudicial institution, perhaps as suc-cessor of the Inter-American Com-mission of Human Rights, in orderto enable a greater, speedier instru-mentation of justice.• To suppress the administrativeinstance in the Organization ofAmerican States for regional judi-cial procedures, in order to facili-tate and accelerate the access ofcases to the Inter-American Court.• To promote better quality in thecommunication generated by gov-ernments regarding the actions ofthe different powers, and to imple-ment measures to prevent themeans by which those actions aremade known from becoming aprize and punishment mechanismfor the media, according to theirpolitical and ideological profile.• To modify, in countries where itmight be necessary, property lawsgoverning the media, in order torevert and/or prevent media con-centration and the ultimate subor-dination of information in media inthe less developed regions.• To foster democratic access tomedia ownership (cooperatives,radio stations and other means ofcommunity communication, etc.).• To radically improve the quality ofhigh schools in Latin Americancountries, in order to break the cur-rent vicious circle, in which onlythe high classes who are able to payfor good private high schools are



Participants

tative methodology. Formerly: Consul-tant, World Bank, Institute of AppliedEconomic Inquiries (Brazil) and UNDP.Author of the book “Class Structure andSocial Mobility in Brazil” (2006) andarticles in academic journals and [email protected]

7 - D’Atri, Darío—Journalist; specializedin Argentine and international politicaland economic affairs. Managing editorand columnist, Editorial CIMECO, S.A.,the company owning newspapers LosAndes [Mendoza] and La Voz del Interior[Córdoba]. Managing editor, Rumbosmagazine, published in 19 newspapers ofthe Argentine provinces (350,000 copiesper week). Formerly: worked for La Van-guardia, Clarín andMercado, Argentina.(Member, BACyAMGroup)[email protected]

8 - Espeche Gil, Miguel Ángel—Jurist andcareer diplomat; expert in juridicalaspects of foreign debt. PhD in Law andSocial Sciences, Univ. of Buenos Aires.PhD in Law “cum laude”, PontificalCatholic Univ. of Río do Janeiro. PhD inLaw and Social Science and in Diplomacyand International Relations, Univ. of theOriental Republic Uruguay. Formerly:Ambassador to Bulgaria, Thailand,Switzerland and Liechtenstein. Member,Juridical Committee of OAS. NobelPeace Prize nominee [email protected]

9 - Ferrer, Aldo—Economist. Member,Board of Directors, Energía ArgentinaS.A. (ENARSA). Leading collaborator inthe development of “Plan Fénix”, analternative project for Argentine eco-nomic policies, School of Economic Sci-ence, Univ. of Buenos Aires. Formerly:Minister of Economy and of PublicWorks and Services; President, Bank ofthe Province of Buenos Aires [one of thethree main public banks of Argentina];President, National Atomic Energy Com-mission; top positions at other publicagencies. Participated in many nationaland international academic and consul-tancy activities. Author of many articlesand books. [email protected]

4 - Colomer Viadel, Antonio (Spain)—Lawyer; specialized in trade union affairsand advanced democratic participation.Head, Constitutional Law Area and thesubjects Constitutional Law, PoliticalStructures and Political Forms and PublicAdministration, Polytechnic University ofValencia. Director, Intercultural Institutefor Worker Self-management and Com-munal Action. Director, Institute of Ibero-America and the Mediterranean. Vicepresident, World Academy of Science,Technology, Education and Humanities.Other academic positions. Formerly:President, Spanish Council for Ibero-American Studies; Full Professor of Con-stitutional Law, Autonomous Universityof Madrid; Founder and Vice president,International Association of Constitu-tional Law (1984-1996). Author of manybooks and other [email protected]

5 - Contrafatto, Haydee Silvia—Lawyer;specialized in public law. Member, Judi-ciary Power of Neuquén Province.Author of Exposition of Motives onHabeas Data, Constitution of Río NegroProvince. Delegate, American Associationof Jurists, Annual Sessions on the LegalCondition of Women, United Nations, N.York. Author and lecturer on humanrights, information technology law, inter-national justice and reformulation of theJustice System, specifically criminal juris-diction. Formerly: Professor, School ofLaw and Social Science, ComahueNational University; technical positionsat major banks. (Member, BACyAMGroup) [email protected];[email protected]

6 - Costa Ribeiro, Carlos (Brazil)—Soci-ologist; specialized in social inequalityand social mobility in Latin America, par-ticularly in Brazil. Professor andresearcher, Postgraduate Program in Soci-ology and Political Science, Rio doJaneiro University Research Institute.Researcher, National Research Council.Extensive research in the field of socialstratification and mobility, wealth andincome inequality, transmission ofinequality through life cycles and quanti-

1 - Buch, Tomás—Chemist and technolo-gist. Consultant for a local advancedtechnology company. Writer on technol-ogy related social issues. Author of booksand other publications on this and othertopics. (Member, BACyAM Group andPugwash Conferences)[email protected];[email protected]

2 - Calvo, Cristina—Economist; special-ized in economic sociology, governanceand human development. Director, Inter-national and Institutional Area, CaritasArgentina. Full Member, AcademicCouncil, “Federal Forum of Teachers andResearchers in Social Economy and LocalDevelopment”, Ministries of SocialDevelopment and of Economy. Coordina-tor, Forum “Argentina: Country Strategywithin the Framework of Regional Inte-gration and the Globalized World”, Univ.of Buenos Aires and Embassy of Ger-many. Member, International Network ofExperts in Democratic Dialogue (UNDP).Coordinator, Latin American Network ofWomen, World Conference of Religionsfor Peace. Representative of Caritas Inter-national on subjects for human develop-ment, United Nations General Assembly.Professor, Univ. of Buenos [email protected]

3 - Campetella, Enzo—Journalist andmeteorologist; specialized in national pol-itics and economy and in environmentalforecasting. Correspondent in BuenosAires for printed and radio media in theArgentine provinces, particularly at theNational Congress, serving as analyst ofArgentine political en socio-economicaffairs within the framework of interna-tional context. Environmental forecasterfor printed and radio media in the Argen-tine provinces and for companies in dif-ferent fields, particularly agricultural.Formerly: weather forecaster for theArgentine National Meteorological Ser-vice; member of research team on envi-ronmental features specific to fruit pro-duction in Alto Valle del Río [email protected]



International Association of DemocraticJurists. Consultant, Center for the Inde-pendence of Judges and Lawyers, Interna-tional Commission of Jurists. Member,other institutions in the juridical field.Lawyer for human rights causes for 40years. Judge and prosecutor. Formerly:Full Professor, Univ. of Buenos Aires;President, National Magistracy. Partici-pated in many national and internationalacademic activities. Author of articles ontopics of his [email protected]

18 - Vanoli, Alejandro—Economist.Member, Fénix Plan Group. Full Profes-sor of International Finance and Associ-ate Professor of International Economics,School of Economic Science, Univ. ofBuenos Aires. Full Professor of ArgentineEconomic Policy,National Univ. ofTucumán and of International Finances,School of Law, Univ. of Buenos Aires.Advisor, Board of Directors, ArgentineCentral Bank. Formerly: various technicalpositions (National Securities Commis-sion, Argentine Central Bank and Min-istry of Economy), in connection withpublic debt negotiation and developmentof the financial system; different teachingpositions at Univ. of Bs. Aires. Author ofbooks and various other [email protected]

19 - Vila Planes, Enrique (Venezuela)—Architect and Licentiate in Education.Official, Planning and Development Min-istry, Venezuela. Design and implementa-tion of projects on social inclusion/exclu-sion, equity and policies for political,social, economic and environmental sus-tainability. (Planning School ofVenezuela, Latin American School ofMedicine, Squares of Popular Parliament,etc.) Formerly: Full Professor, CentralUniversity of Venezuela; Development ofeducational and political projects inCanada, USA, Mexico and other coun-tries. [email protected]

___________________

—Other members of the BACyAMGroup who took part in the discussionswere: Octavio Gorraiz (psychologist),Karen Hallberg (physicist) and WalterScheuer (physicist).

tute; Member, Board of Directors,National Atomic Energy Commission;Vice president, National Commission forUniversity Assessment and Accreditation.Extensive experience in higher education.Author of many papers on research inphysics and on higher education. Holderof many academic distinctions.aló[email protected]

14 - Lozada, Martín—Criminal judge;specialized in international criminal jus-tice, human rights and privatization ofpublic security. Member, American Soci-ety of Jurists. (Member, BACyAMGroupand Pugwash Conferences)[email protected]

15 - Lozada, Salvador—Former judge.President, Argentine Institute for Eco-nomic Development. Founder and Hon-orary President, International Associationof Constitutional Rights. Formerly: Pro-fessor, Univ. of Buenos Aires, ousted bythe military dictatorship in May 1976.Specialist in foreign debt and humanrights. Author of books and other articleson these and related topics. (Member,BACyAMGroup)[email protected]

16 - Sagasti, Francisco (Peru)—Industrialengineer and PhD in Science of SocialSystems. President,National/Interna-tional FORO, an organization geared tothe promotion of discussions and consen-sus on matters critical for national andinternational development. Head, Pro-gram Agenda: Peru, National/Interna-tional FORO. Visiting Professor, Univ.for Peace, Costa Rica. Member, ExecutiveCouncil, International Center of Researchfor Development, Canada. Formerly:Consultant, Council of Ministers; Mem-ber, National Council of Science an Tech-nology; Professor at several universities;important positions at the UnitedNations, World Bank, University of Penn-sylvania; consultant for public institu-tions, private companies and NGOs.Author of many books; member, board ofeditors of various [email protected]

17 - Szmukler, Beinusz—Jurist. Consul-tant, National Magistracy. President,Continental Consultative Council, Ameri-can Society of Jurists. General Secretary,

10 - Guerrero, Sandra—ElementarySchool Teacher. Town Councilor in SanCarlos de Bariloche (2003–07). HumanRights Secretary, Union of Judicial Work-ers of Rio Negro Province (SITRAJUR)[email protected];[email protected]

11 - Katz, Jorge (Chile/Argentina)—Economist; specialized in industrial poli-cies. Full Professor of Economic Develop-ment, Univ. of Chile and Univ. of Bs.Aires. Formerly: Director, EconomicDevelopment Division, Economic Com-mission for Latin America and theCaribbean [CEPAL], Santiago, Chile; Vis-iting Professor, Yale Univ. and SussexUniv.; 1996 Konex Award for EconomicDevelopment. [email protected]

12 - Kosacoff, Bernardo—Economist;specialized in industrial policies. Head,Bs. Aires Office, Economic Commissionfor Latin America and the Caribbean[CEPAL]. Full Professor of IndustrialOrganization, Univ. of Buenos Aires andof Economic Policy, National Univ. ofQuilmes. Formerly: head researcher,Management Strategies and Competitive-ness Area, CEPAL; President, Institute forEconomic and Social Development; Visit-ing Professor, St. Anthony´s College,Oxford; top positions at government andinternational agencies and foreign univer-sities (Ministry of Economy, Inter-Ameri-can Development Bank, German Institutefor Development, Volkswagen Founda-tion, etc.). Author of books and articleson industrial and technological develop-ment, company performance, productivestructure and international [email protected]

13- López Dávalos, Arturo—Physicist.Researcher, National Atomic EnergyCommission. Principal Researcher,National Council for Scientific and Tech-nical Research. Full Professor, BalseiroInstitute. Visiting Professor, national andforeign universities. Senior AssociateMember, International Centre for Theo-retical Physics, Trieste. Member, NationalAcademy of Exact, Physical and NaturalScience. Consultant, Ministry of Educa-tion. Executive President, José A. BalseiroFoundation. Formerly: Director, Bar-iloche Atomic Center and Balseiro Insti-



Introduction

Developments in the field ofcurrent conflict, terrorismand the war on terror,

threats emanating fromenvironmental and other hazards,and changes in current policypractice, have put the ‘classical’ risksarising from armament and weaponsof mass destruction into a largerframework of human security andhuman development. This StudyGroup meeting, organised withfinancial support of the DutchMinistry of Foreign Affairs,addressed contemporary threats tohuman security and explored theirimplications for the agenda ofPugwash.The issue of non-traditional

threats has been on the Pugwashagenda for a number of years, but itwas felt that a further impetus wasneeded, especially at the presentjuncture, where global attempts todeal with those issues seem to bestagnating. The reason for this is thatjust as during the Cold War,imaginative attempts to resolve theissues at stake often seem to become‘frozen’ and sidelined by dominantdiscourses and an intransigence toconsider alternative solutions.Pugwash Netherlands as the

solutions. This often is combinedwith an increasingly intolerantposition towards criticisms andalternative views. Discourse andpower are in effect closely related,and define how we are allowed toperceive and talk about theseproblems.Therefore, not only the scientific

debate about particular substantivearguments per sematters, but also,and even more so, how issues,approaches and solutions are framedand discourses about them aredisseminated and take root.

Goal and approach

The Study Group aimed for anexchange of existing and newapproaches, of mainstream andcritical views, and of established andopposing discourses to reach more

organiser of the Study GroupMeeting saw this happening forseveral of the new securitychallenges, too. Whether we talkabout the war on terror, climatechange, environmental pollution orbackgrounds to intrastate conflicts,there is a marked tendency to reducethe issues to simple and often rigidexplanatory schemes in terms of‘black-and-white’ or ‘us-versus-them’. When policy measures aredevised on such a basis, they tend toexacerbate problems rather thancontribute to their solution.Frequently, deeper insights on theproblems are available, but politicalpowers with the backing ofassociated hegemonic discourses donot wish and do not attempt toengage with available alternativeapproaches to reach more effective

Report byGeorg Frerks,Chairman Pugwash Netherlands

Pugwash Study Group ‘New Challenges to Human Security’Wageningen, The Netherlands, 16-18 June 2006



Pakistani earthquake refugees. (UN PHOTO: EVAN SCHNEIDER)

presentations covering the nexus ofcontemporary conflict and humansecurity and the issue ofsustainability. The second sessiondiscussed regional and thematicapproaches to the problems coveringSouth-Asia, West-Africa, Russia andthe Middle East. The third sessiontouched upon meta-narratives asprovided in the current debates onglobalisation and the ‘sacred realm’.The fourth session moved to the levelof policies and practices, focusing onissues of planning, and the role ofgovernance and science. The lastsession outlined some conclusionsand the way forward. The workshopfeatured 15 substantive paperpresentations and there werepossibilities for debate and discussionduring and after each session.

Substantive issues andconclusions

The study group considered that theshift in attention from state to humansecurity was a significant trend thatimplied a broadening of the notion ofsecurity to include, among others,political, environmental, anddevelopment concerns. Yet, at thesame time state and human securitywere not to be seen as opposingcategories, as they were linked inseveral ways. Problems in onedomain unavoidably affected theother domain. Poverty, environmentand development were, for example,cross-cutting themes that connectedhuman with state security. Moreover,all of those issues were subject tovaried and alternative discourses.Hence, understanding these issuesnecessitated at the same time a deeperknowledge of these related discoursesand of the way they had becomeprominent or hegemonic and wereoperating in everyday political reality.

ISYP Yearbook 2006 / ISYP Journalon Science and World Affairs, Vol. 2,of November 2006. Nine participantsof the ISYP pre-workshop alsoparticipated in the subsequentPugwash Study Group that furtherincluded Pugwash members and otherexperts from the Netherlands andabroad. A total of 26 participantsfrom eleven countries took part in theStudy Group’s deliberations,including prof. M.S. Swaminathan,President Pugwash Conferences onScience and World Affairs and thePugwash Council’s Chair, Prof. MarieMuller (South-Africa).

Programme

The Study Group was opened byProf. M.S. Swaminathan, whoelaborated on a number of majorcontemporary challenges. TheChairman of Pugwash Netherlands,Prof. Georg Frerks, explained therationale and background of theStudy Group. The first session wasdevoted to the problem setting with

effective solutions to the problemsfacing humanity at present. TheStudy Group comprised both senior,authoritative scholars and young,promising students and professionalsto address these new challenges tohuman security. PugwashNetherlands deemed it cruciallyimportant to involve a youngergeneration of scholars to presenttheir informed perspectives.In order to facilitate this, a pre-

workshop was organised byInternational Student/ YoungPugwash (ISYP) from 14 till 16 June2006 to raise awareness and stimulatedebate among ISYP members aboutthe socio-economic, environmental,political, and policy determinants ofcomplex political emergencies. TheISYP pre-workshop was attended by21 participants from eleven differentcountries. Seven senior experts in thefield of conflict and peace studies gavelectures or moderated sessions duringthis workshop. A report on the ISYPpre-workshop was published in the



Hussein Karakra, Joanna Sprackett, Sonika Gupta, Adam Breasley,and Nagappan Parasuraman.

HIV/AIDS and sustainable develop-ment. Case studies underlined thepower and importance of bothhegemonic and alternative discoursesand showed how these were created,reproduced and/or deconstructed bya variety of actors and mechanisms.In the field of science, attention

was paid to the interplay betweenknowledge and values, the need tobridge global science and localexperience, and expert and non-expert views. The limits of sciencewere described as anti-reflexive andautistic scientism, little room foruncertainty, error or ‘evil’, and theprevailing hostility, contempt andderision of the ‘sacred space’.However, also counter-currents weredescribed in terms of doctrinalreligion, craft and personalexperience, humanistic learning andlived experiences. Science had to faceseveral challenges, includinguncertainty and incorporating values(moving from stories via scenarios tomodels and vice versa), issues ofspatial, functional and temporalinterdependence and dealing withextreme effects, and finally the wish

initiative to the powers-that-be.However, a critical and politicallyinformed discourse was needed torelate properly to these policies.In addition, the involvement ofdevelopment practitioners and civilsociety was essential in providing agrounded response.The analysis of the prevailing

multiple discourses was needed in thereligious, political, moral, legal andscientific domains discussed duringthe sessions. It was recognised thatdiscourses play a powerful role inthe present constellation. In all thosedifferent domains participantsdistinguished the existence ofhegemonic and alternative,heterodox discourses. It was, forexample, argued, how the notionsof a secular state and the issue ofsovereignty were re-appraised atpresent, as a definite trend toward areligious resurgence and anassociated societal de-secularisationwas discernable. The discoursesanalysed during the conferencecovered a variety of issues such as therole of Islam, fundamentalism andreligion in society at large, terrorism,

Governance issues were intimatelylinked to the possibility of pursuingpractical solutions for the problemsdiscussed. As they comprised aproblématique on their own, theyneeded to be subjected to specific anddetailed analysis.The notion of global terrorism

and the associated war on terrorneeded, according to the study groupparticipants, to be deconstructed, asthe general usage of those notions isnot only misplaced, but alsomisleading and dangerous, as severalcase studies discussed during theconference showed. It was argued thedominant ‘war on terror’ discoursefocused solely on problems of lawand order and was symptomaticrather than diagnostic. To combatterrorism effectively, an investigationinto grievances, political exclusionand socio-economic inequalities wasrequired. Such initiatives needed tomove beyond state security only, andbe based on the values of ‘voice’ anddemocracy, and on appropriate andculturally adapted conflict resolutionmechanisms. With regard to theMiddle-East, more attention wasneeded on the region’s uniquepolitical, economic, cultural andreligious characteristics on the onehand, combined with a criticalanalysis of the international system’spolicies in dealing with those regionalissues on the other.Dealing with the contemporary

challenges necessitated, according tothe participants, the adoption ofintegrated policies based on a fine-grained analysis of the conflict-development nexus. The emergenceof integrated and comprehensiveinternational policies represented anirreversible trend, and a ‘rejectionist’position thereof was deemedunhelpful and would leave the



Water and human security, Sudan. (UN PHOTO: FRED NOY)

Participants

Dr. Gerald Barney, Chair, Our Task, Inc.,Arlington, VA [formerly: President, Mil-lennium Institute, Washington, DC], USA

Dr. Kayhan Barzegar, Assistant ProfessorInternational Relations, Islamic AzadUniversity, Tehran, Iran

Prof. Frank Biermann, Professor of Politi-cal Science and of Environmental PolicySciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam,The Netherlands

Ms. Bénédicte Borel, Political Analyst &PhD Student, Institute 4S, Brussels, Bel-gium & Political Sciences University,Clermont-Ferrand, France

Dr. Tom Børsen Hansen, Lecturer Philos-ophy of Science and Ethics, University ofCopenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Mr. Adam Breasley (Australia), ForeignExpert Teacher & Columnist, Beijing-USA College of English & National Chi-nese Consumer Rights Protection Maga-zine, Beijing, China

Prof. Bas de Gaay Fortman, Professor ofPolitical Economy of Human Rights,Utrecht University, The Netherlands

Mr. Rens de Man, PhD Student,Wageningen University, Wageningen, TheNetherlands

Prof. Bert de Vries, Professor of GlobalChange and Energy, Utrecht University &Senior Policy Adviser, Netherlands Envi-ronmental Assessment Agency, Bilthoven,The Netherlands

Mr. Pyt Douma, Independent Consultant,The Hague [formerly: Netherlands Insti-tute of International Relations], TheNetherlands

Dr. Eric Ferguson, Secretary of PugwashNetherlands; Consultant on Energy andDevelopment, MacFergus bv, Zeist [for-merly: Senior Scientist, Philips Research;Liaison Scientist to IIASA], The Nether-lands

Prof. Georg Frerks, Professor of ConflictPrevention and Conflict Management,Centre for Conflict Studies, Utrecht Uni-versity & Professor of Disaster Studies,

allocation. Also, in the field ofcontemporary conflict a number ofparticularly helpful approaches andguidelines were outlined.Overall the Study Group

concluded that the issue of broad-based human security deservedcontinuing attention in academic,policy and practical debates. Thedebate was clearly linked to highlyrelevant and broader internationalconceptual and policy developments.A human security perspective wasalso needed to counteract morecoercive and often ill-definedmilitarised approaches anddiscourses to deal with presentsecurity challenges. It wasrecommended that Pugwash as arespected civil society organisationcontinues to debate human securityissues and perhaps could even take amore leading role in these discussionsin the future.On the basis of the presentations

and discussions at the Study Group abook entitled ‘Human Security andInternational Insecurity’, edited byGeorg Frerks and Berma KleinGoldewijk has been published byWageningen Academic Publishers.See for more information:www.WageningenAcademic.com/humansecurity.

to bridge the divide between thenatural and social sciences.A central issue in all debates in

the Study Group was coined as thelink between problématique andrésolutique, or how to move fromunderstanding to action. Theproblématique was described ascomplex with several factorsmutually interfering. It was alsocharacterised as multidisciplinary,border-crossing, dynamic andtransformative. These factorsrequired a particular approach tosolutions such as an orientation onthe future, living-with-uncertainty,the adoption of precautionaryprinciples, change management,public-private partnerships and theneed to “think globally and actlocally”. The raison d’ état, theraison du marché, and the raison de l’humanité were identified asalternative markers for future action.An intensive discussion was devotedto the required overall governancearchitecture needed to deal with whatwas termed the sustainabilitytransition. Based on a combination ofearth system analysis and governanceresearch, critical elements identifiedincluded an adaptive state, but alsoagency beyond the state, addressingissues of accountability and



Paul Rademaker, Kayhan Barzegar, Marie Muller, and Berma Klein Goldewijk.


Dr. Elena Suvorova, Program Head, CivilSociety and Human Rights & AssistantProfessor, International Federation forPeace and Conciliation &Moscow StateUniversity, Moscow, Russia

Prof. M.S. Swaminathan, Chairman,National Commission on Farmers, Govt.of India; President, Pugwash Conferenceson Science and World Affairs, Chairman,MS Swaminathan Research Foundation,Chennai, India

Dr. Irna van der Molen, Lecturer Tech-nology and Development, University ofTwente, The Netherlands

Prof. Paul van Seters, Professor of Glob-alization and Sustainable Development &Executive Director, Globus, Tilburg Uni-versity, Tilburg, The Netherlands

Amb. Bozorgmehr Ziaran, Ambassadorof the Islamic Republic of Iran to theNetherlands & the OPCW, The Hague,The Netherlands

Prof. MarieMuller, Chair of the PugwashCouncil; Dean, Faculty of Humanities,University of Pretoria, South Africa; [for-merly: (Founding) Chair, Pugwash SouthAfrica Group; Director, Centre for Inter-national Political Studies, University ofPretoria; Council Member, Academy ofScience of South Africa], South Africa

Dr. Arthur Petersen, Programme Director,Methodology and Modelling Programme,Netherlands Environmental AssessmentAgency, Bilthoven, The Netherlands

Prof. Paul Rademaker, Chair, Club ofRome Netherlands, The Netherlands

Dr. Jerry Ravetz, Associate Fellow, JamesMartin Institute for Science and Civiliza-tion, Oxford University, UK

Prof. Paul Richards, Professor of Tech-nology & Agrarian Development,Wageningen University, Wageningen, TheNetherlands

Wageningen University; Chairman, Pug-wash Nederland [formerly: Senior PolicyAdvisor, Dutch Ministry of ForeignAffairs; Head, Conflict Research Unit,Netherlands Institute of InternationalRelations], The Netherlands

Dr. Sonika Gupta, Post-doctoral FellowInternational Strategic & Security StudiesProgram, National Institute of AdvancedStudies, Bangalore, India

Dr. AntoinetteHildering, Consultant,MeerKeuze/MultipleChoice, Arnhem,The Netherlands

Dr. Berma Klein Goldewijk, Director,Cedar International, Centre for Dignityand Rights & Vice-chair PugwashNetherlands, The Netherlands

Mr. Rian Leith, History Teacher, [for-merly: Research Assistant, InternationalRelations and History, University of Pre-toria], South Africa




25th Workshop of the Pugwash Study Group on theImplementation of the Chemical and Biological Weapons Conventions:Towards a Successful Outcome for the Sixth Review Conference

Geneva, Switzerland, 18–19 November 2006

ReportBy Catherine Jefferson

of America (USA). This report is thesole responsibility of its author, whowas asked to prepare a brief accountof the proceedings of the meeting inconsultation with the SteeringCommittee. It does not necessarilyreflect a consensus of the workshopas a whole, nor of the Study Group.The workshop was strictly governedby the Chatham House Rule, soreference to specific speakers is notdetailed here.

I Chemical WeaponsConvention; Progress inImplementation

The first presentation examined theprogress of the CWC in the contextof its approaching 10th anniversarysince it entered into force in 1997.However, it was argued that this isnot simply an occasion forcelebration but also an important

occasion for conveying the imageof a mature organisation that isadvancing well compared to otherWMD regimes, and for initiatingdiscussions about future activities,involving both diplomats andacademics. Several key issues werefocused on as particular challengesfor the future of the CWC.

The Destruction of ChemicalWeapons: It has become clear thatthe ten-year destruction periodenvisaged in the CWC is inadequatefor both Russia and the USA. It hasalso been suggested that the USA willfail to meet the proposed extended2012 deadline. Given this situation,modalities need to be agreed uponand options for extension should bediscussed at the Eleventh Session ofthe Conference of State Parties to theCWC, being held 5-8th December,2006.

Compliance Concerns: A furtherchallenge for the CWC is the concernthat some CWC member states maynot have declared all relevant CWfacilities or may subsequently fail tomeet the extended destructiondeadline. The mechanism of theOPCW Executive Council is pro-posed as the best approach to dealingwith compliance concerns rather thana bilateral confrontational approach.

‘Nonlethal’ incapacitants: Thedevelopment of ‘nonlethal’ incapaci-tating chemicals, which is of growinginterest for counterterrorism opera-

This workshop was hosted bythe Association Suisse dePugwash in association with

GIPRI, the Geneva InternationalPeace Research Institute, using thegrant provided by the Swiss FederalAuthorities.The workshop took place on the

eve of the BWC Sixth ReviewConference and was attended bysixty-one participants, all by invita-tion and in their personal capacities,from a number of countries includingAustralia, Belgium, Czech Republic,France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan,Pakistan, Russian Federation,Sweden, Switzerland, the UnitedKingdom (UK) and the United States

United Nations building, Geneva, Switzerland


tions, is a major challenge for theCWC. While such developments, ifintended for “Law enforcementincluding domestic riot controlpurposes” (CWC Art II.9.d) are notprohibited, the development, pro-duction and use of such chemicals formilitary or paramilitary purposescomes under the prohibition of theConvention. Despite attempts bysome states parties to address thisissue in the First Review Conference,it has largely been neglected. Thetopic has been considered too sensi-tive to broach at OPCWmeetings,but solutions must be approached inforthcoming reviews.It was suggested that the Second

Review Conference, scheduled forApril 2008, would be a good oppor-tunity for the states parties to theCWC and the OPCW to addressthese and other challenges.The next presentation examined

the status and problems of implemen-tation of the CWC. It argued thatwhile, in terms of universality, therewere a relatively high number of statesparties to the CWC, some of thosestates not party to the conventionwere important exceptions in termsof their possible CW capabilities.It was noted that, currently, one

of the most important activities in theimplementation of the CWC is CWdestruction. It was reiterated that theoriginally scheduled ten-year destruc-tion period has proven to be insuffi-cient and, while the ongoing destruc-tion process has accelerated, it wassuggested that even the extended timeschedule is unlikely to be met by bothRussia and the USA.Recommendations of the OPCW

Scientific Advisory Board werediscussed, including mechanisms foramending schedules, instruments forsubmitting data on novel agents and

measures for providing cover againstunscheduled and new toxic com-pounds. The need for verification ofthe chemical industry and inspectionswas also stressed.Finally, it was noted that the

problems of scientific and techno-logical developments are expected toattract attention at the Second ReviewConference.

II The Sixth ReviewConference—Achieving asuccessful outcome

This agenda item opened with anauthoritative presentation on pros-pects for the Sixth Review Conference.The presentation focused on theexpected outcome report of the SixthReview Conference and proposals forfuture intersessional meetings.

Outcome Report of theSixth Review Conference

The Sixth Review Conference isexpected to produce an outcomedocument, on the basis, inter alia, ofthe article-by-article review. It wasemphasised that this documentshould be:

• Concise and accessible. Theimportance of communicating theoutcome to the media, the scientificcommunity, industry and thegeneral public was noted in orderto ensure shared effort and sharedresponsibility across governments,commerce and civil society.

• A reaffirmation of the norms andthe core elements of the Convention.It was noted that it would be usefulto recall the understanding that theConvention applies to all relevantscientific and technologicaldevelopments and prohibits the useof BW.

• A statement of deliberations andagreements. It was suggested that

these topics would either fall underparticular articles of the Conven-tion or under ‘cross-cutting’categories. It was noted that theinclusion of cross-cutting issues wasnot intended to duplicate featuresof the articles but to examine whatissues needed more work, such asCBMs, implementation supportand the intersessional process.

Future Intersessional Meetings

It was noted that the BWC is a‘weaker relative’ of the CWC andNPT, having only 155 state partiesand no permanent structure orverification protocol. It was arguedthat a robust review process wastherefore more important, and thatan intersessional program of workwould help to compensate theseweaknesses. It was suggested that theSixth Review Conference shouldestablish guidelines and set schedulesfor future intersessional meetings.Possible topics for the inter-

sessional meetings were suggested,including:

• Confidence-building measures(CBMs)

• New scientific and technologicaldevelopments relevant to theConvention

• Scientific and technologicalcooperation and exchanges

• Bioterrorism

• Compliance and verification

• Coordination with otherorganisations and activities

• Education

Moving onto the workshop’smain agenda topic of the BWC SixthReview Conference, this section wasdivided into the following keycategories:


The Outcome of the PreparatoryCommittee—Article by ArticleReview

This session began by highlightingthe fact that the Sixth ReviewConference provided the firstopportunity for a comprehensivereview of the BWC since the FourthReview Conference in 1996. It wasstressed that this was an opportunityto both reaffirm the norm againstBW and to strengthen theeffectiveness of the Convention byagreeing appropriate measures.In light of the developments of

the 2003-2005 intersessionalmeetings and the UNSCR1540, itwas suggested that the Sixth ReviewConference should endorse andincorporate some of the substance ofthe language used. For example, itwas argued that since the outcomesof the various annual Meetings ofState Parties relate to various Articlesof the Convention, the considerationof relevant articles during the ReviewConference’s Article by Article reviewcould endorse and include theconclusions reached at the annualmeetings in the Final Declaration ofthe Review Conference. It was alsoargued that the language relating tooutreach and implementation in theeighth operative paragraph ofUNSCR1540 could be usefullyincorporated in the FinalDeclaration.

The Intersessional Meetings 2003 to2005—Effective action to be taken?

This section examined theIntersessional meetings of 2003 to2005 with a focus on plans for thefuture. It was argued that a ‘plan ofaction’ or program is necessary inorder to improve universality andnational implementation. The need toimprove mechanisms for confidence

building measures was alsoaddressed.It was argued that a flexible

approach should be taken toprograms and agendas for futureintersessional meetings. Somepossible themes were suggested asfollows:

• Consultation and transparency. Itwas suggested that the Article Vconsultation mechanism should bedeveloped to include a clarificationmechanism in case of potentialinconsistencies in CBM returns. Itwas also suggested that furtherconsideration should be given tocodes of conduct for scientists andthe possibility of developingguidelines establishing nationaloversight authorities.

• Assistance and Cooperation. It wassuggested that information shouldbe exchanged on potentialpreparedness and assistancemeasures; biosecurity and biosafetymeasures; measures for detectingillicit trade; and measures forpreventing proliferation, includingredirecting former weaponsscientists.

• Programs/plans for nationalimplementation and universality.The development ofprograms/plans for achievinguniversal membership of the BWCand for promoting nationalimplementation was suggested.

• Measures for alleged use. It wassuggested that technicalrequirements for the establishmentof an appropriate procedure forinvestigation into suspiciousoutbreaks or alleged use should beconsidered.

• Advisory panels. It was suggestedthat criteria and functions for a

scientific advisory committee forthe BWC could be developed, withthe annual task of reviewing scienceand technology relevant to theBWC.

It was stressed that the BWCshould ensure that a mechanism isput in place that allows BWC stateparties to meet annually to discussand address these themes.

Key Elements of theSixth Review Conference

Overview of the GovernanceRegime: This section began with apresentation providing an overviewof the governance regime for bio-logical and chemical weapons. It wasargued that the norm against the useof disease weapons, which underpinsthis regime, was facing a number ofchallenges such as the perception ofnew utility for CBW and theproliferation of CBW relevanttechnology.In order to address these

challenges it was argued that, firstly,the norm should not be weakened byfragmenting the taboo against diseaseweapons. Furthermore, to strengthenthe norm, it was suggested thatresponsibility for the norm should beentrenched in the bureaucracy ofstates, highlighting the importance ofnational implementation measures. Itwas also argued that machinery forbetter enforcement of the normshould be in place. Sanctions atindividual, not simply state levels,were suggested, including codes ofconduct for scientists and proposalsfor criminalisation under inter-national criminal law.On the issue of criminalisation,

the objection was raised that thejurisdiction of individuals wasencompassed by the BWC andUNSCR1540. It was argued,





however, that this was not sufficientbecause:

• Technical problems exist, such ascourts’ lack of jurisdiction on non-nationals.

• Definitional problems exist, such aslack of harmonisation betweenstates.

• Moral prohibition would be higherunder international criminal law.

• No mechanism exists foraddressing actions of state officialsor members of the armed forces.

Advances in Science andTechnology: The next presentationexplored the ‘dual use’ character ofdevelopments in science andtechnology. It was noted that thepositive, beneficial aspects of theseadvances should be stressed, notsimply their potential for misuse, andit was argued that the threat shouldnot be exaggerated.Advances in genomics, creating

and manipulating microorganisms,immune system manipulation andcombinatorial chemistry—and thechallenges these advances could poseto the BWC—were the key areasexplored.In highlighting the potential for

misuse, it was recommended that theStates Parties of the Sixth ReviewConference should:

• Reaffirm Article 1, ensuring that itcovers all new developments.

• Consider a mechanism for morefrequent reviews of advances inscience and technology.

• Seek measures to raise awarenessamong life scientists of the dual-usenature of their research. Licensingand greater project leaderresponsibility was one suggestion.

National Implementation: Thefirst presentation in this sectionaddressed biosecurity strategies anddemonstrated that differentparadigms exist within the USA,where a security model has beenadopted, and in Germany, where abiosafety regulatory model has beenadopted. While the USA has atargeted list of pathogens and toxinsthat could be used as weapons,German regulation has framed therisk of bioterrorism in public healthterms as a subset of the broaderchallenge of infectious disease.It was argued that these differing

paradigms also translate to theregulation of the publication of dual-use research. In the USA, under theBush administration, the NationalScience Advisory Board forBiosecurity (NSABB) was establishedas a mechanism for reviewingsecurity-sensitive dual-use scienceresearch and suggesting possiblerestrictions on publication. Such anapproach has been rejected inGermany, however, where a strongbelief exists that scientific knowledge

should remain free and unrestricted.In order to achieve middle ground

in the approach to biosecuritybetween, on the one hand inGermany, an almost institutionalisedcomplacency to the threat and, on theother hand in the USA, over-awareness to the point of hysteria, itwas suggested that a system of self-governance in which the dual-usepotential of research is assessed bypeer-review at the pre-funding stagecould be implemented. Furthermore,it was suggested that awareness ofdual-use possibilities needs to beraised and that implementationsupport should be encouraged toassist other states parties in preparingand implementing domesticbiosecurity measures.Another paper presented in this

section examined the importance ofnational implementation with respectto compliance. It was noted that inthe absence of a verificationmechanism within the BWC, nationalimplementation was the onlyinstrument for compliance. Severalissues were raised:

• Standards, guidelines and models ofkey points for nationalimplementation should be agreedupon.

• The BWC should work morecollaboratively with certain IGOsto, for example, produce models oncriminalizing certain activities and

Lake Geneva.

to provide for authority, licensing,national inspection, investigationand training.

• The issue of necessary nationalmeasures should be highlighted inaccordance with the language ofUNSCR1540.

• The issue of nationalimplementation, access andtransmitting information should beaddressed in the intersessionalprocess.

• More synergy between assistanceproviders and IGOs should beencouraged.

• Evaluation, adoption andimplementation depends uponunderstanding so awareness-raisingand training must be increased.

Education and Outreach: Thenext presentation focused on theissues of education and outreach. Itwas argued that academics involvedin CBW arms control and lifescientists existed in ‘parallel worlds’.The importance of education andoutreach in regard to the prohibitionsof the Convention was emphasised.In order to improve education andoutreach in the life sciences, it wasstressed that action, not simplydiscussion, was necessary.In order to investigate the

problem of education and outreach,25 interactive seminars wereconducted with life scientists in theUK, followed by a series ofcomparative seminars in otherEuropean countries and in the US. Itwas found that there was a generallack of awareness of the prohibitionsof the BWC and the possible dual-useimplications of life science research.While these seminars were found tobe an effective means of raisingawareness, they were not an efficient

long-term method. However, theseminars did demonstrate that it waspossible to engage life scientists inBW-related issues and helped toformulate further possiblemechanisms for engaging lifescientists with the use of educationalmodules, including the use of multi-media webcasts and role-playexercises that could be used as part ofa regular course for life scientists.It was argued that in depth

implementation of the BWC withinstates parties would require asignificant effort on education andoutreach in order for implementationto be effective and that concertedaction—not simply a reaffirmation ofthe importance of education—wasnecessary.

Codes of Conduct: The nextpresentation addressed the issue ofCodes of Conduct for scientists. Ithighlighted the need for awarenessraising of BWC issues (such asinternational obligations, relateddomestic laws and regulations, dual-use research and possible inadvertentassistance to BW-proliferation) andfor facilitating a culture ofresponsibility in the scientificcommunity.It was suggested that Codes of

Conduct comprise a series ofcomplementary and mutuallyreinforcing ‘layers’, including:

• Guiding principles (a universalcode, such as the Hippocratic Oath)

• Scientific society codes (codes ofethics/conduct)

• Institutional or workplace codes(codes of conduct/practice)

It was argued that BW codes ofconduct should be incorporated intothis existing structure rather thanbeing developed as an entirely

separate set. Possible approaches torelating BW codes to the teaching ofbiological sciences were suggested,including:

• Teaching BW issues at first yearundergraduate level as part of ascientist responsibility/ethicscourse.

• A refreshers course at the beginningof a postgraduate program.

• Short courses offered byacademia/societies and governmentoutreach to workplaces.

The need to make scientists awareof their domestic and internationallegal obligations was emphasised.Furthermore, the need forinternational cooperation wasstressed in order to implementeffective regulation in all states toavoid the possibility of creating ‘safehaven’ states or territories.

International Legal Restraints:This session examined theimportance of international legalrestraints on the use of BW through acase study of the 1932-1945 Japanesebiological warfare program. It wasargued that this case represented afailure to restrain BW, not simplybecause customary law wasinsufficient to prevent the Japaneseuse of BW, but also because the1946-1948 International MilitaryTribunal of the Far East (IMTFE) inTokyo failed to establish animportant legal precedent byidentifying biological warfareprograms and the use of suchweapons as war crimes.Since the IMTFE, with Richard

Nixon’s 1969 renunciation of BWand the entry into force of the BWC,it was argued that the norms againstBW have strengthened. However, itwas argued that the failure of the





IMTFE has left the current regimewith a deficit of legal restraints. Thelack of a treaty criminalizingviolations of the BWC and CWC isone such deficit and it has hinderedthe universal recognition of suchcrimes and legitimate means ofdealing with them.It was noted that, as

biotechnology continues to advanceat such a rate, the need for a legalframework to prevent its hostileexploitation and to bring thecriminals involved to justice becomesevermore pressing. It was argued thatinternational measures to strengthenadherence to the BWC werenecessary to challenge the BW threat.

CBMs and TransparencyMeasures: This presentationexamined confidence buildingmeasures (CBMs) andrecommendations for improvements.The presentation began by notingthat CBMs are the only transparencybuilding mechanism of the BWCagreed by all states parties. However,it was noted that CBMs had donelittle to increase transparency sincetheir inception 19 years ago and fewstates parties had consistentlyparticipated, while many of thosethat had participated sporadicallyhad provided inadequate informa-tion. Several recommendations forimproving participation andeffectiveness of CBMs were made atthe level of both process and analysis:

• Simplification of forms andremoval of ambiguity.

• Focus on only the most relevantinformation, covering onlymaximum containment facilities.

• Digitalisation of distribution andsubmission of forms.

• Encouragement of translations in

multiple languages.

• Construction of annualparticipation lists to illustratewhich countries have participated.

• Comparison of CBMs with opensource data to assess accuracy andcompleteness of CBM submissions.

• Use of confidence-buildingactivities, such as informaldiscussion platforms or on-siteCBM validation visits.

• Creation of a Permanent Secretariatunit for the BWC.

• Provision of assistance withcompletion of CBM data.

• Awareness raising through the useof workshops, etc.

It was argued that CBMs were animportant issue for the Sixth ReviewConference and that theintersessional process would providea useful forum for further discussionand action towards implementationto improve the effectiveness ofCBMs.

Biodefence Industry: The nextpresentation examined the emergingbiodefence industry through aninvestigation of the scale and kinds ofbiodefence projects that are beingawarded to US-based private firms. Itwas suggested that, while the largeinvestment focused on biodefencewas evidently taking place in privatefirms, it was unclear whether thisrepresented the emergence of asustainable industry or whether itwas more symptomatic of small,money-burning biotech firms findingalternative, short-term sources offunding.

International Cooperation andDevelopment: The first presentationin this session examined theemergence of non-state actors and

the changing nature of internationaldiplomacy, and how this hasimpacted the global governanceframework for biosecurity.It was noted that during the

Intersessional Process of 2003-2003,meetings were attended byinternational organisations such asthe WHO, FAO, OIE, UNESCO andthe OECD. Furthermore, theIntersessional Process fostered greaterinclusion more generally in terms ofthe involvement of officials fromministries (such as health andenvironment) and agencies (such ashealth and safety and lawenforcement), breaking with thetraditionally limited and insularparticipation to BWC meetings.It was noted that while increased

involvement did not necessarilyequate with increased participation, ashift had occurred away from thetraditional ‘national security’approach towards a more inclusive,multistakeholder agenda, appropriateto the challenges posed by advancesin the life sciences. It was argued thatthis shift would only be significant ifit was maintained, but optimism wasexpressed over the inclusive approachbeing adopted for the Sixth ReviewConference.The next presentation in this

section examined biosecurityguidance issues for valuablebiological materials (VBM). It wasstressed that the concept of securityencompassed war, terrorism andpublic health, and that a diversity ofinternational organisations play arole in public health issues, includingWHO, FAO, OIE, etc.It was argued that biosecurity

issues went beyond problems ofdeliberate misuse of dangerouspathogens and included safety issues

in the laboratory environment. It wasnoted that the bioscience communitywas not uniformly accustomed tosecurity issues and that no globalmechanism existed for the control ofcertain biological material. In thisrespect, it was argued that nationalimplementation measures werecrucial in improving protection,control and accountability for VBM.It was noted that awareness

raising was a major issue, but it wasalso noted that many laboratorieslacked the resources or an adequateinfrastructure to deal with thebiosecurity challenge. This was seenas a particular problem in developingcountries. The following standardswere suggested:

• Consensus standards

• Protection from theft

• Transfer/export mechanism

• Record of facilities

• Uniform procedure for threat/riskassessments

Universality: The nextpresentation examined the problemof universalisation of the BWC.While 155 states are party to theConvention, it was observed that 40states had still yet to sign and ratify.The principle reasons for this aresummarised below:

• Ignorance of the treaty’s existence.It was observed that nointernational organisation existedto undertake outreach activities.

• No acute BW-related threatperceptions. However, it wasobserved that concerns existed overthe cross-border spread of disease,import/export control,transhipment issues, and the nexusbetween criminal networks andterrorism.

• Limited resources. It was noted thatsome countries might be of smallsize in terms of territory andpopulation, thereby having smallbureaucracies and limitedresources. Furthermore, policypriorities may lie elsewhere.

• Lack of fundamental knowledgeabout key issues. It was noted thatthe technical and scientificunderstanding of issues involvedmight be limited since many statesnot party to the BWC had nodeveloped base in the life sciencesand limited knowledge ofbiotechnology activity undertakenby foreign companies on theirterritory.

• No stakeholdership. It was notedthat BW prohibition was often leftoff the agenda and that ministriesoften had difficulty in expanding toencompass BW issues.

• Civil society. It was noted that thereis a general lack of knowledgeregarding BW issues in civil societyand that concerns primarily restelsewhere.

• Wariness. It was noted thatpressure by larger states to join theBWC meets with a degree ofwariness by smaller states as aconsequence of similar movesrelating to other security issues.

• Lack of sense of ownership. It wasnoted that lack of resources orsupport to participate in relevantmeetings and therefore be a part ofthe security community created alack of ownership.

It was argued that awarenessraising, capacity building andoutreach activities were essentialrequirements to supportuniversalisation.

Withdrawal. The presentation inthis section examined the issue ofwithdrawal from the BWC. It wasargued that the need to discouragewithdrawal from the convention isessential if universality is to beaccomplished, and the followingmeasures were proposed:

• Withdrawal from the Conventionshould not be cost-free.

• Three months notice should bedemanded in advance ofwithdrawal as per Article XVI.

• A deliberate narrowing of whenwithdrawal is permissible should bemade.

• New procedures for withdrawalshould be considered. Particularly,the withdrawal clause within theConvention should be re-examined—it was noted thatsignalling the possibility ofwithdrawal and building thepossibility into the treaty was ofquestionable logic if universality isto be achieved.

• Article XVI, paragraph 3, should bere-emphasised to remind states thatthey are still bound by relevantrules even if they withdraw.

Future Work

The workshop concluded withremarks that the limiting factor in allcases of possible BW use is intent. Itwas suggested that this would be animportant topic to investigate in afuture workshop. Issues of whatfactors encourage and what factorsdeter BW use could be explored.Future work would also depend to anextent, it was generally agreed, on theoutcome of the Sixth BWC ReviewConference, the results of whichPugwash should study carefully assoon as might be possible.




Introduction: An Open Nerve

Inmany villages in the Netherlands, but rarely in thecities, people refrain from noisy operations on Sun-days, such as cutting their grass or blowing away

autumnal leaves. At stake is “Sunday serenity”, to berespected by everyone, through the ages. The noise ofchurch bells is accepted, however, practically during thewhole day, as distinct churches have different times atwhich they call believers to their services. What we touchupon here are peaceful practices relating to the sacredrealm, a space only partly subject to publiclaw and order. The term is used by, amongothers, city architects: aside from the privaterealm of houses and offices and the publicrealm of roads, parks and squares, there isalso a sacred realm of mosques, churches,temples, monuments and graveyards. In thesetting of the present study on new chal-lenges to human security the term will beused particularly in a figurative sense, as afield of orientation and focus, an area ofbeliefs, feelings, and emotions but also ofrituals, symbols and words.Already half a century ago there was a

feeling that the sacred realm would disappear before long.As Wright Mills put it rather bluntly:“Once the world was filled with the sacred—in

thought, practice, and institutional form. After the Refor-mation and the Renaissance, the forces of modernisationswept across the globe and secularisation, a corollary his-torical process, loosened the dominance of the sacred. Indue course, the sacred shall disappear altogether except,possibly, in the private realm” (Wright Mills 1959: 32-34,as quoted in Norris and Inglehart 2004: 3).While the trend towards secularisation continues in the

West, this does not apply to the world as a whole. In theirstudy Sacred and SecularNorris and Inglehart conclude:

”1. The publics of virtually all advanced industrialsocieties have been moving toward more secular ori-entations during the past fifty years. Nevertheless,2. The world as a whole now has more people withtraditional religious views than ever before –and theyconstitute a growing proportion of the world’s popu-lation” (2004: 5).

Clearly, all those believers do not accept a confinementof words and practices based on their religious viewspurely to the private realm. Far from vanished, the sacred

realm now dominates the international newsalmost daily. Gravely, it has become an areafull of sparks that tend to set fire throughoutthe world’s tinder. Yet, for ‘secularists’ theview that the sacred realm was just to evapo-rate into the private realm has assumed nor-mative proportions: as something that justought to happen. The cartoon drawings ofthe Prophet Mohamed that set off massdemonstrations all over the world in the firstmonths of 2006 are a case in point. Notably,these did not emerge from autonomous artis-tic desires to express contemporary views onthe founder of Islam but instead they consti-

tuted responses to a Danish newspaper editor’s explicitinvitation to draw such cartoons. Once published in Den-mark a full process of ‘mediatization’ followed, with anawkward aftermath. In a first stage it was just DanishMuslims who consulted their teachers in Arab countries oforigin. Next, it became a full media-hype in which the car-toons were brought to public attention in all sorts ofplaces where people might be easily incited. We live,indeed, in a ‘symbolic society’ in which spreading informa-tion through newspapers, (summarised) reports and oralaccounts has been largely replaced by electronic dissemi-nation through symbols, images and words transmitted onthe internet by websites with instant video and audiotapes

ISLAM AND THE WESTThe Sacred Realm: Domain of New Threats and Challenges

PROFESSOR BAS DE GAAY FORTMAN

From the 56th Pugwash Conference, Cairo, Egypt

S P E C I A L R E P O R T

Bas de Gaay Fortman

(Elchardus 2002). Although as a result of processes ofindividualisation in principle more autonomous than everbefore, the individual has actually become an easy prey tomedia manipulation. Public anxiety, culminating in massdemonstrations, can be quite easily mobilised today, andthis certainly applies to ‘religious’ violence. Illustrative ofthe irrationality at the roots of such violence are sometotally unreasonable expressions of protest against the car-toons. In Pakistan, for example, Christian schools andhospitals were attacked, whereas both global and localChristian leaders had fully condemned the cartoons. Onaverage ninety percent of students and patients in themolested institutions were Muslim.Instances of folly abound. In the Netherlands a cabinet

minister pointed to the consequences of democracy as anarithmetic method of political decision-making, implyingthat with an Islamist majority of two thirds the constitu-tion could be changed in order to introduce Shar’ia law.Subsequently parliament devoted a full afternoon to a dis-cussion of ways and means to block Shar’ia in the low-lands. (Notably, of the seven percent current Muslim MPs

none advocates such a move.) When Pope Benedict quoteda 14th century Byzantine emperor’s derogatory remark onProphet Mohamed’s assumed legacy in respect of hostilityand violence, before giving him an opportunity to clarifyand express his regret, mass demonstrations against himwere held all over the world, not habitually very peaceful,while in Mogadishu a catholic nun was assassinated. Is it,indeed, an almost complete silliness that is getting ourworld in its grip? What we are witnessing today may atleast be called an open nerve. The sacred realm hasbecome an extremely shaky space.As an organisation tuned to peace, Pugwash cannot

ignore the new threat to global security embodied in thesacred realm as a heavily contested space. But scholarsrelate a great deal more easily to processes of modernisa-tion and secularisation than to senseless violence inresponse to what people perceive as attacks that hit theminside their sacred realm. Yet, at this juncture we are con-fronted with such a serious challenge that attempts to gaininsight into causes and possible policy responses may wellbe seen as urgent. This chapter attempts to stimulate sucha venture.

Conventional Inter-religious Violence

“Good people will do good things …”, the physicist andNobel laureate Stephen Weinberg once said in a dialoguewith other scientists on religion, “… and bad people willdo bad things. But for good people to do bad things—thattakes religion” (Dyson 2006: 6). Although the historicalbackground to this statement is clear enough –just think ofthe religious wars in Europe to which the Peace of West-phalia (1648) constituted a positive response—it needs atleast an amendment: for good people to do bad things—that takes unholy alliances between religion and politics.One might see the still unpacified civil war between Tamilsand Singhalese in Sri Lanka as an example here. Institu-tionalised Buddhism—the Sangha—has been heavilyinvolved in the provocation of collective intra-state vio-lence. Yet, that religion to which by far the majority of thepopulation adheres, is not only known for its peacefulcharacter, it even embraces tolerance and non-violence asprimary religious principles (Pereira 2000). How then toexplain the involvement of Buddhist activism in that col-lective violence?In response to this query one should first take note of

the many ages of peaceful coexistence between BuddhistSinghalese and Hindu Tamils. Hence, those who describethe war as religious or ethnic or a combination of these,


Islam and the West

Saladin Citadel, Cairo.


Islam and the West

are faced with a major interpretative problem: how toexplain all those centuries of inter-religious and interethnicpeace? Apparently, all that time religion functioned if notas a peace-promoting force than at least as a non-instiga-tor of sectarian violence. Secondly, the question is how inthe 1980s religion got involved. Undeniably, the spark offpoint was when young Buddhist monks got mixed up inextremist nationalist politics. Accordingly, it was not reli-gion as such but its link with politics that drove people todo bad things.There are, moreover, a number of other factors that

have to be considered in order to understand the contextin which collective intra-state violence erupted in SriLanka. Decidedly significant among these are, for exam-ple, the economic factor, expressed in a lack of job oppor-tunities for educated youth, among both the Tamil and theSinghalese population, and the political-juridical factor,related to processes through which the Tamil populationlost all confidence in the state as protector of people’s per-sonal security.In other instances of religious division linked to collec-

tive violence such as the civil war between Catholic Croatsand Orthodox Serbs, the story is not essentially different.Although religion does play its part in terms of a potentialto mobilize resources on the basis of collective identity,such wars cannot be satisfactorily explained as just ‘reli-gious conflicts’. Undeniably, religious identity figures as anincreasingly significant part of modern identity politicsand ways in which contending identities generate markersand signposts to distinguish them from other identities.Generally, identity politics is informed by collective memo-ries of injustice or shared experiences of prosecution orfear of those groups that they perceive as a challenge to away of life, heritage and set of values and beliefs unique tothem. Religious identity is also boosted by similar fears,although originally it draws its edifice from the practicedand non-practiced values of a community of believers.Similarly, religious identities may be intensified by feelingsof oppression and stigmatization. In the latter case, reli-gious identity may manifest itself in different forms ofextremism as an instrument of counter-oppression (Salihand Fortman, 2007, forthcoming).Given the often dangerous consequences of a mixture

of religion with politics one might think that protectionwere to be found in a constitutionally enshrined separa-tion of religious institutions and the state. Yet, secularityper se does not seem to guarantee the necessary combina-tion of tolerance with the rule of law, implying that power

is limited by law and the individual is recognised as a per-son with rights. Iran may serve as an example here: justlike the Shah’s secular state, the current Islamic republicalso appears to see respect for the rule of law and toler-ance as vices rather than virtues. Notably, AbdulkarimSoroush argues in his exquisite Treatise on Tolerance thatlike love, tolerance “is an extra-religious (and certainly notan anti-religious) virtue” (2004: 21). It is to be seen as anextra-secular virtue too, as current attacks in the Westagainst Islam as a whole demonstrate. Furthermore, therule of law seems to have lost its global secular sanctity asnew anti-terrorist legislation in the United States, based onprincipal deviations from well established internationallegal standards, indicates. What is new then is the way inwhich growing intolerance in both the East and Westmutually reinforces enemy images. Doubtless, the climatethis creates constitutes a threat to international security.

Clash Between Occidentalism andAnti-Islamic Secularism

Intolerance and ‘us–them’ divides are usually built uponcontorted pictures of the other. What we are witnessingtoday is a new threat in this respect, not so much Hunting-ton’s clash of civilisations (1996) but rather a collisionbetween an ideologically coloured rejection of ‘the West’and an ideologically coloured rejection of Islam as amonolithic despicable religion. In both cases the threat tohuman security lies in ideological manipulation of reli-gion—or of its opposite, anti-religion—as a means of con-structing opposing cultural identities in regard to whichboth sides claim irreconcilable incompatibility.

Jame Mosque, Isfahan, Iran.

Buruma and Margalit have coined Anti-Westernism asespoused by radical Islamists religious ‘Occidentalism’(2004). Occidentalism despises ‘the West’ as a materialistcapitalist society worshipping false gods based on a pub-lic-political order that allows a false dichotomy betweenthe public and the private realm. (Incidentally, the ideolog-ical manner in which the Danish prime minister distancednot only the state but also his government and his personfrom the cartoons issue—‘those offended can file theirapplications with the judiciary’—did much to confirm thatimage.)Strikingly, we find the term ‘Occidentals’ already in the

last lines of Edward Said’s famousOrientalism (1978),albeit in a different connotation (Westerners as they seethemselves, viz. as superiors). Said’s scholarly work showshow time and again studies originating outside the Easthave constructed ‘the Orient’ as distinct, culminating in allsorts of divides between ‘them’ and ‘us’. Orientalism is away of dealing with ‘the Orient’ that confirms a relation-ship between the Occident and Orient of power, domina-tion and hegemony. Said’s focus is, primarily, on academicstudies. Today, however, orientalism manifests itself as asecularist political ideology. Its object is not so much theEast as such but Islam as a religion fundamentally incom-patible with such crucial values and institutions as free-dom, democracy, gender equality and the rule of law.When criticised from within the West itself it is usuallycalled ‘secularism’ or even ‘secular fundamentalism’ (Ekins2002), even though the term ‘fundamentalism’ is mislead-ing in this respect, as will be argued below. Althoughindeed political in nature, it seeks connections with liberalpolitical theory arguing that without fully confining reli-gion to the private realm, democracy were impossible.Notably, in the Netherlands we see a growing number ofliberal theorists entering the political arena today, present-ing their ideological secularist view in newspaper columns,radio and television interviews, and presentations at politi-cal party gatherings. Whereas this observation finds itsbasis particularly in that country, it would, however, be nosurprise if it were confirmed elsewhere.It is, particularly, the confrontation between contem-

porary Occidentalism and Anti-Islamic Secularism thathas created a climate of intense sensitivity towards any-thing that might be seen as confirmation of ideologicalpositions already taken. This applies, for instance, to boththe publication of cartoons of the prophet Mohamed in a‘Western’ medium and the violent demonstrations follow-ing that ‘simple manifestation of freedom of expression’. It

is quite possible that without such incidents—they happenwith increasingly shorter intervals—the conflict betweenIsrael and the Arab Middle East would not have assumedthe dimension of the Israel-Hezbollah war of 2006.Notably, in the social sciences it is impossible to get suchassumptions confirmed as in the natural sciences. Hence,such careful observations remain a matter of argued plau-sibility.It is the constant ‘mediatization’ of touchy events,

opinions and discourses that makes the new sensitivity sohazardous. There is an urgent need, therefore, to recognisethis global ideological confrontation as a new threat in thefirst place, and to accept the new challenge to surmount it.In order to overcome the new battle of discourses a

first prerequisite is to understand how it came into being.Towards the end of their mirror studyOccidentalism,Buruma and Margalit acknowledge the way in whichIslamism has been influenced precisely by Westernsecularism:“The Islamist revolutionary movement that currently

stalks the world, from Kabul to Java, would not haveexisted without the harsh secularism of Reza Shah Pahlavior the failed experiments in state socialism in Egypt, Syriaand Algeria. This is why it was such a misfortune, in manyways, for the Middle East to have encountered the modernWest for the first time through echoes of the French revo-lution” (2004: 143).This historical interpretation is confirmed by Sadik Al-

Azm in his perceptive essay on Islam, Terrorism and theWest Today:“In fact, the modern European violent intrusion into

Islamdom and Arabdom [starting with Bonaparte in 1798]created, in my view, a final, decisive and definitive rupturewith the past that I can only compare with the no less finaland definitive rupture effected by the violent Arab-Muslimintervention into the history of Sassanid Persia. And justas the history of post-conquest Persia stopped makingsense without Arabs, Islam and their eruption on the localFarsi scene, similarly, the post-Bonaparte history of Arab-dom stopped making sense without Europe, modernityand their eruption on the local Arab scene as well” (2004:27).No Occidentalism without its prior counterpart, in

other words. Consequently, from a Western perspective afirst challenge lies in a critical analysis of what can bedone to overcome Orientalism in its modern Anti-Islamicsecularist guise. The importance of that ‘liberating’ mis-sion was implicitly noted by Said, when towards the end


Islam and the West


Islam and the West

of his study he concluded: “Without ‘the Orient’ therewould be scholars, critics, intellectuals, human beings, forwhom the racial, ethnic, and national distinctions wereless important than the common enterprise of promotinghuman community” (1978: 328).

Building Peace From Within the Sacred Realm

At the roots of perceptions and discourses about ‘theother’ lie interpretations of holy texts, too. Remarkable inthis connection is the popular secularist assumption thatIslam will always remain bound to a literal grammaticalinterpretation of ‘violent’ texts in the Qur’an. Thishermeneutical premise stands at the roots of modern Anti-Islamism. Notably, however, the Bible, too, is full of textsthat tend to be classified as brutal, some 1400 or so, moreat any rate than in the Qur’an. Some of these classifica-tions rest on obvious misinterpretations such as Jesus’words “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: Icame not to bring peace, but a sword” (St Matthew10:34). Rather than advocating violence Jesus told his dis-ciples that they would encounter animosity. Yet, withregard to Exodus 32: 27-28 where Moses orders the peo-ple of Israel in the name of God that every man put “hissword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gatethroughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, andevery man his companion, and every man his neighbour”,an order followed to such an extent that “there fell of thepeople that day about three thousand men”, all I found ina modern commentary is a direction to the next versewhich states that by executing that divine judgment theLevites are consecrated to the Lord (Fensham 1977: 221).Not surprisingly, in mainstream contemporary Christiantheology and practice such texts are totally disregarded.No text without a context, at any rate.In Islam, however, the fundamentalist movement is

notably stronger than it is in contemporary Christendom.In this respect two observations seem relevant. Firstly, it isa serious error to confuse fundamentalist interpretation ofholy texts and the desire to lead a puritan life with politi-cal Islamism. “The political Islamists”, Buruma and Mar-galit observe, “are interested in power and want to estab-lish an Islamic state. … The puritans, who wish only toenforce collective morality, are fundamentalists”(2004:129). Notably, it is quite possible to be fundamentalist aswell as tolerant, simply because the orthodox faithful maytoo realise that one has to acquiesce to the impossibility ofconvincing others that one’s own truth, considered asbeing absolute, must be accepted as exclusive.

Secondly, as already noted, it is precisely those whoreject and attack Islam per se who underline its completerigidity, while connecting orthodoxy with politicalJihadism. By denying all Muslims their sacred realm,orthodox believers are thrown on one heap with politicalterrorists. In this way the real clash of civilizations, thestruggle between moderate Islam and radical militantIslam, is being denied and neglected. A more constructiveattitude, in contrast, starts with the recognition of Islam asa legitimate faith as well as a genuine way of life. It is justby dissociating ourselves from any tendency to approachdifferent religions and worldviews in categories of moral-political superiority and inferiority that dialogue becomespossible. Only through dialogue and reunion, based onrecognition of the other’s precious sacred realm, the newideological threats to global security can be effectivelyaddressed.Freeman Dyson wrote his review of Daniel Dennett’s

Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenonunder the title ‘Religion from the Outside’. Dennett’s studyis indeed an attempt to study religion as a sociologicallyobservable set of facts. In contrast, Dyson’s point is that itwill never be possible to understand religion purely fromthe perspective of an outsider. In response to Weinberg’sfamous words that were quoted above, he states: “And forbad people to do good things—that takes religion” (2006:6). This at least has always been the purpose of religion: toconvert sinners in a way that affects human behavior, too.In order to understand that function of religion it will benecessary to explore it from the inside: “The sacred writ-ings, the Bhagavad Gita and the Koran and the Bible, tellus more about the essence of religion than any scientificstudy of religious organizations” (id. : 8).Islam of course is far from monolithic (Ferguson 2006:

639), as the real conflict, I repeat, is between moderateIslam and radical Islam. Crucial for an Islamic reformfrom within, is a rereading of texts in general and criticaltexts in particular. At a conference on ‘Hermeneutics,Scriptural Politics and Human Rights’, organized atUtrecht University to bring theologians and jurists fromdifferent religious backgrounds together, two Shiite schol-ars of Mofid University in Qom (an institution establishedparticularly for higher education of Mullahs) addressedsensitive issues that always arise when it comes to the ‘vio-lent and uncompromising’ character of Islam. In a schol-arly paper Sadegh Haghighat (2007, forthcoming) arguesconvincingly that the militant interpretation of theQur’anic notion of Jihad is false, and he concludes:

“No text can be interpreted without its specific con-text. Jihad, in all kinds, must be read in the context oftribe-state conditions. The offensive kind of jihad—whichis allowed just in the time of the holy Prophet and his suc-cessors (according to the majority of Shiite jurispru-dences)—is tuned to anti-Muslim countries, not to secularones. International conventions confine trans-nationalresponsibilities of Islamic states (11)”.Ali Mirmoosavi presented a paper on the highly intri-

cate theme of ‘The Qur’an and Religious Freedom: TheIssue of Apostasy’. After carefully analysing the relevanttexts he arrives at the following conclusions:“The Qur’anic scriptures establish a general principle

that can be described as the Qur’anic principle of religiousfreedom. The main rule is that ‘there is no compulsion inreligion’, which rejects any pressure on belief. Yet, in con-nection with other verses that put some limitation onbelief, this principle cannot justify religious freedom in itsbroad dimensions. … [Yet], according to the Qur’an apos-tasy does not mean just simple changing of religion or dis-belief. It implies to change religion after confidently believ-ing and because of an unjustified motivation, usuallyconcerning treason. However, the Qur’an does not directlyimpose any worldly punishment for apostasy. This deduc-tion discloses a possibility for reconciliation between theQur’an and religious freedom.“Freedom of religion was not compatible with past

Islamic society where citizenship was based on religiousbelief…”“Modern Islamic societies experience a completely dif-

ferent life in the globalized world of political, economicand security interdependence. Freedom of religion in thisworld is not only the legitimate right based on severalarguments, but also a necessary condition for peaceful andstable life.”Evidently, efforts such as those undertaken by Islamic

scholars like Haghighat and Mirmoosavi, arguing on acommon ground, and confronting religious rules and cul-tural practices incompatible with universal standards ofhuman dignity from within, are of foremost importance.

Some Final Observations

Clearly, globalization has affected religious sensitivities,too, and as a result the sacred realm has become a rathershaky space. To take this up, Pugwash would do well toprovide a space for those involved in religion and peace.Indeed, contemporary new threats do imply a challenge toinvolve theologians no less than natural scientists, as

hermeneutics is subject to manipulation because it is wellknown that people act on interpretations of sacred texts.Where religion is used as an instrument of power andmanipulation, it has been less respectful of sanctity andhuman well being and has become further removed fromenhancing the common good. Yet, religious praxis or the-ory of practice cannot be removed nor made to appear dis-tant from the realities people endure in the real world(Salih and Fortman 2007, forthcoming).The new challenge lies not merely in a struggle against

ideological manipulations; where religion has been used asan instrument for the good, it delivered unprecedented jus-tice, liberty and freedom. In both religion and politics,identity could also develop into a function of positive self-esteem, cooperation, solidarity and compassion in a com-munity of believers. It may also extend from religion tosocial welfare, empowerment and positive attitudestowards oneself and to those with whom the communityof believers interacts in the course of living together.In response to the new challenges posed by globaliza-

tion of religious sensitivities governments are obviouslylimited, precisely because the sacred realm requires a cer-


Islam and the West

Sheikh Lotfollaf Mosque, Isfahan, Iran


Islam and the West

tain degree of autonomy in the first place. Yet, there is oneparticular aspect of ‘religious violence’ that remains highlysubject to public policies. Indeed, this new threat to inter-national security cannot be understood aside from a worldwith incredibly rapidly rising inequalities, both in the eco-nomic realm and in the political domain. In HannahArendt’s view the opposite of violence is not non-violencebut power: “Power and violence are opposites; where theone rules absolutely, the other is absent (1993: 64[1969])”.Violence often springs from rage, themad fury asa collective instinct that Sartre used to refer to, and thatlong ago expressed itself in the slave revolts and the rebel-lions of the oppressed. Yet, Arendt comments,“…rage is by no means an automatic reaction to mis-

ery and suffering as such; no one reacts with rage to a dis-ease beyond the powers of medicine or to an earthquakeor, for that matter, to social conditions which seem to beunchangeable. Only when there is reason to suspect thatconditions could be changed and are not, does rage arise.Only when our sense of justice is offended do we reactwith rage. The point is that under certain circumstancesviolence, which is to act without argument or speech andwithout reckoning with consequences, is the only possibil-ity of setting the scales of justice right again. (Billy Buddstriking dead the man who bore false witness against himis the classic example.) In this sense, rage and the violencethat sometimes, not always, goes with it belong to the‘natural’ emotions, and to cure man of them would meannothing less than to dehumanize or emasculate them(Arendt 1993: 65-66 [1969]).This enlightening discourse brings us to a final focus:

the scales of justice. Based on his practical experience inpeace building, John Paul Lederach of the Conflict Trans-formation Program in the United States speaks of a justicegap (1999: 27ff.). This is the result of inadequate efforts todevelop a peace building framework that not only reducesdirect violence but also produces social and economic jus-tice. The point is that in all situations of violent conflict,there are original injustices that lie at the roots of it. Themain reason why hostilities can be stopped in the end isthat those involved realize that the violence of the war iseven worse than the original injustices. But at the sametime they will expect these original injustices to be dealtwith after the cessation of hostilities. Expectations areraised that life will not continue as it used to but that therewill be an improvement, a public path towards justice.Notably, justice has very much to do with the outcome ofthe use of power, and hence with daily livelihoods, with

people’s needs and the recognition of these. It is the rootconflict, in Johan Galtung’s terminology (1998) that has tobe addressed (Klein Goldewijk and Fortman 1999: 82). Ata global level that root conflict lies in socio-economic andpolitical inequalities. Challenges to human security in thatsense, are not new. With a slight amendment to former USPresident Bill Clinton’s famous exclamation: It is notmerely the economy, stupid; it is justice!

References

Al-Azm, S. (2004) Islam, Terrorism and the West Today. Amster-dam: Praemium Erasmianum Essay.

Arendt, H., (1993) ‘Reflections on Violence.’ in B. Epstein andR.B. Silvers (eds.), Selected Essays From the First Thirty Years ofthe New York Review of Books. New York: New York Reviewof Books, pp. 61-67. (Originally Published in NYRB, February27, 1969)

Buruma, I. and A. Margalit (2004)Occidentalis:. A Short His-tory of Anti-Westernism. London: Atlantic Books.

Dennett, D. C. (2006) Breaking the Spell: Religion as a NaturalPhenomenon. New York: Viking Penguin.

Dyson, F. (2006) ‘Religion from the Outside’, Review of Break-ing the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by Daniel C.Bennett,New York Review of Books, 22 June, 4-8.

Ekins, R. E. (2002) Secular Fundamentalism and Democracy.Grand Rapids: Acton Institute Publications.

Elchardus, M. and I. Glorieux (2002)De Symbolische Samenlev-ing: Een Exploratie van de Nieuwe Sociale en Culturele Ruimtes.Tielt: Lannoo.

Fensham, F.C. (1977) Exodus. Nijkerk: Callenbach.

Ferguson, N. (2006) The War of the World: History’s Age ofHatred. London: Allen Lane.

Gaay Fortman, B. de, K. Martens and M. Salih (eds.) (2007forthcoming) Between Text and Context. Hermeneutics, Scrip-tural Politics and Human Rights. New York: Palgrave Macmil-lan.

Galtung, J. (1998) Conflict Transformation by Peaceful Means(The Transcend Method). [Manual Prepared by The DisasterManagement Training Program of the United Nations] NewYork: United Nations.

Haghighat, S. (2007, forthcoming) ‘Jihad from Shiite Perspec-tives: Between Text and Context’, in B. de Gaay Fortman, K.Martens and M. Salih, Between Text and Context, o.c. PP.

Huntington, S. (1996) The Clash of Civilizations and theRemaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Klein Goldewijk, B. and B. de Gaay Fortman (1999)WhereNeeds Meet Rights: Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in a

New Perspective. Geneva: World Council of Churches Publica-tions, Risk Book Series, No. 88.

Lederach, J. P. (1999) ‘Justpeace—The Challenge of the 21stCentury’, in People Building Peace. 35 Inspiring Stories fromAround the WorldUtrecht: European Centre for Conflict Preven-tion.

Mirmoosavi, A. (2007 forthcoming) ‘The Quran and ReligiousFreedom: The Issue of Apostasy’, in B. de Gaay Fortman et al.(eds.) Between Text and Context, o.c.

Norris, P. and R. Inglehart (2004. Sacred and Secular: Religionand Politics Worldwide. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Pereira, R. (2000.) ‘Sri Lankan Buddhism and Religious Free-dom’, in Jonneke Naber (ed.), Freedom of Religion: a PreciousHuman Right: 133-140. Assen (NL): Royal van Gorcum.

Said, E.W. (1978)Orientalism. London: Routledge and KeganPaul.

Salih, M.M.A. and B. de Gaay Fortman (2007 forthcoming)‘Religious Identity, Difference and Human Rights’ in B. de GaayFortman et al. (eds.) Between Text and Context, o.c.

Soroush, A. (2004) Treatise on Tolerance. Amsterdam: PremiumErasmianum Essay.

BAS DE GAAY FORTMAN is a Professor of Political Econ-

omy of Human Rights at Utrecht University, The Nether-

lands, and Emeritus Professor of Political Economy at the

Institute of Social Studies in The Hague. Former Dutch MP

and Senator (1971-1991). Chair of the Working Programme

on States, Societies and Conflict of the Netherlands Research

School for Development Studies (CERES). Member of the

Committee for Development Co-operation of the Nether-

lands Advisory Council for International Affairs. Among

his more recent publications are Globalization and Its New

Divides: Malcontents, Recipes, and Reform, Amsterdam:

Dutch University Press & West Lafayette (Ind.): Purdue

University Press, 2003 (co-editor with Paul van Seters and

Arie de Ruijter and author of two chapters), and From War-

fare to Welfare. Human Security in a Southern African Con-

text, Assen: Royal Van Gorcum, 2004 (co-editor with Marie

Muller and author of a chapter), and ‘Violence among peo-

ples in the light of human frustration and aggression’, in

European Journal of Pharmacology (international journal

published by Elsevier), 526 (2005), pp. 2-8.


Islam and the West


On29November 2006 the German PugwashGroup organized together with IFSH in Berlin aone day seminar titled: “Security, Disarmament

and Arms Control after the North Korean Nuclear Test”.In his welcome adress the scientific director of the IFSH,Michael Brzoska, emphasized the good cooperationbetween Pugwash and the Institute. Later lecturesintroduced the following subjects: German chair ofPugwash Götz Neuneck underlined the specialopportunity in Europe for a renunciation of the redesignof new nuclear carrier systems. Pugwash’s Secretary-General Paolo Cotta-Ramusino explained the currentPugwash agenda that places an emphasis on the MiddleEast, and John Finney (London) illuminated the activitiesof the British “Nuclear Awareness Campaign”.In connection to those discussions three panels

followed: in the first panel Jonathan Tucker (currentlyaffiliated with SWP), Alexander Nikitin (Moscow), andOliver Meier (IFSH) analyzed the deficits of the American,Russian and European Non-Proliferation Policy.Ambassador Rüdiger Lüdeking pleaded in his shortcontribution for stronger unity between the USA andEurope and warned against “introducing double

standards”. The second panel with M. Kadry Said (Cairo),Secretary-general Cotta-Ramusino (Milano) and MargretJohannsen (IFSH) addressed the current situation in theMiddle East, in particular the Lebanon-war and thenuclear dispute with Iran.The panel felt that the creation of a zone free from

weapons of mass destruction, although highly desirable,does not look very likely. The third panel with Frank ofHippel (Princeton) and Herbert Wulf, Chief TechnicalAdvisor for Arms Control/UNDP, focused theircontributions on the technical and political implications ofthe situation on the Korean peninsula. Wulf pleaded forstronger EU-activities and saw a solution in negotiatingsecurity assurances with North Korea. In the eveningRobert Zuber, Outreach Director for UNEPS, and LoisBarber, President of the Earth Action Project, presentedthe UN project “Global Action to Prevent War—UnitedNations Emergency Peace Service”.Sponsored by the BMBF, the event was held in the

“Landesvertretung Hamburg” building and the audience,which included multiple high ranking leaders, wasinvolved in many discussions.

German Pugwash Group

N A T I O N A L P U G W A S H G R O U P S

Olivier Meier, Alexander Nikitin, Götz Neuneck, Jonathan Tucker,Amb. Lüdeking.

Introduction

This report summarizes the proceedings and out-comes of the 4th annual International Student/Young Pugwash (ISYP) Conference, held in Cairo,

Egypt from 9 to 10 November 2006. ISYP divided 30 stu-dents and young professionals and 2 senior participantsfrom 17 countries into two working groups that met inparallel. Working group A, “Nuclear and Military Threatsto Security”, consisted of ISYP participants in senior Pug-wash working groups 1, 2, and 3. Working group B,“Non-Military Threats to Human Security”, was com-posed of those in senior Pugwash working groups 4, 5,and 6. The working group discussion topics originated inthe papers prepared for possible publication in the ISYPJournal www.scienceandworldaffairs.org. This documentis the report of the presentations and discussions fromboth working groups but its content is the sole responsibil-ity of the rapporteurs.We are grateful for the opportunity to share our

thoughts with the Pugwash Conferences on Science andWorld Affairs. It is our hope that this report will enrich theideas and actions of the entire Pugwash Community.

Working Group A addressed nuclear and militarythreats to security through global and regional WMD pro-liferation and began with a discussion of the theoreticalsteps required to denuclearize Israel utilizing WMD FreeZones in the Middle East and Africa. Papers on Turkey’schanging security concerns and commitment to its obliga-tions under international agreements, the Indo-US Nucleardeal and its effect on global and regional security, and thefuture of the NPT regime were discussed in relation to U.S.military nuclear policy including the war on terror and thechanging role of nuclear weapons in U.S. security policy.Papers on the technological culture of war, nuclear testingand uranium mining in Australia, the relevance of the rec-ommendations of the commission on WMD from anAfrican perspective and the relationship between Islamand the West from an Iranian perspective allowed thegroup to link regional examples to broader themes.

The definition of security played a central role in thediscussions. How do states and the people in them, as wellas non-state actors, perceive their security? Do nuclearweapons and WMD play a deterrent role, or do they sim-ply increase threats to security in regions and countries?What role do nuclear weapons play with regard to asym-metric security threats such as terrorism?During the discussion on the denuclearization of the

Middle East, the point was made that if an agreementbetween Israel and Palestine were reached it would domuch to promote cooperative security agreements bycountries in the region and prevent other political interestsfrom delaying the disarmament process. Official diplo-matic recognition of Israel by key states in the region mayallow discussions on WMD Free Zones to commence.The group discussed creating a Middle Eastern zone

free not only of nuclear weapons, but of all weapons ofmass destruction, WMD security issues often transcendstate boundaries and can be addressed on a regional level.It was proposed that Japan and Turkey could each play asignificant mediating role to create the Zone. A “Track II”initiative modeled after the successful Council for SecurityCooperation in the Asia Pacific (CSCAP) organization,perhaps beginning with cooperation on environmentalissues such as water security, would build confidencebetween actors in the region. It may be possible to pro-mote ratification of the WMD Free Zone treaty in Africaby presenting the benefit such an agreement would haveon the continent and relate its importance to the concernsof African citizens.With regard to the US-India Nuclear deal the US is

committing grave proliferation errors to promote itsstrategic interests in the region. The possible deleteriouseffect of the deal on security in South Asia is a serious con-cern. Providing economic and other incentives to haltnuclear and other WMD activities might entice economi-cally suffering countries to pursue a similar route as a bar-gaining tool. Improving the economic situation in thesestates would greatly reduce this temptation.

2006 International Student/Young Pugwash ConferenceCairo, Egypt, November 9–10, 2006

Rapporteurs: Adam Breasley and Katie Marvel

I S Y P



It may be an appropriate time, even within the US mili-tary, to push for further strategic nuclear arms reductions.Although significant reductions have been achieved sincethe Cold War, several US government programs may makefurther reductions possible. Concerns were raised aboutplans for a new generation of US nuclear weapons thatwould require building a new weapons production infra-structure. This would require training another generationof nuclear weapons scientists; here, we hope that Pugwashcan continue to stress and promote its founding principleof social responsibility for scientists.A paper illustrated the Australian history of the British

nuclear testing program and its impact on the indigenousnations in Australia. Indigenous Australians continue tobe affected by uranium mining on their land and viola-tions of their rights through an undeclared war. We hopethat Pugwash will continue to support the renunciation ofwar, declared and undeclared, as a means of resolvinginternational disputes.The process of implementing the recommendations of

the Blix Commission on WMD in an African context isconstrained by various factors. Implementation problemsinclude the porous nature of African borders, more urgentpriorities put on economic, health, and violence problemsin African countries, and the growth of terrorist cells

within Africa. It was noted that biological weapons pre-sent a unique problem for the already compromisedAfrican continent with a limited capacity and resources torespond to an attack.Politically motivated rhetoric can escalate security

threats. During the senior conference we heard much talkabout the Clash of Civilizations, particularly with regardto Islam and the West. A United Nations—and religiousleader—led Track II program can promoteDialogueamong Civilizations as a new paradigm in internationalrelations.The technological culture of war is given its ultimate

expression in the development of nuclear weapons. Pug-wash, with its continuing emphasis on fostering a cultureof dialogue and mutual goodwill by promoting the socialresponsibility of scientists can foster a new technologicalculture of peace.Fundamental to the discussion inWorking Group B

and in keeping with the spirit of the Russell-Einstein mani-festo, was a willingness to reject conventional models andto learn to think in a new way. Defining security withoutreference to a military apparatus requires not only a redef-inition of the traditional concept of security, but also anability to search for connections and subtleties rather thansimple cause-and-effect explanations. The working group

Götz Neuneck, Immaculate Motsi.

attempted to tackle the complexity of human securitythrough a wide ranging series of presentations and discus-sions representing a diverse set of backgrounds and views.The presentations started with a discussion on the

international criminal responsibility for abuse of power,which considered the ways in which those responsible forcrimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide may besubject to prosecution. The International Criminal Court,supported by 102 countries, has provided a mechanismfor holding those who abuse their positions of poweraccountable. The need to raise awareness of the interna-tional framework for criminal prosecution among victims,potential aggressors, and among the international commu-nity as a whole was stressed during the discussions.A presentation on the security of internally displaced

persons emphasized the precarious security situation ofthose who have been displaced within their own country,arguing that many governments fail to protect theseextremely vulnerable segments of their own populations.Recently this issue has led to a serious challenge to thenotion of state sovereignty in the doctrine of the Responsi-bility to Protect as put forward and reaffirmed by theUnited Nations. Each state has the responsibility to pre-vent conflicts, protect its citizens, and rebuild after disas-ters; if it is unwilling or unable to do so, it will then abro-gate its sovereignty, transferring responsibility to theinternational community. Questions regarding the imple-mentation and possible abuse of this principle still remain,and it is as yet unclear how or whether to implement it inreal terms.The group discussed a prepared statement about the

role of credibility in approaches to democratization in theMiddle East that compared the aggressive policies of theUnited States, including “democratic warfare” and the“Greater Middle East” initiative, with the European-Mediterranean partnership initiative, finding both incom-plete and unsatisfactory approaches to democratization.The EU’s attempt at partnership suffers from credibilityissues, as the EU appears to fear and distrust the outcomesof democratic elections in the Middle East. Any democra-tization attempt necessarily raises questions of ownershipand partnership, as well as the need to inject credibility,transparency, and legitimacy into the process. Discussionscentered around themes of transparency and credibility ininternational and local organizations, as well as the effec-tiveness of policy implementation at different levels.Additional presentations focused on country-specific

issues and initiatives. The group discussed the issue of

opium cultivation in Afghanistan, outlining the historicaland contemporary factors that have made the country theworld’s leading supplier of opiates. The opium economyposes a security threat on local, regional and internationallevels. Opium cultivation provides a funding source for AlQaeda and the Taliban; it encourages corruption and war-lordism in government and it destabilizes buyer countriesthrough addiction and its attendant problems. Licensingof the crop for medicinal purposes can help to control theflow of opium from the country and to combat thesethreats; however, only an improved ground security situa-tion will help eradicate the problem.On a different track, discussions that dealt with the

youth perspective on food security and human security indeveloping countries explained some of the health andnutrition threats faced by the population of India. Theproblem is interconnected with unemployment and eco-nomic security and can be alleviated by creating specificjob programs for Indians under the age of 25.The potential of knowledge systems was illustrated by

a presentation on an integrated approach to land manage-ment for the mitigation of health hazards through a frame-work based on the use of GIS technology. “Smart map”methods can be used to identify and investigate potentialthreats, but there is a need to integrate these methodswithin a wider multidisciplinary framework. Indigenousknowledge, in combination with relevant technology andscience can help to address issues of human security. TheAfrican Institute for Mathematical Sciences is a goodexample of a successful capacity building project in SouthAfrica used to train highly qualified researchers throughits pan-African focus, innovative teaching methods, andespecially its reliance on free and open source softwareand educational materials.It is important to understand the psychology of soci-

eties at war which affects the political and social identityin conflict situations. It is very easy for combatant groupsto demonize “the Other” with devastating consequences.This is illustrated by the lack of trust and good faith innegotiations, particularly between Israel and Palestine.The working group B papers illustrated four basic

themes. First, participants were concerned about the avail-ability of information- who controls it, who may access is,and how we, as individuals and ISYP members, can raisethe awareness of important issues. We believe it is a vitalobjective in conflict situations to raise awareness of bothsides’ concerns, constraints, and limitations, as well as tofocus on awareness of one’s own responsibilities and



opportunities. Second, we are concerned with issues oflegitimacy: how do institutions achieve the credibility andtrust necessary to effectively implement international law?In order to increase the legitimacy and credibility of inter-national norms and organizations, the objective must be toprovide a framework for effective, transparent implemen-tation. Third, how can the international communityimplement policies without succumbing to traditionaldynamics of power and colonization? Often the interna-tional community appears to apply arbitrary and inconsis-tent standards to conflict management, ensuring civiliansare lost in the struggle. To this end, we must work tosecure civilians and the democratic process and to bringabuses and double standards to the forefront of the discus-sion. The relationship between state security and the secu-rity of citizens is interdependent, encompassing economic,agricultural, community, and personal security. The objec-tive is to develop an integrated framework to address thisfundamental complexity.Proposed solutions relating to all four themes focused

on training, education, and awareness. Proposals includeda training course for young media professionals—thetastemakers of the future—as well as programs to identifyand train those who can liaise between government andgrassroots to serve as agents of change.

Conclusion: ISYP Statement, Cairo 2006

In a world where the risks and threats to the survival ofhumankind continue to remain great, not least from thebreakdown in traditional arms control and renewed pro-liferation threats, it is important to remember our human-ity and not to be motivated by fear.Recalling the 2005 ISYP Vision StatementMission

Possible: Engaging a New Generation, the challengesfaced by future generations will not be solved onlythrough diplomacy and the traditional political channelsof negotiations. Youth has a tremendous potential toaddress these challenges. However, new and concertedapproaches are required for the realization of a prosper-ous, equitable and a peaceful future.Increased dialogue, among and with the youth, and an

understanding of the complexity of conflict and fragility ofpeace are necessary tools to exploit this potential. Youngpeople should embrace the idea that the responsibility toprotect can also be exercised at individual level.Raising awareness, creating expertise and engaging in

dialogue are the means to enhance the potential of apeaceful future. Contributing to this end, young peoplecan initiate novel programs which are both creative andfeasible. In this area organizations such as ISYP play animportant role.

Amnon Pazy, a former member of the Pugwash Coun-cil and the Israeli Pugwash group, died on August 16,

2006 at the age of 70.Amnon was a wonderful friend. He was sympathetic,

passionately intelligent, insatiably curious. He had a deli-cious sense of humor.Amnon’s great strength was his absolute and transpar-

ent integrity. He never wavered from the bedrock of hisprinciples: freedom of speech, justice, and equality. He wasnever beholden to any political party or ideology. Hespoke only from his own conscience. He was not inter-ested in personal power.Amnon was one of the contributors to the building and

the expansion of Israel’s system of higher education. Asa professor of mathematics, the president of the HebrewUniversity of Jerusalem and the chairman of the Planningand Budgeting Committee of the Council for Higher Edu-cation in Israel, he was one of the main leaders of Israel’shigher education system.As one of the founders of Israel’s Atomic Energy Com-

mission he contributed a lot in strengthening the ties

between the academic institutes and defense research anddevelopment establishment, resulting in numerous scien-tific, political, technological and strategic fields.Amnon’s first Pugwash meeting was the 40th Pugwash

Conference, Towards a Secure World in the 21st Century,held in Egham, UK in September 1990. He participated inmore than a dozen Pugwash workshops and conferencesover the years, and was a member of the Pugwash Councilfrom 1992 to 2002.Amnon saw the suffering, felt his suffering and the suf-

fering of the world. He believed that beyond this sufferingthere was hope. Beyond hope there was justice. Beyondjustice there was freedom. His search led him towards thatfreedom as it encompassed and was born of suffering,hope, struggle and justice. This was a freedom beyond theconventional understanding of the world, a freedom thatincluded the political but went beyond it. It was a freedomof mind, a freedom reflected in the human mind.

Aharon ZoharFor the Israel Pugwash Community

AMNON PAZY(1936–2006)

O B I T U A R I E S


Dr. Alvin Weinberg, former director of the Oak RidgeNational Laboratory in the US and an early and

influential participant in the Pugwash Conferences, diedOctober 18, 2006 at the age of 91.In the 1940s, Weinberg was part of the Manhattan

Project, first at the University of Chicago and later at OakRidge. Though he would remain a vigorous proponent ofnuclear energy, he worried that nuclear weapons mightagain be used in war. He led an effort in 1996 thatbrought a large “peace bell” cast in Japan to Oak Ridge asa symbol “that bitter enemies can become friends.”As a scientist, the son of Russian emigrants born in

Chicago and educated at the University of Chicago, he co-authored the standard text on nuclear chain reaction the-ory with Nobel Laureate Eugene Wigner in the 1940s.Under his leadership between 1955 and 1973, the Oak

Ridge lab broadened its work to include early researchinto the biological effects of radiation on human genetics,the environmental effects of manmade pollution and thepotential impact of energy conservation.Weinberg attended the 3rd Pugwash Conference,Dan-

gers of the Atomic Age &What Scientists Can Do AboutThem, in Kitzb hel, Austria, in September 1958, and laterparticipated in Pugwash annual conferences in 1961,1967, and 1987.Weinberg was known for vividly articulating issues

associated with nuclear energy with such catch phrases as“nuclear priesthood,” “Faustian bargain,” “technologicalfix,” and “big science” to convey that nuclear physics orspace research “require extremely elaborate equipmentand staffs of large professionals” to support them.

ALVIN WEINBERG(1915–2006)


Amb. (ret.) Ochieng Adala, of theAfrica Peace Forum (APFO) inNairobi, Kenya, is former PermanentRepresentative of Kenya to theUnited Nations in New York, formerDeputy Secretary/Director for Politi-cal Affairs, Ministry of ForeignAffairs and International Coopera-tion, and former Ambassador ofKenya to the Arab Republic ofEgypt, the Kingdom of Morocco,Algeria and Tunisia; APFO, P.O. Box76621, Tel.: (++254-2) 574092/6,Fax: (++254-2) 561357, E-mail:[email protected]

Dr. Jeffrey Boutwell is ExecutiveDirector of Pugwash Conferences onScience and World Affairs, formerAssociate Executive Officer at theAmerican Academy of Arts and Sci-ences in Cambridge, and former StaffAide at the National Security Coun-cil in Washington, DC; PugwashConferences, 2029 P St., NW, Suite301, Washington, D.C. 20036, Tel.(++1-202) 478-3440, Fax: (++1-202)238-9604, Email:[email protected]

Prof. Francesco Calogero is Profes-sor of Theoretical Physics at the Uni-versity of Rome “La Sapienza”. For-merly, he was Secretary-General ofPugwash (1989-1997), Chair of thePugwash Council (1997-2002), anda member of the Governing Board ofSIPRI (1982-1992); Pugwash Con-ferences, via della Lungara 10, I-00165 Roma, Italy, Tel. (++39-06)687-2606, Fax: (++39-06) 687-8376,E-mail:[email protected] /[email protected](please use BOTH)

Col. (ret.) Pierre Canonne is a Lec-turer in Disarmament and ArmsControl issues at the Univ. Marne-la-Vallés/Paris, former Head of TDB at

the Organization for the Prohibitionof Chemical Weapons in The Hague,former Senior Staff in the StrategicAffairs Department of the FrenchMinistry of Defense, and formerNegotiator, Chemical Weapons Con-vention; 29 Avenue Danton, 43300Langeac, France, Tel./Fax: (++33-4)71 77 24 57, E-mail:[email protected]

Mr. Chen Jifeng is Convener of thePugwash Group of China; Vice Presi-dent of the China Arms Control andDisarmament Association; ExecutiveVice President of the China Associa-tion for Promotion of InternationalScience and Peace; he was formerlySecretary General of the ChinesePeople’s Association for Peace andDisarmament (CPAPD) in Beijing,and Council Member of the ChineseAssociation for International Under-standing; CPAPD, PO Box 188, 15Wanshou Rd., Beijing, China100036, Tel.: (++86-10) 6827-1736or 6821-4433 (ext. 8586), Fax:(++86-10) 6827-3675, E-mail:[email protected]

Prof. Paolo Cotta-Ramusino is Secre-tary General of Pugwash Confer-ences (since August 2002; Professorof Mathematical Physics at the Uni-versity of Milan; Director of the Pro-gram on Science, Technology andInternational Security, Landau Net-work—Centro Volta, Como; andformer Secretary General of theUnion of Italian Scientists for Disar-mament (USPID); Department ofPhysics, University of Milan, ViaCeloria 16, 20133 Milan, Italy, Tel.:(**39-02) 5031 7277, Fax: (**39-02) 5031 7480, E-mail:[email protected]

Dr. Lynn Eden is Associate Directorfor Research and Senior ResearchScholar at the Center for Interna-

tional Security and Cooperation(CISAC) at Stanford University inCalifornia, and co-chair of the USPugwash Committee; CISAC, EncinaHall, 2nd floor, Stanford University,Stanford, California 94305-6165,Tel.: (++1-650) 725 5369, Fax: (++1-650) 724 5683, E-mail:[email protected]

Prof. Galia Golan-Gild is ProfessorGovernment, Interdisciplinary Cen-ter (IDC), Herzliya, Israel, and Pro-fessor Emerita of the Department ofPolitical Science, Hebrew Universityof Jerusalem. She was formerly theDarwin Professor of Soviet and EastEuropean Studies, and Chair,Department of Political Science,Hebrew University of Jerusalem; E-mail: [email protected]

Dr. Karen Hallberg is Professor ofPhysics at the Instituto Balseiro (Bar-iloche, Argentina), Research Fellowat the Argentine National Council ofScience and Technology, a memberof the Board of the Argentine Physi-cal Association, and a member of theBariloche Group for Science andWorld Affairs; Centro AtomicoBariloche, 8400 Bariloche,Argentina, Tel.: (++54-2944)445170, Fax: (++54-2944) 445299,E-mail: [email protected]

Prof. Pervez Hoodbhoy is Professorof Nuclear Physics at Quaid-e-AzamUniversity in Islamabad; Chairmanof Mashal Books; an independentmaker of documentary films for pop-ularising science in Pakistan; and anactivist for peace and social reform;E-mail: [email protected]

Gen. (ret.) Dr. Mohamed Kadry Saidis Head of the Military Studies Unitand Technology Advisor at the Al-Ahram Center for Political andStrategic Studies, Al-Ahram Founda-

Pugwash Council for the 2002–2007 Quinquennium

the Academy of Science of SouthAfrica, and Chair of the PugwashSouth Africa Group; University ofPretoria, Pretoria 0002, Republic ofSouth Africa, Tel.: (++27-12) 420-2318, Fax: (++27-12) 420 4501, E-mail: [email protected]

Dr. Götz Neuneck is a physicistworking on international securityissues. He is currently Senior Fellowat the Institute for Peace Researchand Security Policy (IFSH) in Ham-burg; Member of the Council of theGerman Physical Society (DPG), andDeputy Chairman of the WorkingGroup “Physics and Disarmament”in the DPG; IFSH, Falkenstein 1, D-22587 Hamburg, Germany, Tel.:(++49-40) 866077-21, Fax: (++49-40) 866-3615, E-mail:[email protected]

Dr. Alexander Nikitin is Director ofthe Center for Political and Interna-tional Studies (CPIS); Vice Chairmanof the Russian Pugwash Committeeof Scientists for Disarmament andInternational Security; Professor atMoscow State Institute for Interna-tional Relations; First Vice-Presidentof the Russian Political Science Asso-ciation; and Board Member of theRussian Academy of Political Sci-ences; CPIS, Prospect Mira 36,Moscow, Russian Federation129010, Tel. (++7-095) 280-3441,Fax: (++7-095) 280-0245, E-mail:[email protected]

Prof. Hitoshi Ohnishi is Professor ofInternational Relations and DeputyPresident at Tohoku University inSendai, Japan; former President ofthe Peace Studies Association ofJapan; and former Council Memberof the Japanese Political ScienceAssociation; School of Law, TohokuUniversity, Kawauchi, Aoba-ku,

tional Studies, Jawaharlal NehruUniversity (JNU), New Delhi [for-merly: Member, National SecurityAdvisory Board]

*Office: University of Jammu,Jammu 180006, J&K, India, Tel.:(++91-191) 243 5268, E-mail:[email protected]

Prof. Anne McLaren is PrincipalResearch Associate at WellcomeTrust/Cancer Research UK, Instituteof Cell and Developmental Biology;a Member of the British PugwashGroup; Member of the EuropeanCommission’s Life Sciences Groupand European Group on Ethics; andformer Foreign Secretary of theRoyal Society; Tel.: (++44-1223) 334088, E-mail:[email protected]

Dr. Steven Miller is Director of theInternational Security Program of theBelfer Center for Science and Interna-tional Affairs at Harvard University’sKennedy School of Government, Edi-tor-in-chief of the quarterly Interna-tional Security, and Co-chair of theUS Pugwash Committee. Formerly, hewas a Senior Research Fellow at theStockholm International PeaceResearch Institute (SIPRI), and taughtdefense and arms control studies inthe Political Science Department atthe Massachusetts Institute of Tech-nology; CSIA, J.F. Kennedy School ofGovernment, Harvard University, 79JFK Street, Cambridge, Massachu-setts 02138, Tel. (++1-617) 495-1411,Fax: (++1-617) 495-8963, E-mail:[email protected]

Prof. Marie Muller is Chair of thePugwash Council, and Dean of theFaculty of Humanities and Directorof the Centre for International Politi-cal Studies at the University of Preto-ria. She is also a Council Member of

tion in Cairo, Egypt; Professor ofMissile Mechanics of Flight at theMilitary Technical College (MTC) inCairo; Member of the Committee ofStrategic Planning of the EgyptianCouncil of Space Science and Tech-nology; Al-Ahram Center for Politi-cal and Strategic Studies, Al-GalaaSt., Cairo, Egypt, Tel.: (++20-2) 770-5630, Fax: (++20-2) 578-6037, E-mail: [email protected]

Prof. Saideh Lotfian is Associate Pro-fessor of Political Science at the Fac-ulty of Law and Political Science atthe University of Tehran, DeputyDirector of the Center for MiddleEast Strategic Studies in Tehran, andthe former Director of the MiddleEast Program at the Center forStrategic Research; Faculty of Law& Political Science, University ofTehran, Enghelab Ave., Tehran, Iran,Tel.: (++98-21) 611-2546, Fax:(++98-21) 896-9565, E-mail: [email protected]

Dr. Riad Malki, Director General,Panorama, The Palestinian Centerfor the Dissemination of Democracyand Community Development,Ramallah, West Bank, Palestine [for-merly at BirZeit University, School ofEngineering]

Office: Panorama, Ahliyya CollegeSt., Cairo-Amman Bank Building,3rd Fl.n Ramallah, West Bank,P.O.Box 2049, Palestine, Tel.: +972-(970) 2-295-9618/23, Fax: +972(970) 2-2981824, E-mail:[email protected],[email protected]

Prof. Amitabh Mattoo, Vice Chan-cellor, University of Jammu, Jammu,J&K, India; Member, Prime Minis-ter’s Task Force on Global StrategicDevelopments; Professor of Disar-mament Studies, School of Interna-


Pugwash Council continued


Sendai 980-8576, Japan, E-mail:[email protected]

Gen. Pan Zhengqiang is Professor atthe Institute of Strategic Studies atthe National Defense University,PLA, China, a retired Major Generalin the Chinese People’s Army, andformer Director of the Institute ofStrategic Studies; Institute of Strate-gic Studies, National Defense Uni-versity, PLA, China, Tel/Fax: (++86-10) 8283-1159, E-mail:[email protected]

Senator Douglas Roche, O.C., is amember of The Senate of Canada;former Visiting Professor at the Uni-versity of Alberta in Edmonton;Chairman of the Canadian PugwashGroup; Chairman of the MiddlePowers Initiative; and former Cana-dian Ambassador for Disarmament;University of Alberta, Edmonton,Alberta, Canada, Tel.: (++1-780)466-8072, Fax (++1-780) 469-4732,E-mail: [email protected] (or)[email protected]

Acad. Yuri Ryzhov is President of theInternational Engineering Universityin Moscow; Chair of the RussianPugwash Group; Academician of theRussian Academy of Sciences; for-mer Member of the PresidentialCouncil of the Russian Federation;and former Ambassador Extraordi-

nary and Plenipotentiary of Russiato France; 6 Leninsky pr., Moscow,Russia, Tel.: ++7-095) 236-5066 /9761, Fax: (++7-095) 236-1469, E-mail: [email protected]

Prof. Ivo Slaus, a Member of theCroatian Parliament, is Chairman ofthe Parliamentary Subcommittee onScience, Higher Education & Tech-nology, President of Croatian Pug-wash, a Member of the Club ofRome, a Fellow of the World Acad-emy and Academia Europea, formerProfessor of Physics at RudjerBoskovic Institute, and former For-eign Secretary of the Croatian Acad-emy of Sciences & Arts; RudjerBoskovic Institute, Bijenicka 54, P.O.Box 1016, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia,Tel.:(++385-1) 46 80 202, Fax:(++385-1) 46 80 239, E-mail:[email protected]

Prof. Fernando de Souza Barros isProfessor Emeritus at the PhysicsInstitute of the Federal University ofRio de Janeiro in Brazil; PhysicsInstitute, UFRJ, Tel.: (++55-21)2562-7337, Fax: (++55-21) 2562-7368, E-mail: [email protected]

Dr. Mark Byung-Moon Suh, a SouthKorean political scientist, is a SeniorResearcher in the Department ofPolitical Science at the Free Univer-sity of Berlin in Germany and Presi-

dent of the Korean Pugwash Group.He was formerly the director of theKorean International Peace ResearchInstitute (KIPRI) in Seoul, and amember of the Advisory Council onPeaceful and Democratic Unificationof Korea; Schlieperstr. 12, D-13507Berlin, Germany, Tel.: (++49-30)433-8574, Fax: (++49-30) 433-2896,E-mail: [email protected]

Prof. M.S. Swaminathan is arenowned agriculture scientist. Con-sidered the scientific leader of theGreen Revolution, his approach inpioneering “ever-green revolution” isat the heart of what is now calledsustainable agriculture. He is a pastrecipient of the World Food Prize,the Honda Award, the RamonMagsaysay Award, the UNESCOGandhi Prize, and the Indira GandhiPrize for Peace, Disarmament andDevelopment. He chaired the Inter-national Commission on Peace andFood, and is UNESCO Chair inEcotechnology, and Chairman of theMS Swaminathan Research Founda-tion in Chennai, India; MS Swami-nathan Research Foundation, 3rdCross Street, Taramani InstitutionalArea, Chennai-600 113, India, Tel.:(++91-44) 254 2790 / 1698, Fax:(++91-44) 254 1319, E-mail: [email protected]

Pugwash Council continued

Calendar of Future Pugwash Meetings

2007

17-18 March 2007 Pugwash Meeting no. 324: 26th Workshop of the Pugwash Study GroupNoordwijk, The Netherlands on the Implementation of the Chemical and Biological Weapons

Conventions: 10 Years of the OPCW: Taking Stock and Looking Forward

12-14 April 2007 14th National Student Pugwash USA Conferenceon Science andWashington, DC Social Responsibility: Promoting the Integrity of Science

22-23 April 2007 4th Pugwash Workshop on Prospects for Self-Governance in JammuKochi, India and Kashmir

5-7 July 2007 Pugwash Conferences/Middle Powers Initiative, “Revitalizing NuclearNova Scotia Pugwash, Disarmament”, 50th Anniversary Pugwash Workshop

21-26 October 2007 57th Annual Pugwash Conference: Prospects for Disarmament, DialogueBari, Italy and Cooperation in the Mediterranean Region

7-8 December 2007-03-20 27th Workshop of the Pugwash Study Group on the ImplementationGeneva, Switzerland of the Chemical and Biological Weapons Conventions

2008

Spring 2008* Pugwash Workshop on Science, Ethics and SocietyAjaccio, Corsica, France

* = tentative

Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs

President Professor M.S. Swaminathan

Secretary-General Professor Paolo Cotta-Ramusino

Executive Director Dr. Jeffrey Boutwell

Pugwash Council

Chair Professor Marie Muller

Members Ambassador Ochieng Adala

Professor Fernando de Souza Barros

Dr. Jeffrey Boutwell

Professor Francesco Calogero

Dr. Pierre Canonne

Professor Paolo Cotta-Ramusino

Dr. Lynn Eden

Professor Galia Golan-Gild

Professor Karen Hallberg

Professor Pervez Hoodbhoy

Mr. Chen Jifeng

Maj. Gen. Mohamed Kadry Said

Prof. Saideh Lotfian

Dr. Riad Malki

Pugwash Executive Committee

Chairman Professor Paolo Cotta-Ramusino

Members Dr. Jeffrey Boutwell

Prof. Saideh Lotfian

Professor Marie Muller

Amb. Miguel Marin-Bosch

Professor Amitabh Mattoo

Professor Anne McLaren

Dr. Steven Miller

Dr. Götz Neuneck

Dr. Alexander Nikitin

Professor Hitoshi Ohnishi

Maj. Gen. (ret.) Pan Zhenqiang

Senator Douglas Roche

Academician Yuri Ryzhov

Professor Ivo Slaus

Dr. Mark Byung-Moon Suh

Professor M.S. Swaminathan

Professor M.S. Swaminathan

Maj. Gen. (ret.) Pan Zhenqiang

Geneva Office16 rue de la Voie-Creuse1211 Geneva, SwitzerlandPhone: **41-22-919-7920Fax: **41-22-919-7925E-mail: [email protected]

Washington, DC Office1111 19th Street NW12th FloorWashington, DC 20036Phone: **1-202-478-3440Fax: **1-202-238-9604E-mail: [email protected]

London OfficeFlat A Museum Mansions63A Great Russell StreetLondon WC1B 3BJ, EnglandPhone: **44-20-7405-6661Fax: **44-20-7831-5651E-mail: [email protected]

Rome OfficeAccademia Nazionale de Linceivia della Lungara, 10I-00165 Rome, ItalyPhone: **39-06-6872606Fax: **39-06-6878376E-mail: [email protected]

newsletter · 09:30–10:15 plenary session 2: opening speech [open] chair:marie muller...

Documents