Partnership In The Middle East, With The Middle East
Abu Dhabi
November 24th, 2008
It is a privilege to be among such a distinguished audience. I am grateful to Dr Jamal al Suweidi and the Emirates Centre for Strategic Studies and Research for extending the invitation.
No Foreign Secretary can come here without a sense of wonderment at what is being achieved. The UAE in general and Abu Dhabi in particular have become a global success story; a demonstration to the world of what can be is possible in the Middle East. A model of openness: business-friendly, tolerant, peaceful and responsible. In a region scarred by violence and division, the UAE is a microcosm of what a successful Middle East can become.
In just two generations, you have created some of the most advanced and inspiring cities in the world. The UAE economy has doubled in size in just four years. Per capita income now bears comparison with rich European countries. And the GCC is now ranked fifth in the list of world exporters, surpassed only by the US, EU, Japan and China.
This country does not just sit on a tenth of the world's oil. It is also home to the financial capital of this region, to the world's largest sovereign wealth fund and to a generation of dynamic business and political leaders who have secured your place at the cutting edge of not just commercial but also scientific enterprise.
It is an indication of your foresight that energy – nuclear and renewables – should have brought you together. This region, like many others, is facing a looming energy shortage. Our response in Britain has determined that enhancing our civil nuclear capacity is crucial for us in meeting this challenge. The approach you have taken sets a high standard for states which seek responsibly to acquire a civil nuclear capacity, and I am delighted that we have signed a bilateral agreement to support you. Later today I will visit the Masdar Initative, with which we have also recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding. Another example of your commitment to forward thinking.
But while no British Foreign Secretary can come without a sense of wonderment, nor can he or she come here without a sense of the shared history – for 200 years - between our countries. It is a unique relationship of which we in the UK are intensely proud. It is a partnership which has left a deep well of experience, affection respect and most important trust. These are virtues that the Prime Minister and I are determined to nurture.
What fuelled Britain's interest in the region in the 18th century was trade, and the need to protect the Gulf waters. But inevitably political engagement quickly followed. Security of the sea demanded stability on the shores. What began with a handful of bilateral treaties and agreements in the early 1800s saw Britain as the dominant external power here by the end of the First World War.
I am conscious that, by today’s standards, our colonial history is not a history of liberation or freedom, of rapid social and economic development or of partnership. We cannot wish away our role in mandate Palestine or its aftermath. There were those here in the Gulf who felt abandoned when, in 1968, we announced our intention to withdraw from treaties of protection with the Gulf states.
And despite good intentions in Iraq, and current progress, it is clear that serious mistakes were made.
But there is, of course, a positive story that we must not forget. The Buraimi crisis of 1955/6; the actions of British forces in defence of Oman in the 1950s and 60s. Together with an Arab League force, we helped to deter a threatened Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1961 and subsequently contributed to its liberation in 1991. In 1970, we persuaded Iran to drop its claim to the island of Bahrain. We helped to keep Gulf trade routes open when international shipping was threatened during the Iran-Iraq War in the late 1980s.
Today we still maintain a Royal Navy presence in and around the Gulf. We have troops working alongside each other in Afghanistan. We each have active Embassies in Baghdad following the UAE’s important decision to reopen there. We share a common approach to Kosovo. And we are both committed to support Pakistan: President Zardari is here today and I will see him in Islamabad tomorrow.
Since the discovery of oil, British companies have worked with you to help improve extraction and refinery. And British expertise, in education, in healthcare, in construction, in banking, in commercial law, in police training, has played its part in the UAE’s development in recent decades. Now there are 140 direct flights each week, with half a million visitors from the UAE to the UK and one million tourists the other way.
There is no room for complacency. The young UAE population needs to see why we are so close. But under almost any conceivable political and economic circumstances, Britain’s interests will remain deeply bound to the fortunes of this region. Because our economic interdependence means that we both have a stake in each other's prosperity. Trade between the UK and the Middle East and North Africa is worth £29bn a year. The GCC is the EU's sixth largest export market and the EU is the GCC's primary trading partner. Because with sixty percent of the planet’s oil reserves and forty percent of its gas, this region is key to ensuring that the world’s growing appetite for energy can be met. And with five percent of the world's population but only 1% of its water, there can be no question here of the urgency of collective action to tackle climate change.
So the question for us all then, is how we can safeguard our peace and prosperity for the future. How we can protect the economic, political and social gains of the last fifty years, and maximise our opportunities for the future?
Projecting forward I see three threats.
This first is economic, because there is a risk that the current economic downturn will provoke siren voices to call for a return to protectionism and an end to the globalisation on which our economies so depend.
The second is political, because there are two competing trends. One, where pragmatism rules, where shared solutions are developed in response to shared problems, and where diplomacy is the basis for engagement. The other is characterised by the violent opposition of extremist organisations such as Al Qaeda. And here I will focus on the Palestinian-Israeli dispute, because ending the injustices that have persisted for too many decades, is critical to ensuring that in this region the former wins out over the latter, that the politics of collaboration defeats the politics of confrontation.
Finally, security, where I believe the most immediate challenge is from the proliferation of nuclear material and the prospect of a nuclear armed Iran.
Global Economy
In the last six months we have seen world share prices fall 50 percent, huge volatility in the price of oil and other assets, and global financial institutions booking almost one thousand billion dollars of write-downs. Global growth is slowing sharply. We need a policy response to match the challenge.
Today, we must not repeat the mistakes of the US in 1930s when the ill-advised Smoot Hawley tariff act raised tariffs on thousands of US goods and led to a beggar-thy-neighbour spiral that saw global trade fall by 60 per cent. We must resist protectionism in all its forms. That is why it is imperative that we work together urgently to break the deadlock in the Doha trade round, and why the G20 leaders at the summit in Washington were right to task Trade Ministers to take this forward.
It is also why we must ensure openness to investment. Investment flows from Abu Dhabi and the Gulf are part of the answer to the financial crisis, bringing much needed capital and stability. We must ensure that world remains welcoming to your investment, not just in times of crisis, but in times of stability as well.
Sovereign Wealth Funds are now recognized as valuable participants in the international financial system. I particularly welcome the best practice set out in the Santiago Principles, in whose formulation Abu Dhabi played such an important role. I very much hope that this will create the investment environment, from which both our countries can benefit. The UK remains ready to welcome Sovereign Wealth Fund investment. (Although as a lifelong Arsenal supporter, after Saturday’s result at the City of Manchester Stadium, I’m beginning to question my judgement)
Last week's G20 summit was a first step in recognising that collective action to stabilise the global economy and the global financial system, needs a much wider group of actors, if it is to be successful.
Britain has long argued that our international institutions, both political and financial, need to be reformed to reflect the growing importance of countries such as your own. So we are very pleased to see more emerging economies now assuming their seat at the top table. We firmly believe that those who are able to contribute to solutions to the global crisis should be involved as partners in whatever architecture emerges.
Middle East Peace Process
On the Middle-East Peace Process we are at a similarly critical juncture. Because if the status quo continues, I believe that the prospect of peace could disappear forever.
Why? Because the situation on the ground, that leaves too many people insecure, in poverty and despair, is rapidly undermining the political process. And because while both sides are tiring of the conflict, they are also tiring, faster, of efforts to resolve it.
I have visited Jenin and seen a success story in terms of the Palestinian Security Force but met Palestinians who feel hopeless and humiliated. Their daily experience is of checkpoints, road blocks and harassment. In Gaza it is worse. Restrictions on access for supplies through the border crossings have left its citizens short of food and medicine. While their leaders negotiate with the Israelis, settlement construction makes them fear they are being robbed of that which they are negotiating over.
There is a similar sense of insecurity on the Israeli side. They feel threatened and under siege. They tried withdrawal from Gaza and Lebanon, but were greeted with rocket fire. They supported democratic freedoms for the Palestinians, only to see an organisation which vowed to destroy them gain the most votes. They fear Iran’s intentions, not only in the development of its nuclear programme, but in its support and weapons supplies to Hamas and Hizbollah.
Those who believe in peace, those who want to end this conflict through cooperation rather than confrontation, must act now to prevent a downward spiral, to stop the illegal settlement activity, the rocket attacks and the fragmentation of the Palestinian politics and society, all of which are eroding the chances for peace and justice.
We will continue to support the Palestinian authority and the Palestinian economy with over £243 million over the next three years, regardless of the financial climate. This money will support projects that help Palestinians protect their homes and land. It will help the Palestinian authority to provide security for Palestinians, and help provide fuel, healthcare, food water and education in Gaza. We will continue to work for increased humanitarian access and deliveries through the crossings. And we will continue to stand by the consensus expressed in UN resolutions for a final agreement: two states, based on 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as the capital of both, and a just and agreed settlement for refugees.
The insecurity within the region makes progress on peace negotiations ever more urgent. For almost seven years the peace process was frozen. Genuine negotiations have taken place between Israeli and Palestinian leaders. Relations between Lebanon and Syria are being put on a diplomatic footing. Egypt has been trying to broker Palestinian reconciliation. It is not yet a thaw or a breakthrough, but it is an opening.
Last week I travelled from Jerusalem to Ramallah to Damascus to Beirut. We all know the problems of the region are linked. My conclusion is that the only peace will be a comprehensive peace. A peace with an independent Palestinian state at its core, but underpinned by a broader peace between Israel and the whole Arab world.
In other words a 23 state solution – 22 members of the Arab League plus Israel.
And I am convinced that such a peace is our best if not our only hope. Because the Palestinian leadership needs political support from the Arab world in order to agree and implement a deal. Because it is only through an Arab brokered process that Palestinian reconciliation will be possible. Because Arab states can rein in the power of those groups which would seek to torpedo the process. And because the Palestinians simply do not have enough on their own to offer the Israelis to clinch a deal. The real, perhaps the only prize for Israel is a sense that its security in the region is guaranteed.
For too long the countries of the region have been kept at one if not several removes from the peace process. At Camp David they were brought in at the last moment. And when the Arab Peace Initiative was launched in 2002 it was simply not given the attention it deserved. It was - and still is - one of the most significant and promising developments since the start of the conflict.
My belief is that the time has come to build on this initiative and ensure Arab leaders are part of a renewed comprehensive peace process - active participants with interests and responsibilities, not substituting for Israeli and Palestinian negotiators, but not passive spectators either. It is an argument that I make not just to you in the Arab world, but to all Britain's international partners.
2009 is an important moment. Because it is clear that the international community's efforts are not succeeding. The situation on the ground is deteriorating. In Israel senior figures, from President Peres down are now talking about the Arab Peace Initiative – not as a take-it-or-leave-it detailed agreement but as a concept of land for security that only normalisation can start to make real. And President-elect Obama has signalled that he understands the stakes. Arab leaders will do well to show him that the API offer is still on the table; that this offer actively invites a serious Israeli counter offer; and that there is a clear path for both sides to peace and normalisation. Europe needs to be there in support, and I believe it will be.
Iran
The threat from nuclear weapons is by definition the most deadly. As nuclear power becomes a more important source of energy, we face a growing risk of nuclear proliferation. That is the significance of the UAE programme, in explicitly framing its plans to counter this threat.
The UK is committed to a vision of a world free from nuclear weapons. That is why we have reduced the explosive power of our nuclear arsenal by 75% since the end of the Cold War. The US, Russia and France have cut radically too. A Middle-East free of nuclear weapons is critical to this vision. That has been our policy for a number of years.
Iran, however, is going down a different path. It continues to enrich uranium in breach of five United Nations Security Council resolutions. Because of Iran’s long history of secrecy about its nuclear programme the international community is entitled to seek verifiable assurances that it is not for a military programme. The IAEA Director General has made clear that, because of Iran’s failure to cooperate with the IAEA, he is still unable to verify that Iran's programme is for purely peaceful purposes. I remain convinced that the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran poses the most immediate threat to the stability of this region.
When I talk to Arab leaders, journalists or academics, they invariably raise their concerns about Iranian influence and activities. Iraqis complain about Iranian support for the Special Groups who have been responsible for much violence against other Iraqis as well as against multi-national forces. Afghans voice concerns about the assistance Tehran provides to the Taleban. Then there is its political, financial and military support for Hezbollah, as well as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad who are determined to frustrate efforts to achieve a comprehensive peace between Israel and Palestine. And the wholly unacceptable comments from Iran’s President about Israel.
A nuclear armed Iran would be a decisive blow against those seeking to promote pragmatic and peaceful solutions to the regions problems. The consequent nuclear arms race would be very dangerous. The acquisition of a nuclear weapon would strengthen Tehran’s regional position, injecting its attempts to stoke up division and promote instability with much greater confidence.
The pressure we are applying to Iran, the sanctions we have supported in both the EU and the UN, are not an attempt at regime change. And nor are they a precursor to military action. We are 100% committed to a diplomatic resolution of this dispute. We will work closely with the new US Administration on this issue.
But for diplomacy to work we need to present Tehran with a stark choice. Either it cooperates with the UN Security Council, halts enrichment and engages constructively with the IAEA, or it continues on its current path towards further confrontation and isolation. It is only by making this choice more and more stark, by combining increasingly tough sanctions with clear offers of reintegration – such as that which the E3+3 presented to the Iranians in June under cover of a letter signed by all the Foreign Ministers including Condoleezza Rice – that we can hope to veer the Iranian government off its current course.
We are keen to work with the countries of the Gulf on this too. You offer serious incentives for economic cooperation - in terms of closer economic ties or preferential trade arrangements – if Iran plays by the rules. And you could pursue further restrictive measures, partly financial but also for instance clamping down on smuggling or tightening up export controls on goods which could support the development of nuclear weapons. And there is much that the Arab countries could do to counter Tehran's claims that their quest for greater influence and their nuclear programme enjoys tacit support throughout the region. 2009 is the year when we need to work on these issues together.
Conclusion
John F Kennedy once said that "World peace, like community peace, does not require that each man love his neighbour -- it requires only that they live together with mutual tolerance, submitting their disputes to a just and peaceful settlement."
I believe that what happens over the next few years in this region- whether just and peaceful solutions can be found both to the Arab-Israeli conflict and to the problems now posed by Iran; whether a model of extremism and violence is viewed as illusion or inspiration; whether cooperation wins out over confrontation is of vital importance not just here but across the planet.
It is possible to see two very different visions of the Middle-East that might emerge.
In the first, Israel-Palestine remains a sore, fuelling ideologies of hatred and revenge across the region. Iran attains a nuclear weapon, emboldening extremists and sparking a nuclear arms race which diverts attention away from development. Demographics and climate change lead to new tensions to which the countries of the region are poorly placed to respond.
Alternatively, the positive, pragmatic dynamics of the new Middle-East gain ground. The Arab world normalises relations with Israel as a Palestinian state emerges, and Iran accepts that it needs to work with others in the region and the international community to restore confidence in its intentions. New challenges are met through collective diplomacy, and the boundless energy of the Arab youth is channelled into business and technological innovation.
This is the world where Arab renewal follows your example, not just here in the Gulf, but across the Middle-East and North Africa. It is the world Britain is committed to working with you to create.
Abu Dhabi
November 24th, 2008
It is a privilege to be among such a distinguished audience. I am grateful to Dr Jamal al Suweidi and the Emirates Centre for Strategic Studies and Research for extending the invitation.
No Foreign Secretary can come here without a sense of wonderment at what is being achieved. The UAE in general and Abu Dhabi in particular have become a global success story; a demonstration to the world of what can be is possible in the Middle East. A model of openness: business-friendly, tolerant, peaceful and responsible. In a region scarred by violence and division, the UAE is a microcosm of what a successful Middle East can become.
In just two generations, you have created some of the most advanced and inspiring cities in the world. The UAE economy has doubled in size in just four years. Per capita income now bears comparison with rich European countries. And the GCC is now ranked fifth in the list of world exporters, surpassed only by the US, EU, Japan and China.
This country does not just sit on a tenth of the world's oil. It is also home to the financial capital of this region, to the world's largest sovereign wealth fund and to a generation of dynamic business and political leaders who have secured your place at the cutting edge of not just commercial but also scientific enterprise.
It is an indication of your foresight that energy – nuclear and renewables – should have brought you together. This region, like many others, is facing a looming energy shortage. Our response in Britain has determined that enhancing our civil nuclear capacity is crucial for us in meeting this challenge. The approach you have taken sets a high standard for states which seek responsibly to acquire a civil nuclear capacity, and I am delighted that we have signed a bilateral agreement to support you. Later today I will visit the Masdar Initative, with which we have also recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding. Another example of your commitment to forward thinking.
But while no British Foreign Secretary can come without a sense of wonderment, nor can he or she come here without a sense of the shared history – for 200 years - between our countries. It is a unique relationship of which we in the UK are intensely proud. It is a partnership which has left a deep well of experience, affection respect and most important trust. These are virtues that the Prime Minister and I are determined to nurture.
What fuelled Britain's interest in the region in the 18th century was trade, and the need to protect the Gulf waters. But inevitably political engagement quickly followed. Security of the sea demanded stability on the shores. What began with a handful of bilateral treaties and agreements in the early 1800s saw Britain as the dominant external power here by the end of the First World War.
I am conscious that, by today’s standards, our colonial history is not a history of liberation or freedom, of rapid social and economic development or of partnership. We cannot wish away our role in mandate Palestine or its aftermath. There were those here in the Gulf who felt abandoned when, in 1968, we announced our intention to withdraw from treaties of protection with the Gulf states.
And despite good intentions in Iraq, and current progress, it is clear that serious mistakes were made.
But there is, of course, a positive story that we must not forget. The Buraimi crisis of 1955/6; the actions of British forces in defence of Oman in the 1950s and 60s. Together with an Arab League force, we helped to deter a threatened Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1961 and subsequently contributed to its liberation in 1991. In 1970, we persuaded Iran to drop its claim to the island of Bahrain. We helped to keep Gulf trade routes open when international shipping was threatened during the Iran-Iraq War in the late 1980s.
Today we still maintain a Royal Navy presence in and around the Gulf. We have troops working alongside each other in Afghanistan. We each have active Embassies in Baghdad following the UAE’s important decision to reopen there. We share a common approach to Kosovo. And we are both committed to support Pakistan: President Zardari is here today and I will see him in Islamabad tomorrow.
Since the discovery of oil, British companies have worked with you to help improve extraction and refinery. And British expertise, in education, in healthcare, in construction, in banking, in commercial law, in police training, has played its part in the UAE’s development in recent decades. Now there are 140 direct flights each week, with half a million visitors from the UAE to the UK and one million tourists the other way.
There is no room for complacency. The young UAE population needs to see why we are so close. But under almost any conceivable political and economic circumstances, Britain’s interests will remain deeply bound to the fortunes of this region. Because our economic interdependence means that we both have a stake in each other's prosperity. Trade between the UK and the Middle East and North Africa is worth £29bn a year. The GCC is the EU's sixth largest export market and the EU is the GCC's primary trading partner. Because with sixty percent of the planet’s oil reserves and forty percent of its gas, this region is key to ensuring that the world’s growing appetite for energy can be met. And with five percent of the world's population but only 1% of its water, there can be no question here of the urgency of collective action to tackle climate change.
So the question for us all then, is how we can safeguard our peace and prosperity for the future. How we can protect the economic, political and social gains of the last fifty years, and maximise our opportunities for the future?
Projecting forward I see three threats.
This first is economic, because there is a risk that the current economic downturn will provoke siren voices to call for a return to protectionism and an end to the globalisation on which our economies so depend.
The second is political, because there are two competing trends. One, where pragmatism rules, where shared solutions are developed in response to shared problems, and where diplomacy is the basis for engagement. The other is characterised by the violent opposition of extremist organisations such as Al Qaeda. And here I will focus on the Palestinian-Israeli dispute, because ending the injustices that have persisted for too many decades, is critical to ensuring that in this region the former wins out over the latter, that the politics of collaboration defeats the politics of confrontation.
Finally, security, where I believe the most immediate challenge is from the proliferation of nuclear material and the prospect of a nuclear armed Iran.
Global Economy
In the last six months we have seen world share prices fall 50 percent, huge volatility in the price of oil and other assets, and global financial institutions booking almost one thousand billion dollars of write-downs. Global growth is slowing sharply. We need a policy response to match the challenge.
Today, we must not repeat the mistakes of the US in 1930s when the ill-advised Smoot Hawley tariff act raised tariffs on thousands of US goods and led to a beggar-thy-neighbour spiral that saw global trade fall by 60 per cent. We must resist protectionism in all its forms. That is why it is imperative that we work together urgently to break the deadlock in the Doha trade round, and why the G20 leaders at the summit in Washington were right to task Trade Ministers to take this forward.
It is also why we must ensure openness to investment. Investment flows from Abu Dhabi and the Gulf are part of the answer to the financial crisis, bringing much needed capital and stability. We must ensure that world remains welcoming to your investment, not just in times of crisis, but in times of stability as well.
Sovereign Wealth Funds are now recognized as valuable participants in the international financial system. I particularly welcome the best practice set out in the Santiago Principles, in whose formulation Abu Dhabi played such an important role. I very much hope that this will create the investment environment, from which both our countries can benefit. The UK remains ready to welcome Sovereign Wealth Fund investment. (Although as a lifelong Arsenal supporter, after Saturday’s result at the City of Manchester Stadium, I’m beginning to question my judgement)
Last week's G20 summit was a first step in recognising that collective action to stabilise the global economy and the global financial system, needs a much wider group of actors, if it is to be successful.
Britain has long argued that our international institutions, both political and financial, need to be reformed to reflect the growing importance of countries such as your own. So we are very pleased to see more emerging economies now assuming their seat at the top table. We firmly believe that those who are able to contribute to solutions to the global crisis should be involved as partners in whatever architecture emerges.
Middle East Peace Process
On the Middle-East Peace Process we are at a similarly critical juncture. Because if the status quo continues, I believe that the prospect of peace could disappear forever.
Why? Because the situation on the ground, that leaves too many people insecure, in poverty and despair, is rapidly undermining the political process. And because while both sides are tiring of the conflict, they are also tiring, faster, of efforts to resolve it.
I have visited Jenin and seen a success story in terms of the Palestinian Security Force but met Palestinians who feel hopeless and humiliated. Their daily experience is of checkpoints, road blocks and harassment. In Gaza it is worse. Restrictions on access for supplies through the border crossings have left its citizens short of food and medicine. While their leaders negotiate with the Israelis, settlement construction makes them fear they are being robbed of that which they are negotiating over.
There is a similar sense of insecurity on the Israeli side. They feel threatened and under siege. They tried withdrawal from Gaza and Lebanon, but were greeted with rocket fire. They supported democratic freedoms for the Palestinians, only to see an organisation which vowed to destroy them gain the most votes. They fear Iran’s intentions, not only in the development of its nuclear programme, but in its support and weapons supplies to Hamas and Hizbollah.
Those who believe in peace, those who want to end this conflict through cooperation rather than confrontation, must act now to prevent a downward spiral, to stop the illegal settlement activity, the rocket attacks and the fragmentation of the Palestinian politics and society, all of which are eroding the chances for peace and justice.
We will continue to support the Palestinian authority and the Palestinian economy with over £243 million over the next three years, regardless of the financial climate. This money will support projects that help Palestinians protect their homes and land. It will help the Palestinian authority to provide security for Palestinians, and help provide fuel, healthcare, food water and education in Gaza. We will continue to work for increased humanitarian access and deliveries through the crossings. And we will continue to stand by the consensus expressed in UN resolutions for a final agreement: two states, based on 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as the capital of both, and a just and agreed settlement for refugees.
The insecurity within the region makes progress on peace negotiations ever more urgent. For almost seven years the peace process was frozen. Genuine negotiations have taken place between Israeli and Palestinian leaders. Relations between Lebanon and Syria are being put on a diplomatic footing. Egypt has been trying to broker Palestinian reconciliation. It is not yet a thaw or a breakthrough, but it is an opening.
Last week I travelled from Jerusalem to Ramallah to Damascus to Beirut. We all know the problems of the region are linked. My conclusion is that the only peace will be a comprehensive peace. A peace with an independent Palestinian state at its core, but underpinned by a broader peace between Israel and the whole Arab world.
In other words a 23 state solution – 22 members of the Arab League plus Israel.
And I am convinced that such a peace is our best if not our only hope. Because the Palestinian leadership needs political support from the Arab world in order to agree and implement a deal. Because it is only through an Arab brokered process that Palestinian reconciliation will be possible. Because Arab states can rein in the power of those groups which would seek to torpedo the process. And because the Palestinians simply do not have enough on their own to offer the Israelis to clinch a deal. The real, perhaps the only prize for Israel is a sense that its security in the region is guaranteed.
For too long the countries of the region have been kept at one if not several removes from the peace process. At Camp David they were brought in at the last moment. And when the Arab Peace Initiative was launched in 2002 it was simply not given the attention it deserved. It was - and still is - one of the most significant and promising developments since the start of the conflict.
My belief is that the time has come to build on this initiative and ensure Arab leaders are part of a renewed comprehensive peace process - active participants with interests and responsibilities, not substituting for Israeli and Palestinian negotiators, but not passive spectators either. It is an argument that I make not just to you in the Arab world, but to all Britain's international partners.
2009 is an important moment. Because it is clear that the international community's efforts are not succeeding. The situation on the ground is deteriorating. In Israel senior figures, from President Peres down are now talking about the Arab Peace Initiative – not as a take-it-or-leave-it detailed agreement but as a concept of land for security that only normalisation can start to make real. And President-elect Obama has signalled that he understands the stakes. Arab leaders will do well to show him that the API offer is still on the table; that this offer actively invites a serious Israeli counter offer; and that there is a clear path for both sides to peace and normalisation. Europe needs to be there in support, and I believe it will be.
Iran
The threat from nuclear weapons is by definition the most deadly. As nuclear power becomes a more important source of energy, we face a growing risk of nuclear proliferation. That is the significance of the UAE programme, in explicitly framing its plans to counter this threat.
The UK is committed to a vision of a world free from nuclear weapons. That is why we have reduced the explosive power of our nuclear arsenal by 75% since the end of the Cold War. The US, Russia and France have cut radically too. A Middle-East free of nuclear weapons is critical to this vision. That has been our policy for a number of years.
Iran, however, is going down a different path. It continues to enrich uranium in breach of five United Nations Security Council resolutions. Because of Iran’s long history of secrecy about its nuclear programme the international community is entitled to seek verifiable assurances that it is not for a military programme. The IAEA Director General has made clear that, because of Iran’s failure to cooperate with the IAEA, he is still unable to verify that Iran's programme is for purely peaceful purposes. I remain convinced that the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran poses the most immediate threat to the stability of this region.
When I talk to Arab leaders, journalists or academics, they invariably raise their concerns about Iranian influence and activities. Iraqis complain about Iranian support for the Special Groups who have been responsible for much violence against other Iraqis as well as against multi-national forces. Afghans voice concerns about the assistance Tehran provides to the Taleban. Then there is its political, financial and military support for Hezbollah, as well as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad who are determined to frustrate efforts to achieve a comprehensive peace between Israel and Palestine. And the wholly unacceptable comments from Iran’s President about Israel.
A nuclear armed Iran would be a decisive blow against those seeking to promote pragmatic and peaceful solutions to the regions problems. The consequent nuclear arms race would be very dangerous. The acquisition of a nuclear weapon would strengthen Tehran’s regional position, injecting its attempts to stoke up division and promote instability with much greater confidence.
The pressure we are applying to Iran, the sanctions we have supported in both the EU and the UN, are not an attempt at regime change. And nor are they a precursor to military action. We are 100% committed to a diplomatic resolution of this dispute. We will work closely with the new US Administration on this issue.
But for diplomacy to work we need to present Tehran with a stark choice. Either it cooperates with the UN Security Council, halts enrichment and engages constructively with the IAEA, or it continues on its current path towards further confrontation and isolation. It is only by making this choice more and more stark, by combining increasingly tough sanctions with clear offers of reintegration – such as that which the E3+3 presented to the Iranians in June under cover of a letter signed by all the Foreign Ministers including Condoleezza Rice – that we can hope to veer the Iranian government off its current course.
We are keen to work with the countries of the Gulf on this too. You offer serious incentives for economic cooperation - in terms of closer economic ties or preferential trade arrangements – if Iran plays by the rules. And you could pursue further restrictive measures, partly financial but also for instance clamping down on smuggling or tightening up export controls on goods which could support the development of nuclear weapons. And there is much that the Arab countries could do to counter Tehran's claims that their quest for greater influence and their nuclear programme enjoys tacit support throughout the region. 2009 is the year when we need to work on these issues together.
Conclusion
John F Kennedy once said that "World peace, like community peace, does not require that each man love his neighbour -- it requires only that they live together with mutual tolerance, submitting their disputes to a just and peaceful settlement."
I believe that what happens over the next few years in this region- whether just and peaceful solutions can be found both to the Arab-Israeli conflict and to the problems now posed by Iran; whether a model of extremism and violence is viewed as illusion or inspiration; whether cooperation wins out over confrontation is of vital importance not just here but across the planet.
It is possible to see two very different visions of the Middle-East that might emerge.
In the first, Israel-Palestine remains a sore, fuelling ideologies of hatred and revenge across the region. Iran attains a nuclear weapon, emboldening extremists and sparking a nuclear arms race which diverts attention away from development. Demographics and climate change lead to new tensions to which the countries of the region are poorly placed to respond.
Alternatively, the positive, pragmatic dynamics of the new Middle-East gain ground. The Arab world normalises relations with Israel as a Palestinian state emerges, and Iran accepts that it needs to work with others in the region and the international community to restore confidence in its intentions. New challenges are met through collective diplomacy, and the boundless energy of the Arab youth is channelled into business and technological innovation.
This is the world where Arab renewal follows your example, not just here in the Gulf, but across the Middle-East and North Africa. It is the world Britain is committed to working with you to create.
No comments:
Post a Comment