ACRS Oral History Project

In the wake of the Gulf War, President George H.W. Bush announced a plan intended to curb the spread of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons in the Middle East, as well as the missiles that can deliver them, and expressed support for a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region. The initiative called on all countries in the region to “implement a verifiable freeze on the production and acquisition of weapons-usable nuclear material (enriched uranium or separated plutonium)”. It also ed on arms suppliers to establish guidelines “for restraints on destabilizing transfers of conventional arms” to the region. In response, representatives of the P5 held three rounds of meetings from 1991-1992.

Cosponsored by the United States and the Soviet Union, attendees included a joint Jordanian/ Palestinian delegation and delegates from Syria, the European Community, Egypt, Israel, and Lebanon.

Following the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference, the parties met in Washington, D.C. and decided to proceed with dividing the talks into multilateral and bilateral tracks. The multilateral track included five working groups covering arms control and regional security, economic development, water, refugees, and the environment. The working groups complemented the three bilateral peace negotiation tracks between Israel and its Arab neighbors (the Palestinians, Jordan and Syria).

At a foreign minister-level meeting in Moscow it was agreed that Russia, which succeeded the Soviet Union at the talks, and the United States, would serve as the overall co-sponsors of the multilateral process, and ACRS, in particular. A Steering Group was established to serve as the coordinating body of the multilateral forum, comprised of Egypt, Jordan, Israel, the Palestinians, Saudi Arabia (representing the Gulf states), Tunisia (representing the Maghreb states), Japan, Canada, and the European Union. Syria and Lebanon refused to participate in the multilateral talks before a political settlement of outstanding issues with Israel was reached. A Palestinian delegation was admitted after the election of Yitzhak Rabin as Prime Minister of Israel (prior to this the Palestinians participated as part of the Jordanian delegation).

The first substantive meeting of the newly formed ACRS working group met in Washington D.C. from May 11-14, 1992. Discussions centered around of the applicability to the Middle East of measures adopted in the U.S.-Soviet/European theatre: a hotline for messages about military exercises, preventing misunderstandings, and avoiding incidents at sea. The delegates agreed to support measures to reduce the chance of military misunderstandings that could have destabilizing consequences and agreed that, with peace, an arms control regime would include weapons of mass destruction. Arab nations presented a joint proposal for parties to register arms imports, publish military budgets, provide advance warnings of military exercises, and provide for reciprocal visits of defense installations.

At the 2nd ACRS Plenary Meeting held in Moscow, Russia, from September 15-17, 1992, each delegation was asked to formulate its long-term objectives for arms control in the Middle East and to present further suggestions for building trust between the region's countries at the next meeting of the group. This formulation permitted the inclusion of nuclear-related issues into an agreed-upon diplomatic framework. Egypt asked that the next meeting give top priority to Israel's nuclear disarmament.

During the third plenary, held in Washington, D.C., from May 17-20, 1993, the “delegations agreed on the need to move into a more active stage of work. To this end, they agreed on the importance of using intersessional periods between plenary meetings of the Working Group to accelerate the pace of work, increase the frequency of contacts and pursue more focused activities.” As listed in the co-chairmen's concluding remarks, several visits, workshops, and activities were agreed. The three visits agreed were to an airbase in the UK, an observation of a NATO military exercise in Denmark, and a visit to a communications facility in the Hague. The intersessional workshops included a verifications workshop in Cairo, a communications measures workshop, an information exchange workshop, a maritime measures workshop, and workshop on the long-term objectives and declaratory measures of ACRS.

In the intersessional meeting held in Cairo, Egypt, from July 11-13, 1993, experts discussed measures adopted in Europe and between the U.S. and Russia to verify nuclear, chemical, biological, and space armaments, conventional weapons, and review confidence-building measures, as well as ways to validate accords on arms control within the framework of the multilateral talks. On July 12, participants visited the Multinational Force and Observers.

The Oslo I Accords, or the Declaration of Principles (DOP) on Interim Self-Government Arrangements.

Working Group on Maritime Confidence Building

Held in The Hague from September 20-21, 1993, the meeting opened by Foreign Minister Kooijmans. 26 delegates from 8 regional: Egypt (Gen. Ahmed Fakhr +3), Israel (Eli Levite + 4, including Shimon Stein and Uzi Arad), Jordanian/Palestinian Delegation (Jor: Abdullah Toukan +2, Pal : Ziad Abu Zayyad +4), Kuwait (Abdul Ameer Abdul Wahab+1), Oman (Col Hamid bin Said al-Mahrooqi+1), Qatar (Amb Ali M. Jaidah +1), Yemen (LtCol Kassem AbdulSalem al-Shabani +1). Beyond the region: co-sponsors, ‘mentors’ NL, Tu, Can, plus EU Presidency. Abdullah Toukan’s presentation on a possible Conflict Prevention/Resolution Center in Amman. Feedback from Canadian Don Banks on Nova Scotia workshop. Presentations by the co-sponsors (Vladimir Medvedev, Paul Sellers) on their experience with communication in crisis situations, including use of the bilateral hotline. Dutch proposal for a Middle East Communications Network based on the (budding) CSCE Communications Network. It was agreed that communications was a priority area, and support was expressed for the establishment of an ACRS communications network, based on certain principles (voluntary, open to all). The meeting including a simulation at Clingendael, using a small CSCE type network as a multilateral network. Follow up included announcement in Vienna (CSCE) on September 27/28 about potential use of CSCE network for ME peace process.

Held from October 4-6, 1993, in Antalya, Turkey, the Host, co-sponsors and five regional parties attended. Discussion included what military information would be useful to exchange under which circumstances (aggregate numbers, CVs, import-export), visits, pre-notification of selected activities, etc.).

Held from October 20-21, 1993, in Vienna, the workshop addressed conceptual issues such as long-term regional security objectives and declaratory measures

At the 4th ACRS Plenary Meeting in Moscow, Russia, from November 2-4, 1993, representatives discussed the seminars held in July, September, and October with the intention of consolidating the ACRS process into two “baskets”. The conceptual basket focused on creating general principles and norms to guide regional security. Discussions include workshops and other follow-on activities on long-term objectives and declaratory measures, on verification, a conflict prevention or regional security center, the definition of the region for arms control and regional security purposes, the future application of insights and lessons learned from past arms control proposals and confidence and security building measures in the Middle East, and development of a Middle East data bank. The operational basket focused on technical CSBMs in four agreed areas: maritime issues, exchange of military information and prior notification, the establishment of a regional communication network, and establishing a Regional Security Center. The Working Group requests that the Netherlands, Turkey and Canada continue in their role as mentors of these activities. The results of past intersessional events, as contained in the Chairman Summary reports, may serve as the basis for follow-on work.

Delegates from 10 regional parties (Bahrain, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Tunisia, Yemen) attended. Egypt and UAE not present. The discussions were mainly technical. Two options for End-User Station, DOS or UNIX based. Preference was expressed for the more advanced UNIX based option. Not all participating states have an X25 public network; could you use satellite communication instead? Participants went home with a questionnaire, to be filled out and returned before 12 February. Co-sponsors urged participants to decide to join a network before the next Operational Basket meeting.

On January 19, 1994, Nabil Fahmy, the head of the Egyptian delegation to the arms control talks, visited Israel for a bilateral meeting with David Ivry, the head of the Israeli delegation. This meeting marked the first time the top Israeli and Egyptian representatives met for direct talks outside the multilateral working-group framework. The meeting was called to diffuse ongoing controversy between Egypt and Israel in the multilateral talks, precipitated by the Egyptian demand to raise the nuclear issue in the multilateral talks as soon as possible. Israel insisted that the nuclear issue be addressed only when stable peace arrangements were implemented in the Middle East.

Held from January 30-February 4, 1994 in Cairo, Egypt, this workshop of the conceptual basket intended to draft the ACRS Declaration of Principles (DOP). The topic of this meeting was the conceptual basket of measures. Participants attempted to develop a statement reflecting a common understanding about the principles, processes, and objectives. Disagreements centered over the Egyptian-Israeli tensions over reference to the nuclear issue, the Israeli complaining that Egypt was abusing its host role and its “excessive emphasis on nuclear-related verification issues”. The Palestinian rejected the joint Russian-U.S. draft claiming that the paper was an indirect attempt to give new interpretation to United Nations Security Council Resolution 242. The UAE criticized bringing in language on security improvement in the region beyond the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Russian-U.S. paper was adopted not as a “recommendation,” but only as a “draft” which would be submitted to countries for review. It was then put forward at the subsequent meeting in May.

Held from March 20-24, 1994, in Antalya, Turkey. The first one-and-half days (Sunday 20- Monday 21) was led by Canada on maritime measures; the next one-and-a-half days by Turkey (22-23) on prior notification of certain military activities and information exchange; and the last day (afternoon of 23, morning of 24) by the Netherlands. Canadian summary, referring to previous Sydney (Nova Scotia) workshop and the Moscow Plenary, focuses on SAR and INCSEA (Incidents at Sea). Canadians had a draft regional INCSEA agreement ready which was commented. No commitments were made. Participants asked the facilitator to examine the possibilities for a naval exercise in the near future. NL summary refers to the 1 2/1 meeting in The Hague, the Egyptian offer to host the hub (would take 2.5 – 3 years before this would be ready; would be expensive).

Held from May 2-5, 1994 in Doha, this was the first ACRS plenary to take place in the Middle East. It was also the most contentious plenary where Arab and Israeli delegations clashed over how the talks were to proceed. The delegates approved, in principle, the establishment of a crisis prevention center, a communication system linking foreign ministries, and maritime cooperation in search and rescue missions. Qatar offered to host one in the region, if more progress was made in the bilateral tracks. Disagreement continued over how to address the WMD issue. The controversy focused on the Arab parties' insistence that elimination of WMD should top the multilateral agenda. The Arab parties wanted Israel to agree to measures controlling its nuclear weapons capability, including by signing the NPT and opening its nuclear sites to international inspection. The Israelis insisted that the priority should be to establish confidence-building measures. The talks ended without an agreement on the Declaration of Principles (DOP) on arms control.

The language, originally drafted at the Cairo February 1994 intersessional of the “Declaration of Principles and Statements of Intent on Arms Control and Regional Security”, was retitled to “Declaration on Arms Control and Regional Security.” Saudi Arabia was also unwilling to adopt the drafted ACRS Declaration of Principles. The Saudis described the proposed text as a pretext to normalization with Israel, which had “nothing to do with arms limitation.” Other Arab delegations agreed it was premature to adopt such a declaration before a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace agreement. There were also objections to the human rights clause as it might invite external interference in the internal affairs of signatory states.

Israel, Qatar, Tunisia, Egypt, Italy, Canada, and the United States observed a demonstration of search and rescue techniques in the Adriatic Sea.

Held from August 29-September 1, 1994, the 1st Senior Naval Officer’s Symposium took place in Halifax, Canada.

The Paris meeting, held October 10-12, 1994, ended without an agreement on the text of the “Declaration on Arms Control and Regional Security” called for during the plenary meeting in Doha in May 1994. In order to adopt the document during the next plenary meeting, the parties agreed to meet in Amman, Jordan to continue working on the draft.

The chemical weapons verification lab was particularly important for discussions on regional versus multilateral regimes on WMD verification.

The Treaty of Peace Between the State of Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ends the state of war between Israel and Jordan that had existed since 1948 and leads to the exchange of diplomatic relations.

Held from November 8-10, 1994, the 17-member working-level meeting in Amman reached an expert-level agreement to establish a regional conflict prevention center. Other aspects of the operational basket were addressed, including communications, information exchange, and maritime issues. The communication measures were backed by Doha meeting and five positive decisions to join a network. We ordered the equipment for these five and started preparing for a training course in January. Presented a revised set of Standard Operating Procedures. It was agreed that initially the network should be used for ACRS related material: persons, agendas, meeting reports etc. It was agreed to have a User Group meeting six months after the system had become operational.

Held in Tunis from December 13-15, 1994, this plenary session of the arms control working group included delegations from Israel, 12 Arab countries, and the Palestinians. Egypt presented a proposal to form a working group to negotiate aspects of arms control of weapons for mass destruction, as well as space-based and conventional weapons. Under this proposal, discussions were to be held on the establishment of a Nuclear Free Zone in the Middle East, including a system to verify implementation, with the collaboration of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The proposed declaration of principles on arms control and regional security was still being negotiated.

The meeting ended without the parties agreeing on the final wording of a declaration defining security relations in the Middle East. The only differences revolved around the paragraphs on a zone in the Middle East free of WMD, incl ballistic missiles – and on Israeli accession to the NPT, which remained in square brackets. However, agreement was reached on the establishment of three regional security and conflict-prevention centers to be established in Amman, Tunis, and Qatar. A working document was also prepared on the need for prior notification of military exercises. The parties agreed to provide notification of military exercises involving more than 4,000 troops or 110 tanks and to exchange military information. Israel reissued an invitation for Arab nations to visit Israeli military installations.

Operational Basket activities summarized:

- On maritime issues: Plenary approved “Elements of the INCSEA text” and a “Framework for Maritime Search and Rescue”. Canada and the Co-Sponsors urged to implement elements of the framework on a voluntary basis.

- On pre-notification of military activities: a Turkish text was finalized. Final adoption will be complete when all participants (also those who were not in Tunis) confirm their acceptance.

- On a communications network, the Netherlands reported on the Dead Sea meeting: 6 takers, SAP adopted, in region training in Cairo in January

Held March 12-16, 1995 in Cairo. Participants in the training session made use of the equipment that had been sent to the six users in early 1995.

Held from April 4-6, 1995. Operational issues were discussed in Antalya, Turkey, including three confidence-building measures: a communications network, maritime measures, and military information exchanges.

The Working Group Communications Network--the temporary communications network--began operation in The Hague in March 1995. A discussion was held on the elements of the permanent center to be established in Egypt. In order to expand the data base and, subsequently, the use of the network, a list of topics was distributed, including administrative issues, working group papers, confidence-building measures, and general information on arms control. It was agreed to continue discussion on these topics at the next plenary meeting.

The drafting of the agreement on the prevention of incidents at sea was completed. Cooperation in search-and-rescue was discussed. Agreement was reached for a meeting between senior naval officials in the region.

A number of advances were made in information exchange. Prenotification of certain military exercises was agreed upon as were the exchanges of resumes of senior military officers, the exchange of unclassified military publications, and an exchange of military training and education.

Held from May 29-31, 1995, in Helsinki. A statement on arms control and regional security, the definition of long-term goals in arms control and regional security, the delineation of the Middle East region for purposes of regional security and arms control, and the various elements needed to begin negotiations on arms control were discussed. It was decided to schedule a seminar on military doctrines, to be organized by France and held in Amman at the end of December 1995. Also, in Helsinki, the parties heard a proposal on setting up a regional nuclear test ban verification regime for consideration at the next plenary, which was never held.    

Held September 20-21, 1995, in Amman, Jordan. 

An experts meeting discussed the establishment of a Regional Security Center (RSC). The discussion followed a decision taken at the December 1994 plenary meeting in Tunis to establish the RSC in Jordan, with secondary centers in Qatar and Tunisia. The conclusions further stipulate that the staff will be basically in Amman, with some in Qatar, pending a decision on joining in Tunis. The centers would engage in a range of activities, including the organization of seminars on arms control and regional security; encouragement of education and training on issues related to the peace process; support of issues relating to arms control and regional security arrangements; and the functioning of the three centers as an integral part of the regional communications network that began operation in March 1995.

Egypt noted setting up the network was premature, seeing as its primary objective the establishment of a zone free of weapons of mass destruction. The network became operational on 27 March 1995 with a message from the US, Russian and Netherlands Ministers of Foreign Affairs. Since then, message traffic has been low, given ACRS activities have been reduced during that time and no CBMs had been agreed leading to a regular exchange of information.”

Anticipating the imminent resumption of Israeli-Syrian peace negotiations by the end of the month, Mubarak assured Peres that Egypt would not press Israel on NPT adherence for one year or would revisit the issue after a Syrian-Israeli agreement, whichever came first. However, Mubarak said there was no change in Egypt’s willingness to allow ACRS to move forward unless its conditions were met on addressing the WMDFZ issue in ACRS.  

Between December 7-10, 1995, the US delegation put together a “Scorecard of Options for ACRS ‘Caretaker’ Agenda.” The Scorecard listed activities that could be undertaken during the next six months based of those approved at the Tunis Plenary (December 1994). The Scorecard included eight principal tracks: Senior Naval Officers Symposium; Military Doctrine Seminar; Preparation of Papers and Presentations for the next Plenary; Strengthen ACRS Network; Advance the Mandate for Regional Security Centers; Planning Meeting on Setting up a Regional Seismic Cooperation Program; Follow-Up on Maritime Measures; and Cultivate Regional Military Awareness of Arms Control.  

On December 11-15, 1995 at a Track Two meeting attended by many ACRS delegation participants (including DAS Robert Einhorn, but not Egyptian Amb. Nabil Fahmy), ideas for resuming ACRS were explored informally. Several extra regional ACRS participants offered ideas for activities and papers that could be undertaken under a “caretaker agenda.” This resulted, inter alia, in the Canadians offering a Bout de Papier on maritime confidence measures activities that could be planned for the next six months based largely on agenda already approved by the Tunis plenary. 

On December 20, 1995, DAS Einhorn spoke by phone with Ambassador Nabil Fahmy, who confirmed that the outcome of the Peres-Mubarak dialogue resulted in no change in the Egyptian position on ACRS. Fahmy said Mubarak would have a “substantive” problem with postponing the nuclear issue while other issues in ACRS moved ahead. Fahmy laid out two options: First, follow through on the Moussa-Peres agreement reached in New York to hold preliminary discussions on the WMDFZ under ACRS auspices among a limited group of regional parties. Fahmy told Einhorn that there was a discrepancy between Egypt and Israel regarding the outcome from the meeting in New York, most notably about the inclusion of the Palestinians who Israel insisted could not be included because they are not a state. Fahmy insisted that the New York option was the only hope for getting ACRS back on track, and intended to explore it further with Uri Savir, who would be accompanying Israeli FM Ehud Barak to meetings in Cairo on December 23-24. The second option Fahmy offered was simply to postpone all ACRS activities. Einhorn responded that the co-sponsors were responsible for maintaining momentum in ACRS and that the responsible thing to do would be to schedule activities agreed to at the Tunis plenary (December 1994). This would be the “caretaker agenda” option. Fahmy responded that the co-sponsors should not do that, and it would be wrong for the co-sponsors to schedule a meeting that they knew a key regional party opposed. ACRS operated by consensus, which protects everyone, not just Egypt. If the co-sponsors were to schedule a meeting, Egypt would not oppose it but instead attend and make forceful points about the need to address the WMD issue in the ACRS agenda [just as it did at the September meeting in Amman on establishing regional security centers]. Further, Egypt would not hesitate to voice its opposition in public, which would not help anything.

On December 24, 1995, Israeli MFA official Shimon Stein phoned Einhorn. Stein told Einhorn that he did not expect anything positive or new on the WMDFZ issue to come out of the ongoing Ehud Barak visit to Cairo; consequently “we are back at square one” on the ACRS issue. Stein said that the New York option was not viable, so the co-sponsors should proceed with previously agreed activities. Einhorn relayed Fahmy’s remark on the consensus rule and warning about going public if meetings were held over Egypt’s objections. Stein thought Egypt was already very public in its views on ACRS and probably could not do more damage.

In January 1996, the US continued to deliberate what more could be done to resuscitate ACRS. In discussions with the Russian co-sponsor, MFA Deputy Director Valery Kuzmin offered to host the next plenary, but wanted to know by the beginning of Ramadan, on January 20, 1996, if that would be possible. Russia was also receptive to conducting the plenary in or near the region. 

By spring 1996, however, the US decided not to pursue formal meetings of ACRS, and instead look to gathering parties informally through non-ACRS sponsored activities until the political environment changed to allow the resumption of ACRS