Position papers Mexico

DELEGATE : Arkaprava Bokshi
COLLEGE : Hindu College, Delhi University
COUNTRY : Mexico
COMMITTEE : Security Council
AGENDA : Nuclear Proliferation

The position of Mexico against the use and development of nuclear weapons represents one of the traditional pillars of the Mexican foreign policy since emergence of this kind of weapons of mass destruction. Mexico’s conviction is that nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament are equally important and mutually reinforcing processes requiring continuous irreversible progress on both fronts and therefore must be energetically pursued.
Mexico considers the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as the cornerstone of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime and the most important legal foundation for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament (as enshrined in Article – VI). The effective implementation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and the Fissile Material Cut-off treaty (FMCT) would also facilitate the mitigation of all nuclear cache’s at the earliest.
Mexico has always promoted a wide spectrum of nuclear disarmament measures, particularly the principles of transparency, verification and irreversibility regarding nuclear disarmament. The 1967 Treaty of Tlatelolco (spearheaded by Mexico) was the first multilateral treaty to establish a region free of nuclear weapons and a requirement for comprehensive IAEA safeguards for its parties — and clearly gave impetus to the NPT. There are two additional protocols to the treaty: Protocol I binds those overseas countries with territories in the region (the US, the UK, France, and the Netherlands) to the terms of the treaty. Protocol II requires the world's declared NWS’s to refrain from undermining in any way the nuclear-free status of the region; it has been signed and ratified by all the NWS’s. Following our steps, today we have four NWFZ’s with two more in the reckoning. Mexico deems that an important benefit of these zones is that they open a forum for expanded regional dialogue on issues of security – and can also prove to be indispensable in bringing greater peace in the Korean Peninsula and the Middle East.

Till date, Nuclear-Weapons possessing States (NWS’s) have completely refused any verification mechanism enhancing transparency under article VI. Some argue that a more transparent mechanism would have an impact on national security. In this milieu, Mexico is convinced of the importance of working on a stricter and more standardized format for reporting on the implementation of article VI. We cannot continue asking Non-NWS’s more and more obligations while overlooking compliance with some of the Treaty obligations. When becoming Party to a Treaty, the country becomes a Party to the whole treaty, not to a part of it. It is therefore imperative that we review the fulfilment of the unequivocal undertaking pledged buy the NWS’s to obliterate their nuclear arsenals. Sadly today there are “deeply disturbing signs” towards the opposite direction - instead of eliminating nuclear weapons, some nuclear powers have plans to modernize or develop new kinds of nuclear weapons through new strategic rationales. If no progress in the compliance of the nuclear disarmament commitments is promptly made, we more and more carry the risk that a growing number of Non-NWS’s would review and question -under reciprocity or “supreme interest” – the extent of their obligations to the full compliance of their non-proliferation commitments. We must remember at all times that there is an intrinsic bargain within the NPT: There must be no new nuclear-weapon States but in return, current Nuclear-Weapon States must proceed to eliminate their nuclear arsenals. If we expect NWS’s to follow through on their commitment to completely eliminate their arsenals, then we must channel all our creativity and resources towards the development of an alternative system for collective security which must be equitable, inclusive and effective – responding promptly to perceived threats.
Banning nuclear weapons, does not imply we should seek to curtail the peaceful uses of nuclear technology In fact, by reducing the risks of proliferation, we could pave the way for more widespread use of peaceful nuclear applications for socio-economic development. Mexico reiterates its call to all its members to do what they are not just expected to do, but what they are morally, politically and legally compelled to do in order to reach a safer world.

DELEGATE : Arkaprava Bokshi
COLLEGE : Hindu College, Delhi University
COUNTRY : Mexico
COMMITTEE : Security Council
AGENDA : Crisis in Middle-East

As the concept of ‘Global Village’ is gaining greater acceptance, it needs to be realized that the ramifications of a war or strife in any part of the Globe would be felt ubiquitously. Mexico therefore feels that it is imperative that the international community work towards the penultimate objective of bringing peace and stability in the region of Middle East.

Mexico feels that the crisis at hand can be broadly and categorically labelled under two heads – one which involves Israel-Palestine while the other being Shia-Sunni clashes in Iraq. Needless to say both the issues are extremely volatile as they have a strong religious connexion and therefore require an extremely high degree of discernment.

Mexico strongly believes that the trifurcation of Baghdad or the division of Jerusalem as advocated by many - as a plausible solution – is not a pragmatic approach as it would fuel further belligerence in the respective regions.

Mexico acquiesces to the fact that only a democratically elected government – with a proportionate Cabinet composition (based on homogenous representation from the Shia, Sunni and Kurd communities) supplemented by equitable distribution of the resources (based only on ‘economic parameters’) can help restore stability in the state of Iraq.

Mexico is cognizant of the fact that the major hurdle in restoring peace in Israel and Palestine is the question of Jerusalem – the most holy piece of real estate on this planet – and who should be its legitimate proprietor. To this, Mexico feels that Jerusalem should be bifurcated with the East Jerusalem – which is an Arab dominated sector – being made a part of Palestine whereas the responsibility of West Jerusalem – with a predominant Jewish population – be handed over to Israel. However, it needs to be noted that the sanctified ‘Temple Mount’ or Haram-al-Sharif be declared an ‘International Domain’ - as previously recommended by many ‘UN Declarations’ and the various bilateral ‘Peace Accords’.

Mexico urges the concerned nations and ethnic clans to keep behind their past differences and put an end to the unrelenting pursuit by either side to level the past scores. We need to realize that the future would be shaped by our present deeds. It is time for us to retrospect – to see what heinous sins have we committed in the name of religion and introspect – to identify where we took a blind turn that cost us so much.

Mexico reaffirms its faith in the good office of the UN and exhorts all member nations – and in particular the ‘comity of nations’ hailing from the Middle East – to cease this opportunity to forge productive resolutions - which would become the cornerstone for stability and development in this war ravaged part of the world.