Arab countries seek to shift attention at nuclear conference from Iran to Israel

Arab states spotlight Israel at nuclear meeting

UNITED NATIONS — Major powers on the U.N. Security Council were unrelenting Tuesday in their drive for new sanctions against Iran’s nuclear program as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad undermined their efforts at a U.N. nuclear conference.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei A. Ryabkov said he is “reasonably optimistic” that an agreement can be reached on a fourth round of sanctions over Tehran’s uranium enrichment program.

“I do believe the talks are slowly moving forward. There’s definitely some space to bridge over. But I wouldn’t over-exaggerate the differences,” Ryabkov said.

Ahmadinejad planned a press conference at a New York hotel Tuesday afternoon, again seeking to grab the spotlight and press his case against new U.N. economic sanctions sought by the U.S. and its allies.

Arab countries, meanwhile, sought to turn attention to Israel on Tuesday as delegates from 189 countries debated how to stem the spread of nuclear weapons.

On the second day of the monthlong meeting at the United Nations, Arab countries were reiterating calls for a nuclear-free Middle East with criticism of Israel’s unacknowledged nuclear arsenal and failure to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

The first day of the conference was dominated by rhetorical crossfire between the United States and Iran, as Ahmadinejad rejected allegations his country was building nuclear weapons while the U.S. said sanctions were necessary.

On Tuesday, Jordan’s Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh expressed frustration at the lack of progress on implementing a nuclear-free Middle East, a goal that was declared in a resolution of a previous meeting of NPT signatories.

He said that Israel’s failure to sign the NPT and allow international monitoring of its nuclear program “renders the NPT a source of instability in the Middle East.”

Egypt has proposed that this 2010 NPT conference back a plan calling for the start of negotiations next year on such a Mideast zone. The proposal may become a major debating point in the monthlong session.

The United States has cautiously supported the idea while saying that implementing the idea must wait for progress in the Middle East peace process. The position reflected a middle ground as the Obama administration sought to satisfy Arab countries while keeping the spotlight of the conference on Iran’s nuclear program.

The Israeli U.N. mission declined to comment on the specifics of the conference, but told The Associated Press that Israel’s stance on nonproliferation continues to be that an accepted political solution for comprehensive peace in the Middle East should first be reached.

Speaking Monday, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that the United States was “prepared to support practical measures” toward a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction.

Ryabkov on Tuesday suggested that the U.S. and Russian diplomats were discussing the issue and making progress.

“In recent weeks, we have managed to develop a joint approach with the United States,” he said. “We have always favored and are in very full belief in the fact that the only peaceful way forward is and would be that of negotiations, engagement and political dialogue, the so-called first track that should never be abandoned.”

Ryabkov stressed that diplomacy should continue to be pursued.

“As for sanctions, they are only thinkable if we configured them in a way that strengthens the idea, the objective of nuclear nonproliferation. That’s the only purpose — no punishment for a country, no punishment for people,” he said.

The NPT is formally reviewed every five years at a meeting of treaty members — which include all the world’s nations except India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea, all of which either have confirmed or are believed to have nuclear weapons.

The review conference is meant to produce a final document pointing toward ways to better achieve the NPT’s goals of checking the spread of nuclear weapons, while working toward reducing and eventually eliminating them.

Because it requires a consensus of all parties, including Iran, any final document would be highly unlikely to censure the Tehran government, which would block consensus.