Backing up the argument: Israel would look favorably upon turning the region into a nuclear-free zone in the context of true Middle East peace. Israel will agree to discuss demilitarization and international control on its nuclear installations as the second phase of the Road Map is implemented. At that stage, all the countries in the region will discuss a list of issues, among them arms control and security arrangements. The political realities in the Middle East, sustained by the vast experience accumulated by similar processes elsewhere, have shown that a regional Nuclear Weapon Free Zone (NWFZ) should emanate from within the region and be supported by all concerned states of the region. These political realities mandate a practical step-by-step approach. This approach might begin with modest Confidence Building Measures (CBM's), followed by the establishment of a peaceful environment, and eventually lead to more ambitious goals, such as establishing a NWFZ. Such a zone cannot be imposed on the regional parties. There is no substitute to direct negotiations, reconciliation and freely reached agreements between the states of the region. The primacy of the peace negotiations as the principal venue for peace must in no way be eroded. The nuclear issue is part of the comprehensive framework of peace and security in the region. If Israel were to suddenly give up its nuclear "insurance policy," it would actually make the region more unstable. Thus, scenarios that include an Israeli decision to sign the NPT are unrealistic in the foreseeable future. ( See background )