General Assembly Session 56 meeting 86

The President

As members know, I have just returned from Oslo, Norway, where I had the great honour to accept the 2001 Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of the United Nations. I was also honoured to attend that occasion along with Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who accepted the prize on his own behalf. Let me take this opportunity to congratulate all the family members of the entire United Nations system and to pay tribute to our Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan.

Since this was the first time that the United Nations as a whole was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, I was especially pleased that the major United Nations organs and various agencies were also represented at the ceremony. I wish that all the representatives of the Member States could have been there as well. The Nobel Peace Prize belongs to each of them as much as to any other member of the United Nations family.

Surely this award is meant to offer encouragement to the men and women of the United Nations in carrying out their work. Such encouragement will be especially welcome to the thousands of United Nations personnel who serve under extremely difficult conditions, often at grave risk to themselves. While we can be justly proud of what the United Nations has accomplished, we should also look ahead to the many daunting challenges that still lie before us, such as terrorism, poverty, drug abuse and trafficking, HIV/AIDS and environmental degradation. These challenges cannot be met by any single Member State or by any single organization alone.

Since 1945, the international community and the peoples of the world have exerted their best efforts, often with high hopes, for the realization of global peace and well-being through the United Nations. Our efforts have not always been successful or our successes always permanent, but we should not be discouraged. I have no doubt that, were it not for the United Nations, humankind could hardly have advanced as far as it has in realizing the vision of the United Nations founding fathers in 1945. The indispensable role of the United Nations was clearly recognized by Chairman Berge of the Norwegian Nobel Committee at the award ceremony in the following words: "The only negotiable route to global peace and cooperation goes by way of the United Nations."

Finally, let me mention that I will closely consult with the representatives of the major organs and Member States about how to utilize the prize money which the United Nations has received from the Nobel Committee.

In concluding my brief report, I join with representatives in celebrating the award of the 2001 Nobel Peace Prize as both recognition of past achievements and a spur to even greater efforts in the future.

The President

Members will recall that the Assembly held the debate on this item at its 30th plenary meeting, on 22 October.

I call on the representative of Australia to introduce draft resolution A/56/L.10.

Mr. Dauth (Australia)

Australia, in its capacity as Chairman of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has the honour to introduce the draft resolution on the report of the IAEA, as contained in document A/56/L.10.

The draft resolution is sponsored by 50 countries, as follows: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, Romania, the Russian Federation, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and Yugoslavia.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) continues to make a vital contribution to international security. The Agency plays a key role in our collective efforts to achieve the twin goals of peace and development by ensuring that the benefits of nuclear technology are shared globally, by building and maintaining a global nuclear safety regime and by preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons and ensuring the security of nuclear material and facilities.

Following the tragic events of 11 September, the work of the IAEA has taken on even greater significance, as Member States have become united in their concern about terrorism and in their recognition of the important role of the IAEA in providing an international response to increased risks of nuclear terrorism. Through the General Assembly's annual resolution on the report of the IAEA, we are able to take note of the Agency's important work and to affirm our confidence in its role in the application of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

The draft resolution we are introducing today is the product of an exhaustive process of open-ended negotiation among delegations in Vienna -- where Member States' expertise on nuclear issues is focused -- and subsequent, equally exhaustive consultations in New York. The approach taken among experts in Vienna in drawing up the draft resolution was to draw on agreed language from previous substantive General Assembly resolutions on the IAEA, updated and amended as necessary to take account of the outcomes of the most recent session of the IAEA General Conference, which was held, as the Assembly is aware, in September 2001. The draft resolution is a faithful reflection of the Agency's work and the General Conference resolutions.

As many delegations stated during the consideration of this agenda item last year, it was disappointing that the General Assembly was unable at its fifty-fifth session to adopt a substantive resolution on the work of the IAEA. This was particularly so, given that the Agency itself has a long history of making decisions in Vienna on the basis of consensus. Many States have therefore worked hard in Vienna and New York to ensure that a substantive resolution could be adopted by the General Assembly this year. Significant investments have been made in the draft resolution, with hard compromises made on key issues such as integrated safeguards, the role of innovative nuclear technology and the safe transport of radioactive material.

In view of the comprehensive and transparent process of consultation which has taken place in Vienna and New York, it is the strong wish of the 50 sponsors of the draft resolution, and of the Director General of the IAEA, that the draft resolution be adopted as it stands, without further amendment. We look forward to the Assembly's support for the draft resolution and its endorsement of the important work of the IAEA.

The President

I now call on the representative of Iraq to introduce the draft amendment contained in document A/56/L.11.

Mr. Aldouri (Iraq)

My delegation has presented a draft amendment, contained in document A/56/L.11, to the draft resolution entitled "Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency", which would be inserted as a new paragraph after paragraph 12.

We fully understand that this draft resolution is the result of consultations in Vienna and that there were other delegations that had wished to amend it in ways that would reflect their interests. Despite our strong reservations with regard to paragraph 12 of the draft resolution, which demands that Iraq implement relevant Security Council resolutions, with which Iraq has actually complied throughout the past decade, my delegation did not object to its inclusion, for the sake of reaching consensus and adopting a substantive draft resolution.

However, considering the draft resolution an unbalanced and selective document that neglects the verification activities carried out in Iraq by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), my delegation presented its draft amendment. The draft amendment is actually a quotation from what the IAEA states in its reports to the General Assembly and to the Security Council regarding the IAEA's implementation of the safeguards agreement in Iraq, referred to in documents S/2000/300, S/2001/337, S/2001/26, S/2001/129 and S/2000/120 and in the IAEA report presented to the current session of the General Assembly contained in document A/56/313. From among these, I would like to quote from a letter dated 10 April 2000 from the Director General of the IAEA addressed to the President of the Security Council:

"As I informed the IAEA Board of Governors during its recent meeting, the Agency inspectors were able to verify the nuclear material subject to safeguards, which consists of low enriched, natural and depleted uranium. Iraq provided the necessary cooperation for the inspection team to perform its activities effectively and efficiently". (S/2000/300, p. 3)

This fact was stated in the resolution concerning Iraq recently adopted by the General Conference of the IAEA in Vienna, contained in document GC(45)/RES/17.

I hope that the General Assembly will decide that the main element in considering this draft resolution should be transparency, not selectivity that would reflect the political agenda of one or two States. Representatives should be careful not to set the precedent of a political resolution that would not send the right message to the States Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. We should not forget that we are talking about the cornerstone of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which carries out the safeguards agreements between Member States and the IAEA. We hope that representatives will support our draft amendment, which simply reflects what the IAEA reports have stated regarding this matter.

The President

I give the floor to the representative of Australia on a point of order.

Mr. Dauth (Australia)

I should like, on behalf of the sponsors of draft resolution A/56/L.10, to raise a point of order in connection with the amendment contained in A/56/L.11. On behalf of the sponsors of the draft resolution, I formally move, under the terms of rule 74 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, that no action be taken on that amendment. I should also like to request a recorded vote.

Draft resolution A/56/L.10 is the product of an intensive, transparent negotiating process, which took place among experts in Vienna over many weeks. The process included many open-ended meetings at which all delegations were given ample opportunity to present and defend their proposals. The amendment proposed in document A/56/L.11, which was introduced by Iraq, was considered during that exhaustive consultative process. At the conclusion of that process there was no agreement to incorporate that amendment proposal.

In New York, open-ended consultations were also convened, and delegations had a further opportunity to present and defend amendment proposals. No agreement was reached for the further amendment of the draft resolution, which is widely viewed as reflecting a fair compromise, after weeks of negotiation among experts. This draft resolution is traditionally based on the resolutions adopted at the annual General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna. This year's draft was again based on the principle, accepted by all during the consultative process, that the United Nations General Assembly draft resolution should be faithful to the resolutions of the IAEA General Conference. The amendment proposed by Iraq does not accord with the relevant General Conference resolution on Iraq, resolution GC(45)/RES/17.

Bearing in mind the fact that the draft resolution is the product of a comprehensive and transparent process of negotiation, the sponsors believe that a no-action motion on the proposed amendment in A/56/L.11 would be the best means of ensuring that the substantive draft resolution, in its current form, is adopted by the General Assembly at the fifty-sixth session. We therefore hope that the no-action motion will be supported.

The President

The representative of Australia has moved, within the terms of rule 74 of the rules of procedure, that no action be taken on the amendment contained in document A/56/L.11. Rule 74 reads as follows:

"During the discussion of any matter, a representative may move the adjournment of the debate on the item under discussion. In addition to the proposer of the motion, two representatives may speak in favour of, and two against, the motion, after which the motion shall be immediately put to the vote."

Mr. Coutts (Chile)

Chile believes that the draft resolution in A/56/L.10, entitled "Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency", is the outcome of a broad and transparent negotiation process, carried out in both Vienna and New York. Given this fact, we believe that taking no action on the proposal contained in document A/56/L.11 would be the most appropriate way for the Assembly to adopt the draft resolution, in its current form.

For that reason, we second the no-action motion put forward by the representative of Australia.

Mr. de Ruyt (Belgium)

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union.

The European Union would like to recall that it attaches great importance to the activities of the International Atomic Energy Agency. As a result, we sincerely hope that the substantive draft resolution in A/56/L.10, which is before the Assembly today, will shortly be adopted in its current form.

For reasons that have just been set out by the delegation of Australia, the European Union would like to express its unreserved support for the no-action motion with regard to the draft amendment in A/56/L.11 -- the motion just made by the delegation of Australia on behalf of the sponsors of the draft resolution. We call on delegations to vote in favour of the motion to take no action so that draft resolution A/56/L.10 can be voted upon in its current form.

Mr. Aldouri (Iraq)

My delegation would like to ask delegations to vote against the no-action motion that is intended to deprive a Member State of its right to express its position with regard to a draft resolution and to introduce a paragraph that would reflect the simple truth, as expressed in the reports of the International Atomic Energy Agency on its activities carried out in Iraq.

I hope that delegations will take a stand against the introduction into the General Assembly of a veto that is designed to achieve political ends.

Miss Thomas (Jamaica)

While taking into consideration the arguments that have been put forward, my delegation believes that, on a point of principle, any Member State has a right to have its proposals considered. While we do not necessarily support the substance of A/56/L.11, we believe that any Member State has the right to present a proposal. We therefore oppose the no-action motion.

The President

I shall now put to the vote the motion by the representative of Australia that no action be taken on the amendment contained in document A/56/L.11.

The President

Since the motion for no action has carried, no action will be taken on the amendment contained in document A/56/L.11.

We shall therefore take a decision on draft resolution A/56/L.10.

We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/56/L.10.

Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of vote before the voting, may I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

Ms. Marcus (United States)

Paragraph 10 of draft resolution A/56/L.10 does not reflect what was agreed at the General Conference in a balanced way and is thus objectionable. Agreements reached in Vienna should be respected as we pursue our efforts in New York. We regret that this has not been the case.

Mr. Govrin (Israel)

Israel attaches great importance to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and to the tradition of consensus in this Organization.

The report of the IAEA, which reflects the work of the Agency, taking into consideration efforts made by the Members of the Organization to promote the important tasks of the Agency, should also reflect agreed language. Unfortunately, the wording of paragraph 10 of the draft resolution on the report of the IAEA does not reflect that cooperative spirit.

The draft resolutions on the application of IAEA safeguards in the Middle East have been adopted by consensus since 1991. Their language represents a delicate balance reached after long and difficult negotiations aimed at achieving consensus. Israel has joined that consensus because we support the goal of establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East in due course, notwithstanding certain reservations regarding the modalities.

Paragraph 10 of the draft resolution on the IAEA report represents the General Conference resolution on the application of IAEA safeguards in the Middle East in a selective and unbalanced way. Paragraph 10 contains some components from the resolution, but ignores others. This attempt to introduce a new interpretation of the compromise consensus resolution on the Middle East is unacceptable, and may damage the common understanding required for reaching consensus on this issue.

Israel will vote against paragraph 10 of the draft resolution.

Mr. Pak Gil Yon (Democratic People's Republic of Korea)

The core element of the Agreed Framework between the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the United States, which was reached on 21 October 1994, is the provision of light-water reactors by the United States on the condition of a freeze on our nuclear activities.

Seven years have passed since the adoption of the Agreed Framework between the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the United States. During this period, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea has been fully carrying out its obligations under the Agreed Framework, including freezing our graphite-moderated reactors. However, the United States is not implementing the Agreed Framework in good faith. The project for the light-water reactors, which is to be finished by 2003, is only at the ground-excavation phase.

The United States is not providing due compensation for our loss of electricity resulting from the delay in constructing light-water reactors; it would rather take up the issue of inspections. This cannot be construed as anything but an attempt to impose upon us the blame for the delay in the construction of the light-water reactors and to scrap the Agreed Framework. However, the draft resolution ignores the essence of the issue and arbitrarily forces my country to implement the safeguards agreement. A safeguards agreement is not a matter to be implemented by using pressure. The solution to the issue lies in the implementation of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea/United States Agreed Framework.

My delegation would once again like to make clear its position that the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula is not a matter to be addressed at the United Nations, but rather one to be settled between the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea and the United States. My delegation will therefore vote against the draft resolution contained in document A/56/L.10.

Mr. Mehta (India)

India, a founding member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), attaches the highest importance and value to the objectives of the Agency. Since draft resolution A/56/L.10 pertains to the activities of the IAEA, we will go along with it. Nevertheless, we have considerable difficulty with the third preambular paragraph.

The language in that paragraph appears to link adherence to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) with the freedom of research, development, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. The statute of the IAEA, which must guide all our deliberations on the activities of the Agency, calls on the Agency to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world. Furthermore, the statute stresses the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members. The purpose of those provisions in the statute of the IAEA is obviously to encourage unfettered access of Member States to the peaceful uses of atomic energy without any discrimination whatsoever, albeit with appropriate safeguards.

The IAEA statute predates the NPT. Also, the Agency has not been designated secretariat of the NPT. The Agency merely carries out safeguards activities with the various member States in accordance with agreements; and the concept of safeguards itself predates the NPT. The NPT is not an equitable Treaty. Also, the provisions of article VI of the NPT have not been fulfilled by the nuclear-weapon States parties to the Treaty. The NPT should therefore not be used to discriminate between members of the IAEA. By implying that adherence to the NPT -- on which my Government's views are well known -- alone would mean access to the peaceful uses of atomic energy, the draft resolution deviates from and, in fact, derogates the objectives enshrined in the statute of the IAEA.

We have therefore been constrained to call for a vote on the third preambular paragraph, and shall vote against it.

Mr. Aldouri (Iraq)

My delegation regrets that its draft amendment has not been adopted by the General Assembly. It would have reflected the activities of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Iraq as mentioned in IAEA documents. Considering the current unbalanced state of the draft resolution, my delegation has no choice but to ask for a separate vote on paragraph 12, in view of the fact that Iraq has fully complied with all its obligations under Security Council resolutions.

I should like to quote from paragraph 35 of the report of IAEA to the Security Council dated 27 July 1998 (S/1998/694):

"As previously recorded, there are no indications of Iraq having retained any physical capability for the indigenous production of weapon-usable nuclear material in amounts of any practical significance, nor any indication Iraq has acquired or produced weapon-usable nuclear material other than the nuclear material verified by IAEA and removed from Iraq in accordance with paragraph 13 of resolution 687 (1991)."

I therefore would ask representatives to support my delegation and, given the facts I have mentioned earlier, vote against paragraph 12 of the draft resolution before us.

The President

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote.

Separate votes have been requested on the third preambular paragraph, operative paragraph 5, operative paragraph 10 and operative paragraph 12 of draft resolution A/56/L.10.

If there is no objection, we will therefore proceed accordingly.

I now put to the vote the third preambular paragraph of draft resolution A/56/L.10.

The President

I now put to the vote operative paragraph 5 of draft resolution A/56/L.10.

The President

I now put to the vote operative paragraph 10 of draft resolution A/56/L.10.

The President

I now put to the vote operative paragraph 12 of draft resolution A/56/L.10.

The President

Before proceeding to take action on the draft resolution, I should like to announce that, since the introduction of the draft, Suriname has become a co-sponsor of A/56/L.10.

I now put to the vote draft resolution A/56/L.10 as a whole.

The President

I shall now call on those representatives wishing to make statements in explanation of vote. May I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

Mr. Durrani (Pakistan)

I have asked for the floor after the vote on draft resolution A/56/L.10, entitled "Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency", to explain Pakistan's position on the third preambular paragraph and operative paragraph 5. My delegation abstained in the voting on those paragraphs.

The language of the third preambular paragraph, which links the right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), is not acceptable to us. Since Pakistan is not a party to the NPT, we cannot accept any commitment on its behalf.

Similarly, we recorded our reservations on language in the first part of operative paragraph 5, which reads in part as follows:

"bearing in mind the importance of achieving the universal application of the safeguards system of the Agency, urges all States which have yet to bring into force comprehensive safeguards agreements to do so as soon as possible".

In our view, the International Atomic Energy Agency's role is to facilitate the technical safeguards and not to indulge in taking political decisions.

Mr. Wu Haitao (China)

The Chinese delegation voted in favour of resolution 56/94, entitled "Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency", as a whole. The Chinese delegation is of the view that the Agency has done a great deal of fruitful work and achieved significant progress in many areas over the past year for which we wish to express our appreciation.

The Chinese delegation wishes to explain its position on the following issues.

With respect to the nuclear issue concerning the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Chinese Government's principled position on this question remains unchanged. We have always supported the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and the maintenance of peace and stability there. The parties concerned need to seek an appropriate solution to the nuclear issue concerning the Democratic People's Republic of Korea through constructive dialogue, consultations and good-faith cooperation. The countries concerned also need to pursue their dialogue with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea on the basis of equality and mutual respect and to faithfully implement the relevant Agreement.

As regards Iraq, the Chinese delegation is of the view that the prolongation of the problem without resolution has aggravated the humanitarian crisis there and is not conducive to the peace and stability of the Gulf region. The relevant resolutions of the Security Council should be implemented fully and the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq must be respected. China calls for the lifting of the sanctions imposed on Iraq as soon as possible on the basis of an objective assessment of Iraq's implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions.