A/43/PV.39 General Assembly

I remind representatives that, in accordance with the decision taken this morning, the list of speakers in the debate on this agenda item will be closed today at 4 p.m. I therefore request those representatives wishing to pu t the ir names on the list to do so as soon as poss ible. r now invite the Director Gener&l of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mr. Hans Blix, to present the report of the Agency for the year 1987. Mr. BLIX (International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA»: Many of the speakers in the Assembly's general debate expressed concern about growing ~egional and global environmental prob lems, .,ot least the predicted global warming. An examination of the annual report of the International Atomic Energy Agency for the year 1987, which is before the Assembly, will show that a great many techniques wi th which the IAEA deals help to protect or to monitor the environment. The report the IAEA is invited to submit to the General Assembly next year on the subject of environment and development will document this in detail. In my statement today I hope I can show that the environmental interest in nuclear power should not be limited to questions concerning rare accidental (Hr. B1 ixo tAEA) releases of radioactivity and the disposal of waste. t submit that our choice of energy policies and the roles that we give to nuclear power and to fossil fuels are of signal importance to our fOl:'ests and lakes and the atmosphere of the world. It goes without saying that our choiCl! will have an impact on the availability of adequate and reliable energy, an ess~ntial engifiti that drives economic growth. The emotional and intellectual fall-out from ChernObyl was even more globally spread than the radioactive faU-out, and t t has had a considerable impact on public opinion and energy policies. The world picture is heterogeneous, however, and the scepticism vis-~-vis nuclear power that was nurtured by Chernobyl is beginning to be somewhat offset by an increasing awareness of the serious environmental consequences of the current levels of use of fossil fuels. The greenhouse effect of the warming world atmosphere is ~ow seen by scientists and policy-makers as a "ery real threat, and ie is becoming more widely realized that, apart from hydropower, nuclear power is the 0II11y source that is now available to generate electricity in the quantities, form and reliability needed without producing any of the greenhouse gases. During 1987 22 new nuclear-power plants came into operation in the world, bringing the world-wide total to 417 power reactors ~ith 300,000 megawatt capecity in 26 c:ountr les. So far this ~ar some 10 new plants have come on line. Of the world's electric energy, 16.2 per cent was produced by nuclear power in 1987, and that figure may be expected to increase to close to 20 per cent - or the same as hydropower - in the mid-l990s. Most of the capacity is in the industrialized countries, but a few developing countries, such as India, the Republic of Korea, Argentina and Br a:!: il, are well ahead in the technology. In some Sta tes, such as Japan and Korea, nuclear pow~r programmes ~re going ahead vigorously, while in (Mr. DUx, IAEA) several others strong public opposition has led to stagnation. It is no coincidenC3 that in nations with fast-growing economies there is a fast-growing electric supply system. It is testimony to the heterogeneous situation that: at the time - around 1995 - when Sweden is planning to shut down two power reactors, thua reducing the number of its reactors from 12 to 10, the utility in the Republic of Korea is planning to connect two new plants, numbers 11 and 12, to the electric grid. It is understandable that Governments do not want to take de~isions on new electricity generating capacity in the face of vocal and widespread public opposition. Indeed, so lQ'lg as there is not an urgent need for new capacity one can allow oneself to be critical not only of nuclear power but also of hydro schemes because of the huge dams that often drastically affect the environment, of coal, oil and gas for their contribution to the greenhouse effect, and of coal and oil for their impact on forests and lakes. One can also allow oneself the hope that conservation measures will further delay the need for new capacity and that, when the need becomes imperative, new and renewable clean sources, such as solar cells, windmills and biomass, will be able to provide significant quantities of e lectr ici ty • (Hr. 81 ix, IAEA) This has been the situation of many industrialized countries until recently. No decisions have been urgently called for, as the plants "hich were under construction or decided upon already i!\ the 1970a have sufficed to meet the slower increase in electricity demand which resulted from the recession. However, the capacity which reBulted from decisions taken in the past has now been absorbed in Jlany ind\!str ialized countr ies and they will soon have to choose what source to use for producing more electricity or else face the risk that an inadequate electricity supply lliay put a brake on their economic development. The first question to examine is: what is the magni tude of our future requirements of energy - in particular, electricity? The second question is: what sources are available to generate this energy? A third question relates to the QnV'ironraental effects of the different options or mixes of options. The report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, which the General Assembly has invited organizations of the UnitQ~ Nations system to consider, rightly fOcuses on energy as one of the crucial issues for sustainable developaent and examines the three questions I have just Hntioned. The Commission affirms that further growth is indispensable for development and that energy has a crucial role in this reepect. It emphasizes the need for energy saving and commends a rather vaguely defined low-energy path, which would offer the world the energy services it will need some 30 to 40 years from now while using only half of the primary energy it now uses. Whatever lMy be the realism of this thesis, which has regard to a rather distant date, most forecasts point to a demand £oa: more electricity all over the wodd and to an increased need for both primary energy and electricity in developing countries in the near and intermediate future. The need for developing countries to increcse their energy consumption - for irrigation, for industrialization, for tr&nsport - is clear whan one considers that the average per capit~ ~onsumption of energy In developing countries is just about one eighth of that in the induatr ialized countr ie8 and that their consumption of electricity is about one fourteenth. Let .. give 80118 concrete examples. NtXvayrich in hydropower - leads with a consu.ion of 25,000 kilowatt hours per persQ\ and year. Through a massive build-up of nuclear power, Prance has increased its electricity consumption from 3,550 kilowatt hours per persCl1 and year in 1973 to 6,OCO. Italy, which has recently stopped the construction of new nuclear plants and closed a few old ones, conSUMe 3,000 kilowatt hours per persCl1 and year - half the average for indu9tri~1 oountries. Among developing countries, China uses 370 kilowatt hours per person and yearJ India 232, Indonesia 167, Sudan 48, and Bangladesh 46. In view of the high figures which I have cited for many countries, we can surely expect that many other countries with 3 lower cORSUillption will strive to produce much more electricity. I bave in lIind not only the developing countries, but also industrialized countries. Present trends bear this out. What sources of new energy can the wor ld have recourse to, in particular to produce electricity? Fossil fuels - that is, coal, oil and natural gas - vill necessarily continue to be used extensively not cnly for heating and transport, but alao for electricity production. Likewise, hydropower will Cibviously continue to be exploited where it is economically reasonable, but the relllll1ning hydro potential is small in most industrialized countries. Exper ience haG shown that, with the exception of hydro, new and renewable sources of energy ~ such as soler, wind and b10a8sS - are not easily harnessed for the large-scale economic production of electricity which will be neeaed~ Clearly, it is desirable that more research and dcvelopllent funds be spent on these sources. They already h4ve their useful niches, but it i~ fair to say that, with the exception of hydro, they do not offer significant and viable solutions to the need for increased large-scale electricity generation in the near and intermediate term. We come, then, to the environmental consequences of the possible options or mixes of options. How are they to influence our choice of energy sources? We must, of course, consider not only effects on the atmosphere, forests, lakes and buildings, but also injury to the health and life of people and flora and fauna, present and future. The Wor Id Commission on Environment and Development really seems at a loss to offer any practical advice that can be used by Governments faced today with a need to ex~nd energy and electricity production. It recognizes the grave environmental consequences of emissions of sulphur dioxide, nit~ogen oxides and carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, but it fails to mention that nuclear power does not give rise to any of these problems. Rather, the Commission points to nuclear waste disposal, the safety of nuclear plants and the risk of the proliferation ~f nuclear weapons as major problems connected with nuclear power. It clearly does not recommend the nuclear option but concludes only that the "highest priority must be accorded to research and development on environmentally sound and economically viable alternatives, as well as on means of increasing the safety of nuclear energy." (A/42/427, annex chapter 7, 1l!ra. 63) Even more alarmed about the global environmental consequences of the world's current energy uses is the World Conference on the Changing Atmosphere, which was held in Toronto last June under the sponsorship of the Canadian Government and with the support of the Uni ted Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). One focus of the Conference was the risk of global warming from the emissions of so-called greenhouse gases, notably carbon (Mr. BUx, L'.!!) dioxide ~nd others resulting from the burning of fossil fu~ls. The Conference recommended that "An initial goal should be to reduce C02 emissions by approximately 20 percent of 1988 levels by the year 2005." It suggested that: "Apart from efficiency measures, the desired re~uction will require {I) switching to lower 002-emitting fuels; (II~ reviewing strategies for the implementation of renewable energy, especially advanced biomass conversion technologies1 (Ill) revisiting the nuclear power option, which lost credibility due to problems related to nuclear safety, radioactive wastes and nuclear-weapons proliferation. If these problems can be solved through improved engineering designs and institutional arrangements, nuclear power could have a role to play in lower ing 002 emissions. III The TO~onto Conference, rather like the WOrld Commission on Environment and Development, points to "strategies for the implementation of renewable energy" and singles out "advanced blomass conversion technologies". When we look to the practical energy policies of Governments arou~d the world today we do not sea much reliance on renewable energy sources, biomass or other, to generate the electricity Which is i~creasingly demanded. What we clea~ly see almost everywhere is an increasing reliance on coal and gas. This is the reality. We are at present heading not for any reduction or levelling out of emissions of carbon dioxide, but for a considerable increase in them. It is perhaps understandable that the World Commission, drafting its report only one year after the Chernobyl accident, did not say one good word about nuclear power. The Tor~to Conference is one nuance more positive and suggests "a revisiting ~f the nuclear option" un certain conditions. (Mr. (nix, IAEA) It is not suggested that nuclear power would be a panacea against the groenhouse effect, or against acid rains or dying forests and lak~s, and although the overall safety record of civilian nuclear power is very good - and continuously improving - the risk is never zero. Nor is it to be ignored that the disposal of nuclear waste did not always in the past meet the high standards required in the civilian nuclear sector today. As the IAEA is exclusively concerned with th~ peaceful uses of nuclear energy, I cannot comment on the recent reports of serious waste and safety problems in the military nuclear sector. I can only say that to the ordinary citizen and to society it does not matter whether radioactivity released is military or civilian. Without ignoring these points, it should be recognized that nuclear power today is one large-scale source of energy which does not give rise to acid rain or any of the greenhouse gases. In Belgium, to take an example, .the emissions of sulphur dioxide from power plants decreased from 385,000 tons in 1973 to 204,000 tons in 1983, or by 60 per cent per kilowatt hour produced. This was the result mainly of increased use of nuclear power, but a switch to higher quality fuel oil also contributed. The problems which the World Commission and the Toronto Conference attribute to nuclear power - safety, waste and proliferation risk - must be examined in an informed and objective manner, and the risks identified must be compared with the risks connected with alternative options. Perhaps the time is ripe for a more ~orough examination of environmentally responsible and practical energy policies under United Nations auspices. Let us by all means critically examine how much energy we shall need in the next decades for industrial and social development in industrial as well as in developing countries. To what extent can efficiency gains in energy production and use offset increased needs? Everyone agrees that Gonservation is essential. Let us discuss to wh~t extent sul?hur dioxide and nitrogen oxide can be eliminated frOM fossil fuel emissions - and at what cost. Let us examine what contributions to global and regional energy balances r~newable sources like solar energy, wind power and biomass can realistically make - and at what cost. How hr away is nuclear fusion? To what extent could the problems of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and carbon dioxide be alleviated by greater use of natural gas and nuclear power? Let us discuss the problems ~ich the world Commission cmd the Toronto Conference see in nucl"!ar power. Are their concerns justified? Are they susceptible of settlement? There is no world authority that can adopt energy policy decisions for individual countries and enforce them - however much our global survival might depend on it. The concerted action and mutual accommodation that may be indispensable can only come from common convictions that emerge from a discussion between the world's Governments of energy needs and the economic and environmental consequences of different approaches. I should like to turn now to the three problems which the World Commission on Environment and Development and the Toronto Conference linked to the use of nuclear. power and report to the General Assembly on IAEA ilctivities in these matters. To help proteGt man from harmful radiation wile making use of radiation for the benefit of man are objectives of the !AEA. The subject of radiation is not well understood by the public. There is a need for more education and factual information. No data in this field are more authoritative than those given by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation tUNSCEAR). The figures recently published by UNSCEAR are of gr.eat interest. Even those who are not familiar with the measurement of radioactive doses in millisieverts will appreciate the relative proportions of the doses we receive. UNSCEAR reports that, on average, each person in A~ world annually receives a dose of 2.4 millisieverts from natural SOUtces, now mainly radon. Medical diagnostic activities are estimated to contribute another 1 millisievert, while all activities in the world related to nuclear power give ~.0002 millisievert annually. UNSC!AR has also specifically assessed the impact of the radioactivity released by the Chernobyl accident. During the f.irst year after the accident the population of Europe, including the European part of the Soviet Union, received on average an additional dose of radiation which corresponds to less than one third of what it receives from natural sources during a year. For the most exposed population in the Byelorussian region, the first year average dose was lower than one year's dose from natural background radiation. These figures on average doses are reassu~ing and deserve to be made widely known. They should not obscure the tragic fact, however, that individ~als and groups which were subjected to high doses in connection with Chernobyl are subject to special risks. Fortunately, the number of these individuals is not high. While it is important to ascertain and disseminate factual information about radiation, an even more important task is to help work out measures to limit the radiation dose to which man is subject, whether natural as in the case of radon, or man-made as in the case of X-ray examinations and nuclear power operations. The regulations and measures surrounding the operation of nuclea~ ~wer sarve both to keep very low the radiation to which the professional personnel is subjected in normal operations and to prevent accidents which would risk releasing radiation. While national Governments bear the major responsibility for enacting and implementing these rules and measures, those instituted through the IAEA now form a very substantial body of rules, standards, principles and measures which together may be termed an international nuclear safety regime. Some important elements may be mentioned • The first are the ~uclear saf~ty standards. The five codes of practice have be~n revised to ref.lect current thinking and the ~xperience g~ined in accident prevention and management. These codes are not legally bin~ ~ but have considerable authority and have been much used in the elaboration of national regul&tions. It is evidently desirable that national regulations are consistent with nuclear safety standards and Member States havo been asked to provide information on this matter, or have in some cases spontaneously informed the Agency thereon. A second and new element is the set of basic s~fety principles for nuclear power plants developed by the Agency's International NUclear Safety Advi~o!y Group. These principles are not regulatory by nature. Rather they establish exacting but realistic safety objectives for existing and future plants. They are based on the premise that safety must never be a static concept, but must develop in the nuclear industry, as it develops in others. A third element is the service provided by the Agency's Operational Safety Review Teams which, upon request by Governments, visit nu~lear plants and review their operational safety. So far, 25 such teams have been sent to 15 Member States. One team has just reviewed a power plant in Japan, and some 12 reviews are requested for the next 12 months, including the first ones in the SOviet Union, China, Hungary, the United Kingdom and Czechoslovakia. In the current international discussion, the ~uggestion is not infrequently heard that nucle~r power would be more acceptable if new reactors with greater "inherent" - or to use a better word, "passive" - safety were developed. However, if the discussion is to be renlistic, we must first take account of the fact that for a rather long time to come the issue of nuclear power safety will be largely identical with the issue of safe operation of the over 400 nuclear power reactors which are already working. That is why an expanding part of the IAEA's activity is 'Mf. Blix, tAEA) This does not mean that the questions of new technical devices further to improve safety in existing plants and of the next generation of nuclear pavor reactOts are qninteresting or neglected. Just as automobiles and aeroplanes are continuously made safer and more reliable through new designs and inventions, the safety technology of nuclear power reactors Must al~o continuously develop. Current po~er reactor designs tolerate many human errors and much redundance is built into their safety systems. However, this is no reason for negJ.~cting the search for designs which disphy more ·passive" safety, Such designs ara, in fact, emerging both as reg~rds the curre~tly dominant types of reactors and in new types of reactors. (Hr. DUx, IAEA) The issue of waste disposal has &ttr~cted public concern in the recent past, following various reports of illicit exports and dumping of toxic and nuclear wastes in developing countries. In May of this year, the summit Conference of the Organization of African Unity adopted a resolution which, ~nter alia, condemned such practices, and requested the IAEA, the united Nations Environment Progr~mme, the Economic Commission for Afr lea and other concerned organizations to assist African countries to establish apppropriate mechanisms for monitoring and controlling the movement and disposal of nuclear and industrial waste in Africa. The Agency has no mandate with regard to toxic wastes. The question of nuclear dumping, however, was a subject of discussion at both the IAEA Board of Governors and the General Conference this year. The result was a resolution - which I have been asked to bring to the attention of the Sccretary-General of the United Nations - that: "requests the Directoc General of the Agency to establish a representative technical working group of experts with the objective of elaborating an internationally agreed code of practice for international transactions invol~ing nuclear wastes." Obviously, a first basic principle which should govern nuclear waste transactions is that each State generating radioactive waste should enS!lre that it is disposed of in ~ccordanoe with acceptable safety standards. The transfer of such w~ste to any country that lacks the technical or administrative capacity to handle it safely is patently irresponsible, the more so if it occurs without the knowledge and consent of that country. The Agency has for some time been prOViding assistance to developing countries in the field of waste management under its waste Management Advisory Programme and 8S part of its technical assistance programme. At the request af one member country, the Agency also sent an expert to determine whether dumped waste actually contained radioactive material. The result was negative. We will, of course, continue to assist member States which have reason to believe that they have been the subject of such dumping and which do not have adequate resources of their own for checking on this. So far, no incident of dumping of radioactive wastes has come to light. On the larger issue of disposal of radioactive waste, as distinguished from the question of international transactions in wastes, it should be reported first that internationally agreed codes of practice and guides exist for the management and disposal of low and intermediate-level wastes and that an international consensus now also exists on principles for the safe undergrou~d disposal of hig~level waste. One of the concerns expressed about nuclear power by the WOrld Commission on Environment and Development is that reliance on this technology may le~d to a proliferation of nuclear weapons. The Commission urges that all nations should contribute to the de"elopment of a viable non-proliferation regime. The nuclear-weapon States should ~ and I quote the Commission: ~Deliver on their promise to reduce the number and ultimately eliminate nuclear weapons in their arsenals and the role those weapons play in their strategies. And the non-nuclear-weapon States must co-operate in providing credible assurances that they are not moving towards a nuclear-weapon capability." (A/42/427, annex, chapter 7, para. 43) The Commission emphasizes the need for credible safeguards. Most countries outside the five nuclear-weapon States have explicitly renounced nuclear weapons and submitted all the nuclear installations and fissile mater ial which they may have to IAEA safeguards, in order to create maximum confidence that their nuclear activites serve exclusively peaceful purposes. TO suggest, as is sometimes done in the name of non-proliferation, a phasing out of nuclear reactors is to suggest the termination of practically the only acti~ity in this wcx:ld that is legally cO!"lmitted to exclt;;sively peaceful use and is internationally verified to be so. It is neither a realistic nor a reasonable proposal. Wer~ it to be followed we would scrap electricity-producing nuclear power stations and be stuck with the nuclear weapons - all in the name of non-proliferation. It would certainly seem more appropriate to suggest an expanded acceptance of safeguards and decisive steps to nuclear disarmament. Such steps, which were envisaged in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NP1') might, indeed, encourage further adherence to non-proliferation, whether under the HP'!' or other agreements. Perhaps the present climate of detente allows some optimism. The first ~issiles have met the chain saws ~~d major new disarmament efforts are under discussion. In the non-proliferation field we can note Spain's adherence to the HP'!' in 1987 and Saudi Arabia's adherence recently. The iAEA safeguards now cover about 95 per cent of the fissile material and 9S per cent of the nuclear installAtions in non-nuclear-weapon States. with an agreement recen~ly concluded between China and the tAEA, under which some nuclear facilities in China will be placed under Agency safeguards, all five nuclear-weapon States now experience some safeguazds inspection. Perhaps the new climate will yield results even in more int~actable areas. The General Conference of the IABA concerned itself, last month, with the acceptance of safegudrde in South Africa and in Israel. The qu~stion of the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East has been discussed here in the General Assembly. The subject is essentially a political one. However, such a zone, whether established ~y treaty or established by the assumption of similar obligations by a group of neighbouring States would require verification. This is a task that may be entrusted to the IAEA. ! should mention that the IAEA General Conference adopted a resolution, in september 1987, which urged Israel to place all its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards, and requested me this year to prepare a technical study on different modalities of application of IAEA safeguards in the region. Such a study will be prepared in the coming year. When I addressed the Assembly in October last year, I reported that the South African Government had announced its intention to begin discussions on the signing of the non-proliferation Treaty. Such discussions have taken place in Vienna in August and september this year and it is hoped that SOuth Africa will now adhere to the Treaty and respond positively to the resolutions calling for its acceptance of safeguards. If it does SOB the secretariat of the.IAEA will be ready to discuss the conclusion of an NPT-type safeguards agreement with the Government of South Africa. In those circumstances, perhaps other States in Africa whicll have not yet done so will also adhere to the non-proliferation Treaty. In that way a step may be taken towards a nuclear-weapon-free Africa. Mankind is not threatened by the approgimately 420 nuclear power stations which produce energy for our well-being without burdening our atmosphere. It is not these high-tech creations that should be decommissioned, but rather the approximately 50,000 nuclear warheads, whether they are located on land, ships or planes or planned to hang above us in space, as swords of Damocles.

I now call on the representative of Canada, to introduce draft resolution A/43/L.l7. Mr. FORTIER (Canada) (interpretation from French): It gives me great pleasure to open the debate by congratulating the Director General, Mr. Hans BliK, on his statement, which ably set out the priorities and preoccupations of the Agency. Canada also wishes to take this opportunity to comm~nd the Director General for his annual report for 1987, which sets out in clear and concise fashion the Agency's activi ties in promoting the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. My delegation wishes to reaffirm Canada's strong support for the Agency and its various programmes for the development of nuclear energy for the benefit of all. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) plays a crucial role at the centre of international nuclear co-operation. Its safeguards activities are the core of the international non-proliferation regime, without which meaningful co-operation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy would be impossible. Canada is pleased to note that no anomalies were deteoted during 1987 which would have indicated the diversion of a significant amount of safeguarded nuclear material. The twentieth anniversary of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons, (NPT) in 1988, should remind us of the Treaty's central importance in preventing nuclear proliferation, facilitating nuclear co-operation for peaceful purposes and encouraging nuclear-weapon reductions. Canada has an abiding commitment to the MPI' and attaches particular importance ..~ all States becoming full parties thereto. As we approach the 1990 Review Conference of Parties to the Treaty, the Treaty's role in the strengthening of international peace and co-operation remains essential. Canada congratulates the Agency and the People's Republic of China on the conclusion of a voluntary-offer safeguards agreement. With this agreement, all the nuclear-weapon States are now covered by voluntary-offer agreements. We believe this to be an important devE:lopment. Canada favours the full implementation and extension of such agreements with a view to achieving universal application of IAEA safeguards to all peaceful nuclear activities in all States. Turning to developnents at the recent General Conference, my delegation welcomes the fact that the Director General has attached great importance to sustainable development. The Agency is to be commended for its ongoing activities in matters related to the environment - in particular nuclear safety, radiation protection and nuclear-waste management. WOr Id attention is also being focused increasingly on the environmental impact of fossil fuel use, and concern is growing over climatic changes caused by man. In its call for action by Governments and industry, the world Conference on the Changing Atmosphere, held in To?ooto in June 1988, recommended "revisiting the nuclear power option", which, it sugq~sted "could have a role to pL~v in lowering carbon dioxide emissions". The Director General has shown the extent to which he is determined that the Agency shall play a full role in current activity in this field. We believe that a review of Agency programmes from the envir~Jmental perspective would be of benefit and that it would con tr ibute both to the public acceptance of nuclear power and to the Agency IS important role in its promotion. Canada also welcomed the adoption by consensus at the General Conference of a resolution on the dumping of nuclear waste~. This resolution, the first of its kind adopted in the United Nations system, clear ly defines the role of IAEA in this important and topical aspect of nuclear safety. Canada was pleased to participate in the Diplomatic Conference on the Relationship between the Paris Convention and the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage. The Joint Protocol adopted by the Conference represents a modest improvement in the civil liability regime. My Government believes, however, that the time has come for a study of broader questions relating to liability, including state liability. The usefulness of a new intarnational instrument should not b2 excludea from such a study. As Canada has assumed the chairmanship of the Agency's Board of Governors in Vienna, I have the special honour of introducing, on behalf of Alge~ia and the German Democratic Republic, the other members of the Bureau, draft resolution in A/43/L.l7, entitled "Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency·. The draft resolution is the result of close consultation among interested member countries in both Vienna and New York. The draft resolution follows, to a large extent, the format and text of earlier resolutions adclpted by the General Assembly under this item, with some additions in both the prealnbular and the operative parts reflecting recent IAEA nuclear safety activities. Under operative paragraphs land 2 the General Assembly would take note of the report of the Agency and affirm its confidence in the role of the Agency in the application of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. In paragraph 3 of the draft resolution the Assembly ·urges all States to strive for effective and harmonious international co-oper3tion in carrying out the work of the Agency, putsuant to its statute; in promoting the use of nuclear energy and the application of the necessary measures to strength@n further the safety of nuclear installations and to minimize risks to liie, health and the environment; in strengthening technical assistance and co-operation for developing countries; and in ensuring the effectiveness and efficiency of the Agency's safeguards systemD • In paragraph 4 the Secretary-General is requested to transmit to the Director General of the Agency the records of the forty-third session of the General Assembly relating to the Agency'~ activities. We are confident that, in keeping with our previous tradition, and in view of the importance of the matters contained in this draft resolution, the General Assembly will adopt it by consensus. Mr. KENNEDY (United States of America): My delegation wishes to express its strong support for the draft resolution before us regarding the 1987 annual report submitted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). As my Government has often stated, IAEA is an organization of critical importance. As demonstrated in its excellent report to the General Assembly, the Agency continues to play a vital role in promoting the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and in foster:ing international peace and security. We take this opportunity to commend the Director General, Mr. Blix, and the IAEA secretariat for the diligence and commitment they have continuously demonstrated, which have contributed so greatly to the Agency's success. As we review the report and reflect upon the Agency's accomplishments in 1987 and over the three decades since its establishment, one fact clearly emerges, namely, that the IAEA has provided high quality programme activities to its members on a consistent and long-term basis. r am certain that many representatives here will agree that the past several years have been challenging ones for the united Nations system. It has been a time of re-examination, a time of questioning, a time to take a closer look at exactly what the system and the United Nations stands for and whether, indeed, it is continuing to serve effectively the interests of all its Members. We have been pleased to note that much has happened in recent months to restore the confidence of Members in the work OL the United Nations and its efforts. Its diplomatic initiatives clearly today are resulting in genuine progress towards peace between Iran and Iraq, in Afghanistan, Angola and the Western Sahara. These and the many other steps which are on the positive side give us cause for qreat hope, a reinvigoration of the system. And these events form a useful backdro? against which we can look at the accomplish~~nts of other, perhaps somewhat less visible, bodies of the system, many of which have maintained a solid record of achievement throughout these years. One such orqanization is the IAEA. It has clearly and consistently served the interests of its members in a wide var iety of ways. In highlighting the importance of the Agency, it may be useful to consider what the world might be like without it. The IAEA maintains an international system of safeguards by which members provide tangible evidence of their commitment to utilize nuclear energy exclusively for peaceful purposes. Rather than restricting nuclear development, the IAEA safeguards system has provided the necessary basis for peaceful nuclear co-operation. That system creates confidence among nations that transfers of nuclear technology and information will not serve military purposes and thereby undermine international peace and stability. Indeed precisely the opposite. It assures that peace and stability. In the absence of the extensive and effective safeguards system, suspicion rather than trust could well characterize international nuclear trade. This, in turn, would likely lead to a climate of tension rather than co-operation among States. The IAEA safeguards system could not, I submit, be duplicated by any array of bilateral arrangements or controls. At best, such co~trols would be a less effective, more costly and confusing patchwork of disparate arrangements. Thus, all Members of the United Nations clearly benefit from the IAEA safeguards system, first, because it fosters peace and security~ secondly, because it facilitates co-operation among States for social and economic development and, finally, because it is a cost-effective and efficient means of achieving those ends. I would ask a similar question as to the Agency's Technical Assistance and Co-operation Programme. Where would we be without the many programmes conducted by the iAEA in support of peaceful nuclear development? Over the past three decades, we have become incr~asingly aware of the potential of nuclear technology to aid countries in fields basic to the well-being of mankind: energy production, agriculture and medicine. The IAEA's annual report this year, as it has in the past, makes clear the breadth oC the Agency's activities which benefit the developing world in all these fields. The Agency has. assisted countries in all aspects of nuclear power planning and development, from the exploration and mining of uranium resources, to the production of nuclear reactor materials, to the safe operation of plants, and Ultimately to the safe disposal of nuclear wastes. Yet, as extensive as the Agency's nucleat power programme is, requests for assistance in the non-power nuclear technologies represent over 70 per cent of all requests for IAEA technical co-operation. In agriculture, for example, the IAEA implements a variety of programmes to improve crop and animal production. It has assisted countries in developing food irradiation facilities to protect and preserve scarce food resources. In medicine, the IAEA continues to work with Member States to identify better methods fo~ diagnosing and treating diseases - particularly, I would note, cance~ - as part of its overall programme devoted to radiotherapy and dosimetry. Nor should we overlook the wide range of IAEA activities in the physical sciences. Perhaps one of the most important of these is isotope hydrology. This has benefited many developing States in efforts to identify and harness crucial water resources. Clearly, it is impossible in' this forum to detail the Agency's many technical co-operation initiatives. Suffice it to say that the IAEA's work touches, in a very positive way, the lives of many across the globe. In reflecting upon the Agency's accomplishments, I would also suggest that we should not overlook its work in the area of nuclear safety. As in the fields of safeguards and technical co-operation, we can readily acknowledge the Agency's valuable contributions to the international community. The Agency's involvement in th~se areas has become more visible in recent years as a result of Chernobyl and other radiological accidents. But for many years the IAEA has in fact devoted major resources and efforts to promoting nuclear safety. safety guide-lines have been developedJ persons from many nations have been trained in nuclear safety and radiological protection; and a programme of voluntary safety inspections of nuclear facilities has been effectively pursued. (~~~~edy, United States) Moreover, the Agan(ly continUftS 1;0 work towards the "rid,est possible adherence and most effective implemfrnf;ation of the two international conventions. negotiated in 1986 on early notification and erl1ergency assistance i1'1 the event o:f nuclear accidents. Activities of this kind have helped to make the benefits of safe nuclear enetgy ever more widely available. All Members of the United Nations have profited and will continue to profit from the important work of the IAEA, sharing in the benefits of peace and security that it fosters. The !AEA has remained faithful not only to its own statutory mandate but also to the purposes &od principles of the United Natio~s enshrined in its Chartar: to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; and to achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of ~n economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character. My Government WOllld also wish to note that key to the continued success of the IAEA is its commitment and the commitment of its members to it~ unique scientific and technical character. The IAEA's work is far too important for its energies to be expended on matters for which it has neither competence nor responsibility. We are pleased, therefore, to note that the Agency's membership has become increasingly alert to the dangers which such diversions might pose for its continued succass in the pursuit of its mission. We believe this signals an ever growing awareness of the importance of the IAEA to world peace and development. In closing, my Government wishes today to commend the International Atomic Energy Agency for its invaluable contribution to a safer, more prosperous and more secure future. The united States pledges its continuing strong support for the work of the IAEA. Mrs. HYDER (Pakistan): Once again the General Assembly is considerin~ the report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which this year is annexed to a note by the Secretary-General (A/43/488) dated 29 July 1988. Since its establishment 31 years ago, the Aguncy has made important contributions to the objective of harnessing nuclear technology for peaceful purpose::s. It is a matter of great satisfaction for us that, as the embodiment of international effo~ts to use atQmic energy for the well-being of mankind, IAEA has carried out the tasks assigned to it in a thorough and exemplary manner. I should like to take this opportunity to e~press our amniration for the dynamic, brilliant and farsighted leadership of Director General Rans Blix and the manner in which he has conducted the affairs of the Agency. His wise guidance and commitment to the goals of the Agency have not only ensured its success but also helped to expand and strengthen the role which it has been called upon to play in the peaceful application of nuclear energy. Pakistan has always attached great importance to the work of IAEA. As in the case of many other developing countries, we have benefi ted enormously from our collaboration with the Agency and are deeply appreciative of the co-operation it has extended to us. The Agency provided valuable assistance in the formulation of Pakistan's long-term programme for nuclear power generation necessitated because of the scant non-renewable resources of energy at its disposal. We are grateful for the expertise, support and advice it has rendered to us in this context. As we approach the twenty-first century, the increasing depletion of fossil fuel resources, the threatening deterioration of our global environment and the gradual but perceptible d&~gers of an ecological backlash have reinforced the viability of nuclear energy as a safe, clean and reliable alternative. Therefore, in our collective efforts geared to the socio-economic development of humankind, IAEA will be called upon to play its due and increasingly important role. According to IAEA's latest report, during 1987 the total installed nuclear power generating capacity world-wide increased by about 8 per cent, reaching 297.9 GW(e) by the end of the year, an increase of 24.6 GW(e) over the previous year. Sixteen per cent of the world's electricity was being generated by nuclear power plants in 1987, with 417 power plants in operation, which, as the IAEAreport points out, r~~resents an accumulated operating experience of around 4,600 reactor years. According to the report, 120 nuclear power reactors are under construction. From the gradual expansion of global nuclear power generation capacity, it would be safe to conclude that the Agency should, accordingly, expand its programme for providing assistance for the development of nuclear power. We commend the IAEA's ongoing efforts to help strengthen infrastructures for th~ planning, implementation and operation of nuc~ear power projects in developing countries through interregional and national training courses and technical co-operation projects. The ~ency's assistance to developing countries in assessing the role for nuclear power within their national energy plans can and does provide relevant and useful inputs in their long-term strategies for socio~conomic development. The IAEA's contributions in the field of food and agriculture, in connection wi th nuclear techniques in the domain of medicine and in the sphere of physical scienees deserve special praise. They constitute invaluable inputs of sssistance to developing countries. It is, therefore, a matter of f"; Jsfaction for us that the technical assistance programme continues to receive the necessary attention in the activities of the Agency. (Mrs. ~'derr Pakistan) Pakistan has always attached importance to the Agency's existing safeguards system, which has demonstrated its reliability and effectiveness in detecting any diversion of nuclear materials to non-peaceful purposes. We have noted from the Director General's report that no anomaly was detected during 1987 which could indicate diversion of nuclear material or misuse of other material and equipment under safeguards. As the Director General has concluded: "nuclear material under Agency safeguards in 1987 remained in peaceful nuclear activities or was otherwise ••• accounted for.!! (;\/43/488, annex, pa!a. 384) Over the years the imbalance between the funds allocated to technical assistance and those allocated to safeguards activities has been highlighted. While Pakistan supports the Agency's safeguards activities, it must be recognized that it has limitations in this field. It carries out safeguards inspections of nuclear installations, plants and facilities in accordance with the terms of the respective safeguards agreements. It is not equipped or competent to deal with tasks out&ide its assigned mandate. It is our earnest hope that the Agency will, in consonance with its charter and mandate, assign first priority to the promotion of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. The task is all the more imperative in that the developing co~ntries are faced with increasing resistance from some States in their efforts to acquire technology for the development and advancement of their peaceful energy programmes. The result~ of the International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy only served to underscore the need for the Agency to undertake its activities for the promotion of the paaceful uses of nuclear energy with renewed vigour. There has been a growing tendency to exploit concern for nuclear safety by restricting greater co-operation in the peaceful uses of nuclear technology. The (Mrs. HYder, Pakistan) need for a more rational and equitable regime covering the various aspects of international CO-operation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy cannot be made an excuse fOl imposing discriminatory restrictions against the flow of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. It may be recalled that Pakistan has endeavoured to promote an international agreement prohibiting attacks against all nuclear facilities. Sueh an agreement could further reinforce measures for nuclear safety. Pakistan would also like to reiterate the need for sharing safety-related information within the framework of the IAEA. we consider it very important, in order to forestall the possibility of future nuclear accidents, which would have a far-reaching and negative impact on the harnessing of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. The international community, conscious of the need for peaoeful nuclear co-operation, enunciated certain principles through the instrument of this Assembly. These principles, contained in General Assembly resolution 32150, categorically affirmed that MAll States have the right, in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality, to develop their. programme for the peaceful l:Ise of nuclear technology for economic and social developnent, in oonformity with their priorities, interests and needs". The resolution also clearly spelled out that "All States, without discrimination, should have access to and should be free to acquire nuclear technology, equipuent and mater ials for the peaceful use of nuclear energy". It is our earnest hope that all States will abide by these principles in order to reverse the negative trends in peaceful co-operation and provide a fillip to the building of nuclear energy crucial to the needs of developing countries. Pakistan is in a positioo to join the adoption, by consensus, of the draft resolution on the repor t of the !AEA. Mr. ZACHMANN (German Democratic Republic): The delegation of the German Democratic Republic wishes to thank the Director Gener~l of the International Atomic Energy Agency (!AEA), Dr. Hans Blix, for his wide-ranging observations in the course of introducing the annual report of the IAEA for 1987. The canpetence of the Agency in the promotion of international oo-operation in the fields of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy in safety, and the prevention of the further spread of nuclear weapons, is highly appreciated in my country. The organization's activities are an impressive illustration of the great potential and benefits inherent in peaceful international m-operation and in the advancement of science and technology as an alternative to their misuse for military purposes. The past year has been marked by favourable political developments that are of immediate relevance to the activities of the IAEA. ~he Treaty concluded between the USSR and the United States of America on the elimination of their intermediateand shorter-range nuclear missiles brought the advent of nuclear disarmament. This must now be followed up with further steps, such as a 50 per cent cut in Soviet and American strategic offensive weapons while strictly observing the anti-ballistic missile Treaty and a comprehensive nuclear-test ban. The non-proliferation Treaty has been in force for more than 20 years now. The preservation and strengthening of that key instrument in the field of arms limitation and disarmament is a decisive prerequisite for a sustained process of nuclear disarmament expanding to include further categories of arms. If the universality of that Treaty were achieved, it would be conducive to greater international security and more effective multilateral co-operation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Preparations for the Fourth Review Conference of the non-proliferation Treaty in which my country is actively involved are already under way. We attach special importance to that Conference since it is to lay the groundwork for the extension of the Treaty, which will be up for decision in 1995. The outlook for such an extension is favourable since the basic provisions of the Treaty have come to be generally recognized norms in international relations. The German Democratic Republic shares the view of many States which believe that concrete agreements on the nuclear disarmament priorities I mentioned in the beginning would have an exceedingly favourable impact on the results of the forthcoming Review Conference on the non-proliferation Treaty. Jointly with the great majority of IAEA member States, my country demands that all nuclear activities of South Africa be subjected to IAEA safeguards without delay. In this cOMectien we welcome the joint statement en the question of the immediate and unqualified accession of South Africa to the non-proliferation Treaty circulated by the deposi taries of the Treaty at the thirty-secald session of the Agency's General Conference. Those who work together 1lJith SOuth Africa in the nuclear field are called Upal to bring their influence to bear along these lines. The same holds true for Israel. The Ger1lllln Democratic Republic attaches great importance to the activities of the Agency in the field of nuclear IMterial safeguards. The latter are closely related to efforts to strengthen the non-prolIferation regime and to create an atmosphere of confidence among States. We noted with satisfaction that the annual report states that, •••• the Secretariat••• did not detect any anomaly which would indicate the diversion of••• eafeguarded nuclear material - or the misuse of facilities (or) equipment••• subject to safeguards••• - for the manufacture of any nuclear weapon, or fac any other military purpose, or for the manufacture of any other nuclear explosi~e device ••• •• (A/43/488, para. 384) Nevertheless we cannot help pointing to the financial problems the IAEA is fi!cing, notably where its safeguards system is concerned. '1'0 enhance the meaningfUlness and credibility of IAEA safeguards, my delegation sees the need for all Member States to make their contribution to the growing budget required for these activities. As for the German Democratic Republic, it will continue to live up to ita obligations towards the organization. The 1987 annual report illustrates the wide-ranging efforts of the Agency and its member States to keep strengthening international co-operation in th~ fieldS of nuclear safety and radiation protection. We support the efforts of the IAEA for the implEmentation of the Conyention on Early Notification of a tt.lclear Accident mld the Convention on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency which haue come into force. The essential thing now is expeditiously to increase the number of States parties to these important accords and to underpin them by more. detailed regulations. On the basis of article 9 of the Convention on Early Notification, the German Democratic Republic has since 1987 concluded bilateral agreements on the exchange of information in the field of radiation protection with seven countries• • The IAEA works extensively and beneficially in the area of physical protection. Even though the corresponding international Convention has meanwhile entered into force, a number of things remain to be done. First, there is a need for further States to accede to the COfivention; secondly, it would be an achievement of great importance if the Convention could be widened to cover nuclear facilities in addition to nuclear material. The German Democratic RepUblic is ready to take part in activities designed to achieve this with a view to the review conference scheduled for 1992. The renewal and revision of nuclear safety standards carried out by the Agency and the document on basic safety principles worked out by the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group are of great benefit to IAEA member States, no~ably where their national nuclear safety and radiation protection policies are concerned. The German Democratic Republic welcomes the more expedi tious pur suit of the establi'Alment of an international regime for liability for nuclear damage with a transboundary effect. My country took part in the Dipl.omatic Conference on the adoption of a joint protocol on IIlZltters of nuclear liability. At present we are closely studying the question of becoming a party to the Joint Protocol and to the Vienna Convention on the Civil LiabiUty for tllclear Damage. The work ing group to be set up by the Agency should look into ~ll outstanding questions as regards both civil and State liability. In connection with the current programme of missions of the Operational Safety Review Team6 the German Democratic Republic recently informed the 11'.1::1'. Director General that it was prepared to receive such a mission in 1990. Of course, the safety of the nuclear energy indus try and the indus try •s fu ture prospects do not depend solely on technological or organizational measures. Measures for the prevention of attacks on nuclear facilities and for the (Mr. Zachmann, German Democratic Republic) prevention of all manifestations of nuclear terrorism are also needed. We hope that the Geneva Conference on Disarmament will react favourably to the readiness of the Director General of IAEA to work out a corresponding study, so that a step may be taken in the direction of an international agreement on the prohibition of armed attacks on nuclear facilities. The German Democratic Republic will continue to contribute its share to the implementation of the Agency's programme, including that in the area of technical aesistanoe. This applies not only to the funding of the technical assistance programme but also to the provision of equipment and materials, b;e training of scientists from developing countries, the hosting of study tours and training programmes and the provision of experts. My aelegation would like to express its appreciation to the permanent Representative of Canada for having so ably introduced draft resolution A/43/L.17. As a sponsor of that draft we express the hope that it will be adopted without a vote. Mr. ZAl'O'lOQ(Y (Czechoslovakia) (interpretation from Russian): First, I should like to congratulate the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mc. Hans BIix, on his statement at this meeting. We have also carefully studied Mr. Blix's statement to the third special session of the General Assembly devoted to Disarmament and his statement to the thirty-second General Conference of the IAEA, in which he gave an analysis of the activities of the Agency during the preceding period and the results achieved in the use of nuclear energy for peacefUl purposes to meet economic development needs and maintain ecological balance, in the adoption of measures to ensure greater safety in the use of nuclear installations, and in helping to ensure the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. We have also devoted careful attention to the report of the Agency (A/43/488, annex). The work of the Agency is taking place today in circumstances which differ from those of the recent past. positive changes in the international climate, heightened confidence among States and understanding of the common responsibility for the survival of mankind are leading to a strengthening of political and material guarantees that atomic energy will be used solely for peaceful purposes and to meet development needs. TOday's conditions highlight more clearly than ever before !AEA's task of ensuring the non-proliferation of nuclear weapon$ through the application of its system safeguards and, in particular, its efforts to establish the broadest possible and most fruitful co-operation in the use of nuclear ener.gy for peaceful purposes. The Agency is a universally recognized international organization which unites the efforts of States in the area of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. This year marked the twentieth anniversary of the signing of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The practical results of the Treaty h&ve reaffirmed tha~ it is promoting the maintenance of peace and the strengthening of international security. Czechoslovakia s~pports the universalization of the Treaty and is ready to work actively on the preparations for the forthcoming Fourth Review Conference of the parties to that legal instrument. We have noted with satisfaction that in carrying out its inspection activities in the period under review, the Agency did not discover any serious violations of States' obligations of the kind to lead it to suspect that there had been misuse of nuclear materials to produce nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or for unknown purposes. (Mr. Zapotocky, Czechoslovakia) Czechoslovakia continues to believe that the activity of the Agency in extending safeguards to nuclear materials is of the highest priority. It believes the Agency's safeguards systQm to be an important element in efforts to prevent a nuclear war and strengthen peace, confidence and co-operation throughout the world. We therefore support the proposal of the Director General of the Agency, Mr. Hans Blix, to make use of the Agency's experience in this control activity in carrying out inspection measures in connection with both steps already agreed upon and those which are still being worked out in the area of disarmament. . Czechoslovakia continuea to support constructive measures leading to the enhanced effectiveness and the improvement of safeguards sy~tem and it is ready to make available its experts and technical means in order to promote the implementation of those measures. At the same, however, we are concerned at trends that have recently emerged indicating that some difficulties and problems may arise in the near future in the activities of the Agency with regard to safeguards. At the present time, specific conceptual changes could be made in the safeguards system in order that in the near future, with an extremely limited increase in its financial resources, the Agency would be able to meet new political demands for control and inspection activities linked to disarmament and the development of the use of nuclear energy. In that connection, at the thirty-second session of the General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) we proposed the introduction of two ievels for the inspections system. The first level would ~e the conducting of large-scale inspections without notification - inspections that, with the help of statistical mechanisms, would be concentrated on the search for possible irregularities. On the second level, if irregularities were detected, careful control by testing and inspection would be carried out in the ~ppropriate area. We have taken note with great appreciation of the conclusion of a safeguards agreement between the People's Republic of China and the IAEA based on the voluntary offer by the People's Republic of China to place some of its nuclear installations under the IAEA safeguards. so, too, we welcome Spain's adherence to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Indeed, we should be very pleased to be able to express gratitude to other States as well in this regard, in particular to those States located at the so-called flash points of our planet. Like many other countries, we believe that an integral element of non-proliferation is the strengthening of alresdy existing, end the creation of newf nuclear-free zones in various regions of the world. That is precisely the aim of the joint proposal by Czechoslovakia and the German Democratic Republic regarding the establishment of a non-nuclear corridor in Central Europe. A comprehensive approach to achieving broad international co-operation in the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and the elimination of the nuclear threat is today, in our view, particularly relevant to ensuring the safe development of nuclear energy. A feeling of great responsibility vis-a-vis the activities of the IAEA in this domain led Member States to produce the international Convention on Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident and the Convention on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency. Since those vitally important international Conventions were adopted, they have been signed by more than 70 countries, and approximately 30 countries have already ratified them. The process of adherence by new States to those Conventions is actively continuing. In preparing for the thirty-second session of the General Conference of the IAEA, Czechoslovakia, together wit..J other countries of the socialist community, reached the conclusion that that useful process needed a new impetus. That led, in turn, to a new initiative in support of both Conventions, in the form of resolution GC/XXXII/865 of 22 September 1988. It was introduced by Czechoslovakia and 19 other States and was adopted by consensus, with universal support. The activity in the field of nuclear energy at the present time has demonstrated that .. despite the irreversible successes of that activity and despite its predominantly positive effect, we cannot exclude the possibility of a nucleaf accident or the danger of radiation. In order for the international community as a whole to avert such a potential danger, it is imperative that both of the Conventions to which I have just referred should become universal. Czechoslovakia is extremely interested in ensuring that the basis for co-operation laid down in those two Conventions continues to develop and expanda through both bilateral and multilateral relations. That is why Czechoslovakia was ate of the inltiators in the preparation of agreements between the countries members of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (OlEA) in regard to notification of nuclear accidents and mutual assistance. Those agreements ~hould be signed in the near olture. There has also been good progress in the work ~n agreements between Czechoslovakia and the Federal Republic of Germany that will regulate relations in the development of nuclear energy in our two neighbouring states. We have been extremely open in giving our Austrian partners information regarding Czechoslovak nuclear~power stations, in accordance with the a9reeme~ ~ concluded between Czechoslovakia and Austria on the regulation of questions of mutual interest linked to nuclear installations. The same can be said of negotiations on the expansion of co-operation that are now under way. We believe also that the implementation of measures that would prevent various forms of nuclear terrorism should form part of a comprehensive solution to issues of international security. In this connection, we shall welcome the entry into force of the multilateral Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Mater ial. We attach great significance also to the efforts of the IAEA and a number of its member States to prevent nuclear installations from becoming the targets of a~med attacks in which either conventional or nucleat weapons are used. The acHv! ties of the Agency in the sphere of technical assistance and co-operation are, we consider, one of the major areas for the developmert of the use of nuclear er.ergy for peace1ul purposQs on a global scale, but particularly in the less developed countries. We therefore support the proposal for the allocation for this purpose of $42 million in 1988. The fund for technical assistance thus creat~d should, however, be based as usual on the principle of voluntary contributions. Czechoslovakia plans to organize in our collntry in 1989 two IAEA training courses, and also to serve as host and give grants to specialists from the developing countries for advanced trGining in scientific research institutions in Czechoslovak ia. As in past years, Czechoslovakia has paid increased at'antion to the field of t~e non-energy uses of nuclear power. There has been broad development in the ~pplication of radio-nuclides in industry and of radio-indicator methods and activated analysis. We are interested in involving the IAEA in research ..programmes in this field, and we are ready in particular to give the developing countries effective assistance in using radio-nuclide methodo in various spheres of the economy. During past years we have acquired considerable experience in producing equipment for and building and using nucleat-power stations. The necessary technical and legal conditions have been created to ensure their safe use. As has always been the ca~e in the past, the work of Czechoslovak nuclear-power stations is characterized by great stability and by reliable use. In co-operation with the USSR and other countrie~ of the socialist community, we are beginning work en a project for a modernized nuclear power station with a WWER-IOOO reactor of a more sophisticated typer enhanced security against radiation and significantly better economic indicators. 'The past year has once again demonstrated that the assessment of the activity of !AEA made in connection with its thirtieth anniversary was fully merited. I should therefore like to express the gratitude of the Czechoslovak delegation for the work of the Agency over the past year. We should like to express our approval of the constructive approach and initiative of the representatives of IAEA, headed by the General Director, Mt. Blix 6 as well as of the representath·es of the Board of Governors in seeking to resolve a number of the extremely complex issues and problems which faced and continue to face the Agency. Mrs. BERTRAND (Austria): The General Assembly is once more called upon to deal with the annual report of one of the most prestigious and efficient organizations of the United Nations system, the International Atomic Energy Agency (lAEA). Representing as I do the host country of the Agency and a ocuntry that is closely involved in many of its substantive activi ties - while holding an independent view on the merits and prospects of nuclear power - I should like to take this opportunity to express once more Austria's strong support for the Agency and its oonfidenoo in the Agency's able leadership. Nuclear power, one of the major areas of the activities of IAEA, continues to be a subject of debate and even of controversy. While the number of nuclear-power plants in operation and the share of nuclear ~~er in world electricity production is still increasing, so too is the general concern with regard to the unsolved issues related to nuolear power g such as safety hazards, radioactive waste disposel and physical protection requirements. It is a fact that only a few of those Member States in which nuclear power production is at present an economically viable option pursue energy policies aimed at the constant expansion of nuclear power potentials. Other countries have been led by economic or safety considerations to take a more cautious stance, which has led to a freeze or near-freeze in the growth of their nuclear power potential. Still others have committed themselves to a gradual phasing out of nuclear power production and some countries - including Austria - have deliberately withdrawn from the nuclear option. In addition to the diversity of attitudes towards nuclear power on the governmental level, there is also a diversity of attitudes within countries, so that in several instances government endorsements of nuclear power have met with opposition from important segments of the population. The General Conference requested the Agency's Board of Governors to continue, as a matter of priority, its consideration of the question of liability for damage arising from a nuclear accid~nt and to convene, in 1989, an open-ended working group to study all aspects of the question of liability for nuclear damage. This obviously includes the important question of State liability for damage arising from nuclear accidents, a question which now, for the first time, has been put on the agenda of a working body reporting to the Agency's Board of Governors. This is an important development indeed. Austria hopes that it will ultimately lead to the elaboration of an international convention on State responsibility for nuclear damage and to the adoption of such a convention under the auspices of the Agency. As was stated in the General Conference, Austria is ready to submit a first draft of such a con~ention to serve as a basis for further work. Austria firmly believes that it is not only possible to resolve the difficult issue of State liability for nuclear damage through an appropriate instrument, but that it is also timely and necessary to do so. Our partiCUlar interest in the Agency's activities relating to nuclear safety in no way diminishes our interest and involvement in the other activities of the Agency, in particular those in the area of non-proliferation safeguards. It is an ongoing achievement of the Agency as a whole, of its management and of its highly specialized staff that it has been possible for the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - which was opened for signature 20 years ago - to be implemented on a worl~-wlde basis and in a satisfactory manner. The coming months will see the beginning of the preparations for the Fourth Review Conference of the Parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty to take place in 1990. Austria trusts that the Agency, with all its experience and prestige, will play an important role in th is process. Mr. FAN Guoxiang (China) (interpretation from Chinese): The Chinese delegation listened with great attention to the statement made by Mr. Blix in presenting the annual report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for 1987. It is clear to us that over: the past year, IAEA has done I\llch to pronnte peaceful uses of nuclear energy. We are pleased to note that !AEA has improved its training programme for developing countries. The three regional plans of co-operation for Asia and the Pacific, tatin America and Africa supported by !AEA are also welcomed by the developing countries. Progress has also been made on the issues of nuclear energy, nuc'le' ,1;' fuel recycling, nuclear safety and protection against radioactivity. Apart from its achievements in the field of technical co-operation, IAEA has made great efforts to strengthen nuclear safeguards and imptoye administrative management. We support the technical appraisal and the review of policies of technical co-operation carried out by the secretariat and aimed at greater efficiency and better results. we are confident that IAEA will continue to make further contributions to the promotion of peaceful uses for nuclear energy• (Mr. Fan Guoxiang, China) The Chinese Government has always followed closely, and supported, the IAEA's work. Although China is a relatively new meJrber of the Agency, it haa taken an active part in its activities. It pays its dues, and and makes its contributions for technical assistance, i,n time and is actively involved in the WOI' k of the International Nuclear f"Jafety Advisory Group. After the Chernobyl accident, China actively participated in the drafting of two conventions on nuclear safety, which it later signed and ratified. We have also agreed to and financed a nuclear safety expansion plan. Chinese experts on nuclear safety have worked with others on the "er the past year, China, as a revision of the nuclear-safety-standards plan. host country, and the IAEA have jointly run six training classes and spa"sared seven international conferences, especially the tenth meeting of the wcxking Group on the Plan of Co-operation for Asia and the Pacific, held last April. After this meeting, China and the IAEA will sponsor a series of activities. We al:e ready·...:, develop the relaticnship of co-operation with the Agency ~nd its other member ~. both benefi Hng from it and cootr ibu t ing to it. In its co-operation with other countries in the n"clear field, China strictly follows a policy of neither standing for, nor encouraCJing or helping, the development of nuclear weapons by other countries. Guided by this policy, when exporting nuclear materials, and equipment, China requests the receiving country to place them under IAEA safeguards. When importing such mater ials and equipment China also sees to it that they will be used for peaceful purposes. In the light of this policy, at IAEA's twenty-ninth plenary session China proclaimed that, when appropriate, it would voluntarily place some of its civil nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards, and, in fulfilment of that undertaking, it has thereafter conducted consultations with the Agency accordingly. After t\10 rounds of formal negotiations, held in August 1986 and September 1987 respectively China and the IAEA reached an agreement on the &&feguards text Iilnd signed it (Mr. Fan Guoxiang, China) officially last September. This agreement once again reflects China's devotion to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to the international endeavour towards this end. It also demonstrates our support for the two major objectives prescribed in the IAEA's statute - namely, the peacaful use of nuclear energy and its safeguards. By signing this agreeinent China will extend its co-operation with the IAEA and its members. In the meantime, the agreement will also create conditions for greater participation by us in the Agency's operational activities in the field of safeguards. China has already r eoo11l1lended exper ts of its own to wor k as IAEA inspectors, and will receive Agency inspectors on its own soil. To facilitate implementation of the agreement, China is stepping up the building of state systems of accounting for and controlling nuclear: lIB ter ial and is consul HnC] wi th the Agency on auxiliary arrangements. In conclusion, the Chinese delegation would like to express its great appreciation of the IAEA's work. We endexse its annual report and support draft resolution A/43/L.17. Mr. IOZINSKIY (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): The Soviet delegation has carefully studied the report of the International Atomic Energy Agency for 1987, presented by the Director-General of the Agency, Mr. Hans BUx, of whose activity we greatly approve. This important document fully reflects the leading role of that unique organization in the canprehensive d~velopment of inter-State co-operation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and control over the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. The Soviet Union views very positively the varied activies of the IAEA and its effective response to the emergence of new problems. The Agency must be directly involved in finding solutions to such probleillS, as happened in the case of the accident at the ChernClbyl nuclear-po"'ier station. The Agency is now working in conditions brought about by positive changes in the general international climate. The imple_nution of the SovietocAIHrican Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles has laid down the basis for beginning a process of real disar.anent. Progress is being made, though with aOhe difficulty, in working out a treaty on a 50 per cent reduction of Soviet and American strategic offensive weapons, in compliance with the anti-ballistic-miseile Treaty. Definite progress haD also been made at the current Soviet-American negotiations on the limitation and ulti~ate cessation of nuclear tests.. The Soviet Union hopes that agreement on effective measures of control and ratification of th3 Soviet-American Treaties of 1974 c..ad 1976 "ill be reached 1n the very near future and that the parties will without delay engage 1n the consideration of further, more radical, measures to limit the yield and nuBber of nuclear tests pending their total cessation. On the threshold of the new and historic era of the liberation of ..nkind from nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, the IABA incarna~es the peaceful alternative to the military use of nuclear enercw. It is the prototype of the international organization of the future, Which must guarantee that nuclear weapons will not re-emerge. In that connection we should like to emphasize that the Agency's control machinery and ita ex~erience in the area of implementing safeguards could be used broadly in the procesa of creating political, legal and control _chinery to regulate international relations both in the process of nuclear disarmament and in a future nuclear-free and non-violent world. One of the important conditions necessary for uninterrupted progress in nuclear disaraament is the strengthening of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the twentieth anniversary of which is being lUrked this year. The principles laid down in that Treaty are videly recognized and have become fundamental to international lav• (Mr. Lozinskiy, USSR) (Mr. Lozin~kiy, USSR) In terms of the number of parties adhering to it the Treaty ia obviously the broadest international legal document in the area of arms limitation. The objective of ensuring &dherence to the Treaty by countries that are not yet parties to it is of the utmost illpOrtance. In that connection we should like to IIlention the nuclear aa>itions of South Africa and Israel and emphasize that the adherence of those States to the Tre&ty is imperative. Strict compliance by all States with the obligations they h&ve undertaken under the Treaty in the area of the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons is of great significance in ensuring comprehensive security. Another important cont~ibution is the continuation of the work on developing international machinery to ensure the safe development of nuclear energy, including the solution of such questions as the prevention of attacks on nuclear facilities c the prevention of nuclear terrorism and the international legal regulation of responsibility for nuclear damage. In all of those areas the International Atomic Energy Agency has an important contribution to make. We are convinced that the Fourth Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons, to be held in 1990, wUl promote a further strengthening of the nen-proliferation regime. The Soviet Union will continue its firm support for the Treaty, which must J'. reIMin in effect until such tinre as a nuclear-free and non-violent world has bacome a reality. It can only be replaced by a collpl.'ehensive international treaty on the non-re-e.ergence of nuel@ar weapons following their total and definitive eliJlination. As t,~Ae report of the Agency makes clear, and as the Director-General of the Agency noted in his statelHnt, duting the period covered by the report the safeguards activities of the Agency ha~e been expanded and the safeguards system has been consi8t~ntly i.proved. The safeguards system effectively' and reliably ensures that there will be no diversion of nuclear material from peaceful applications to the production of nuclear weapons. We note with satisfaction that, as in previous years, the secretariat of the Agency did not detect any anomaly that would indicate the diversion of a significant amount of safeguarded nuclear material for the manufacture of any nuclear weapon or for any other military purpose, or for the manufacture of any other nuclear explosive device. The Soviet Union therefore favours the involvement of as many States as possible in the work of IAEA and supports the universal nature of that body. The Soviet Union is making its contribution to the technical improvement of safeguards within the framework of its national programme for scientific and technical support. for IAEA safeguards. In 1988 work was done to implement 40 individual projects in major safeguards ~reas. TO conduct the next cycle of scientific research and experimental design work under that programme, the Soviet Union will allocate 4 million rubles for 1989-1990. In addition, our country has allocated 300,000 rubles as a voluntary contribution to educational programmes concerning safeguards in 1989-1990 to be conducted by the Soviet Union with the participation of IAEA specialists. We welcome the increase in the Agency's efforts to transmit experience, knowledge, technology and equipment in the area of the peaceful uses of nuclear energ~ to the developing countries members of the Agency for their social and economic development. That activity has been promoted by the Agency's orientation towards the impl~mentation of long-term and large-scale technical-assistance projects and co-operation. The Soviet Union contributes fully and regularly to the Fund for Technical A~3istance and Co-operation and, together with the Agency, is conducting activities on the effective use of nuclear energy. The voluntary contrihution made by the USSR in national currency to the IAEA Fund for Technical Assistance and Cc-operation for the coming year has ~1en increased to a sum equivalent to $US4,238,OOO. In 1989 there will also be continued disbursement of the sum allocated by the Soviet Union for additional assistance to States members of the IAEA that are also parties to the Treaty on thQ NOn-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The Soviet delegation would like to associate itself with other delegations that have already expressed their approval of the IAEA report for 1987. We also support the draft resolution introduced by the representative of Canada. We are convinced that the Agency will continue to remain a reliable instrument for organizing international co-operation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy under the regime for the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. Mr. SOULDDTIS (Greece): On behalf of the 12 States members of the European Community, I should like first of all to thank the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for his annual report on the Agency's work during 1987. I should also like to express appreciation for the comments made by the Director-General in his introductory statement on the main developments that have occurred in the Agency during 1987. We wish to reaffirm our full support for IAEA's objectives of encouraging and facilitating international co-operation in the use of nuclear energy for peace, health and prosperity throughout the wOlld and in preventing nuclear proliferation. The Agency remains q in our view, the primary international orqanization for the promotion of the application of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes~ We should like to e~press our appreciation for the work that haS been done to promote the safe use of nuclear energy in some areas of special interest to members (Mr. SOuliotis, Greece) of the European Community. First, we repeat our support for the activities of the lAEA in the Technical Assistance Programme. We are among the major contributors to the Agency's Technical Assistance and Co-operation Programme, and it is our policy to maintain that position despite domestic bUdgetary problems. The Agency's Technical Assistance and Co-operation programme is a useful reminder that, in addition to the power applications of nuclear energy, nuclear techniques are increasingly being used to combat disease and improve human welfare in many parts of the world. Of significance to us all is the application of nuclear technology in medicine ana agriculture. The work in that area is also of special importance to Member States for which the nuclear-power option is still only a distant possibility. Further, we note with appreciation that the Agency is making a valuable contribution in nuclear research activities in the laboratories in Seibersdorf, Trieste and Monaco - activities in which scientists from both developed and developing countries take; an active part. We are convinced that this work is in the long-term interest of all Member States and deserves their full support and encouragement. We also wish to stress our continuous support to, and int~rest in, the Agency's activities as regards waste management. These are of impOrtance for the continued utilization of nuclear energy, the protection of the environment and public safety. This work should not be confined to safe storage, but should also cover such matters as trcmsport. The annual report for 1987 records an increase of about 8 per cent in total world installed nuclear power generating capacity. TWenty-two new plants came on line in nine states members of the Agency, bringing the total to 417 operating nuclear power pl&nta in 26 countries. Within the European Community a third of our electricity is generated by 132 nuclear power reactors. It is thus clear that nuclear power is playing, and will continue to play, a substantial role as a source of energy. Ensuring nuclear safety is recognized in the Statute of !AEA as one of its functions and since the Agency's forma tion in 1957 it has been an important, integr a1 par t of its progr amme. We appreciate and support the activities of the Agency in the area of nuclear safety and believe that it is important for the Agency's activi ties in this field to mainta in their momentum. Nuclear energy could not develop without rigorous safety measures, which must be kept under regular review, and the Agency'S programmes in this area should be accorded high priority. ChernObyl clearly showed that a nuclear accident can have trans-boundary effects, and it underlined the vital importance of international co-operation in the nu.;lear field • The Agency is playing an essential role in the field of nuclear safety and radiation protection, not only by contributing to the establishment of enhanced safety principles, guides and standards, but also in the way in which it provides a focus for diseussion on key subjects. The entry into force of the Convention on Ear ly Notification of a Nuclear Accident end the Convention on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency has been an important step towards improved international co-operation in the field of nuclear safety and radiological protection. The two Conventions have already been signed or ratified by a large number of member States. It is grati tying that the five Nuclear Safety Standards (NUSS) Codes of Practice h~ve n~ been reviewed and, where necessary, revised to reflect current thinking and the experience gained in accident prevention and management. Nuclear safety is primarily a national responsibility, but it also has an international dimension. It is our hope that the acceptance of the updated HUSS-safety standards csn help obtain and preserve a high international level of nuclear safety, and that member states will take them into acco~~t when elaborating their own national safety requirements. In this context, we also appreciate the work which has been carried out by the International Nucle~r Safety Advisory Group (INSAG) during the past year. The INSAG principles, now completed, show once more that the establishment of INSAG has been V0gy useful. We should like to express our support for the Agency's Operational Safety Review Team (OSART) programme. Its missions are a good example of the kind of services the Agency can provide to member States in order to secure a high international safety level and a reassurance that strict standards are being applied in the field of nuclear plant opera Hon. We also welcome the effor ts made by the Agency to encourage greater co-operation in the areas of regulatory regimes and legislation. We should also like to express our appreciation of the efforts put forth within the Agency and other forums to improve the regime governing liability for nuclear damage. We note with satisfaction that the text of the Joint Protocol relating to the application of the Paris Convention on Third Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy and the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage elaborated during the meeting of experts of IAEA and the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in October 1987 was adopted and opened for signature on 21 September 1988. Having stressed the Agency's work in support of nuclear safety, we wish to underline the importance of the Agency's safeguards activities. We have noted from the annual report w,i th satisfaction that the Agency has concluded that in 1987 all nuclear mater ia1 under Agency safeguards continued to be used only in peaceful nuclear activities. The safeguards system is an essential part of non-proliferation policy, which the European Community and its member States strongly support. The Community and its member States consider it a matter of great importance that the safeguards should be applied as widely as possible in furtherance of the policy of non-proliferation. Therefore, we repeat our appeal to those non-nuc1ear-weapon States having nuclear facilities which are not under IAEA safeguards to place them under that regime. We also appreciate the fact that the negotiations with China to place some of its civilian nuclear installations under Agency safeguards led to the conclusion of a voluntary offer agreement in September 1988. This means that such safeguards agreements have now been concluded with all five nuclear-weapon States. In reviewing the Agency's achievements in 1987 I should like, finally, to express our appr.eciation of the initiation of a project under the auspices of !AEA by the world's four major fusion partners - the European Community, Japan, the United states of America and the Union of Soviet SOcialist Republica - for a conceptual design of an international thermonuclear experimental reactor (ITER). While Member States have expressed their appreciation of the effectiveness of IAEA and underlined the importance of its tasks, major problems threaten its smooth working. First, we note that not all assessed contribution~ were paid on tim~. In our opinion, it is important that the financial regulations of the Agency be respected as international obligations. If they are not, IAEA will not be able to perform in a satisfactory way the important tasks to which I have referred. Secoudly, it is also of great concern to the European Community and its Member States that the Agency has to deal wi th polidcal issues that are really the responsibility of other forums. This jeopardizes the rOlE! of the Agency as an effective inst~ument for the promotion of co-operation in the peaceful use of nuclear ener~. It is the firm wish of the European COlll1lunity and its Member States that the close co-operation which exists between them and the Agency in all fields of peaceful nuclear activities should continue to develop successfully. Mr. MAKAREVITCH (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian): The delegation of the Ukrainian SSR has read with great interest and satisfaction the report submitted to the General Assembly of the United Nations on the activities of the International Atomic Energy AgenLi (IAEA) for 1987 and has also heard with the same satisfaction the statement of the Director General of the Agency, Mr. Hans Blix, made at this meeting. First of all, we should like to express particular gratitude to Mr. BIix for his qreat personal contribution to the activity .of the Agency and also to his colleagues at the !AEA for their positive and effective work. The Ukrainian SSR has a very positive view of the activi ties of the IAEA, the au thorita tive international organization which is promoting the comprehensive development of international co-operation in the sphere of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, control OVer the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and the safe use of nuclear energy. The reality of peaceful alternatives to military uses of nuclear energy is already symbolized for most states by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which Mikhail Gorbachev called in his article "Reality and Guarantees of a Non-Nuclear World" a universal example of the great responsibility of States. The conclusion of that Treaty was an adequate collective answer by the international community to the threat of further proliferation of nuclear weapons. Special recognition here should be given to the role of the !AEA, to which the Treaty entrusts control functions and which worked out the system of guarantees effectively and reliably ensuring the non-diversion of nuclear materials from peaceful applications to the production of nuclear weapons. That control is being carried out with full respect for the sovereign rights of States and without detriment to the development of their peaceful nuclear activity and international co-operstion in the area of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Therefore, as we see it, there is every reason to use the experience acquired in connection with the !AEA safeguards bo work out systems of control for future measures of nuclear disarmament. We believe that a comprehensive stren9~~ening of the non-proliferation regime still remains the highest priority objective of the Agency in limiti~g the nuclear arms raos. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons plays a substantive role in the maintenance of international peace and in particular in building comprehensive international security. Therefore we share the profound concern of the international community regarding the actions of those near-nuclear States which, openly displaying their nuclear ambitions, do not wish to recognize that adherence to the Treaty is the sole option which can be dictated by reason, morality or genuine concern for national and international security. Our delegation supports the establishment of an international regime for the safe development of nuclear energy and the programme for its creation which was put forward by the Soviet Union in 1986. We also support the working out of a reliable system of measures to prevent attacks on nuclear facilities, steps to prevent nuclear terrorism and the international regulation of responsibility for nuclear damage. The Ukrainian SSR actively supports areas of activity and the programmes of the Agency, and all countries are interested in their implementation. In our view, those programmes are on the whole in keeping with the principles and purposes of the Agency, the goals of which are the universal use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and the expansion and strengthening of international co-operation in this sphere. In our view, the issues of atomic energy are an important element here. Analysis of available data demonstrates that needs for energy and its consumption throughout the world are growing unchecked. It is perfectly obvious that the (Mr. Makarevitch, Ukrainian SSR) fundamental question determining the future of nuclear energy is that of ensuring its reliability and safety. In this connection, we should note the useful activity of the IAEA in this area: the holding of a number of conferences and meetings on nuclear safety, the working out of international standards for such safety and the adoption of the Conventions On Early NOtification of a NUclear Accident and on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident. At the same time, in our view, the Agency should step up work on norms for action in cases of nuclear accidents. The experience of many countries has demonstrated that, with appropriate efforts, the problems of safety of nuclear power stations can be successfully resolved. The Ukrainian SSR is devoting a great deal of attention to this question. We have taken into account the bftter experience of ChernObyl and at the present time a range of measures have been carried out excluding the possibility of a recurrence of such an accident at any of our functioning reactors. There has been a significant enhancement of the safety of work on nuclear power stations as a whole. Last May in Kiev, the capital of the Ukrai.ne, an international scientific conference took place ~n the meO'.ical aspects of the accident at the ChernObyl nuclear power station, with the participation of scientists from more than 20 countries of the world and also representatives of the IAEA. The conference emphasized that the experience of the huge and effective work to eliminate the consequences of the accident at the ChernObyl nuclear power station is of great significance for science and practice throughout the world • The Agency is devoting a great deal of attention to issues of the application of nuclear methods in various arems. For many countries this problem is fundamental, in so far as the ~oad use of sources of ionizing radiation in agriculture, health, various areas of science and technology is promoting an enhanceMent of the stllndard of living of the population and the growth of national economies. Here, definite success has been achieved in a number of spheres. However, the field of application is still very wide.. We see as one of the major tasks of the IAEA the development and practical use of ecologically clean radiation methods g which promote a solution to agrarian problelMJ facing many countries and in particular the developing countries. Other aspects of the application of nuclear methods are also v~ry important. we support the desire of the IABA to make those methods as accessible as possible to all countr ie8. The Ukrainian SSR views positively the activity of the IAEA in renderinq tec..'lnical assistance to the developing countries and favours the fu::ther development and improvement of forms and methods of such assistance. This year the Government of the Republic took a decision to make a voluntary contribution from the Ukrainian 5Sft to the Fund for Technical Assistance of the Agency for. 1989, that contribution amounts to the equivalent of more than $500,000. We believe that the activity of the !AEA aimed at broad use of nuclear energy in various fields and theearrying-out of the rfllevant progral'llllles of the Agency in this area are an important step in the inaplementation of the ujor objective of the Agency: promUng the use of nuclear energy for peacefUl purposes, welfare and progr~SB. In a relatively short historical time-frame, nuclear energy has become an integral part of the life of society today. Moreover, there is a need for resolving ~, nUlllber of important problems which have further intensified the need for a significant deepening and strengthening of international co-operation in the . sphere of the safe devel0S-Gnt of nuclear energy. The activity of the IAEA in consolidating pea~ and security and the furthe~ developllent of international co-operation in the area of the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is a clear .and cutatanding ex_ple of how the difficult prcblallo of today's vodd can be resolved on the basis of mutual interest. (!rQ Makarevitch, Ukrainian SSR) Mr. N. SINGH (India): My country is wedded to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. The Indian Atomic Energy Programme witnessed satisfactory progress during the preceding year. The pressurized heavy water reactor system is now toemlly indigenizad from the point of viaw of design, manufaoture of components, construction and operation. The successful attainment of criticality of the fast breeder test reactor at Kalpakkam gave us the necessary experience and confidence for the design of a Ptototype fast breeder r~actor of 500 MW(e, capacity. Our efforts during the last few years at planning and designing larger unit size pressurized heavy water reactor systems ot 500 MW(e) are also nearing fruition, - with the design work on primary f'leat transport system, moderator system, reactor boiler and auxiliaries at ..n advanced stage. The two units of the power station at have Tanpur have logged 34 reactor years of successful operation. Rajas than atomic power station unit-2 recorded the highest annual power: generation of all its years of cOlUlercial production. The problems faced by the two uni ts of the power station at Madras in the generator transformer and the fuel transfer system were overcome successfUlly. The indigeneously designed and constructed 100 megawatt high flux research reactor - DHRUVA - which met with initial problems has been operating at 60 megaWAtt thernta1 which is expected to be nised to 80 lIegawatt theraa1. A uraniua-233-fuelled neutron reactor facility is nearing completion at Kalpakk_~ This research reactor will be used _inly for the neutron radiography of radioactive and nen-radioactive objects. Another Major development is conversion of the NUclear Power Board into a corpocation to manage nuclear power generation along modern commercial lines and involve the public in its financing. Tht.., tore hope .. will ~peed up the Achievement of our objective of generating 10,000 MW(e) of nuclear power by the year ,2000. (Mr. N. 5ingh, India) India has never lost track of the need to assure the public of absolute safety in its nuclear installations. The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, which has been established and entrusted with the overall responsibilities for the purpose, has set about its task in a systematic manner. The Board has undertaken preparation of codes and guides in the nuclear medical, industrial and transportation areas. A fresh safety asselJsment of the country'snuclear power plants was undertaken last year. Environmental surveys were conducted around all the nuclear plants and research sites. The International Atomic Energy Agency (!AEA) has completed 30 years of its fruitful career. Three decades ago the Agency came into existence' in response to the widespread realization that nuclear technology is important for all-round economic development. The international promotion of nuclear energy was accepted as its most important task. This was clMr ly reflected in the statute.. of the organization. India participated actively in the statute conference in the person of the late Dr. Homi Bhabha, an articulate champion of the peacefUl uses of nuclear enercnr. Since then Indian scientists have actively co~peratCld wi th the IAEA. In addition to its promotional role, the !AEA has been asleed to concern itself with the danger posed by the possible diversion of nuclear technology for military purposes. The implementation of safeguards at those facilities where we have voluntarily placed nuclear material under safeguards continues to be slIlOOth. The safeguards inspectors have carried out their tasks in a mutually satisfactory manner. India is deeply committed to the objective of nuclear disarmament. We are an active participant in the six-nation initiative for peace and nucl~ar disarmament. we are firmly opposed to any kind of proliferation of nuclear weapons - horizontal, spatial or vertical. We beUeve in a linkage between disarmament .and (Mr. N. Singh, Indl!) I hmd the honour to preside oyer the first ever Internationml development. Cenference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development, held last year in New York. If the world is to be made safe from nuclear destruction, nuclear weapons of all types and in all countries Bust be banned and nuclear technology - everywhere, not selectively - should be used only for peaceful purposes. Finally, my delegation would like to thank Mr. Hans Blix, Director General of the IAEA, for his comprehensive, thought-provoking a!"td useful remarks. We also appreciate the contribution of tha Agency during the past few years in the area of nuclear safety, such as the evolution of basic safety principles for nuclear power plants, the revision of nuclear safety codes and the adoption of the two Cenventions on ear: ly notification and assistance in the case of nuclear accidents. Mr. 'lO'rH (Hungary): My country considers the International Atomic Energy Agency (~EA) to be one of the outstanding organizations of the United Nations system. The report of the Agency now before us fully bears out the importance that Hungary has always attached to the activities of the IAEA. It well reflects the manifold functions of the Agency in the spheres of the production and peaceful uses of nuclear energy, the safety of nuclear mater ial and inst:allations~ the application of isotopes in various fields, the disposal of nuclear waste, the important and efficient technical assistance progr.almlO and, last but not least, the safeguards activi ties entrusted to the Agency under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons. In all these areas the Agency, under the able leadership of Director General Rans Bllx, has done an outstanding job, as Hungarian representatives hmd the opportunity to state at the General Conference and in the Board of Govern«D of the IAEA. (Hr. 'l'oth w Hungary) Hungary is profoundly interested in the furthering of international co-operation in the production and peaceful uses of. nuclear energy. SUffice it to say that t 1e four blocks in operation at the Paks nuclear power plant provide 39 per cent of the country's electrical energy production, a proportion that is one of the highest of any State. It is planned to expand that capacity in the years to come. In doing so, one of Hungary's main considerations is the beli@f that nuclear energy is one of the cleanest of all energy sources from the environmental point of view. This is a consideration as important to my Government as its conviction that the most demanding safety measures should accompany the efficient operation of nuclesr power plants and the use of fissionable material in general. Hungary, therefore, not only relies upon the close co-operation established with the Agency in the material, intellectual and moral aspects of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, but is actively participatirg in the Agency's efforts to increase the safety of nuclear installations. It is with this in mind that international experts from the Operational Safety Review Team are expected soon to visit the Paks power plant, at the invitation of the Hungarian Government. (Mr. Toth, Hungar,I) we also note with satisfaction that a growing number of States are acceding to the two Conventions, on early notification and on assistance in case of Cl nnclear accident, Qlaborated in 1986, which ~ere ratifted by Hungary at an early date. The importance of IAEA resides to a large extent in its highly appreciated role as the organization responsible for the application of safeguards to peaceful nucl~r installations and the nuclear material used in them. Therefore it is a source of great satisfaction to us that the Agency has further developed its activities in that regard. It is gratifying to learn from the report that no fissionable material has been diverted to non-peaceful purposes during the past year in installations verified by the Agency. Hungary is doing its best to contribute to the efficiency of the Agency's safeguards activities. This has prompted my Government to respond to Hr. Blix's appeal, and Hun~ary is the fir st member state of IAEA to have waived its legal right of preliminary approval of the safeguard inspectors to be designated to work in the country. It is a source of satisfaction to us that our gesture, aimed at speeding up the safeguards process and thereby assisting the Director General's endeavours, has since been emulated by other member states. An event of great importance took place recently, when an agreement wa~ signed between the People's Republic of China and the Agency placing certain Chinese nuclear installations under Agency safeguards. The fact that all five nuclear-weapon States have now placed some of their installations under Agency safeguards reinforces the universal character of the safeguards system. Hungary also welcomes the accession of Spain cmd Saudi Arabia to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons (NPl') and expresses the hope that others will follow suit. The significance of the IAEA safeguard system is becoming even more apparent now that, because of the favourable trend in the international political climate, new and important accords on nuclear disarmament are in sight. The experience gained by the Agency in verifying compliance by the parUes to the NPr could become immeasurably valuable should the Agency be entrusted in the future with similar tasks in regard to the accords that the nuclear Powers will, we all hope, reach before long. Permit me to recall that, relying on the rich experience gained by the safeguard system, Hungary raised at the thirty-second General Conference of IAEA the possibility of placing under Agency safeguards fissionable material obtained from the n'Jclear weapons to be dismantled under future accords. I cannot refer in detail to other matters, such as the important programmes on the application of nuclear material and the important technical assistance programme of the Agency, in all of which my country actively participates. Nor can I address many other useful activities that are detailed in the report. I wish to conclude by stating that my delegation is in agreement with the content and the priorities of the Agency's report and takes a highly positive view of the activities of IAEA. Mr. MGBOKWERE (Nigeria): Please permit me to most warmly thank the Director General of the International Atomic .Energy Agency (IAEA) for the comprehensive annual report of the Agency for 1987 and for his lucid statement. My delegation has devoted a great deal of attention to the Agency's activities for 1987 as outlined in the report. We are convinced that it has been a successful year for the Agency. The annual report shows that encouraging strides were taken in some areas of activity, such as the area of nuclear power, where 22 nuclear power plants came on line in 1987. In the field of nuclear safety and radiation protection, the Agency continues to play an active role in strengthening public (Mr. Mgbokwere, Nigeria) confidence in nuclear power. My delegation is also pleased to note that in the field of nuclea~ appl~cations about ~OO technical projects were carried out in 62 developing States member s',of the ~gency, along wi th 14. regional and interregional projects, especially in the area of food and agriculture. We cannot but agree that development of human resources is a key element of technology transfer, and we hope that more resources will be allocated so that professionals from developing countries may benefit from the Agency's training courses and fellowships. In recognizing the commendable achievements of the Agency, I wish to stre~s the need for it to persist in its endeavours to ensure that many developing countries, especially in Africa, benefit adequately from its promotional activities. It is, therefore, my delegation's view that the Agency should intensify efforts to assist those countries, to enable them to establish appropriate infrastructures and aoqui!~ the expertise to carry out on their own substantial parts of their nuclear programmes, particularly i~ the areas of nuclear power 1nd nuclear applioations. In this connection, my delegation would like to see the Agency undertake assistance and send pre-project support missions to these countries. We recognize that constraints such as lack of financial resource~, inadequate infrastructure, shortage of highly qualified specialists, restriction of access to nuclear materials, equipment and technology, and the low level of research and development support constitute major obstacles to developing countries' efforts in the area of nuclear generationo My delegation therefore urges ~le AgAncy to expedite action on the recommendations of the Senior Expert Group on mechanisms to assist developing countries in the promotion and financing ,.• of nuclear power programmes. We are thankful to those Governments that have decided to finance Nigeria's footnote (a) projects. we beli~ve that the new project request forms designed by the Agency will not only enhance the linkage between projeet and priorities but also be of tremendous help t~ the developing countries io preparing their requernts. The attention now being ~evoted by the Agency to mid-project and end-of-project evaluation reflects the $p@cial degree of thoughtfulness that characteriz2s its activities and projects. My delegation would like to express its appreciation to the Agency for ta~ing the opportunity of the thirty-sec~~d regular ~eg~ion of the G~~er~J. Conference to convene a preliminary meeting in Vienna to discuss the modalities for establishing a regional co-operation agreement for the African region along the lines of the existing reg!o~al arrangements in Asia and the Pacific and in Latin America. Judging by the experience of the Asian and Pacific regional arrangements, there are advantages to be gained by the African region f~om the project~d agreement. The ground has now been set for individual Africa~ Governments to make commitments to this project and put in place arrangements to complement the benefits African countries \'lOW receive in nuclear techniques and applications. With regard to nuclear safety and radiation protection i the Agency should asaist developing countries to build up the necessary infrastructure and capability In order effective1r to fulfil their obligations under the two Conventions on early notification and on emergency assistance. Assistance is needed in most of those ceuntr les i~ establishing t.he tele,fant ra:J:101ogical legislation, acquir 1nl] the n"dlut radiological lftOnitoring equipment and establishing effective contact. points. I shuuld like now to turn briefly to a~ issue of great concern to the Nigerian GovernMent. This relates to the issue of dumping of nuclear wastes, in respect of which Nigeria's delegation to the thirty-second regular session of the lAEA General General Conference, along with others, proposed a resolution waich addressed this disturbing subject. In doing so, Nigeria believed that a positive response by the C~neral Conferer.oe to the proposals would contribute to strengthening the Agency's role in ~ potentially dangerous and delicate area which could gravely weaken public confidence in nuclear energy. It is to the credit of the Agency that resolution GC(XXXII)/aea/490 on dumping of nuclear wastea was eventually adopted by consensus. It, inter alia, condemned all nuclear waste dumping infringing the sovereignty of states and called for £teps to be taken by the IAEA to elaborate an internationally agreed code of practice for international transactions involving nuclear wastes. We urge the Agency to continue to emphasize environmental protection in its waste management activities. I take this opportunity to express ~ppreciation to various delegations, among others those of F~ance, Egypt, 3razil 6nd Indiar which worked closely wi,th Nigeria to produce the consensus resolution. without being over-sanguine, this holds out the hope that coneideration of the question of dumping of nuclear wastes at the current sesaion of the General Assembly will be marked by the same spirit of co-operation and understanding as produced the IAEA resolution. I wish now to turn to the issue of South Africa's nuclear capabilities. The Report of the International AtOMic Bner.gy Ag~ncy referred to resolution GC (XXXI)/Res/485, in which the Gen6ral Conference decided, in 1987, to: ·consider and take a decision on the recommendation of the Board of Governors contained in its report GC(XXXI)/807 to suspend South Africa f~om the exercise of the privileges and rights of membership in accordance with Article XIX.B of the Statute, at the thirty-second regUlar session of the Gene~al Conference.- The Board took this important decision after carefully taking into account that SOuth Africa had consistently refused to comply with successive IAEA resolutions and because of the racist r'gi..'s apartheid policies in violation of the purpo8~. and principles of the United Nations Ch~rter. Z acknowledge that the issue of South Africa's suspension from the IAEA belongs principally to that organization, that is, IAEA. But I am also convinced that it ie a matter on the minds of most of U8, apart from being ~art of the report under consideration. I shall, therefore, be brief. We are all aware of the di~ersionary tactics South Africa has been emp.oying in order to forestall Hs s!Jspens:t.on. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NP'l') is open to any country that wishes to accede to it. The 136 parties to the NPT to date have taken that route. There is nothing in it to negotiate or bold consultations about. That i8 why the procedure that the racist r'elBe is adopting in its 8O-call~d intention to sign the NPT is unusual and unnecessary. Perhaps, to put the Issue in proper perSPeCtive, one may ask what suspension iMPlies. The Vienna Group of 77, at the General Conference last September, sought the legal opinion of the Agency on the iaplicatlons. That opinion states: ·Suspension is of temporary ~ature, rather than of permanent character and could, therefore, be lifted once the underlying reasons for suspension no longer exist. Furthermore, suspension co~ld be viewed as a means of applying additional pre~sure on a State recalcitrant to the provisions of the Statute of IAEA, i.e. SOuth Africa. Suspension of a .e.ber's rights includp those ot representation, voting, election, technical and financial assistance, award of research contract, purchase of eQUipment and material and hos~ing of Agency's Maetlngs. It, however, does not include bilateral and multilateral agreements conclUded by the Agency or under its auspices, such as safeguards agreement in exiatence. Suspension as provided under Article XIX.B of the Statute does not imply excl"sion8 or finality, which expulsion as provided for under the United Nations Charter does-. This opinion is contained in lAB1+. document GC(XXXII)/IMF/265, of 30 September 1988. The consultations or negotiations South Africa held in August and September with the three depositary Powers and some members of the IAEA were basically a posturing gambit. From various accounts, our understanding was that in these contacts South Africa set pre-conditions and sought far-reaching guarantees that belie its bad faith. We are encourged by certain frank responses that the three Depositary Power. conveyed to South Africa. Nevertheless, W@ are in no doubt that the only appropriate message which can drive home to the apartheid r~gime the concerted repugnance of the international community for apartheid lies in Pretoria'. susgension from the IAEA, in c~mpliance with General Assembly resolution 41/35 B, which calls on all organizations within the unite~ Nations system to exclude SOuth Africa. The thirty-second General Conference of IAEA held last September, decided to hold over decision on South Afric~'s suspension to next year's Conference. Suffice it to say that the racist r6giMe's continued membe~ship of the Agency is not a proapect that can sit well with member States' expressed respect for human dignity and unyielding opposition to apartheid. Mr. MOYA PALBNCIA (Mexico) (interpretation from Spanish): The del~atlon of Mexico wishes to thank the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mr. Hens Blix, for his clear statement on the activities of the Agency, ss well as for his well-known dedication to the attainment of its objectives. The peacef~l applications of nuclear power are increasing 1n the fields of agrL'11tgre, food and medicine. In 1987 16 per cent of the world'S electric power (Mr. Moxa Palencia, Mexico) was generated by nuclear plants. This emphasizes the growing role that will fall to the IAEA in promoting the benefits of the use of nuclear power for peaceful purposes. We are pleased to note that in 1987, as in the previous year, the resources earmarked for tech~ical co-operation activities again increased, reaching the anK,unt of $41.5 million. As the report indicates, this increase in resources has brought about an expansion of the technical co-operation progr8Jllllle of the Agency, Which is made up of expert missiono, equipment, fellowships and training courses, which benefit, in partiCUlar, the developing regions of the world. (!!.r. Moxa Pal.ncia" Mexico) My delegation notes with .ati.faction that recognition hae bean given to the l~rtance of human resource. develoPMent as a key ele-ent in the tranafer of technology and that in the Agency'. efforts to render ita technical co-operation activities more effective it ha. made it a perBanent practice to a.se•• all its programmes on a continuing ba.is. My delegation wolcomes the fact that the report highlights a growing and increaRingly active participation by developing countries in the progr.... of technical co-operation, organizing aeetlng., training cour.es, providing eKport services and lectures and offering fellowship. and a.si.tance in kind. Only through combined efforts by the developed and tha developing cogntrioD will it he possible to ensure the continued succe•• of the progr.... G In this context, ~ Government reiterates the desirability of promoting the use of expert~ fra. developing countries. Since the decade of the 1910~, the Mexican Conatitution has proclaiaed ae a fundamental tenet that the use of nuclear power should be exclusively for peaceful purposes and that it also falls to the nation to decide how nuclear fuel. will be used to generate power and ho" its application for other purpo.es .hall be regulated. In that spirit, and with the valuable technical advice of the International Atomic Energy Agency (~) in every pha~ of the project, and after a serl~s of missions by the operational safety inspection group, .y country will soon be bringing on line its first nuclear power plant. We therefore ca.aend the efforts of the Agency to improve the planning of nuclear power progra.... in the developing countries and to provide the experti•• to insure their appropriate and safe implementation. (Mr. Moya Palencia, Mexico) The Third Review Conference of the parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, held in September 1985, recognized the importance of the IAEA as the key agent in the transfer of nuclear. power technology. My delegation wishes to endorse that recognition and to commend all the efforts of the Agency in implementing the recommendations of the Conference relating to the strengthen~rjg of its activities in providing assictance to the developing countries. Mexico believes that the Agency's safeguards regime constitutes one of its essential functions. In this regard, my delegation notes with satisfaction that in 1987 the Agency did not detect any anomaly that might indicate diversion of a significant amount of materials under the safeguards regime. The safeguards system of the Agency is an important verification mechanism which generates confidence among States by guaranteeing that all nuclear activities under the system are devoted to peaceful purposes. All States should place themselves under this system. We oppose unregulated trafficking in nuclear wastes. The thicd ~~rld cannot become the rubbish hin of nuclear wastes. These should be concentrated as close as possible to the place where they originate. Cross~border traffic ih s~ch wastes should he permitted only when it is harmless to the environment. My delegation attaches particul'L importance to the nuclear-weapon States voluntarily accepting IAEA inspection of their peaceful nuclear facilitip.s and placing them under the safeguards regime. My delegation notes with satisfaction the announcement made by China that it will open all of its non-milit~ry plants to international inspection. While we do not,deny the importance of the IAEA safeguards regime, my Government is concerned that the financial resources earmarked for the ~afeguards progr.amme are increasingly larger than those earmarked for technical 'co-operation and assistance activities. 'rhe Ager'cy's technical co-operation activities are indispensable to the developing countries if they are. to r.eap the benefits derived from the peaceful usea of nuclear power. The meeting rose at 6.30 p.m.