A/72/PV.47 General Assembly

I have the honour of speaking on behalf of the delegation of the Republic of Paraguay, a founding member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). We thank Mr. Yukiya Amano, Director General of the IAEA, for his presentation of its report (see A/72/221) for 2016. Paraguay underscores the importance of this presentation in the General Assembly, which represents the highest democratic expression of the peoples who compose it on the basis of sovereign equality among States. The delegation of Paraguay, which was a member of the IAEA Board of Governors until this September, reaffirms its trust in the Agency’s ability to ensure that atomic energy contributes to world peace, health and prosperity, as enshrined in its Statute. We welcome the Director General’s recent reappointment as well as Grenada’s admission as a new member of the Agency. Paraguay emphasizes that the development and implementation of programmes for the peaceful use of nuclear energy must be carried out with transparency, under the advice and supervision of the IAEA, taking the greatest possible precautions and limiting the damage that the production of nuclear energy can do to the environment and human health. States carrying out such programmes on their territories must do so while ensuring broad cross-border responsibility, adhering to best practices in international cooperation, risk prevention and due diligence and responding appropriately to possible transboundary damage or harm. Paraguay’s radiological and nuclear regulatory authority, in coordination and with the support of the IAEA, regulates and controls the peaceful and beneficial use of ionizing radiation and nuclear energy with the aim of protecting the health of our people and the environment. Throughout our national territory, we promote a culture of technological and physical safety where sources of ionizing radiation and radioactive waste are concerned. Since 1968, through our national atomic energy commission, Paraguay has also been promoting research and technological development regarding the peaceful uses of nuclear energy in order to improve the people’s quality of life. Again, this is being done with the support and oversight of the IAEA and in a framework of regional initiatives such as the Regional Cooperation Agreement for the Promotion of Nuclear Science and Technology in Latin America and the Caribbean. We would like to highlight the importance of the IAEA’s work on nuclear security and verification. Such efforts should not be manipulated to serve military purposes or undermine international peace and security. We affirm our commitment to the provisions of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. We reiterate our concern about programmes aimed at improving existing nuclear weapons or developing new ones. We utterly reject all nuclear tests, including those that were conducted in September, which are a violation of international law. The delegation of Paraguay urges all Member States to support and facilitate the IAEA’s verification and monitoring work in the application of safeguards. We also urge all members of the international community to refrain from any act contrary to the objective and purpose of these international instruments, as well as those that are part of the international legal frameworks on the non-proliferation and prohibition of nuclear weapons, especially the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and on the use of atomic energy for peaceful purposes. Lastly, we would like to emphasize the role of the IAEA’s technical assistance and international cooperation for developing countries such as Paraguay, especially in developing and strengthening national capacities for the peaceful use of nuclear energy where achieving the Sustainable Development Goals is concerned. We would therefore like to thank the IAEA for its help in strengthening public access to nuclear medicine in Paraguay, particularly for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer through the integrated missions of its Programme of Action for Cancer Therapy, and for monitoring variations in environmental radiation levels through its Occupational Radiation Protection Appraisals. The delegation of the Republic of Paraguay commends the work of the International Atomic Energy Agency and congratulates it on the sixtieth anniversary of its founding.

I would first like to thank Director General Yukiya Amano for his comprehensive presentation of the report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for 2016 (see A/72/221) and to welcome Grenada as a new member of the Agency. The Republic of Argentina has been committed to the work of the IAEA since its inception and, in that spirit, we co-sponsored the draft resolution on the report (A/72/L.6). Argentina’s nuclear sector already has several decades of experience and has made major progress in developing exclusively peaceful uses of nuclear energy, supported by a solid and consistent State policy that considers the application of the international safeguards system extremely important. Argentina considers it vital to ensure that safeguards implementation activities are efficient, effective and underpinned by a solid technical basis, guaranteeing their non-discriminatory nature. Ensuring the effectiveness of the IAEA’s verification system for nuclear activities is essential it we are to prevent nuclear proliferation. However, such verification measures must not affect States’ inalienable right to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, as established in article IV of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Both in the IAEA and other forums, my country has consistently emphasized the importance of refraining from infringing on or reinterpreting that right. Argentina would like to stress the the importance of a system of safeguards and guarantees that is conducted in a context of cooperation and dialogue. In this regard, we wish to highlight the quadripartite agreement that Argentina has with Brazil, the Brazilian-Argentine Agency for Accounting and Control of Nuclear Materials and the IAEA, and which has defined and regulated our cooperative activities for implementing nuclear safeguards since 1991. The establishment of the Brazilian-Argentine Agency has been a milestone not only in relation to Brazil, by providing trust and credible guarantees on the exclusively peaceful use of nuclear development for both countries, but also because of the great contribution it has made at the regional level, enabling us to consolidate the idea of a nuclear-weapon-free Latin America. Argentina would like to express its thanks and support for the IAEA’s work in the area of nuclear security. In that regard, our country has consistently supported the Agency’s central role in coordinating and strengthening the nuclear-security architecture, while calling for it to play a more active role in this area. We therefore welcomed the IAEA’s convening in December 2016 of the International Conference on Nuclear Security: Commitments and Actions, as we do the upcoming International Conference on Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities, to be held in Vienna from 13 to 17 November. We believe that such initiatives reaffirm the IAEA’s essential responsibility and central role in strengthening and coordinating the international nuclear physical security architecture. Argentina encourages the IAEA to continue playing its role as the main coordinator of other international organizations and initiatives in this area so that nuclear security efforts and the fight against nuclear terrorism can align in an orderly and sustained manner. In that connection, Argentina also underscores the importance of supporting the work of the IAEA, financially as well as politically, in view of the fact that nuclear security is a clear issue on which countries can ensure that their actions live up to their words. The role of the IAEA in nuclear security must be strengthened and allowed to reach the level of maturity and development that it has shown itself capable of achieving in technological nuclear security, another of its fundamental pillars. Responsibility in matters of physical nuclear security is a sovereign power of individual States and efforts to make progress and improvements in countering terrorist threats must correspond to the real risk that each country faces. In that regard, we reiterate the importance of harmonizing binding and non-binding measures so that progress is harmonious, gradual and permanent. The Republic of Argentina wishes to reiterate that it is firmly committed to the highest standards of nuclear technological safety, which remains one of the main pillars of Argentina’s nuclear policy. Hence the importance of the work done by our nuclear regulatory authority, an independent regulatory body within the framework of our expanding national programme. In 2015, Argentina had the honour of presiding over the diplomatic conference examining a proposed amendment to article 18 of the Convention on Nuclear Safety. That was when we adopted the Vienna Declaration on Nuclear Safety, which reflected the interest of many States parties in continuing to strengthen technological security. We must continue working to improve the implementation of the principles of the Vienna Declaration. In that regard, Argentina is the first and so far the only country to declare that its new nuclear-power plants will be designed, located and built according to principle 1 of the Declaration. We encourage other parties to do the same. Argentina participates actively in capacity- building activities in the region and aspires to be a focal point in that area. In that regard, our country has offered to host various human-resources training and education activities, under the auspices of the IAEA, related to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. We will continue working with the Agency’s Technical Cooperation Programme, which we are providing with our experience and facilities for training and capacity- building, which technicians and professionals from our region and other parts of the world have already benefited from.

Bangladesh thanks Mr. Yukiya Amano, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), for his presentation of its report for the year 2016 (see A/72/221), and congratulates him on his appointment to a third four-year term. Bangladesh has full confidence in the guiding role of the IAEA in coordinating international efforts to strengthen global nuclear safety, security and safeguards in using nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Our Prime Minister visited Vienna in May this year to attend the International Conference on the IAEA Technical Cooperation Programme, while the Director General visited Bangladesh for the second time in July 2017. We had a high level of participation at the International Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Power in the 21st Century, held recently in Abu Dhabi. Bangladesh attaches great importance to nuclear safety and stresses the importance of ensuring that the Agency retains a central role in nuclear safety, owing to its mandatory functions, broad membership and long- standing expertise. We also stress our principled position that nuclear safety and nuclear security considerations must not hamper the utilization of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. We would like to highlight the importance of the Agency’s work in maintaining, improving and promoting nuclear, radiation, transport and waste safety, as well as in emergency preparedness and response worldwide. Bangladesh appreciates the Agency’s continuing efforts to support Member States in sharing knowledge, expertise, technology and information on all aspects of nuclear safety. We also welcome its activities aimed at supporting nuclear- safety infrastructure development in Member States. We particularly appreciate the assistance it provides to developing countries operating, expanding or embarking on nuclear power programmes. We stress the importance of a sustained focus on activities aimed at building the competency of regulatory functions and management for safety, including a culture of safety. Bangladesh appreciates the Agency’s efforts to assist Member States in building and developing their nuclear- security capacity, including establishing effective, sustainable and comprehensive national nuclear security infrastructures. We note the Agency’s goals and priorities concerning nuclear security for the period from 2017 to 2018, which include promoting further adherence to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, with the aim of its universalization. Bangladesh deposited its instrument of acceptance for the amendment to the Convention earlier this year. We acknowledge the Agency’s efforts in responding to member States’ growing requests for its support in the area of information and computer security. Bangladesh considers nuclear energy to be a safe, environmentally friendly and economically viable source of electricity generation. We have started construction of the Rooppur nuclear power plant, our country’s first, under bilateral cooperation arrangements with the Russian Federation. We are following the IAEA guidelines for implementing our jointly developed integrated work plan for infrastructure development. We are grateful to India and Japan, among others, for their contributions to our national capacity- building efforts. Bangladesh counts on the IAEA as its main partner in promoting safe and secure applications of nuclear science and technology for peaceful purposes. Through its Technical Cooperation Programme, the Agency has been cooperating with and assisting Bangladesh in human-resource development and capacity-building for the introduction, development and peaceful use of nuclear technology in various sectors, such as nuclear infrastructure, livestock, agriculture, health, industry and water management. We have completed 138 national projects under the Technical Cooperation Programme and participated in 111 regional projects under the Regional Cooperative Agreement, which we consider an important tool for promoting and coordinating research and development activities in using nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. Bangladesh is confident that the Agreement will continue to promote regional capabilities and expertise in various thematic areas, including research-reactor and radioactive waste management, nuclear safety and radiation and environmental protection. Bangladesh thanks Indonesia for facilitating draft resolution A/72/L.6, on the report of the IAEA, to be adopted by the Assembly. We reaffirm our own commitment to further promoting the IAEA’s work on advancing the Sustainable Development Goals and look forward to playing an enhanced role on its Board of Governors, with the kind support of member States.

I too would like to express my sincere appreciation to Mr. Yukiya Amano, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), for his succinct presentation of the IAEA’s 2016 report (see A/72/221) and for providing valuable updates on the Agency’s 2017 activities. South Africa has just concluded its one-year term at the helm of the IAEA’s Board of Governors. During our term on the Board, we were pleased that the Board of Governors emphasized the development role of the IAEA through its activities related to nuclear science, technology and applications, which Director General Amano ably outlined in great detail during his presentation. South Africa used its leadership of the Board to advocate a balanced approach in the implementation of the IAEA’s mandate in line with its motto, “Atoms for Peace and Development”. I would like to express South Africa’s appreciation to the membership of the IAEA generally, and the Group of African States in particular, for entrusting us with the task of leading the Board in the past year. We are more than ever convinced that the IAEA has a pivotal role to play in global efforts to promote international peace, security and development. We would also like to congratulate Indonesia on its appointment to chair the Board for the period from 2017 to 2018 and to assure it of our commitment and cooperation in that regard. South Africa fully supports the priorities and work of the IAEA, including the progress that the Agency has achieved during the 2017 period. In that regard, we have always maintained that the Agency’s nuclear applications in areas such as agriculture, crop production, food security, human health, water- resource management, nuclear technology and animal health contribute to socioeconomic development in developing countries and thereby help them in their efforts to implement the 2030 Agenda, particularly on the African continent. South Africa has benefited immensely from the IAEA’s scientific and technological support, not least in strengthening its clinical management of oncological, neurological and cardiovascular diseases. The IAEA also supported South Africa in developing the sterile-insect technique to help control malaria. In that context, South Africa reiterates its support, which is shared by many IAEA member States, for ensuring that the Agency continues to assist developing countries, particularly in Africa, in enhancing the benefits that can be derived from the peaceful uses of nuclear science and technology. We also want to underscore the central role played by the Agency in implementing its safeguards verification system, which plays an essential role in verifying the peaceful nature of nuclear energy programmes. As the only country in the world to voluntarily dismantle its nuclear programme, with the assistance and guidance of the IAEA, South Africa can attest to the indispensable role of the Agency’s safeguards system. In addition to the peaceful uses of energy, South Africa’s view is that nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation are mutually reinforcing processes and that progress in all the pillars of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is therefore essential if its objectives and purpose are to be realized. In conclusion, my delegation has co-sponsored draft resolution A/72/L.6, submitted by Indonesia in its capacity as Chair of the Board of Governors for the period from 2017 to 2018. Among other things, the draft resolution reaffirms the Agency’s indispensable role in encouraging and assisting the development and practical application of atomic energy for peaceful uses, in technology transfers to developing countries and in nuclear safety, verification and security, and we appreciate Indonesia’s role in coordinating the draft resolution.

Australia commends Director General Amano for his report (see A/72/221) on the activities of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). We were pleased to co-sponsor the draft resolution on the report (A/72/L.6). This has been another productive year for the IAEA, and Australia continues to greatly appreciate the Agency’s work across nuclear science and technology, safety, security, safeguards and technical cooperation. During the past year, in which we celebrated the Agency’s sixtieth anniversary, we are particularly pleased to see the Director General’s commitment to championing gender equality. Australia will continue to strongly advocate for and support efforts to increase the representation of women in the Agency’s technical areas and senior management, particularly through the Group of Friends for Women in Nuclear, newly established in Vienna. Australia remains a strong supporter of the transfer of knowledge and expertise through the IAEA Technical Cooperation Programme. In June 2017, we ratified the new Regional Cooperative Agreement for Research, Development and Training related to Nuclear Science and Technology in Asia and the Pacific, which will help embed regional technical cooperation, particularly in developing countries, in our region. Australia is pleased to continue highlighting the important contribution of peaceful applications of nuclear science and technology in many areas of human endeavour, including development and health. This year, we completed the construction of our new large-scale molybdenum-99 processing plant. This facility, which has the capacity to provide 25 per cent of current world needs, will help secure the global supply of this lifesaving nuclear medicine. Australia is firmly committed to nuclear safety and will undergo an Integrated Regulatory Review Service mission in 2018. That demonstrates our sustained commitment to the international peer review system and to continued improvement in the regulation of nuclear and radiation safety. Australia will not accept North Korea’s illegal development and testing of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems, or its threats, which continue to pose a grave and increasing threat to global security. It is vital that all members of the international community fully implement the relevant Security Council resolutions and work collectively to bring Pyongyang to the negotiating table. Finally, Australia appreciates the work of the Director General and his staff in monitoring and verifying the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Australia has been consistent and clear. We consider the JCPOA to be the best available option for addressing Iran’s nuclear programme, and we believe there is no credible alternative. We continue to urge all parties to the agreement to keep the deal in place and implement it in full.

As a strong partner of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Philippines is pleased to have co-sponsored draft resolution A/72/L.6, entitled “Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency”. It is consistent with the partnership between the Philippines and the IAEA, which has contributed to addressing outstanding issues on nuclear safety, security and safeguards. The Agency is the sole United Nations body that promotes the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. In that connection, the Philippines recalls that the IAEA was founded in the aftermath of the most devastating war in the world to harness the power of the atom for peace, health and prosperity. For its part, the Philippines has been active in bringing together national and international experts in the nuclear field to share ideas and expertise on nuclear applications in the areas of food and agriculture, health and medicine, industry and the environment. The Philippines acknowledges the leadership of Director General Yukiya Amano in maintaining high-quality programmes and delivering concrete results for Member States. We congratulate him on his reappointment as Director General of the IAEA and commend the “Atoms for Peace and Development” initiative, which he has actively promoted during his tenure. We also support the Agency’s efforts to achieve gender equality and balanced geographic representation at all levels of the organization, assuming satisfactory qualifications. The Philippines encourages the IAEA to maintain a balance between the promotional and non-promotional aspects of its work, in line with its Statute. We believe that a balanced approach across the Agency’s six major programmes will serve to strengthen it and help to increase its relevance to the citizens of all its member States. The IAEA’s relevance is becoming all the more significant given the increased importance of its dealings with nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament issues from the technical and scientific perspectives. The strong commitment of the Philippines to the important work of the IAEA was made more meaningful by the election of our resident representative to international organizations in Vienna, Ms. Maria Zeneida Angara Collinson, to the presidency of the sixty- first IAEA General Conference. In line with the policy of advocacy for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, in her acceptance statement Ambassador Collinson noted the adoption by 122 nations on 7 July of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, whose aim is to minimize, if not to neutralize, the weaponization of nuclear power. The sixty-first Conference adopted all its resolutions by consensus, including the highly sensitive one on the North Korean issue. The Philippines looks forward to continued active collaboration with the IAEA in the years ahead.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on agenda item 89. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/72/L.6, entitled “Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency”. I now give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution and in addition to those delegations listed in the document, the following countries have become sponsors of draft resolution A/72/L.6: Albania, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Egypt, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Iraq, Italy, Kazakhstan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Montenegro, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates and the United States of America.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to adopt draft resolution A/72/L.6?

Several delegations have asked to speak in exercise of the right of reply. I would like to remind members that statements in the exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to five minutes for the second, and should be made by delegations from their seats.

Lithuania wishes to exercise its right of reply in the light of the statement made by the representative of Belarus. Each country has the right to develop nuclear power as long as its international obligations on nuclear safety are properly addressed and national decisions are taken in the context of possible transboundary implications. The newcomer countries must be especially diligent in the implementation of international standards. Despite the global efforts to strengthen nuclear safety, a declarative and selective approach towards nuclear safety still exists. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) brand and its review services are being used for manipulative public communications. That kind of practice increases the risks related to nuclear-power development. In that regard, I have to express our concern regarding the way the project of the new nuclear power plant in Ostrovets, Belarus, is being implemented on the border with Lithuania, just 40 kilometres from its capital, Vilnius. This is being done without the proper and full implementation of nuclear-safety measures and genuine dialogue with neighbouring countries. The lack of transparency and the fact that essential information on site selection, seismic evaluation and emergency preparedness plans is missing are deeply alarming. IAEA specialized missions can bring the maximum benefits if IAEA experts are engaged from the very beginning of project development and in full scope at all stages. Therefore, Lithuania urges all member States, especially the newcomers, to focus on the safety of the project rather than on its hasty implementation.

On behalf of my delegation, I would like to make some remarks additional to the statement delivered by my Ambassador this morning (see A/72/PV.46) to help clarify the lack of understanding and to educate some persons sitting in this Hall who are illiterate and ignorant as to the situation on the Korean peninsula. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea rejects resolution 72/5, based on the report (see A/72/221) of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and all the reckless remarks made by the observer of the European Union and the representatives of Australia, Japan, South Korea and the Philippines, which are part of a politicized, evil-minded and confrontational plot aimed at defaming the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and thereby effecting change in the social system of my country. First, let me pose one question to the aforementioned persons. What would they do if a burglar burst into their house, knife in hand? Would they sit idle with folded arms? The answer is definitely no. The same answer applies to the issue of the Korean peninsula. As everyone here knows, technically speaking both parties — the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the United States of America — are still in a state of war against each other. An armistice agreement was signed by both parties in 1953, leading to a ceasefire. An armistice does not mean permanent peace. That is why my Government has insisted that the United States abandon its hostile policy against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and sign a peace agreement in order to ensure complete peace on the Korean peninsula. But this justified position of my Government has been consistently neglected by the United States. The nuclear weapons of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea are a deterrent against war that reliably safeguard the sovereignty and security of our nation and contribute to regional and global peace and security in the face of over half a century of nuclear blackmail by the United States. Over half a century — more than 70 years — the United States has continued its long history of hostile politics towards the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and has directed extreme nuclear threats and blackmail against our people. The resolutions adopted by the Security Council against my country are the products of double standards, high-handedness and anachronisms on the part of the United States. The nuclear threat posed by the United States has compelled the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to go nuclear. The hostile policy of the United States against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is the cause of the nuclear problem on the Korean peninsula. The United States armed forces stationed in South Korea, under the cover of so-called United Nations command, are disrupting peace and security on the Korean peninsula. We are all witness to the events happening now, even at this very moment, as the head of the United States regime wanders through several countries — Japan, South Korea and China — uttering reckless, hostile and belligerent words against my country. Everyone has witnessed that. Every year, there is a large-scale joint military exercise performed by the United States armed forces in South Korea. These exercises occur one after another, every year and even several times a year. All strategic nuclear weapons assets — including aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, nuclear ballistic missiles and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system — were introduced by the United States into South Korea. If the United States really wants to fulfil its duty and responsibility regarding peace and security on the Korean peninsula, it should completely and irreversibly abandon its nuclear threat and hostile policy against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, dismantle the United States command in South Korea and withdraw its armed forces from South Korea. With regard to Japan, I strongly condemn Japanese intervention, criticizing our self-defensive nuclear-power development, as a most unpardonable provocation against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. This morning we heard the Director General of the IAEA (see A/72/PV.46) say that ensuring nuclear safety and security is one of the vital roles of the Agency. Let me raise one more question for the Japanese delegation and the Director General of the IAEA. Who was the victim of the first atomic bomb disaster in humankind’s history? It was none other than Japan. If that is historical reality, then what should the IAEA and Japan do to respond to this inhumane tragedy? They should definitely focus on the United States first, which is the only nuclear war criminal and the largest nuclear Power on the planet. However, they turn a blind eye to the nuclear assets of the United States, such as nuclear submarines, nuclear aircraft carriers and strategic nuclear bombers, which enter and leave Japan’s territory all the time, year- round, freely and without impediment. On the contrary, they go to extremes in their fury about the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s nuclear deterrent, which represents the absolutely rightful and justified right of a sovereign State to defend itself. I should raise another question for the Japanese delegation. What is its country’s real aim on that issue? What is its real concern regarding this issue? Is it nuclear weapons, or simply that Japan does not like our political system or the way in which the people of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea are living? I turn next to South Korea. I believe that the delegation of South Korea is not representing its own interests. Rather, it represents only the interests of the United States, because South Korea does not have the right to speak about itself, independently, without the consent of the United States. South Korea is merely a colony of the United States. It has handed over control of its military, the symbol of its sovereignty, to the United States and turned every corner of its territory into a United States army base. Among the 193 States Members of the United Nations, there is no country like South Korea, which sits here after totally handing over the symbol of its sovereignty, the control of its military, to outside forces. There is no country like South Korea, which has been involved in disgraceful pro-United States policies and has joined conspiracy cooperation manoeuvres against its fellow countrymen. A country without its sovereignty can never be considered an independent Member State, and it is both weird and ridiculous that such a regime can say anything about the membership of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which is a dignified, independent and sovereign State. The South Korean authorities should abandon their reliance on foreign Powers and give up the policies that are at the root of the confrontation between North and South Korea. Lastly, I would like to say one more thing about a slightly different issue. It is the issue of the Japanese representative calling my country “North Korea”. It is very clear that the official name of my country is the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. That is why the United Nations Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names is held every year. I wonder how that representative would feel if I called his country “the island of Japan”.

With regard to the speculation that we have heard concerning nuclear infrastructure in Crimea, I would like to say that the Russian position is well known. It is set out in the International Atomic Energy Agency information circular contained in document INFCIRC/876 and remains unchanged. For the Russian Federation, this question is closed.

I would like to exercise my right of reply regarding the statement made earlier by the representative of Lithuania. Belarus considers that nuclear security belongs in a factual rather than a political category. As I noted in our general statement in today’s debate (see A/72/PV.46), Belarus considers nuclear security to be a priority for our national nuclear-energy programme. Apart from our efforts to achieve the highest possible level of nuclear safety at the national level, we do our utmost to work with the international cooperative mechanisms that, in our view, will make the most useful practical contribution to our project. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), whose report we endorsed today, is particularly important in that regard. Very recently, in April, Belarus successfully defended its seventh report under the Convention on Nuclear Safety. As I noted briefly, before the initial launch of the first energy-producing unit of our plant, we brought in an almost record number of the IAEA’s major nuclear security missions, including the Integrated Nuclear Infrastructure Review, Integrated Regulatory Review Service and Site and External Events Design Review Service missions. The conclusions of all of these missions affirmed Belarus’s steadfast commitment to ensuring the highest possible level of nuclear security. We have published the relevant reports, and they are available on the Internet for anyone who wants to read them. The conclusions of the experts of the Agency that we consider the most competent to judge the nuclear security levels during any assessment are open and accessible to those wishing to familiarize themselves with them. We are also working with the European Commission and with other partners to make the greatest possible use of their expert potential. At this point we have already conducted a so-called stress test, a comprehensive survey of the risks and security of the Belarusian plant. We are currently beginning work on expert assessments of the stress-test results in partnership with European regulators. In our view, the accusations of our plant’s so- called lack of security are unjustified and, in a number of cases, politically motivated. In an example of what we see as unconstructive action, this year one of our near neighbours enacted legislation banning imports of electric power from Belarus’s as yet unbuilt nuclear- power plant on a pretext of a supposed lack of security. For the past several years we have frequently invited all interested parties to engage in dialogue on security issues surrounding the Belarus nuclear-power plant. While a number of our neighbours, and not only our neighbours, have taken advantage of this opportunity, some did not consider it advisable and have taken a political route. Nevertheless, it is important to us to establish normal cooperation with all interested parties, including our near neighbour Lithuania. We firmly believe that if we are to achieve nuclear security on a global scale, it is absolutely critical to maintain a dialogue.

It is deeply regrettable that the representative of North Korea continues to make groundless statements impugning my country’s sovereignty. Faced with North Korea’s constant threats, the Republic of Korea will take every measure necessary to protect the security of its people and territory. However much North Korea tries to distort the facts, it will not change the fundamental nature of its nuclear-missile problem. The international community has made its united and unequivocal position on this issue clear on numerous occasions. My delegation once again urges North Korea to immediately cease its aggressive threats to peace and security on the Korean peninsula and to the international community as a whole, and to immediately dismantle its nuclear programme in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner.

Japan would like to exercise the right of reply in response to the comments and justifications made by the North Korean delegation. North Korea’s nuclear-missile development is a clear violation of a series of Security Council resolutions that urge it to abandon all its nuclear-weapon and ballistic- missile programmes. North Korea should refrain from any further provocations and fully comply with the relevant Security Council resolutions as well as the joint statement of the Six-Party Talks.

I would like to comment briefly on the qualifications of Japan. In my understanding, Japan is in no way qualified to say anything about the nuclear issue or about questions of humanity in this Hall. Japan is the only country in the world that is still trying very hard to avoid admitting to, apologizing or answering for the inhuman war crimes it committed in the past. Instead, it seeks to revive its old imperialist dreams by distorting and beautifying its criminally aggressive history. I would like to provide some very basic figures on Japan’s historical crimes against humanity, and specifically the Korean people. Japan is the only nation in human history that has shamefully committed State-sponsored and organized military sex slavery in a number of other Asian countries. That includes forcing more than 200,000 innocent women and girls from Korea into sex slavery for the Japanese army during the Second World War. Japan committed genocide against the Korean people during over 40 years of colonial rule on the Korean peninsula. It massacred more than 1 million Koreans and kidnapped and forced more than 8 million into hard labour. Let me repeat those figures once more: 200,000 women and girls for sex slavery; over 1 million were killed; over 8 million were kidnapped and forced into hard labour. However, Japan continues to refuse to admit to or apologize for its crimes and avoids making reparations to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. We have learned from those historical lessons, and it is our conclusion that Japan has no political or moral qualification to speak on the matter in the sacred international arena of the United Nations. I would say the following to the representative of South Korea. There is no nation like us in this world. We share the same territory, the same blood and the same language. We share over 5,000 years of history. We are divided by outside forces. That is the tragedy of the Korean people. I really wish the South Korean authority would learn the lessons of history with respect to outside forces. My country’s nuclear-war deterrent seeks to guarantee the peace, stability and prosperity of the Korean people on the Korean peninsula. It is the tragedy of the Korean people that we are divided into two by outside forces. South Koreans should reject United States foreign policy and return to the path of collaboration with their fellow countrymen with respect to the principles of independence, peace and great national unity.

We are here to discuss the agenda item 89, “Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency”. We do not think it is appropriate to get into the discussion of history initiated by the North Korean delegation. However, let us be clear that throughout its history, Japan has upheld all the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and contributed to the peace and prosperity of not only Asia but also the world while consistently championing freedom, democracy and the rule of law. Once again, we urge North Korea to completely comply with the relevant Security Council resolutions.

I thank you, Mr. President, for giving me a second opportunity to exercise the right of reply in response to the allegations of North Korea. I just want to recall that in his speech to the General Assembly this year (A/72/PV.11), President Moon once again stressed that the Korean Government does not seek the collapse of North Korea or unification by absorption or artificial means. The Government of the Republic of Korea remains open to talks aimed at the denuclearization of North Korea. We have made it clear on many occasions that we will honour the commitments in the joint statement of the 19 September 2005 Six-Party Talks. It is North Korea that refuses all kinds of dialogue, raising tensions in the region and beyond. I would like to take this opportunity to urge North Korea to come to the dialogue and negotiation table to talk about peace and the common prosperity of our common people.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 89?