(Main Committee III) Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)

Excellencies, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, the fourth meeting of the main Committee three of the 2026 Review Conference of the parties to the Treaty of the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons is called to order.
Excellency, distinguished delegates.
Main Committee three will continue its work to discuss and negotiate the relevant elements of the zero draft outcome document, which was circulated last Wednesday and bears the symbol NPT slash 2026 slash CRP dot two.
I propose that we dedicate our meeting today to hear delegations views on preambular paragraphs 12, 13, and 16 paragraphs 23 to 45, paragraphs 81 and 82.
I look forward to your reactions on the elements of the text related to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and the right of withdrawal from the treaty.
I would like to remind delegations that in addition to the discussions in the main committees, delegations are encouraged to send written comments on the draft to NPT at un.org.
Emails sent to this address should clearly state in the subject line that the email contains written comments on the zero draft outcome document and identify which main committee subject matter it refers to.
Distinguished delegates.
Before we move to the list of speakers, please allow me to remind you of some guidelines for the conduct of our deliberations.
As usual, there will be a strict time limits of 8 minutes for group statements and 5 minutes for national statements.
There will be a timer shown on the screen.
Your microphone will start to blink when there is 1 minute remaining, and it will be cut off once the time limit has been reached.
Finally, delegations are requested to kindly inform the Secretariat as soon as possible if they wish to exercise their right of reply.
Rights of reply will be heard at the end of the meeting today.
Those allegations that wish to take floor are requested to press the button in front of you.
The delegations that wish to take the floor are requested to press the button in front of you.
Thank you.
The first speaker on my list is to distinguish the representative of Australia.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chair.
Australia welcomes the efforts made by the chair approach as a constructive and pragmatic basis for advancing discussions and building consensus among members.
Australia reaffirms the right of all states parties to develop, research, produce, and use nuclear energy for safe and peaceful purposes should they choose to do so in full conformity with Articles one and two of the NPT.
We welcome most of the language on peaceful uses and believe it provides the appropriate balance between the three pillars.
At the same time, Australia notes the absence of gender responsive language in the current text and underscores the importance of addressing this gap.
Gender considerations strengthen nuclear nonproliferation, disarmament and peaceful uses efforts by broadening participation, improving decision making, and ensuring that policies account for the differentiated areas of nuclear policy and technology fields.
Women remain underrepresented in many areas of nuclear policy and addressing this imbalance contributes to more comprehensive and innovative approaches.
Embedding gender perspectives within the NPT framework supports more effective, equitable and sustainable outcomes across all three pillars of the treaty.
Australia welcomes the language in paragraph 45 that expresses grave concern about the safety and security of nuclear facilities and materials in Ukraine.
However, this fails to recognize the reasons for these concerns, which are a direct result of Russia's illegal full scale invasion of Ukraine and continued occupation of Zapoja nuclear power plant.
Australia looks forward to working constructively with all parties and to find a consensus outcome.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Australia for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished the representative of Norway.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chair.
We would like to thank you and the Secretariat for dedicated and inclusive work on this draft.
Pillar three on peaceful uses remains a fundamental element of the NPT and a key pillar for maintaining the treaty's balance and legitimacy.
The right to access nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, covering both nuclear power and non power applications such as health, agriculture, industry, and environmental protection is central to the treaty.
These applications play an increasingly important role in achieving sustainable development goals and improving quality of life worldwide.
At the same time, this right must always be exercised in accordance with appropriate safety, security, and nonproliferation safeguards which underpin confidence in international cooperation.
We consequently support the strong and well balanced language in the draft highlighting the central role of the IAA.
The agency is indispensable for the effective implementation of this pillar, not only through its safeguards function, but also through its technical cooperation program and capacity building efforts.
These activities are essential for enabling states to benefit from nuclear science and technology in a safe, secure, and responsible manner.
We would also underline that export control regimes are essential tools for ensuring that nuclear cooperation takes place.
Properly implemented, they strengthen, not hinder this pillar by building trust and facilitating transparent and predictable cooperation.
Chair, the 11th review cycle, significant international progress has been made on HAU minimization, including T and international symposium in Oslo, the outcomes of which are reflected in working paper 36.
Norway believes that the conference should recognize these efforts and encourage states on a voluntary basis and where feasible to further minimize civilian HAU stocks and use, including through experience sharing, transparency, and regular updates.
Norway also believes that the gender perspective should be reflected in the document.
This important aspect is often found in Paris under this pillar.
However, this integral and important topic should appropriately be included in the preamble section and in relevant parts of the text, such as the section on nuclear disarmament verification, where diverse perspectives strengthen outcomes.
Finally, we consider the language on Ukraine to be insufficient.
It is important that the document reflects realities on the ground and we support proposals to strengthen the text, including to include a clear reference to Russia's illegal seizure of the Spori nuclear power plant in Paragraph 45.
Thank you, Chen.
I thank the distinguished representative of Norway for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Canada.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chair.
Canada appreciates the early issuance of the draft outcome document and the effort that has been put into this draft attempting to capture a range of views.
We believe this is a good starting point for our negotiations.
Regarding the paragraphs assigned to main Committee three and the importance of the peaceful use of nuclear technology, Canada is generally pleased with the draft.
We appreciate the recognition of the vital role of the IAEA, in particular, the IAEA's technical cooperation program and the various flagship initiatives that help facilitate access to the peaceful uses of nuclear technology.
We are also supportive of the recognition in the text of the importance of implementing the highest standards of safety, security, and safeguards for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
We've looked closely at the language on armed attacks in the draft.
While we are concerned about the safety and security impacts of armed attacks on nuclear facilities, we believe there are some legal inaccuracies in the text in paragraph 42.
Canada fully supports the references to the importance of the IAEA DG's seven indispensable pillars for nuclear safety and security during armed conflict, as well as the five concrete principles for nuclear safety and security.
It's important that the Review conference express concern with the nuclear safety and security challenges in Ukraine.
However, the current language in paragraph 45 fails to adequately capture the root cause of these challenges which are direct result of Russia's military action against nuclear facilities and critical infrastructure and its continued occupation of Ukraine's Zaporiza nuclear power plant.
In line with previous IAA Board of Governors and general conference resolutions, the NPT Review conference should call for urgent withdrawal of all unauthorized military and other personnel from Ukraine's Z NPP and for the plant to be immediately returned to the full control of the competent Ukrainian authorities.
Canada will be submitting written proposals today in this regard.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank the distinguished representative of Canada for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Egypt.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chairperson.
I wish to deliver the statement on behalf of the ARA group.
The ARA group expresses its appreciation for the language and peaceful uses pillar within the draft, which was drafted in a balanced manner according to how the ARA group sees it.
That said, the group believes that this language could benefit from further strengthening in different dimensions, particularly in specific paragraphs that tackle the coordin principles of peaceful uses and which we detail as follows.
First, paragraph 23, there is a need to affirm that the inalienable right of all the parties to the treaty to develop, research, produce, and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes constitutes one of the fundamental objectives of the treaty and the country's sovereign choices and decisions in this regard should be respected as long as they are in line with international obligations.
The Arab Group believes that the current formulations of this aspect in paragraph 23, by calling upon states to respect countries' sovereign decisions, does not give the proper message needed.
Second, Paragraph 24, there is a need to add a clear reference to the importance of encouraging transfers of nuclear technology, training of skilled workforce, and enhancing international cooperation among state parties in conformity with Articles one, two, and three of the treaty.
The current formulation calling for the transfer of technological information, material, and equipment is commended and necessary but not sufficient.
Third, paragraph 26, this paragraph could benefit from further illustration of the wider scope of usage of nuclear energy for peaceful uses, including inter alia meeting energy needs, managing the use of water resources, optimizing industrial processes, and improving health and cancer therapy through advanced diagnosis, provision of radioactive isotopes, and training of skilled labor force.
Fourth, paragraph 33, and while asserting the centrality of IAEA technical cooperation program, a reference needs to be added that these programs should be formulated in accordance with IAEA statutes, guiding principles, and relevant resolutions of the general conference, and that they shall be financed in line with the concept of shared responsibility.
Fifth and last, paragraph 38, the other group is of the view that the current reference in the paragraph to the highest safety and security standards is a vague and unquamtifiable formulation.
The 2010 language in this regard might better serve the objective through using the terms appropriate and effective.
The group believes that measures to strengthen nuclear security while important and indispensable should not hamper international cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities.
Mr.
Chair, the Arab group will share these amendments in writing to facilitate the consideration of incorporating them.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Egypt for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Brazil, followed by Mexico.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you Chair.
My delegation thank the president for circulating the draft.
We believe that this part is a good basis for our work especially in the peaceful uses.
I would like to share some preliminary suggestions and comments regarding this part.
In the preambar part, our attention goes to preamble paragraph 12.
We understand that this language comes from Article 4, paragraph two of the treaty.
But we also believe that we should have in the preambular part, reference to a reaffirmation of the inalienable rights to peaceful uses as is consecrated in paragraph 41 of the treaty.
We understand that we should have a mention to this inalienable rights in the preambular part as well.
Our concern is to have a balanced approach in this part that h balances provides the idea that this is a right and we don't want to focus put too much emphasis in the language on terms that we could read as undue conditionalities for the exercise of this right.
Following the text, I would like to go to paragraph 23.
It's just an issue with the language of the final part of the paragraph.
My delegation would like to suggest to make the reference to fuel cycle after policies.
It would read without jeopardizing its policies, including on fuel cycle, and then the rest of the paragraph goes just as a matter of readability of the text.
Now, I would like to go to paragraphs 38 to 41.
He I would like to echo the suggestion made by the Arab group regarding the expression highest levels, both in paragraph 38 and 41, we would like to request that this expression should be replaced by appropriate and effective levels.
We think that it's more accurate to have this expression when we're talking about safety and security.
In paragraph 38, we would also like to suggest that deletion of the second line after accompanied by commitments to the ongoing implementation of safeguards as well as the deletion from commitments to us.
The focus of this paragraph should be the levels of safety and security and not the focus on safeguards.
Finally, On paragraph 39, we believe that this paragraph should have a mention to the inalienable right to peaceful uses.
After the first phrase, we would like to suggest the addition of something along the lines of without prejudice to the inalienable right to peaceful uses under the treaty.
With this addition, the paragraph would be rather in line with our purposes in this part of the text.
Further suggestions will be sent written to the president.
Thank you so much.
I thank the distinguished representative of Brazil for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Mexico, followed by Cuba.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chair.
Mexico is grateful to the chair for preparing the paragraphs to be discussed in this main committee three.
My capital is continuing to study in detail the language here, and we will make some comments now on the sections indicated by the chair.
With regard to the preambula section, we think it's relevant to have a reference to the inalienable right of all states parties to research, produce and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes contained in preambula paragraph two.
And as Brazil pointed out, we suggest that we include an express reference to Article 7 to Article 4, correct Speaker of the treaty as the fundamental basis for this paragraph and as an express reference to this inalienable right.
With regard to paragraph 24 that refers to exchanges of equipment and materials, we think it's important to remove any kind of restriction here that would be inconsistent with the treaty and we suggest including and highlighting the elimination of those restrictions that are particularly affecting developing states and least developed states.
Okay.
With regard to paragraphs 81 and 82, we think it's important to include these in order to stress the need to clarify the scope and procedure applicable to leaving the treaty.
Experience with regard to Article 10 has shown the importance of strengthening clarity, predictability, and transparency when it comes to the requirements with regard to the withdrawal of a state party in order to preserve the credibility of the international nonproliferation regime.
Finally, We agree with Norway's proposal to include a reference to a gender perspective throughout the text.
Mexico's proposals will also be put forward in writing.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Mexico for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished the representative of Cuba, followed by Iraq.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chair.
Once again, we thank you for assuming the chairmanship and the Secretariat we thank you for producing this draft so quickly and we have a few general comments.
Pursuant to the treaty, all states have the right to participate in the broadest possible exchange of equipment and material and scientific and technological information to better develop nuclear applications for peaceful purposes.
We think it's positive that the draft contain a reference to this in paragraph 24 and we suggest adding a reference to um, technical cooperation between states parties and international organizations.
In that same paragraph, we refer to lifting undue constraints inconsistent with the treaty.
That should be strengthened to reaffirm that any measure that would be a partial or total constraint to the exercise of the inalienable rights of all states pursuant to Article 4 of the treaty would be a violation of this purpose.
There should be, let us repeat no conditionalities or constraints on international cooperation for peaceful uses.
We think that we should also urge states parties to review their national policies and once and for all lift all discriminatory restrictions that contravene the treaty.
The peaceful use of nuclear energy should not be the privilege of the few.
And therefore, we should take due account of the needs of developing countries.
In paragraphs 25 and 33, it does refer to the importance of taking into the needs of developing countries, including the LDCs and we feel that those references could be further strengthened.
For example, we should include references to transfer of technology and capacity development as effective ways to guarantee that the benefits of nuclear technology help all states, particularly developing countries.
And with that in mind, we should also include general references in the preamble recalling the principle that the benefits of the peaceful uses of nuclear technology should be available to all parties to the treaty without discrimination or conditionalities as established by the IAEA document, and also the contributions of science and technology are very important to achieving the sustainable development goals.
In paragraph 40, we stress the reference to international frameworks for nuclear safety.
Um, Cuba has endorsed all of these documents.
This is very important for us to achieve the, and we have, are included in our national legislation, all of these provisions, and we have been pioneers in promoting universalization of these provisions.
We support that the conference requests that those states that have not yet done so join and fully implement these instruments.
We'd also like to highlight the proposal contained in paragraph 32, recognizing the role of the IAEA and various initiatives of this body, as well as paragraph 33, that highlights technical cooperation programs.
However, we should include references to the need for the implementation of these mechanisms to be free of politicization and political conditionalities that would work against deficiency and the credibility of the body.
The technical cooperation program should continue to be applied in accordance with the IAEA statute, and we should not apply any additional criteria.
Those are a few general comments that we have, and we will be sending in other comments in writing.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished Representative of Cuba for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Iraq, followed by Dominican Republic.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chairperson.
At the outset, we associate ourselves with the statement of the Arab Group and Nam.
We would also like to express our appreciation for the positive and comprehensive elements contained in the draft with regard to the pillar of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
We also particularly welcome the language contained in preamble of paragraphs 12, 13, and 16, which affirm the inalienable right of all states to harness nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, as well as the importance of the role of nuclear science and technology in achieving sustainable development.
Mr.
Chair, we also appreciate the language contained in paragraphs 23 to 38, which reflect the growing attention to the use of nuclear energy in the fields of clean energy, energy security, and sustainable development.
In this regard, Iraq would like to emphasize the following points.
First, Iraq values the content of paragraph 29 concerning bridging the gap in nuclear science and technology among states parties.
This paragraph should be strengthened to emphasize face and fair and equitable access for developing countries to peaceful nuclear technology, capacity building, and technology transfer in a manner that takes into account their development needs.
Second, Iraq attaches importance to paragraph 42, which affirms the inviolability of nuclear facilities dedicated to peaceful usages and subjected to the safeguards agreement.
This paragraph should be strengthened to clearly affirm that any attack or threat thereof against such facilities constitutes a serious violation of international law of the UN charter and a threat to international peace and security, in addition to posing grave risks to human beings and the environment.
Third, with regard to paragraph 39.
The paragraph can be strengthened by adding provisions on technical assistance and capacity building, particularly concerning the central role of the agency in developing safety standards and nuclear security guidance.
In conclusion, we look forward to constructively cooperating with all states parties to reach a balanced final document.
Thank you, Chair.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Dominican Republic, followed by the Islamic Republic of Iran.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Chair.
Our delegation would like to thank you for preparing this draft and we would like to make the following comments.
We I'm very happy with preambular paragraph 12, which is the commitment of all parties to participate in the broadest possible exchange when it comes to the peaceful use of nuclear energy in conformity with the treaty.
With regard to preambular 13, this recognizes the expanding role of nuclear science and technology and we suggest that at the end of this paragraph we include the following, in particular, through its application in the areas of health, agriculture, sustainable water use, protection of the environment, and the strengthening of food security.
Sure.
With regard to paragraph 23, we very much appreciate that we reaffirm here the inalienable right of states to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination in conformity with the treaty and also respecting national sovereignty and international obligations.
Our delegation welcomes what is stated in paragraph 25, referring to strengthening international cooperation for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy with a priority to developing countries.
Also, we recommend adding at the end of the text the following reference, including those belonging to nuclear weapons free zones.
Sure.
Likewise, with regard to paragraph 34, that refers to the need to ensure sufficient safe and predictable funding for technical cooperation programs, we suggest that we highlight the importance of strengthening the scalability, continuity, and visibility of the programs with a view to maximizing, optimizing their impact, and producing sustainable benefits in the long term.
In this regard, we recommend highlighting the importance of periodic review of the programmatic frameworks assigned between the states parties and the IAEA in order to follow up on national priorities as they have been established.
Finally, my delegation supports paragraph 37 because it strengthens actors with the world of academia, private sector, and development agencies and makes it possible for the benefits of nuclear science and technology to directly and sustainably reach member states.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of the Dominican Republic for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Islamic Republic of Iran, followed by the United Kingdom.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you very much, Mr.
Chair.
I'd like to echo non nuclear weapon states who emphasized on recognition of the peaceful, the right to peaceful uses as ineligible.
This was mentioned by a lot of non nuclear weapon states, including Brazil and Mexico.
Therefore, we believe that this should be specified in paragraph 12 of the preamble.
And on paragraph 13, we believe that as we have expressed before, nothing should restrict their right to peaceful uses and participation in international cooperation with regard to peaceful users without any discrimination.
This is our proposal with regard to other paragraphs, including 26 and 29.
This should be highlighted in those paragraphs as well.
On paragraph 13, we believe that the language should be strengthened by using the language of the 2010 and specifically on highlighting the sovereign right of the state parties with regard to national fuel cycle.
With regard to we need a new paragraph after paragraph 23, and it will be 23 B to reject the imposition of any UCMs or conducting any attacks against nuclear facilities, as well as assassination of nuclear scientists.
This is really needed based on the, the bitter experience that we have seen.
And with regard to paragraph 25, we believe that the removal of any restriction should be done in all its aspects.
With regard to paragraph 27, of course, we see that the inclination to use peaceful nuclear technology is noted, but we think that it should be acknowledged instead and this will be consistent with the realities.
And on paragraph 29, we should emphasize the right to peaceful users in an effective and non discriminatory manner.
After 29, we need two more paragraphs, new paragraphs, one to emphasize on the role of the developed countries in promotion and implementation of international cooperation.
And the other paragraph should reflect on the notion that safety and security should not restrict in animal right in any way.
Uh, Mr.
Chair, with regard to paragraph 41, against the backdrop of several illegal attacks triggered by the United States and the Israeli regime against Iranian nuclear facilities, we think that the language here exactly should be strengthened and therefore we have some modifications with regard to first part of the paragraph 41 that reads as follows.
The conference underlines the importance of full compliance with and reaffirms the existing norms of international law on the inviolability of peaceful nuclear activities, according to which any armed attack against peaceful nuclear facilities, operational or Under construction is absolutely prohibited, is a serious material breach of international law, constitutes an act of aggression and entails the international responsibility of the aggressor, including for seizing such acts, making full reparation and compensation, as well as for providing appropriate assurances of its non repetition in the future.
Any such attack also seriously undermines the very objects and purposes of the NPT and the IAA's statute, gravely endangers the IAA safeguard systems and seriously impedes the full and effective exercise of the inalienable rights of any state party to the treaty to develop, research, production, and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination.
Then we can continue the rest of the paragraph.
We believe that on paragraph 42, because of the reference to unnegotiated documents, it should be deleted.
The rest will be shared accordingly afterwards.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom, followed by Ukraine.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chair.
Allow me to join others in thanking through you, our president for this zero draft.
As many have commented already, he has given us a good basis to work from and importantly, the time in which to do so.
There are many areas included in the draft on pillar three issues that we welcome and can support.
This includes the recognition of the role that nuclear power, including advanced technology like SMRs and advanced reactors can play in addressing energy security, decarbonization, and sustainable development.
The recognition of the vital role non traditional stakeholders, particularly international financial institutions and industry can and should play in assisting access to peaceful uses, recognizing the essential role of the International Atomic Energy Agency and of the safeguards regime, and that the IAEA facilitates the safe, secure, and peaceful applications of nuclear science and technology.
However, we propose that this conference be more ambitious in delivering improved access to the peaceful uses.
We would like to see calls for state parties to mobilize people and amplify resources to deliver long term success in expanding access to peaceful uses in close partnership with the IAEA, a greater emphasis on the need for transparency and the safe and secure use of nuclear technology, and explicit recognition that export controls, safeguards, security and safety are enablers of accesses to peaceful uses and build trust between stakeholders.
Chair, we acknowledge and strongly support the essential role played by the IEA in addressing the grave nuclear safety and security risks arising from Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine.
The agency's continued presence and reporting are critical.
It is important that the outcome document recognizes their important role.
At the same time, we should also be clear that Zaporiz nuclear power plant is a Ukrainian facility.
Mr.
Chair, we share the concerns Canada has raised with paragraph 42.
The United Kingdom recognizes the safety and security risks posed by attacks on nuclear facilities.
Our starting point is that all parties should uphold international law.
However, paragraph 42 is not correct as a matter of fact or of law.
All nuclear facilities benefit from robust legal protections.
The UN charter protects all nuclear facilities from the use of force, subject to limited and well established exceptions.
During armed conflict, international humanitarian law protects all nuclear facilities that constitute civilian objects in the same way as any other civilian object.
They must not be the object of attack.
The rule of proportionality must be respected and in accordance with Article 51, Article 57, apologies of additional Protocol one to the Geneva Conventions, all feasible precautions must be taken to avoid or minimize civilian harm.
Even when an adversary uses a nuclear power plant in a way that renders it a military objective, Article 56 of Additional Protocol one offers additional protections subject to caveats set out in the article.
IEA resolutions reflect important historical concern, but do not alter this established and robust legal framework.
Chair, introducing new political language not grounded in established law risk creating confusion.
There is already a comprehensive legal framework in place, and we should focus on ensuring it is applied, it is respected, and it is upheld.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
I thank the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished the representative of Ukraine, followed by Indonesia.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
We would like to express once again our gratitude to the president, the Bureau, and the Secretariat for circulating the draft outcome document, and we would like to focus on a section on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy of the draft.
First of all, there are many elements in this section that our delegation can support.
Um, in particular, we welcome the language contained in paragraph 43 and 43 on seven pillars of nuclear safety and security as well as the five principles.
At the same time, paragraph 45 does not adequately reflect the situation in the field of nuclear safety and security in Ukraine.
In this context, we believe that the paragraph fails to mention the root cause of this situation, which is Russia's ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine.
Including the illegal seizure and militarization of Ukraine's Zaporiz nuclear power plant, as well as its numerous repeated violations of the seven pillars of nuclear safety and security referred to in paragraph 43.
Furthermore, there is no clear call from the conference for the immediate withdrawal of Russian military forces and other unauthorized personnel from the plant and for its return under the full control of the competent regulatory authorities of Ukraine.
We believe that particular attention should also be paid to the importance of the IA program of assistance to support Ukraine in maintaining continued nuclear safety and security, including through the continued presence of agency staff at all nuclear power plants, including Zaïre nuclear power plant.
In addition, Russia's repeated, deliberate and targeted large scale strikes on Ukraine's energy infrastructure have significantly increased risks to nuclear safety and security of Ukraine.
Finally, we regret that the draft final document makes no reference to the 40th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, an important milestone commemorated by the international community just two weeks ago.
The conference should also condemn the Russian drone strike against the new safe confinement at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant and underscore the importance of its timely repair and continued functioning to ensure nuclear safety and security.
We will also submit our written proposal to this section of the draft final document for the consideration of the President and the Bureau.
Thank you for your attention.
I thank the distinguished representative of Ukraine for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Indonesia, followed by Namibia.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
We thank you for your leadership of this committee and assure you of our full cooperation and support.
Indonesia appreciates the draft outcome document as a basis further negotiations.
We reiterate the vital importance of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy for sustainable development, including in health, water management, industry, energy, and climate resilience.
The full effective and non discriminatory implementation is essential to maintaining the balance, credibility, and sustainability of the treaty.
As we continue to assess the draft outcome document, we wish to highlight several issues within the purview of this spent committee.
Indonesia supports a credible safeguard system.
However, the strengthening of safeguard must not come at the expense of the agency's development mandate.
We therefore propose that paragraph 18 be supplemented to make clear that support for safeguard shall be pursued without prejudice to continued support for the IAE technical operations program and nuclear applications, taking into account the needs and priorities of recipients member states.
Indonesia reaffirms well that the eligible rights of states to develop, research production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, as enshrined in the NPT and the IAA statute must be fully respected without discrimination.
In this context, measures to strengthen nuclear safety and security should not be framed in a manner that limits conditions or restrict the exercise of this right.
Any such conditionalities risk undermining the fundamental balance of the treaty and widening the technological gap between developed and developing countries.
Safety and security are important national responsibilities.
They should be strengthened through cooperations, capacity building, technical assistance and respect for national ownerships.
In this regard on paragraph 30, 33, 38 and 41, Indonesia recalls the longstanding principles that primary responsibility for nuclear safety and security rests with individual states.
The obligation under this treaty do not encompass safety and security as such.
We therefore of the view that the formulations in the draft that suggest peaceful uses must be accompanied by the highest level of safety and security.
Is not technically miserable and that is being read as a precondition for the exercise of the inaligable rights under Article 4.
On paragraph 39, Indonesia is also of the view that nuclear safety and security should be addressed comprehensively.
They should not be discussed only in relations to peaceful uses.
A significant proportions of nuclear material globally remains outside peaceful nuclear programs, including in military stocks and facilities where risk of accidents, loss of control, sabotage or unintended escalations might also arise.
We therefore propose that the language on nuclear safety and security speak to all nuclear and other radioactive material and facilities, including those used for military purposes, consistent with the IAA ministerial declarations on nuclear security.
In closing, Mr.
Chair, Indonesia calls on the Conference to reform Article 4 in its entirety and to ensure that no state party faces under restrictions in exercising its sovereign right to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
We will submit as well our written recommendations for language to be considered in the text.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
I thank the distinguished representative of Indonesia for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is to distinguish the representative of Namibia, followed by the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Chairman, Namibia welcomes the strong and elaborate references to the work of the IEA in developing and promoting the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
We also thank those member states who continue to consistently and substantially support the IEA Technical Cooperation Program, since it is the main mechanism through which technology transfer occurs to IEA member states.
Chairman, while we are appreciative of the contribution to the IEA technical cooperation program by the NPT state parties, we take note that such contributions are done on a voluntary basis.
We take note of the call as provided for in paragraph 34 for state parties to make every effort and take practical steps to ensure that the resources for technical cooperation program activities are sufficient, assured, and predictable.
We have continued to make this call without its practical realization.
We are of the view that it would be an important step for this conference to call for the integration of the IEATC budget into its regular budget and thereby working towards making it sufficient, assured, and predictable.
This call aligns to our earlier call for a balanced, a balanced and non discriminatory approach to the three pillars of the NPT.
And in particular, we note that the 39% as of 2024 of the IEA regular budget was appropriated for nuclear verification purposes.
Chair.
Namibia also welcomes the acknowledgment of the interest of many countries to pursue nuclear power programs in pursuit of their energy security as detailed in paragraph 27 of the outcome document.
While we support this, we are of the view that this conference should take it a step further by explicitly referencing the nuclear fuel cycle in its entirety.
The nuclear power conservation should not be pursued without discussion about the full nuclear fuel cycle development.
This is in recognition of paragraph 29, which calls for the bridging gap among state parties for peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
This technological gap not only relates to nuclear power infrastructure, but also to other nuclear fuel cycle activities, including nuclear fuel services.
Chairman, with regard to paragraph 36, we take note of the references of the IEA low enrichment uranium bank that was established to provide assurance of supply and availability of LEU for eligible member states.
We would therefore appreciate that this paragraph be expanded to qualify that the purpose of the IEA LEU bank is to provide a last resort safety net for countries unable to source LEU through the commercial market and also the criteria for eligibility to the access of LEU.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Namibia for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of the ingdom of the Netherlands, followed by Switzerland.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chair.
My delegation welcomes the draft document, which we consider to be a solid basis for further deliberations.
We would like to share a few specific comments related to MC three.
The Netherlands is pleased to note that the peaceful uses pillar is referred to extensively in the draft documents, reflecting the important and increasing contribution of nuclear science, energy, and technology to sustainable development.
We also appreciate that the draft recognizes the essential role of the IAEA in both supporting peaceful uses programs as well as safeguards.
Furthermore, we are happy to see that adequate attention is given to nuclear safety and security, which are key prerequisites for the peaceful uses pillar and will only become more relevant in light of emerging technologies.
In this light, the Netherlands would like to strengthen the language in paragraph 38 by referring to the need to maintain the highest standards of nuclear safety and security.
Chair, the Netherlands is deeply concerned by the nuclear safety and security situation in Ukraine as a result of Russia's war of aggression and in particular, its illegal seizure of the Zapoica nuclear power plant, et MPP.
Although the outcome document mentions Set MPP, no context is given as to why there are nuclear safety and security risks in Ukraine.
We needed to be clearly reflected that SetnPP is a Ukrainian MPP and that the root cause of these risks lie with one state, namely the Russian Federation, that is endangering nuclear safety and security in Ukraine by its indiscriminate attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure and its illegal occupation of SetnPP.
We have shared some concrete tax proposals for Paragraphs 40 43 through 45 in that regard.
I thank you Chair.
I thank the distinguished representative of the King of the Netherlands for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Switzerland, followed by Republic of Korea.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Switzerland would like to once again commend the approach of the chairmanship as we take up this outcome document.
It's a positive constructive starting point, allowing us to focus our discussions in a useful fashion.
We submitted our written comments for your considerations already.
Turning to Main Committee three issues, we have the following comments.
Paragraph 23237 on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and technical cooperation.
We held the important place according to IEA programs which have been developed over the course of the review cycle, we believe that a rigorous regulatory framework is in all of our interests so that we can harness the benefits of nuclear power, develop and share them in keeping with the objectives of the treaty.
On this note, we welcome paragraphs 38 to 41, which underscore the important role played by the IAEA as regards safeguards, nuclear safety and security, as well as the development of standards and advice to states parties.
As for civilian nuclear facilities, what happens to them in conflicts as well as nuclear safety and security in Ukraine.
We believe that in Paris 42 to 45, the text does try to accommodate various opinions expressed on the subject throughout this conference.
We believe that the conference has spoken as regards the seriousness of the situation surrounding Zaporiza.
We recall that Switzerland believes that the Z NPP remains Ukrainian.
The IAEA has played a key role in managing this crisis.
We note the IA Director General's seven indispensable pillars and the principles important for the nuclear safety and security of the Z NPP, thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Switzerland for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Republic of Korea, followed by Kazakhstan.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
As my delegation emphasized during last week's meeting, the Republic of Korea supports the draft outcome document related to Article 10, which requires that states parties remain accountable for any violations of the treaty committed prior to withdrawal.
We have witnessed how the DPRK exploited the NPT regime, claimed its withdrawal from the treaty, and developed its nuclear and ballistic missile programs in open defiance of its obligations.
Should also explore mechanisms to ensure that nuclear materials, equipment, and technology acquired for peaceful purposes while a state was party to the NPT cannot be diverted to weapons programs following withdrawal.
We strongly support maintaining paragraph 82 in this regard.
With regard to other paragraphs highlighted by my delegation during last week's meeting, we'll submit our suggestions in writing shortly.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Republic of Korea for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Kazakhstan, followed by South Africa.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Distinguished Chair, at the outset, I wish to reaffirm my delegation's full support for your leadership and express our confidence in your guidance to the successful outcome of this meeting.
While we have been still studying the substance of the draft outcome document, I would like to make several initial observations.
Kazakhstan attaches great importance to the promotion of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and applications and works closely with the IEA across all areas of nuclear cooperation.
We welcome the strong language on the IEA Technical Cooperation Program, which remains a key instrument for advancing access to nuclear technologies through the procurement of advanced equipment and the implementation of capacity building activities for member states.
We also thank the president for including a paragraph recognizing the contribution of the IEA owned and operated low enriched uranium bank established in Kazakhstan and fully operational since 2019 in providing assurance of supply and availability of LEU for member states.
In 2024, the IEA successfully completed a recertification campaign of its 60 cylinders.
Which demonstrated that they meet the requirements for international transport and that the LEU remains suitable for manufacturing fuel for light water reactors.
Regarding paragraph 43 to 45 on DG's seven indispensable pillars and five concrete principles, we recognize their importance for many delegations.
At the same time, we propose merging these three paragraphs into one or at least two in order to streamline the text of the outcome document.
In this context, Language contained in relevant IEA conference resolutions could serve as a useful basis and we hope that the IEA Secretariat may assist delegations in this regard.
We also see merit in including language on the minimization of highly enriched uranium in civilian stocks and the use of low enriched uranium where technically and economically feasible.
In this connection, we call upon the IAEA to continue advising and assisting member states upon request in these efforts.
Finally, we appreciate the efforts of the president and the Secretariat in reflecting the key takeaways from discussions on strengthening the work and effectiveness of the review process.
I thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Kazakhstan for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of South Africa, followed by Argentina.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chairperson.
We remain appreciative of the president and his team's effort for the zero draft outcome document, which we recognize as a good basis for further discussion.
We welcome the preambula paragraph 12.
However, we believe it would be more appropriate to confine the context of this paragraph to Article 4 of the treaty specifically instead of to all the provisions of the treaty.
On paragraph 23, we welcome the reflections in the discussion on the importance of reaffirming the inalienable right of all state parties to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without restrictions and according to the treaty provisions.
On paragraph 26, we support the reference to the scaling up of nuclear applications for peaceful purposes as this is consistent with the emphasis on the importance of these applications for developing countries and the global South.
Regarding paragraph 27, we note that while the IA General Conference resolution on nuclear power includes the term low carbon, there does not seem to be the same consensus on decarboniization, and we therefore suggest its deletion.
The new element introduced in paragraph 28 on the role of stakeholders in the peaceful applications, nuclear energy seems acceptable to our delegation.
We consider it a bit premature to already welcome the launch of the Atlas project in August 2026 in paragraph 32 and would suggest noting at this early point.
We also suggest that consideration be given to the placement of this specific project as it does not seem to be belong in the paragraph dealing with the flagship projects of the agency.
On paragraph 42, we suggest the inclusion of a new sentence at the end of the paragraph which reads as follows.
The conference recognized the need for a comprehensive, mutually multilaterally negotiated, legally binding instrument prohibiting attacks and threat of attacks on nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
South Africa has consistently supported the seven indispensable pillars as an appropriate technical response to the nuclear safety and security challenges faced by nuclear power plants in conflict situations.
However, we emphasize the importance of the seven pillars consistent application in all conflict situations in paragraph 42.
43, sorry.
Finally, on paragraph 44 and 45, South Africa would request more clarity on the value of their inclusion, especially considering the total emission of nuclear safety and security concerns following the attacks on the Iranian nuclear facilities.
With that, I thank you chair.
I thank the distinguished representative of South Africa for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Argentina, followed by Japan.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you very much, Chair.
We would like to present some additional comments to those submitted initially.
Argentina supports the proposed language, highlighting the strategic role of nuclear science and technology as a driver of economic development, promoting the supply of reliable and low carbon energy as reflected in preambula paragraph 13 and operative paragraphs 26 and 27.
We agree with the recognition given to the inalienable right to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and access to the corresponding technology in accordance with Article 4, nonproliferation obligations and the highest standards of nuclear safety and security.
In this regard, we support preambula paragraph 12 and operative paragraphs 23 to 25.
We appreciate the language emphasizing the relevance of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the importance of its technical cooperation program, and the reference to the principal initiatives carried out within that framework.
We likewise support the call to ensure that the technical cooperation program has sufficient and predictable funding with the establishment and maintenance of partnerships with stakeholders, donors, and credit mechanisms being fundamental.
We share the emphasis placed on physical and technological security in paragraphs 38 and 39, as well as the importance of the international regulatory framework on safety supporting the references to the conventional nuclear safety in paragraph 40.
Finally, we agree with the need for paragraph 38 to contain a reference to appropriate and effective levels of safety and security in line with the language of paragraph 52 of the 2010 text.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Argentina for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Japan, followed by Russian Federation.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
Japan highly values the presidents and the chair's tireless effort to guide us to find a common ground.
We feel that the draft draft is well balanced and contains the necessary elements for further advancement of our discussion.
We congratulate you and the president in facilitating the process.
Japan would like to offer a couple of proposals for the sake of constructive discussions as follows.
Number one, role of the IAEA and its technical cooperation project and others, which are stipulated in paragraph 33 35 and paragraph 39.
The current languages in these paragraphs recognize IAEA central role in the context of peaceful use of nuclear energy, as well as the enhancement of nuclear safety and security.
Japan welcomes these paragraphs.
Japan, alongside other state parties, has been actively contributing to the IAEA technical cooperation Program and to agency's flagship initiative through its voluntary contributions.
We would like to see significance of these contributions be duly reflected in the outcome document as positive elements to maintain and strengthen the treaty.
Concrete languages of these effects are to be added in paragraph 34.
Japan has submitted it in writing.
Number two, paragraph 24, exchange of equipment, materials, scientific technological information.
Japan is of the view that effective management of these exchanges are on one side, essential to prevent proliferation and on the other hand, conducive to build trust and transparency and after all, to facilitate peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
Several state parties pointed out these positive aspects already in the subsidiary body meeting this morning and Japan believes it should be also duly considered as a basis for the related paragraphs within the purview of MC three as well, concretely para 24.
My delegation has submitted the concrete proposal for para 24 in writing to replace the verb called upon to encourage in line with the 2022 final draft.
Number three, Pray eight and 41 on nuclear safety, security, and safeguards.
We reiterate that the highest levels of safety, security, and safeguards are quintessential when developing nuclear energy in order to maintain the broadest confidence in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
We would like to strengthen languages in both Party eight and 41.
Concrete proposals have been submitted in writing.
Para 43 and 45, nuclear safety and security in Ukraine.
Japan echoes the deep concerns expressed so far over the nuclear safety and security in Ukraine in the context of the war aggression on it.
Japan supports the IAEAs vital role in this matter and the inclusion of the seven indispensable pillars and five concrete principles for Ukraine's NPP in the current draft context.
Finally, withdrawal, which is stipulated in Para 81 and 82.
Japan reiterate once again its basic position as follows.
While acknowledging Article 10, withdrawal of any state party after acquiring nuclear weapons or nuclear capabilities against its obligation not to do so would have an enormous impact on the credibility and integrity of the treaty.
Japan emphasizes that notice of withdrawal should not and cannot acquit any state party of illicit acquisition of nuclear capabilities.
Japan welcomes paragraph 82 on the responsibility of state parties for any violation of the treaty committed prior to withdrawal.
I thank Mr.
I thank the distinguished representative of Japan for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Russian Federation, followed by Zimbabwe.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you very much, Mr.
Chairman.
At the outset, we'd like to express our gratitude to the president of the Review Conference and to you personally, as well as to the entire team involved in drafting the text.
Thank you for preparing this fairly balanced draft.
We believe that it could form the basis for consensus, of course, if we do make the necessary amendments.
Mr.
Chairman, for the Russian Federation, the central issue within the framework of Committee three on cluster three issues is the assertion of the right of all states to to develop nuclear technologies on an equitable footing and to use the relevant nuclear materials.
The relevant amendments have been drafted by my delegation and we've submitted these to the president of the review conference.
Specifically, in Article 23 of the document, Article 4 of the NPT is quoted.
However, there are some additions to that, the inalienable right of states to use nuclear energy is related to Article 4, but that's not correct because the wording of that paragraph actually contains Article 4, but the reference to Article 4 within the context of the state's right to use energy for peaceful purposes.
Well, that seems to be a fairly liberal interpretation of these provisions in the treaty.
We need to use the exact wording from Article 4 of the NPT.
Furthermore, we believe that the outcome document needs to refer to the In Pro project.
It would be optimal to mention in Pro in paragraph 27 specifically.
We'd like to draw your attention to the fact that Atlas is mentioned amongst the DGs initiatives.
That's an initiative that hasn't yet been launched.
We have no objections to mentioning Atlas and we've submitted our proposals to that end.
Turning to Para 36, the LEU Bank in Kazakhstan, it's absolutely right that we should mention this.
We believe we should also mention the Agask Uraanium Bank in the Russian Federation, which was also established.
Okay.
At the behest of the former IA Director General.
Paragraph 139 needs to be brought closer into line with the Nuclear Safety Convention.
We should say that the responsibility for nuclear safety falls not just to the state, but to the operator holding the license for the specific nuclear facility to the operator, specifically.
We see no need to mention the Director Director General's seven indispensable pillars for ensuring nuclear safety and security during an armed conflict.
We wish to highlight that first that these seven pillars have been compromised by the fact that they were not applied to Iran and in fact, they've only been applied to just one conflict.
Second, we are not sure that these stem from relevant IEA relevant documents on nuclear safety and security.
Perhaps that is the case, it probably is the case, but in order to sign up to this, we need to verify this information.
This hasn't been done yet.
Mr.
Chairman, the Russian Federation decided to abstain from introducing into the text provisions related to Ukraine's crimes and the terror it has unleashed vis-à-vis the staff at the ZNPP as well as the assistance provided to Ukraine by NATO countries and EU countries.
We believe that at this stage of our work on the text, we can consider this issue as something that is not related to the review conference.
If other states have views to the contrary, we will, of course, submit our proposals and will, of course, insist on those proposals being taken into consideration.
On that note, we believe we need to delete the reference to DD Gross's five concrete principles.
This is between the IA and the Russian Federation.
It has nothing to do with the review conference.
Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
I thank the distinguished representative of Russian Federation for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Zimbabwe, followed by Singapore.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Mr.
Chair, Zimbabwe wishes to Zimbabwe wishes to convey its appreciation to the Review conference president and the Beirut for circulating the draft in a timely manner, which has provided us with a reasonable window for negotiations on an outcome document.
We find the draft to be of a balanced nature, generally based on agreed language and providing a good basis for negotiations.
Chair, Pending further consultations, we wish to proffer some initial views on the zero draft.
Zimbabwe wishes to underscore that the outcome document should be built upon existing commitments and not renegotiate or backtrack on previous agreements.
Zimbabwe reiterates and emphasizes Five priorities on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy that we would like to see in the final document.
First, the upscaling of capacity building to train the experts needed for safe and effective nuclear programs as part of paragraph 29.
Second, firm commitments towards enhanced technology transfer under appropriate safeguards also under paragraph 29.
Third, strengthening affordable and predictable financing for projects related to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
This could strengthen paragraph 28 and it could be enhanced with additional language on the need to promote the contribution of peaceful nuclear energy towards industrialization in the global South.
Fourth, Strengthening national institutions engaged in peaceful uses of nuclear energy, including regulators, research centers, universities, hospitals, and technical agencies.
This could also be addressed in paragraph 28.
Fifth, ensuring inclusive partnerships with Africa and other developing regions fully represented in shaping the future of peaceful nuclear technology.
This could also be included in paragraph 28 29 and 30 Chair, we wish to underscore that the principle of accountability also applies to the peaceful uses the pillar.
States parties have a responsibility to contribute towards the implementation of Article 4 subsection two of the treaty.
That is to facilitate the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials in scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
We call for the further strengthening of this section by calling upon states parties to account for their activities related to the implementation of sections 49 50, 51, 55, and 56 of the 2030 Review Conference action plan as part of the Anational reports during review cycles.
Finally, Zimbabwe recognizes the critical role of IAEA, regional organizations, bilateral partners, and South South and triangular cooperation in this regard.
I thank you, Chair.
I thank the distinguished representative of Zimbabwe for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Singapore, followed by France.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Chair, we thank Vietnam as president of this conference for its preparation and early circulation of the zero draft of the outcome document.
Singapore's view is that the draft is a good starting point for a practical, streamlined and action oriented text, one that can offer a viable path to advance our discussions towards the collective objective of achieving a consensual outcome by the end of this conference.
Allow me to comment on specific sections of the draft relevant to MC three.
Singapore strongly supports the inalienable right to states parties to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy as provided for in Article 4 of the treaty in conformities with Articles one and two of the treaty.
In that regard, Singapore strongly supports the inclusion and retention of paragraphs 23 to 34 and 38 to 41 of the zero draft.
Our view is that this section of the draft would also benefit from strengthened language as follows.
First, on strengthening the IAEA's essential role in assisting member states to develop and enhance capabilities in the nuclear field, which remains a key priority for the Southeast Asia region.
My delegation's preference is to retain reference in the president's draft to the highest levels of safety and security as reflected in paragraph 38.
Second, with regards to paragraphs 33 and 34, the IEAs technical cooperation program is critical for developing countries to enhance capabilities and ensure access to the power and non power applications of nuclear energy.
My delegation therefore stresses the importance of including a reference that the IAEA remains fit for purpose and that it is sufficiently resourced through both its regular budget and technical cooperation fund, notwithstanding that the IAEA has strengthened partnerships with relevant partners and donors.
Thank you, Chair.
I thank the distinguished representative of Singapore for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of France, followed by Belgium.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Monsieur President.
Chair.
As we recorded in our national statement, the development of peaceful applications of nuclear energy as well as access to its benefits constitutes an essential objective of the NPT.
All states parties to the treaty have the right to pursue this goal provided they comply with international nonproliferation obligations.
Far from being constraints, these obligations constitute an indispensable framework for the development of peaceful uses of nuclear energy, which play a major role in social, economic, and human development.
Allow me to add a few remarks to the text submitted on Wednesday.
Firstly, we fully support the approach according to which the development of nuclear energy must be accompanied by the implementation by states of their safeguards agreements concluded with the IAEA in accordance with Article 3 of the NPT.
In this regard, we'd like this requirement to be reflected more explicitly in paragraph 38.
Secondly, in line with language already agreed elsewhere and because they represent an indispensable framework for compensation for nuclear damage in the event of an accident, we would like the introduction of a new paragraph under paragraph after paragraph 40 on international nuclear civil liability instruments.
Recalling the various instruments that already exist in this regard.
Thirdly, allow me to return to Paragraph 42, I For us, the conference must acknowledge that attacks against nuclear installations used for peaceful purposes may compromise nuclear safety and security.
It's therefore essential for us that the conference call upon states parties to respect their international commitments in connection with international humanitarian law and to refrain from any action of this kind.
With regard to the efforts deployed by the IAEA in 2022 in Ukraine, we should fully reflect those efforts in this paragraph.
We hope that these proposals will be submitted in the final document of our conference.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished Representative of France for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Belgium, followed by Nepal.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Mr.
Chairperson, we commend you for your efforts in searching for common ground.
Belgium considers the language regarding the implementation of safeguards in Ukraine and the risks to nuclear safety and security in Ukraine, insufficient as it presently stands.
The text should reflect the unique responsibility of Russia for its illegal war of aggression against Ukraine.
It should be specified that the Zapoa nuclear power plant was illegally seized.
Furthermore, the text should clarify that any potential restart of the facilities can only take place once safety and security conditions have been met and the facility has been returned to the oversight of the Ukrainian regulatory authorities.
The text should reflect the need to uphold international law and the IAEA's seven pillars for ensuring nuclear safety and security in armed conflicts.
We would like to see the importance of actively upholding these better reflected, contrary to the statement of fact as it presently reads.
On the strengthened review process and the importance of transparency and accountability, Belgium would like to see more details on the operationalization of the initiative for a review of the national reports of all nuclear weapon states, be it either in the outcome document or in a separate decision adopted by this conference.
Belgium believes that the text would benefit from a better reflection of the importance of gender and the equal participation and leadership of women and men in the text.
We support the remarks made by the distinguished delegates of amongst others, Australia and Norway in this regard.
I thank you, Mr.
Chairperson.
I thank the distinguished representative of Belgium for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguish the representative of Nepal, followed by the Philippines.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
Nepal welcomes the draft reaffirmation of the inalienable right of states parties to develop research, production, and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination, as well as the call to eliminate any undue constraints that might undermine the exercise of this right.
We also support the language that underlines the IAA's central role with regards to nuclear safety and security.
Further, Nepal welcomes the draft's strong emphasis on capacity building and equitable access to the peaceful uses of nuclear science and technology.
In particular, we appreciate the recognition in paragraph 25 of the need for enhanced cooperation, including through the IAEA, taking into account the needs of developing countries, including the least developed countries to advancing peaceful nuclear applications.
We also value the focus in paragraph 29 on bridging the nuclear science and technology gap, including through capacity building and South South triangular cooperation.
Likewise, paragraph 33 rightly underscores the centrality of the IAEA technical cooperation Program as a major mechanism for expanding access to nuclear technology and building national capacities, aligning it with the needs and priorities of member states.
We support the texts retention and further strengthening.
Mr.
Chair, our delegation supports your great work and stands ready to engage constructively towards a meaningful conclusion of this process.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Nepal for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of the Philippines, followed by Cameroon.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
The Philippines welcome the balanced treatment of peaceful uses in this zero draft, particularly preambular paragraphs II and XIII.
We appreciate the growing recognition that peaceful application of nuclear energy are not ancillary to the treaty, but one of its central pillars.
In paragraph 23 to 45, the Philippines strongly supports the emphasis and scaling of peaceful applications of nuclear science and technology, especially for developing countries.
We welcome the recognition of the expanding role of nuclear applications in sustainable development, food security, health, marine protection, energy security, and industrial development and support the call to ensure that resources for the IAEA technical cooperation program remain sufficient, assured, and predictable.
In particular, we welcome references to new tech plastics, Race of Hope, Atoms for Food, and the growing importance of partnerships with development institutions, the private sector, and other stakeholders.
These reflect the practical direction that many states parties have consistently called for.
Finally, we welcome the emphasis on the IAEA, Director General's seven indispensable pillars for ensuring nuclear safety and security during an armed conflict, and the International Legal Framework in nuclear safety and security.
That's all for us, Mr.
Jett.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of the Philippines for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Cameroon, followed by Madagascar.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Sure.
Chair.
My delegation would like to thank you for effectively leading our work and we'd like to make comments on paragraph 45 with regard to nuclear safety and security.
My delegation fully supports the basic concern here, namely that no nuclear installation for peaceful purposes should be exposed to military activity, whether it's in construction, in operation, or whether it's at standstill, wherever that be in the world.
This concern is legitimate and should be reflected in our outcome document.
However, the current wording of paragraph 45 that specifically mentions one country does make it difficult for my delegation politically and technically to accept this.
My delegation would recall that previous review conferences since 2015, we have said that singling out one state in the final document always led to the failure of negotiations.
Paragraph 45 would be going down that path and would lead inevitably to the opposition of the other party and potentially that of its allies.
We would then run the risk of sacrificing the whole text because of one single paragraph Whereas important approaches are mentioned elsewhere, we would recall that the preamble of the treaty states that there be equal treatment of states parties within the statutes.
My delegation would point out that when it comes to nuclear safety, all peaceful installations deserve the same protection.
Specific mention of one state will create an implicit hierarchy C lives and risks might be considered more important than others.
Politically, my delegation would find that counterproductive and questionable.
My delegation is particularly sensitive and extremely concerned about how this might appear as if we're applying double standards.
If we accept today to just mention one specific country, we will be okaying this practice for the future where other states might ask for specific references here and there.
When it comes to nuclear installations, and the MPT would then become an area to score resolve political differences.
Um.
That would be a naive approach.
Um.
My delegation recalls the mandate of the review conference that we're all aware of.
We are not here to allocate responsibility.
That's the role of the Security Council.
Um, And we're not here either to decide issues of humanitarian law.
That's up to international courts, or a paragraph that mentions a country in particular could be interpreted as, uh implicitly applying a political judgment which will be exceeding the mandate given to us by the treaty and Cameroon wants to ensure that institutions are respected.
We would call for the respect for the principles of the IAEA and the independence of its director general and we would point out that the IAEA has developed universal tools.
It's an indispensable pillar to ensure nuclear safety and security during armed conflict.
The Director General said this on the 4th of March and has visited Saparia and what the comments that were made apply to all these situations.
The Director General himself applied these principles in several contexts in 2022, but also recently in 2011 and also to other incidents.
And so the review conference should not just focus on one of these cases.
We should much rather welcome the work of the IAEA and commend the universal application of these principles without singling out one country.
My delegation will be submitting more detailed comments in writing.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Cameroon for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Madagascar, followed by Thailand.
You have the floor, Excellency.
President Madriues Chair.
My delegation would like to begin by thanking you for the draft document that we're looking at.
We feel that this document is a good basis for our discussions and my capital is continuing to study the document in detail and I'd like to make a couple of comments now.
Paragraph 24, I This is leaving the door open to bilateral sanctions.
We propose saying the conference suggests lifting all unilateral constraints on the transfer of equipment and knowledge in accordance with Article 4 paragraph 34 Paragraph 34, we stress the fact that the sources for technical resources for technical cooperation must be predictable and sufficient and encourage but a budgetary contributions makes this too dependent on charity.
We propose the conference stresses that the technical cooperation program must be obligatory and included in the regular budget of the IAEA in order to ensure predictability.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished Representative Magascar for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished Representative of Thailand, followed by Nigeria.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you so much, but not yet, Excellency.
Mr.
Chair, Thailand commends the effort reflected in the draft.
We have already submitted our written comments in which to share some of our observation on the peaceful use as follows, Thailand fully supports lience to peaceful use as the inalienable right to all state parties in the draft outcomes, including the right to develop, research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with the treaty in paragraph 23.
We welcome the affirmation that all state bodies undertake to facilitate and participate in international cooperation in paragraph 12 and in the recognition of the contribution of nuclear applications of sustainable development in paragraph 26.
Thalin also welcomes the language of the central role of the IAEA in supporting the implementation of the treaty through its safeguard system, technical cooperation activities, and capacity building programs in the draft.
We therefore underscore the importance of providing the agency with adequate, assure and predictable resources to effectively discharge its statutory functions.
While supporting this, we believe that the IAEA should continue to discharge its responsibilities fully, effectively, professionally, and impartialally, strictly in accordance with its statute safeguards agreements and mandate Thailand which to see the reaffirmation of this important matter in the draft outcomes.
Mr.
Shah, Thailand supports reference to nuclear safety and security as indispensable enables of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy in paragraph eight.
In this regard, Thalin welcomes the references in the draft reaffirming the inability of nuclear facilities and calling on all states to refrain from attacks or threat of attacks against such facilities.
Nuclear facilities must never be targeted or affected by military actions under any circumstances.
Finally, Than wished to join previous speakers in supporting language on gender perspective across the S.
I thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Thailand for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Nigeria, followed by the United States of America.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
First and foremost, let me take this floor on behalf of the African group.
We wish to thank Your Excellency for your job well done for preparing a well balanced test, which cuts across the three pillar.
However, we have some observation which we are going to submit later, especially on pillar three and that will be submitted to Your Excellency as soon as we are done in the room.
Thank you.
Having said that, permit me to take the floor to continue on my national capacity.
Nigeria appreciates efforts undertaken in the preparation of the test, and we generally support its strong emphasis on peaceful uses of nuclear energy under Article 4 of the Treaty.
In our view, the draft approximately recognizes that the in label right to develop research, production, and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes constitute one of the fundamental objective of the NPT.
Nigeria nevertheless believes that the test could be further strengthened in several areas.
First, we underscores the need for clearer language against undue restriction or discriminatory barriers that limit access of developing countries to peaceful nuclear technology, material, and scientific cooperation consistent with the treaty.
Second, Nigeria attaches particular importance to strengthen references to the IAEA technical cooperation Program, including the need for sufficient assured, predictable, sustainable and non conditional funding to meet the growing developmental needs of member states, especially African country and other developing countries.
Third, we believe the draft should reaffirm more explicitly that the three pillars of the treaty are mutually reinforcing and must be implemented in a balanced and non discriminatory manner.
Finally, Niger supports stronger and more general language, condemning attack or threat of attack against peaceful nuclear facility anyway, given their grave implications for Uma's safety, the environment, and international peace and security.
We remain committed to constructive engagement on this, and we shall send our proposal to you later, Mr.
Chair.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Nigeria for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of the United States of America, followed by Lithuania.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
Mr.
Chair, the United States would like to begin by thanking you for this version of the text.
We believe that it represents in many respects an excellent basis upon which to achieve further progress.
I'd also like to note, like other governments, that the United States has previously submitted to you our comments in writing on a number of the detailed provisions.
That said, there are a few specific TPAs which we'd like to bring to your attention.
Um, Regarding paragraph 23, the United States takes note of the fact that many in the room have noted the importance of the inalienable rights language and others of the safety, security, and nonproliferation language.
The United States would like to stress that there is the necessity for balance and complementarity amongst or excuse me, between these two theories.
We believe that they work in harmony with one another and in doing so, operate in furtherance of all of the principles of the treaty.
In that regard, the additional fuel cycle language in paragraph 23, we find duplicative, redundant, and contrary to the balance we are seeking and believe that it should be deleted.
I would also like to bring to the group's attention that excuse me, there are a number of references to sustainable development in these paragraphs and my government cannot support the use of the word sustainable.
We would propose the use of the word economic as this language better highlights the importance of a balanced approach to economic growth, energy security, and environmental protection.
Lastly, Mr.
Chair, with respect to the language on attacks against nuclear facilities, particularly in paragraph 42, the draft misstates international law in many respects, in key respects.
We echo the comments of our UK colleagues that introducing new political language not grounded in international law or in applicable legal terms such as inviolability is unhelpful.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
I thank the distinguished representative of the United States of America for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Lithuania, followed by China.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
As a general remark, I would like to know that my delegation will submit written comments and at this stage, I would like to share some general observations on the paragraph relevant to the work of this committee.
I would like to support all those countries that have called for recognizing and strengthening the text on the importance of the EIA, including its impartial mandate and professionalism.
Mr.
Chairman, I must reiterate the grave situation at the Ukraine's operation nuclear power plant.
For over four years, Russia illegal seizure and occupation has posed persistent, serious risk to nuclear safety and security.
The militarization of the NPP by Russia as documented by the EAA, is incompatible with safe nuclear operations while the unlawful detention and intimidation of Ukrainian personnel violate international humanitarian law and undermine nuclear safety.
Repeated Russian attacks on Ukraine energy infrastructure have resulted in losses of offside power, significantly increasing the risk of nuclear accident with catastrophic consequences beyond Ukraine.
In this light, Lithuania considers that the current wording in the outcome document regarding the NPP does not adequately reflect the situation and should be strengthened.
I would like to reaffirm the importance of the EIA Director's General seven indispensable pillars for ensuring nuclear safety and security during an armed conflict and five concrete principles for nuclear safety and security as illegally says NPP and welcome the inclusion in the draft text.
I will outline suggestions in respect of NPP.
First, responsibility must be clearly attributed in the text.
The grave situation of the ZMPP is the direct result of Russia's illegal occupation, its militarization of the plant, and its continued attacks.
Second, there must be no ambiguity in the outcome document.
The ZMPP is a Ukrainian facility and must be returned to the full control of Ukraine's competent authorities.
This should be clearly indicated in the document.
Third, we also need to be clear that any future restart of the reactors can only be considered once full safety and security conditions are restored and the facilities returned to the legitimate control and oversight of the Ukraine's regulatory authority.
In addition, the outcome document should recall the 40th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster and expressed concern about the damage to the new safe confinement resulting from Russia military strikes.
Mr.
Chair, we also emphasize that export controls are an important tool to ensure that nuclear cooperation and the transfer of sensitive technologies support exclusively the peaceful use of nuclear energy in accordance with NPT, while not hindering the iniable right of state parties to develop and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
We believe this should be clearly reflected in the outcome document.
I thank you, Mr.
Chair.
I thank the distinguished representative of Lithuania for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of China, followed by Malaysia.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Chair.
In recent discussions over the past few days, all participating parties have reaffirmed the right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy, underscored their support for the IAEA in playing its central role and promoted the application of nuclear energy and nuclear technology in areas such as electricity generation, energy, agriculture, medicine, environmental protection, and water security in order to accelerate progress towards sustainable development.
China fully agrees with this.
And we actively advocate the vision of atoms for the benefit of global sous.
In recent years, China has become the second largest contributor to the IAEA Technical Corporation Fund.
It has opened and shared with international community 12 large scale nuclear research facilities and experimental platforms involving nuclear fusion, research, medical, isotop production, and radioactive waste management.
China has received over 6,000 scholars from other countries for short term training programs.
Through the Chinese government Atomic Energy Scholarship Program, China has supported 400 students from 46 developing countries to pursue masters or doctoral degrees in nuclear energy and nuclear technology in China.
By taking such concrete actions, we are advancing the nuclear energy development in the global South.
China stands ready to work with all parties to build an open and non discriminatory international environment for nuclear science and technology development and to strengthen cooperation in John In general research, in light of the divisions of responsibilities of MC three, China puts forth the following proposed amendments to the paragraphs of the peaceful uses.
First, we propose that the preamble part emphasize that the peaceful uses of nuclear energy comes to an enable right of states parties NPT and stress the importance of international cooperation in peaceful uses, including advancing north south, south south, and triangular cooperation.
We call upon all parties to scale up efforts to implement the 2030 agenda.
Second, we propose that the language be added in the preamble or relevant operative paragraphs to reflect a balanced approach between nuclear proliferation and peaceful uses.
We stress that any measure aimed at preventing nuclear proliferation shall not impede or undermine the legitimate rights of all states, particularly developing countries to the peaceful uses.
We oppose under the pretext of non proliferation, unreasonable restrictions being imposed on developing countries, and we call upon relevant parties to abandon double standards and cease the indiscriminate application of unilateral sanctions and so called long arm jurisdiction and other improper restrictions.
Third, against the backdrop of revival of nuclear energy and accelerated application of nuclear technology, strengthening nuclear safety and security bears directly on the survival and development of all humanity.
Efforts should be made to prevent nuclear accidents and disasters, including by guarding against and controlling the potential transboundary impacts, we propose to include the following language.
Reaffirm including the indispensability of the importance of international cooperation in nuclear energy.
And all countries should be in a transparent and in cooperation with all the countries and and should reduce the impacts from the transboundary accidents and disasters.
China will provide written proposals of amendment and we will help you with your work.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of China for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Malaysia, followed by Austria.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
Malasia thanks the President for the early circulation of the zero draft and welcomes the inclusion of paragraphs 23 to 22 45 on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
MSA views this section as essential to preserving the balance of the treaty and to maintain confidence in the NPTs grand bargain, particularly for developing countries.
We are broadly supportive of the text and offer the following suggestions in a constructive spirit to strengthen clarity, implementability, and consensus appeal.
First, Maliia strongly supports paragraphs 23 and 24, which reaffirmed the inalienable right to peaceful users without discrimination and call for eliminating undue constraints inconsistent with the treaty.
Maia suggests adding language that peaceful cooperation should be implemented in an open, transparent, and objective manner and should not be subject to political conditionalities that have the effect of discouraging legitimate cooperation.
MSA welcomes second, MSA welcomes the strong development framing in paragraphs 25 to 31, including the call for preferential attention to the needs of developing countries and these developed countries and the emphasis on bridging the nuclear science and technology gap through capacity building and regional cooperation.
MASH also supports the explicit recognition of the IAEA technical cooperation Program as a key enabler and suggests the text could further encourage better coordination between IAEA programs and relevant development partners where appropriate to scale impact while respecting national ownership.
Third, Malasia notes paragraph 32 for recognizing the IAEA Director General's flagship initiatives as tangible community facic avenues that demonstrate the real world value of Article 4 implementation.
Fourth, MSH strongly supports paragraph 33 and 34 on ensuring that resources for technical cooperation are sufficient, assured, and predictable, including through extra budgetary contributions and the peaceful users Initiative.
Masi would welcome language that encourages shared responsibility true timely payment and sustained support to the technical cooperation Fund to enhance planning certainty and continuity of delivery, particularly for developing countries.
Fifth, MSA supports paragraphs 38 to 41 on nuclear safety, nuclear security, and safeguards as essential conditions accompanying any development of nuclear energy, including advanced reactors and SMRs.
MSA views this as a balanced formulation that protects Article 4 rights while safeguarding the treaty nonproliferation objectives.
We also welcome references to IAEA standardization efforts as this can reduce duplication, build confidence, and support cross border cooperation.
Mr.
Chair, MSHA offers these suggestions to strengthen the peaceful user section as a practical balance and development oriented pillar of the zero draft.
We stand ready to work constructively with all states parties to refine the text in a manner that safeguards non discrimination, supports IAEA technical cooperation, strengthens safety and safeguards and preserves the credibility of the NPT as a whole.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Malaysia for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is to distinguish the representative of Austria, followed by the Islamic Republic of Iran.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Monsieur President.
Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
At the outset, I would like to reiterate Austria's full support for the work you're conducting.
We welcome the zero draft of the outcome document, which forms a robust basis for our negotiations.
We submitted our written comments to the chairmanship and we'll continue to work on pillar three cluster three issues.
I'd like to make the following remarks today on nuclear safety and security.
First of all, a notion that refers to the principle of appropriate priority given to safety and security needs to be introduced in PP 13 and also in paragraph 23, in particular, against the same backdrop of nuclear safety, we support the comments made by France with a view to to ensuring we mention the instruments linked to civil liability for nuclear safety.
Second, notions in the text pertaining to attacks on nuclear facilities.
Paragraph 42, we believe this is an issue of growing interest, not only due to existing armed conflicts, a number of delegations mentioned, which are undermining nuclear safety and security, but beyond that, due to Deployments which are announced or already underway at nuclear facilities all over the world.
This means that the risk of nuclear safety and security being undermined continues to grow and these facilities developed for peaceful purposes.
This risk could grow in future in armed conflicts.
Austria and other co signatories developed the rationale for this in working paper number 55.
Thus, Austria proposes that we strengthen paragraph 42 by introducing a specific reference to international humanitarian law, as well as to the relevant provisions of the Geneva Conventions.
For instance, action 64 of the 2010 plan is also something worth mentioning.
Next, paragraphs 44 and 45, as a number of delegations have already said, we believe it's necessary to clarify the situation surrounding Ukraine in these paragraphs.
First of all, we need to mention the occupation of the Z NPP.
That's first.
Second, we need to clarify the fact that the nuclear safety and security in Ukraine is being undermined due to an external cause that is the war waged by the Russian Federation on Ukraine.
Fourth, a number of delegations spoke to the risks linked to emerging technologies, risks for nuclear disarmament, nuclear nonproliferation and nuclear safety and security.
We encourage further consideration of AI risks, the risks posed by AI for nuclear safety, in particular, the fact that malicious actors could use AI to compromise the nuclear safety of facilities.
We need to take measures to prevent being affected by cybersecurity risks thrown up by AI and we submitted language on this in writing.
Next on peaceful uses, in particular, growing demand and new initiatives.
Here, we support South Africa's comments Regarding changes to the wording of paragraph 27 and para, 32 new initiatives.
Last but not least, we wish to express our support for the proposals made by a number of delegations.
The aim being to strengthen the text so that it appropriately highlights the role played by women in nuclear safety and security.
I thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Austria for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran, followed by El Salvador.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
In follow up to my previous intervention and our proposals, I'm happy to share with you and other colleagues further proposals with regard to the rest of the document under the section under the purview of this main committee, starting with paragraph 34, and we believe that given the current imbalance between allocation of the resources for safeguards implementation as well as the resources for international cooperation.
We believe that this course should be reversed and therefore the state parties should be urged, in fact, to make all attempts to ensure that the resources for international cooperation would be sufficient.
We see references to, as I mentioned, on negotiated programs initiated by Director General of the IAEA in paragraph 36 and 40, 42 and 43, we believe that all those references should be deleted and in line with our principal position that the inalienable right to peaceful use of nuclear energy should not be restricted in any way.
We believe that on paragraph 37, there is a linkage between enjoying this inalieable right with the implementation of safeguards and we believe that that reference, meaning application of safeguards should be deleted.
We believe that paragraph 44 on Ukraine also should be deleted.
And finally, paragraph 82, as we have explained, the treaty content and provision with regard to the right to withdrawal from the treaty is absolutely clear and there's no need for further interpretation of application of that right.
Therefore, we believe that as there is no reference to the notions expressed in paragraph 82, this paragraph should be deleted.
Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
I thank the distinguished representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of El Salvador.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chair.
El Salvador would like to thank the chair once again for circulating this draft in a timely manner for consideration by states parties.
We feel that this contributes to transparency and an orderly substantive discussion.
In El Salvador's opinion, the issues under committee three and the subsidiary body cover important issues.
However, as we've stated previously during this conference, the unequal implementation of the pillars of the treaty continues to create structural imbalances in the treaty that need to be corrected in order to preserve the credibility and sustainability of the NPT.
In that regard, we'd like to reiterate the importance of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
In conformity with the provisions of the treaty and in particular to support economic and social development of states parties, including areas such as health, agriculture, food safety, water resources and scientific research.
As we've pointed out in the main committee to, we recognize the central role of the IAEA in promoting the peaceful applications of nuclear energy and in providing technical assistance to states parties.
We think that the IAEA plays an indispensable role, not just as a guarantor of the international safeguards system, but also as a fundamental platform for international cooperation, transfer of technology, and strengthening national capacities, particularly for countries for developing countries.
Here we positively welcome the language in paragraph 28 relating to the role of other interested parties in promoting nuclear science and technology for peaceful purposes.
We think it's important that these initiatives continue to be developed in coordination with the IAEA, fully respecting the principles of the treaty.
Also, as was stated by other delegations, we support robust language when it comes to technical cooperation, capacity building, and international assistance, particularly to ensure that all states parties are able to benefit equally from the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
In this regard, we feel it's important to recognize the role of the technical cooperation department of the IAEA and the need to strengthen its resources and institutional capacities to respond to the increasing demand for technical and programmatic information.
We also would add our country to those countries that have expressed the need to stress the role of women in the area of research, education, and nuclear management.
Thank you very much.
I thank the distinguished representative of El Salvador for her statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Costa Rica, followed by Mexico.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chair for giving me the floor.
We thank you for leading this process, and we're happy to have this dialogue on the outcome document of the conference.
In addition to the comments that we've already made in this committee, we'd like to recall that the final rev com draft for 2022 had more robust language on youth participation, civil society, academia, and communities affected their participation.
Um, that was in paragraph various paragraphs of the action section.
We feel that that language should be used here with regard to the significant involvement of women in all aspects of the implementation of the treaty.
This is a cross cutting issue that should be recognized in the final document.
Rev com 2022 referred to this in paragraph 37 with regard to nonproliferation and safeguards and in paragraph 54 and paragraph 51 of the action section with regard to the implementation.
And equality between men and women in the area of nonproliferation disarmment and the review process of this conference is language that we could use from previous processes in order to strengthen the final document of this conference.
Thank you very much.
I thank the distinguished representative of Costa Rica for his statement.
The next speaker on my list is the distinguished representative of Mexico.
You have the floor, Excellency.
Thank you, Chair.
Mexico would like to make a brief comment with regard to operative paragraph 42.
Oops.
On attacks and threats against nuclear facilities, Mexico believes that inviolability is not the best term.
The protection that nuclear facilities benefit from is undeniable, and this is in line with customary law and international humanitarian law, principally the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution during armed conflicts and in that regard, we will be sending in a proposal to make this paragraph more in line with international law.
Thank you.
I thank the distinguished representative of Mexico for his statement.
Is there any delegation wishing to request for the floor? This concludes my list of speakers for this meeting.
The meeting is adjourned.