Dear Mr. Chairman,
We regret to note that some countries continue to exploit this agenda item on the application of IAEA safeguards in The DPRK, in its own political interests. The speeches made demonstrate the desire of the delegations to use the Agency’s technical platform for manipulations aimed solely at increasing pressure on the DPRK, and with it on Russia.
There has been no presence of Agency inspectors at North Korea’s nuclear facilities for a very long time. Without this, the IAEA cannot make any reliable conclusions about the state of the country’s nuclear infrastructure. In order to maintain operational readiness for a potential (although very unlikely at this stage) resumption of inspections, the Secretariat relies mainly on analysis of satellite images and information from open sources. We are skeptical about the conclusions that are drawn based only on this tool.
The Russian Federation does not intend to indulge the hackneyed practice of adopting annual resolutions of the IAEA General Conference. During the 68th session of the General Conference, our delegation did not join the consensus on another such document. We consider the text of the resolution inappropriate, inadequate and harmful.
We regret that the hackneyed approach of the co-authors has not changed in thirty years. We are convinced that the dialogue with the DPRK should be based on concrete and practical incentives to involve this country in negotiations, and not on threats and escalatory rhetoric. There is no practical sense in the ritual of listing endless claims against the DPRK. Every year, the resolution is imposed by interested countries, whose task is to point the finger at the DPRK and blame Pyongyang, and present themselves as supporters of peace on the Korean peninsula. In fact, it’s not like that at all.
Constantly talking about the readiness to resume dialogue with the DPRK, and allegedly “without preconditions,” the United States does not support this with any practical steps. On the contrary, the United States, together with Japan, and The Republic of Korea is increasing its military activity, including large–scale exercises with the openly declared goal of preparing for a confrontation, including with the nuclear component, with the DPRK.
The true intentions of the United States became apparent in April 2023 with the signing of the Washington Declaration with the Republic of Korea. The United States is once again moving closer to a non-nuclear-weapon State within the framework of the NPT and assigning it an unprecedented role in strategic planning and decision-making. Since the beginning of this year, the United States and its allies in the region have conducted a series of joint military exercises “Freedom Shield”, “Freedom’s Edge” and “Joint Air Exercises” (“Freedom Shield”, “Freedom Edge”, “Combined Air Exercise”) against the DPRK. US nuclear submarines entered South Korean ports, and a strategic bomber landed at one of the air bases of the Republic of Korea.
By their actions, the United States and its allies are actively increasing the military threat, creating additional tension in the region, which can lead to catastrophic consequences. It is precisely this irresponsible and confrontational policy of nuclear blackmail that pushes Pyongyang to possess nuclear weapons and stimulates the process of strengthening the DPRK’s nuclear forces as an element of deterrence. Under these conditions, it is quite logical that the term “denuclearization” has lost all meaning.
Unlike the United States and its allies, the DPRK refrains from truly aggressive actions in the nuclear field. In fact, Pyongyang still adheres to the moratorium on nuclear tests announced on April 21, 2018. And what did the DPRK get in return? Definitely not a relaxation in the sanctions regime. And, in fact, the formation of a hostile alliance around itself. It seems that the United States and its allies are deliberately provoking Pyongyang to take harsh and harsh steps.
Recall that the UN Security Council resolutions on the DPRK contain a paragraph according to which The UN Security Council should be ready to strengthen, modify, suspend or cancel measures depending on the DPRK’s compliance with the established requirements. The fact that Western countries are blocking the possibility of easing sanctions in response to Pyongyang’s restraint in the nuclear sphere is a violation of the relevant provisions of UN Security Council resolutions.
A new element. On October 16, the United States, the Republic of Korea and Japan announced the launch of the “multilateral sanctions monitoring team”, which in addition to the aforementioned “troika” included a number of countries – Australia, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, Canada, the Netherlands, New Zealand, France. It is planned to endow this mechanism, created to replace the Group of Experts of the UN Security Council Committee 1718, which was dissolved in April, with supervisory functions for compliance with restrictive measures established by relevant UN Security Council resolutions regarding the DPRK.
The newly formed “multilateral group” is a completely illegitimate structure whose activities are aimed at serving the interests of Washington and its satellites.
The Group of Experts of the UN Security Council Committee 1718 was dissolved due to the absolute anti-Pyongyang bias of the majority of its members, which cast a shadow on the international authority of this subsidiary body of the Council and contributed to the deterioration of the situation around the Korean peninsula. Now, a self-educated group of states is trying to arbitrarily appropriate the powers of the UN Security Council and its subsidiary bodies. This initiative has a clear political charge and is aimed at exerting maximum pressure on the DPRK.
Any possible results of the planned mechanism’s activities have no legal force and should not be recognized by States that pursue an independent foreign policy. We believe that the irresponsible line of behavior of Western countries led by the United States in Northeast Asia, as well as their unjustified monitoring activity, is fraught with a further increase in the degree of tension and the creation of a serious threat to regional security.
We advocate a radical revision and lifting of the UN Security Council sanctions restrictions on the DPRK, which should give way to peaceful and honest diplomacy with solutions acceptable to all regional countries and taking into account their legitimate security interests.
As for Russian-North Korean cooperation and the accusations made here, we note that it is absolutely legitimate, does not violate international obligations and is not directed against anyone.
The same, however, cannot be said about the countries supplying Kiev needs weapons, including long-range ones, mercenaries and military advisers. All the facts of such cooperation are well known and are not hidden. Just a few days ago, there were reports that the United States allowed the Kiev regime to hit Russia with long-range ATACMS missiles. Interestingly, this was confirmed by the head of European diplomacy, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, J.Borrel. The corresponding blows have already been struck. This brings the situation to a qualitatively new level of escalation with extremely serious consequences.
In conclusion, we would like to return to the fact that this agenda item is being used by politically engaged countries for their own purposes. This does not correspond to the Council’s mandate and completely emasculates the essence of the discussion. In the absence of any application of IAEA safeguards in the DPRK, we consider it inappropriate to continue this fruitless conversation. In this regard, we propose to remove the issue from the agenda before the situation changes and save the Council time.
Thank you, dear Mr. Chairman.
