General debate on all disarmament and international security agenda items
🇷🇺 Russian Federation, 🇰🇵 Democratic People's Republic of Korea, 🇮🇱 Israel, 🇺🇸 United States, 🇮🇷 Islamic Republic of Iran
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Earlier in this room, the Russian Federation exercised in right of reply. That remains relevant? However, we see some delegations continue to speculate against Russia. We invite on those delegations to see our previous ROS. We categorically reject the Western states' insinuations related to the situation surrounding the Zaborovsky in ZNPP. They are divorced from reality. Let us remind you the ZNPP is a Russian nuclear facility located under Russian jurisdiction following the Zaborovsky region becoming a constituent entity of the Russian Federation following the September 2022 referendum. Any pronouncements contradicting this reality and calling for a return of the ZNPP to Ukraine or to establishing control, international control over the ZNPP is uh tantamount to an attempt to infringe on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Russian Federation. We never deployed on the territory of the ZNPP military contingents nor military equipment intended for offensive action, as frequently groundlessly alleged by Western colleagues. The ZNPP has their only forces necessary to protect it from Ukrainian attacks, as well as addressing the potential consequences of such attacks. In contrast to Ukraine, which made a habit of attacking nuclear facilities, our country has never conducted such attacks. Over the last few months, Kiev has stepped up the intensity of strikes on the ZNPP in the city of Vinogoda, where personnel and their families reside, broadening the geography of Ukrainian diversions as well. We've seen Smolenskaya, Koskaya, Novovraneshkaya, ZNPP. Attacked by reckless provocations of Ukraine, we inform the IAEA about such incidents on a regular basis and in great detail, and this via the IAEA's information circulars. The latest refers to the Ukrainian Armed Forces uh conducting an attempt to conduct an attack on a UAV. Using a UAV on the Novoreshka Z N NPP on the 6th of October, the UAV was suppressed via radioelectronic warfare, hitting a cooling tower of Unit 6 of Vroneshka ZNPP and detonated on the 7th of October. Yet another plane type UAV was spotted 100 meters above Novovorineshka ZNPP. Such reckless actions by Kiev wouldn't be possible were it not for the constant political support provided to Ukraine by the West, hushing up Ukrainian provocations. Not calling a th the spade of spade. In essence that's tantamount to complicity with Kyiv. All of this imbues the Kyiv authorities with false hope for impunity, prompting them to engage in more ventures. With the convenance connivance of their Western backers, Ukraine is using the tactics of direct attacks on the largest NPP in Europe and other Russian nuclear sites. We are doing everything that's within our power to ensure effective and safe presence of IA experts at the ZNPP starting in the first of September 2022. The mechanism for rotations of experts via Russian territory is up and running. Thirty such rotations have taken place. Uh, the latest at the start of October. Such a decision was taken together with the IAA following unceasing attacks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. This is a decision we took with the IEA leadership. On our side, we will continue ensuring protection of Russian nuclear sites in such a way to stop Kiev and Western states from creating threats to their safe functioning.
Thanks, Mr. Chair, for giving me the floor. My delegation totally rejects the stereotyped and absurd arguments of the delegations like Ukraine, Australia, Czechia, Turkey, Hungary, Romania, and Croatia, who groundless groundlessly blamed the DPRK's sovereign rights and defensive measures. DPRK's position of nuclear weapons is the sovereign entitlement and right to defend itself from the nuclear threats of the US which have been lasting for several decades. We have become a nuclear state, and this was an inevitable choice we made at the crossroads of rise and fall of the state. The ever increasing physical deteriorant of DPRK has completely sapped the will of its enemy states to unleash a war and ensure the balance of strength in the region. Today's reality testifies that the DPRK's painstaking efforts to speed up the accumulation of physical strength without interruption are entirely justifiable. DPRK enshrined the nuclear possession in its supreme law as sacred and absolute, which cannot be affected or amended in any case. The fact that the DPRK is possessed of nuclear weapons will remain permanently as it is, whether those member states like it or not. And however ardently they call for denuclearization, we will never lay down our nukes. DPRK will invariably, firmly, and without the slightest deviation defend its constitution and the basic law on the nuclear force policy and thoroughly safeguard the supreme interests of its people. Mr. Chair, as stated before several times, the friendly tie between the DPRK and Russian Federation. is just and legal. I thank you, mister Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. My delegation wishes to take the floor to comment on the statements by some delegations today. Today is a profoundly moving day in Israel, a day of hugs and hope. There have been two long years of war, a war we did not initiate it, but we had to fight to make sure that Gaza will never again pose a threat to the Israeli population. A war prolonged unnecessarily because of a terrorist organization that cowardly entrenched itself among the Gaza population defending its tyranny on their expense, instead of returning the hostages and laying down its arms as any terrorist organization should. Chair Delegates, just recently an internal document handwritten by the Hamas chief Ihiya Sinwar has been exposed to remind Sinwar a mega terrorist with blood on his hands from multiple nationalities, not just Israeli. In this document which Signor wrote in preparation to October 7 in the Hamas invasion, one can find the following instructions. I quote Things are to be carried out deliberately. Stepping on the heads of soldiers, pointing black shootings, slaughtering people with knives. Preparations must be made for two or three operations whose objective is to burn entire neighborhoods, ekibuts and so on. The plus the place will be burned and the images will be broadcast. End of quote. The full document is easily accessed online. Mr. Chair, this is the terrorist organization Israel has been fighting during the last two years. It is time that Hamas and its supporters be held responsible for the actions and decisions, for using the population as human shields, for denying civilians the possibility to move to safe areas, for withholding humanitarian aid in Gaza from Gaza citizens to maintain power. For wasting the world's aid to build terror tunnels, for using civilian infrastructure to launch rockets at our cities and then hiding among the most vulnerable. And for committing the worst program since Holocaust. Hamas, as we speak now, is executing people in front of a crowd in Gaza. You can check that. Hamas has to step down and submit its arms so the security of Israel and the region will not be threatened again. It is the international community's duty to ensure Hamas will comply. Dear colleagues, today is a time of rejoicing and embrace that was broken for two years between hostages and their families. The October 7th massacre, meticulously crafted by Hamas chiefs to terrorize us, has ultimately made us stronger. We hope that the implementation of President Trump's plan will open the door for further progress toward a more secure and prosperous Middle East. We are ready to foster the Abrahama Accords that Hamas and Iran tried to blow on October 7th. But we will never forget october seventh. Israel will continue to exercise its right to defend itself and its duty to ensure that Gaza can never again threaten our population. I thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Chair. I would like to respond to several inaccurate and misleading statements during the general debate regarding U.S. extended deterrence, defense spending and force modernization, and conventional weapons deployments. The United States has long worked to advance global nonproliferation objectives and prevent additional states from acquiring nuclear weapons. In the face of growing threats, U.S. extended deterrence arrangements have successfully reassured allies that they can remain secure without acquiring nuclear weapons of their own and contributed to the preservation of regional stability and the prevention of nuclear war. Core goals we all share. The strategic nuclear forces of the NATO alliance, and particularly those of the United States, are the supreme guarantee of NATO's security. NATO's nuclear burden sharing arrangements have always been fully consistent with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, including throughout its indefinite extension. The United States maintains full custody and control of its nuclear weapons wherever they are, in full conformity with Articles 1 and 2. While we consult with our allies about matters of security and defense, no NATO allies or otherwise ever have control over U.S. nuclear weapons. Our further extended deterrence consultation mechanisms with the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Australia are a critical pillar in a broader strategy designed to preserve peace, deter conflict, and ensure a free and open Indo Pacific. Turning to defense investments and forced modernization, maintaining a safe, secure, reliable, and effective nuclear deterrent to defend our homeland and our allies remains a top priority. We readily acknowledge and are transparent about the modernization of our nuclear forces. These efforts stand in stark contrast to some nuclear weapons states' non transparent expansion of their arsenals, open threats to use nuclear weapons, and development of novel weapons, which we will address during the nuclear cluster. Chair, two states have accused the United States of increasing the risk of escalation. One even said the United States might launch a nuclear war. This is a preposterous fiction. It is the United States that has remained committed to our arms control obligations and repeatedly called for these two states' serious engagement in arms control negotiations. The United States also has a long standing track record of taking concrete actions to reduce nuclear risk and avoid miscalculation that could lead to a nuclear war. With the highest nuclear safety and security standards in the world, the United States has taken numerous steps to ensure nuclear weapons are never employed accidentally. Since the end of the Cold War, U.S. strategic bomber forces have been de-alerted, which is to say they are not loaded with nuclear weapons day to day. In addition, all of our intercontinental ballistic missile systems and submarine launched ballistic missiles have been detargeted to ensure, in the extremely unlikely event of an accidental launch, that they could not strike another country. Forces on day to day alert are subject to multiple layers of control. And the United States retains rigorous procedural and technical safeguards to prevent misinformed, accidental, or unauthorized launch. Chair, it is concrete measures like these and others, such as ballistic missile launch notifications and the use of secure communication centers, that build the confidence and trust that is so lacking in the current environment and demonstrate my country's commitment to a safer world. On references to the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, one country's rebuff of six years of U.S. efforts seeking a return to compliance with that treaty, after that country produced, tested, and deployed a ground launched intermediate range cruise missile in direct violation of that treaty caused its demise. As for the specific allegation about U.S. deployments of medium and intermediate range missiles, the deployments of U.S. long range fires are conventional, not nuclear, in nature, and align perfectly with our goal of enhancing NATO's collective defense, our strategy of deterring aggression in Europe, and our alliances and security arrangements in the Indo Pacific. At the same time, another nuclear weapon state has deployed such systems in significant quantities across the Indo-Pacific for decades, and including intermediate range ballistic missiles that are capable of carrying both nuclear and conventional payloads. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you Mr Chair. It is observed that the representative of the Israeli regime, rather than providing a proper and convincing response to the serious concerns raised by many delegations, including some of its close allies, about its crimes and genocide in Gaza over the past two years, has chosen to distort reality and resort to a disinformation campaign against Iran and Palestinian resistance groups. The Israeli regime and some of its Western partners have consistently sought to mislabel legitimate resistance groups in the region as terrorists. Let us be clear according to the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46 51, these groups are not terrorists. They are legitimate resistance movements, fighting against occupation, apartheid, aggression, and genocide in the Palestinian and other occupied territories. International law explicitly recognizes the right of peoples to resist foreign occupation and defend themselves against aggression. The real terrorists are those who killed more than 200,000 innocent people, bomb hospitals and schools, massacre civilians, and violate international law with impunity. Mr. Chair, distinguished colleagues, when assessing any conflict involving occupation and resistance, we must ask a fundamental question. When a population is under foreign occupation, do the occupied not have the right to resist? History offers countless examples of oppressed people rising against occupiers in pursuit of freedom and self determination. In the case of Palestine, it is the Israeli regime that is the occupying power and the Palestinians who are resisting, not the other way around. History did not begin on October 7th. Yet the Israeli regime continues to isolate specific actions from the broader historical and political context, one marked by decades of occupation, systematic violence, massacre, apartheid, and genocide against the Palestinian people. To truly understand the present moment, we must place it within the long trajectory of Palestinian experience, a history of dispossession, resistance, and resilience spanning nearly 80 years. Without that context, our understanding of this conflict will remain shallow and distorted. I thank you, Mr. Chair.
Verbatim from the transcript. A reply is identified from its own words, the Chair's grant, or its place in the right-of-reply sequence; delegations and addressees follow the transcript's attribution.