Addressing a conference on nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in New York on Tuesday, the Iranian delegation called for increased measures in a bid to prevent further non-compliance of the industrial States parties, with undertakings under Article IV.
The Iranian delegation in its statement also called for creating a balance between rights and obligations of the member states according to the NPT.
Here is presented the full text of the Iranian delegation's statement to the Preparatory Committee of the NPT 2010 Review Conference:
I would like to begin by associating my delegation with the statement already delivered by the distinguished representative of Indonesia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement under this cluster.
"To establish a balance between security concerns and the socio-economic requirements for development, especially for developing countries, Article IV of the Treaty guarantees "the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear
energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty" and provides for an undertaking by all parties to the Treaty "to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy".
"This Article also plays a crucial role as the main incentive set forth to encourage non-nuclear-weapon States to join the Treaty and thereby foster the non-proliferation regime.
"This main pillar of the NPT has been underscored in light of the increasing need of the world to nuclear energy in the third millennium. We have recently witnessed this promising trend in our region. We welcome the new initiatives of our brotherly neighbors to move toward the peaceful
application of nuclear energy. This trend confirms once again the long-standing position of Iran concerning the need for diversifying the energy resources in order to guarantee our future
"The inalienable right of all States parties to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes without discrimination indeed constitutes the very foundation of the Treaty. This inalienable right in itself emanates from two broader propositions. First, scientific and technological achievements are the common heritage of humanity. The second general proposition is the requisite balance between rights and obligations, which is the basis of any sound legal instrument. This balance guarantees the longevity of the legal regime by providing incentives for membership.
"Article III, while providing for the undertaking by each non-nuclear-weapon State to conclude safeguards agreements with IAEA, is equally explicit in articulating that the implementation of such safeguards shall be "in a manner designed to comply with Article IV of this Treaty, and to avoid hampering the economic or technological development of the Parties or international cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities, including the international exchange of nuclear material and equipment for the processing". This notion was duly noted in the final document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference when considering that "the strengthening of the IAEA safeguards should not adversely affect the resources available for technical assistance and cooperation. The allocation of resources should take into account all of the Agency's Statutory
functions, including that of encouraging and assisting the development and practical application of atomic energy for peaceful uses with adequate technology transfer."
"Given the importance of the peaceful applications of nuclear energy and nuclear technologies for human health, agriculture, environmental protection and sustainable economic development, especially in developing countries, the Statute of IAEA recognizes its role in encouraging and
assisting "research on, and development and practical application of, atomic energy for peaceful uses throughout the world" and fostering "the exchange of scientific and technical information on peaceful uses of atomic energy".
In spite of the emphasis of the NPT on this pillar for promotion of nuclear science and technology, the international community has witnessed a contrary trend to limit the access of non-nuclear weapon states to peaceful nuclear technology. Establishment of exclusive, non-transparent
export control groups like NSG to impose further restrictions under the excuses of strengthening the non-proliferation regime are examples of this trend in contravention to the NPT. The instrumental use of UN Security Council in order to impose illegal and irrational policies, calling
punitive measures such as "Sanctions" as a new type of "Multilateral Diplomacy" is the ugliest phenomena of these years creating the worst image of multilateralism. The other serious concern is referring to notion of "Dual Use" nature of some nuclear materials or equipments in order to further restrict developing countries. Political motivations aiming at neglecting the technical criteria defined in relevant documents such as the Safeguards Agreement and its appendixes, and imposing arbitrary list of items of parallel export regimes have created serious difficulties and further undermined the NPT and the IAEA.
"The last but not the least is the attempt of few Western countries to create another new notion of "Reading intentions" of State Parties for peaceful or non-peaceful objectives! I recall the responsible reaction of the Director General of the IAEA to this notion to the effect that the Agency has not any verification mechanism to measure the intention of Member States! This
notion is in contravention with Sovereignty of States and
undoubtedly creates mistrust among States Parties.
By adopting restrictive decisions, the balance of rights and obligations of the States Parties would be disturbed, the existing discrimination and gap between haves and have-nots in the Treaty would be increased, and finally the very basis of the fundamental bargain of the NPT would be destroyed.
"Furthermore, in recent years, unfortunately the fundamental role of IAEA in the promotion of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes has been increasingly undermined by shortcomings in resources and restrictions imposed by some States. Since the establishment of the IAEA, developing countries have continuously expressed serious concerns about the funding policy of
technical cooperation, based on voluntary contributions that are unpredictable, unsecured and subject to the political motivations of the donors. Safeguards activities are however funded from the regular budget.
"Such a discriminatory policy with respect to two pillars of the Agency's Statute and the NPT has to be changed. Donors impose their political conditions of technical projects of the IAEA.
Undue restrictions on the transfer of nuclear materials, equipment and technologies for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy should be swiftly removed. The application of unilaterally enforced export control regimes in contravention of the letter and the spirit of the Treaty has hampered the access of developing countries to nuclear materials, equipment and
technologies for peaceful purposes. It is essential to note the fact that, in the Agency's Statute and the NPT, as well as in the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement and even the most intrusive instrument, that is the Additional Protocol, there is no provision to prohibit or restrict nuclear fuel cycle activities. The Agency's function is merely to verify the declaration of Member States.
"In this context the unprecedented recent decision of NSG, an exclusive and non-transparent Group which claims to have been established to strengthen the non-proliferation regime, has severely damaged the NPT. The decision of this group which has been taken under political Pressure of a certain state is a clear violation of paragraph 2 of Article III and a violation of nuclear Weapon States commitment to promote the universality of the NPT.
"Such a decision is another manifestation of double-standards and discrimination in implementing the provisions of the Treaty.
"Given the above mentioned facts, measures need to be taken to ensure that the inalienable rights of all States parties under the provisions of the Preamble and Articles of the Treaty are all fully protected. No State party should be limited in exercising its rights under the Treaty based on
allegations of non-compliance. The inalienable rights of the States parties, as stipulated in the Treaty, cover all aspects of peaceful technologies and are not limited to specific areas. In this connection, the 2000 NPT Review Conference reiterated that "each country's choices and
decisions in the field of peaceful uses of nuclear energy should be respected without jeopardizing its policies or international cooperation agreements and arrangements for peaceful uses of nuclear energy and its fuel-cycle policies".
"Unfortunately, for the first time in the history of the IAEA, the promotional Statutory pillar of the Statute has been put in serious jeopardy through politically motivated decisions of the Security Council, which is trying to dictate to the Agency that, how and when to deprive a developing Member State of technical cooperation that is solely aimed at humanitarian and peaceful uses. The authority of the IAEA as the sole competent technical international organization for this issue has been seriously undermined.
"I recall that according the IAEA Statute and the Technical Cooperation guidelines "The technical cooperation and assistance provided by the IAEA in meeting the needs of its Member States for material, equipment and technology for peaceful use of nuclear energy shall not be
subject to any political, economic, military or other conditions incompatible with the provisions of its Statute".
"It should be once again reiterated that arbitrary and self-serving criteria and thresholds regarding proliferation-proof and proliferation-prone technologies can and will only undermine the Treaty. Iran, for its part, is determined to pursue all legal areas of nuclear technology, including fuel cycle, exclusively for peaceful purposes. In accordance with its national nuclear program, Iran is determined to produce 20,000 mw electricity by nuclear Power Plant in next 20 years, by both indigenous and foreign partnership. The Islamic Republic of Iran is of the view that, to strengthen the effectiveness and credibility of the Treaty and to put an end to the selective implementation of the articles of the Treaty, the NPT 2010 Review Conference and its preparatory committee should intensify their work in order to prevent further non-compliance of the industrial States parties, with undertakings under Article IV. To ensure the adoption of tangible measures to promote the implementation of the inalienable rights of all States parties, particularly the developing countries, to enjoy their established right under the Treaty to have full access to nuclear materials, technologies, equipment and scientific and technological information for peaceful purposes and, in doing so, preserve the delicate balance between the rights and obligations arising from the Treaty, any new division among the States parties and interpretations incompatible with the wording of the Treaty should be strictly avoided.
To this end, the industrialized nuclear States committing numerous breaches of their obligations which can in turn result in infliction of damages on a State Party. Some of the breaches and consequential damages are as follows:
"- Imposing Unnecessary Costs on the Agency,
-Violation of Article IV of the NPT by hampering peaceful nuclear activities of a State Party,
- Imposing measures beyond the existing legal commitments of a State party which can cause lots of human, financial and political damages,
- Breach of Article XI of the IAEA Statute on facilitating the technical cooperation projects,
- Involving the Security Council unlawfully,
- Interruption of technical cooperation of the Agency with a State Party while the *raison d'être* of the Agency is to help the Member States in this field,
- Damage to the authority and credibility of the Agency,
- Intellectual damages, particularly damage to reputation of a State Party.
"Given the above-mentioned points, this question arises that "who should compensate theses damages and how the compensation should be made?"
"Due to the importance of the issue and as no mechanism is designed under the NPT in this regard, the Islamic Republic of Iran proposes that this issue to be inserted on the agenda of the 2010 NPT Review Conference and a subsidiary body should be established to consider the issue and make recommendations on this subject.
Permit me to also touch upon nuclear fuel cycle:
1- There is no legally binding negotiated instrument for assurances of supply.
2- Iran is of the view that any proposal on nuclear fuel supply should not impose additional and extra restrictions on peaceful uses of nuclear science and technology, including nuclear fuel cycle of the States Parties. They shall be served just as arrangements to facilitate states to exercise their rights to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. My country believes that the IAEA Safeguards are the only universally accepted monitoring mechanism to prevent diversion of peaceful nuclear materials and equipments to non peaceful and prohibited applications. Any proposal which include criteria and obligations beyond those of the statutory obligation and Agency's Safeguards Agreements are subject to fail and shall be surely rejected by developing countries. Establishing additional nuclear fuel markets are to increase availability and competition further assisting
countries to have various options. It, by no means, shall restrict the sovereign right of Member States to choose and continue their own indigenous option for nuclear fuel production.
3- According to the Nuclear Non proliferation Treaty, all member states have "inalienable right to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes" and clearly this include every state, right to have national programs to plan and produce fuel for its own nuclear reactors. It is recalled that the Final Document of the NPT 2000 Review Conference strongly confirmed and emphasized that "all states choices and decisions in the field of peaceful uses of nuclear energy should be respected without jeopardizing their fuel cycle policies".
4- The Islamic Republic of Iran, while acknowledging that it is premature to discuss and take any decision on these proposals and it needs more time to consider their various political, economical, technical and legal aspects and concerns, is of the view that they will have serious
consequences on Member States' rights under Article IV of the NPT. So it is fundamental all proposals with respect to this issue should be consistent with IAEA statute and the NPT.
"Moreover, all discussions concerning proposals of fuel supply needs to be continued within the
IAEA General Conference and respective decisions should only be made by consensus.
In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that the implementation of the provisions of Article IV and compliance with the obligations of the nuclear technology owners, including the facilitation of
international cooperation should duly be verified and those countries who are responsible for the
violation of the Article IV provisions, should compensate the damages inflicted on the other States Parties, resulted from their actions. "