Since the announcement of AUKUS last September and the subsequent start of trilateral nuclear submarine cooperation, the three countries in this program, namely, Australia, United Kingdom and the United States of America,  have consistently refused to provide the obligatory reports to the Agency on the substantive progress of this cooperation. For this non compliance, they give the lame excuse that "no cooperation programme has been established".

The lack of information regarding any substantive progress on nuclear submarine cooperation under AUKUS has prevented the Director-General and the Secretariat from submitting substantive reports, as required, to the Board and from effectively fulfilling their reporting obligations under Article XII of the Statute. This is clearly aimed at preventing the Board from exercising its due and legitimate authority.

In this regard, the spokesperson of the Chinese permanent mission in Vienna gave the following views:

The AUKUS nuclear submarine cooperation adversely impacts upon global strategic stability, international security order, regional peace and stability as well as the global nuclear non-proliferation regime, and has many other broad and far-reaching negative repercussions. For this reason, it requires a political response from the international and regional security mechanisms.

At the same time, the Agency should respond to it in accordance with its responsibilities and mandate. The Director-General, in relevant reports, has already reminded and urged the three countries to fulfill their mandatory non-proliferation obligations. Neither the AUKUS agreement for the Exchange of Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information nor any other bilateral or trilateral arrangement should hinder the three countries as Agency members from fulfilling their legal obligations under the relevant CSA and AP.

The three countries claim to be the best students in non-proliferation and tout the openness and transparency in their nuclear submarine cooperation. The fact is that Australia repeatedly adopted an ostrich-like policy, by claiming that the cooperation is at an early stage and therefore there is nothing to report about. UK and US, on their part, while accusing some countries of failure to provide complete and correct information to the Agency, blatantly and directly encouraged Australia's refusal to implement its reporting obligations under its CSA and AP with the Agency. Such practice of saying one thing and doing something completely different will have disastrous repercussions for the international nuclear non-proliferation regime and hotspot issues such as the Iranian and Korean peninsula nuclear issues.  

Paper cannot wrap up fire. Those who play with fire are doomed to perish by it. China urges Australia as an NNWS under the NPT to fulfill in good faith its legal safeguards obligations and provide, as required by its CSA and AP, timely and comprehensive information to the Agency secretariat on the various phases of the trilateral nuclear sub cooperation and not become a "bad model of nuclear proliferation".