Mr. Chair,

Over the past year, China has actively advocated the inter-governmental discussion process on the AUKUS issue. The process has witnessed a series of important progress. Member States have further enhanced their awareness and understanding of the complexity and sensitivity of the AUKUS issue. More delegations chose to participate in the discussion. The AUKUS partners also adopted a more positive attitude to interact with other Member States. The Permanent Mission of China in Vienna has hosted two workshops on AUKUS at the VIC. Four side events related to AUKUS happened during the NPT review process. The AUKUS issue has been thoroughly discussed by the Board sessions and the General Conference of the IAEA. More positions, propositions and concerns have been expressed.

If we review broadly the intergovernmental discussion process mentioned above, we can see that the Member States have both important consensus and clear differences on AUKUS. On the one hand, all parties, including the AUKUS partners generally believe that we should firmly commit to preserving the NPT regime and the IAEA safeguards system, so that AUKUS cooperation should not have a negative impact on the NPT and the IAEA. On the other hand, significant differences remain among Member States. First, on the nature of AUKUS, the AUKUS partners have their own views, while other Member States hold different views. Second, on how the IAEA should deal with AUKUS, Australia intends to negotiate the relevant safeguards arrangement with the IAEA Secretariat alone, while others, including China, have called for the issue to be discussed among the IAEA Member States.

Mr. Chair, dear colleagues,

Further analysis of the differences among the parties shows that the main questions lie in the following:

First, is AUKUS just a issue between individual Member State and the IAEA Secretariat? My answer is 'No'. AUKUS safeguards break through the boundaries of IAEA's traditional safeguards practices and models, and will certainly bring safeguards to new territories and uncharted waters, and set a significant model and precedent. AUKUS is not an issue between China and the AUKUS partners, nor can it be handled and resolved by Australia and the Secretariat. Rather, it is an issue between the AUKUS partners and other IAEA Member States. The IAEA Member States and the Secretariat share the common responsibility for the improvement and development of safeguards and need to explore a way forward through multilateralism rather than unilateralism.

Second, is there consensus among IAEA Member States on the AUKUS issue? My answer is 'Not yet'. AUKUS involves many complex issues. Different Member States have different views, propositions and demands based on their own understanding, interests and concerns. This is a reality that all of us must face up to.

Whether AUKUS is nuclear proliferation or non-proliferation, the AUKUS partners and other Member States hold different opinions and positions. China regards this cooperation as a text book case of nuclear proliferation. If any country can, for geopolitical or great-power competition purposes, engage in nuclear cooperation with military allies that involves the transfer of tons of weapons-grade highly enriched uranium (HEU) and breaks the traditional boundaries of IAEA safeguards, the NPT regime will become chaotic. Such cooperation has obviously not been clearly defined in Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement Article 14. AUKUS will certainly set a significant precedent, and many Member States have raised their own concerns.

We attach importance to and respect the non-proliferation commitments made by the US, the UK and Australia on the transfer of HEU involved in AUKUS. However, the essence of discussing the AUKUS issue within the IAEA framework does not lie in the one or two commitments made by the countries concerned, but rather in how we are viewing and handling the AUKUS-related precedents, models and standards.These issues have to be further explored and thoroughly discussed within the IAEA Member States.

Third, is it necessary to continue the intergovernmental discussion? My answer is 'Of course'. The improvement, development and practice of the IAEA safeguards mechanism have always been based on universal participation, joint promotion and consensual endorsement among Member States. If this tradition is challenged or even undermined, leading to the division of Member States, it will have an immeasurable and far-reaching impact on the IAEA's comprehensive safeguards mechanism. No one can afford such a historical responsibility, and the US, the UK and Australia should think twice before acting. According to the US, the UK and Australia, AUKUS nuclear submarine cooperation will be a long-term process lasting more than 20 years, and the intergovernmental discussion on this issue will certainly last long, so there is no need to rush to conclusions, since it is unlikely that a consensus will be reached overnight.

Fourth, what role should the IAEA Secretariat play on the AUKUS issue? This question has raised another, more profound question among Member States: Who is the Agency? The IAEA is an intergovernmental organization led by Member States to fulfill its non-proliferation mandate, and the IAEA Secretariat is the functional organ that implements the joint decisions of Member States as well as the safeguards arrangements. China, like other Member States, supports the Secretariat in carrying out its mandate in accordance with the Statute. We also believe that on such a complex and sensitive issue as AUKUS, with divergent views and concerns among Member States, the Secretariat should pay full attention and carefully listen to the views of other Member States in the same way as it attaches importance to the appeals and views of Australia, the US and the UK, and work with all the interested parties to properly address the AUKUS issue. 

We hope that the Director-General's next report on AUKUS will also objectively reflect the discussions among Member States on this issue as well as different concerns and opinions expressed over the past year.

Mr. Chair, dear colleagues,

As for the way forward for the intergovernmental discussion process, China maintains that in order to ensure the relevant discussion process is meaningful, sustainable and truly effective, we need to jointly clarify the attitude and atmosphere for the discussion. Only by upholding true multilateralism, mutual respect and equal dialogue can discussions be meaningful. Forcing Member States to take sides and imposing one's own views upon others will only poison the atmosphere of discussion and even cause division among Member States. China calls on all IAEA Member States to remain committed to the NPT regime and the IAEA safeguards system, jointly oppose bloc politics and side-taking, and resolutely prevent division of Member States on issues like this.

China calls on IAEA Member States and the Secretariat to view and attach importance to the AUKUS issue from the perspective of international and regional security and stability, in particular the integrity, effectiveness, authority and universality of the NPT and IAEA regime. I would like to emphasize once again that the intergovernmental discussion process that China actively advocates and promotes is not an exclusive "parallel mechanism", let alone the so-called dissemination of "disinformation", but the most open and inclusive democratic process open to all IAEA Member States. All parties should participate in the discussion process responsibly, with mutual respect and in a constructive manner. Let us uphold the principles of openness, transparency, mutual respect and the "Vienna Spirit", take a responsible attitude towards history, and steadfastly promote an open, inclusive and sustainable intergovernmental discussion process to properly address new practice and new challenge in IAEA safeguards posed by AUKUS.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.