Success in the IAEA!

After some hard negotiations, the delegates of IAEA tried to find a compromise and merged different working papers so that the draft resolution 1.3 could be introduced to the house yesterday. The sponsors of the Resolution (Denmark, Germany, Philippines, Turkey, The United Kingdom, United States of America, and Ghana) saw it necessary  to promote higher nuclear security standards in different member states. The delegate of Turkey welcomed the establishment of a policy team, with different subsections located all over the world, which shall respond to any nuclear incidents. Russia supported Turkey´s position and was glad to realise that a compromise had been reached. During this morning´s debate Germany emphasised the close cooperation between Germany and Russia, while negotiating about the draft resolution. In the end no delegations wished to speak against the draft resolution. Before voting procedure an unmoderated caucus “Applying Band-Aid to the draft resolution” was introduced by the chairs, since some formatting was required. The voting process was subject to several motions, starting with a motion to vote clause by clause, brought forward by the delegate of the United Kingdom. Afterwards a motion to adopt the resolution by acclamation followed. Then Great Britain brought forward a further motion for a vote by roll call. In the end the delegates had to vote clause by clause, followed by the roll call vote. All clauses passed a number of them unanimously. In the end with 29 votes in favour and two against the resolution passed.


Tension Between Nuclear Safety and National Sovereignty in IAEA.

Shortly after the restart of IAEA´s session, the content of a draft resolution sponsored by Germany, Denmark, Costa Rica and Paraguay was topic of debate.  The draft referred to the Sustainable Development Goals and to the inadequate protection of nuclear power plants, which is lacking from their point of view.  The first main aim of the draft resolution is two provide information on nuclear security. Furthermore all countries are requested to follow the existing IAEA guidelines, when building new nuclear power plants. Last but not least the sponsors demand high standards in training for on-side personnel. During debate one could note the division of the committee, on the one side the sponsors, promoting nuclear security. On the other side mostly developing countries, being afraid of their state sovereignty, like India. The delegate of Switzerland tried to take a neutral position, so she tried to mediate in this area of tension.

Later a draft resolution, sponsored by Belarus, Ghana, Philippines, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, and United States of America was introduced. Main aims of this paper are expanding the budget of the Nuclear Infrastructure Development section and to make studying abroad a necessary requirement for future nuclear engineers. This draft resolution led to a heated debate. Especially Germany was opposed to the draft resolution. The delegate stated, natural disasters would not be mentioned in the draft resolution. As a consequence Great Britain pointed out, they were included in one of the operative clauses. Furthermore the Russian delegate told he had feared, that fake news are going to be spread, which was entirely happening. Paraguay stated her country had to be protected against nuclear disasters by the international community, so she encouraged all delegates to vote against any disruptive clauses. India stated her country would be unable to fulfil the list of proactive steps, while the delegate of the United Kingdom still defended the draft resolution.

How Do You Secure Nuclear Technology Against Natural Disasters? Ask The IAEA…

Shortly after IAEA´s session was opened, the delegate of Germany brought forward a motion in order to set the agenda. Germany desired to debate on topic A (Securing nuclear technology against natural disasters) first. A short debate followed, also including some points of orders correcting the chairs. Afterwards Germany´s motion passed with a clear majority.


During general speakers time on this topic, opinion differed somehow. Germany, Ghana and the USA demanded higher standards, so that disasters like the ultimate MCA in Fukushima, which was caused by a Tsunami, can be prevented in the future.  Russia also was aware of the necessity to secure nuclear power plants, but also emphasised that these kinds of power plants are a guarantee for energy security in developing countries. Denmark was concerned of the increasing number of natural disaster and required periodic improvements in training of on-side personal. In the following moderated caucus on topic of securing new plants, Ghana expressed its will to collaborate with the IAEA in building new plants, but also was concerned of new rules which might punish developing countries.