On September 15th local time, the International Atomic Energy Agency Council specifically discussed the cooperation issue of the United States, Britain and Australia nuclear submarine . This is the fourth time that the member states of the organization have agreed to discuss in the form of separate formal issues, which has thwarted the US, Britain and Australia's attempt to force the "contract approval". At the meeting, China recorded the "seven major issues" of nuclear submarine cooperation between the United States, Britain and Australia, and made public the dangerous behaviors and evidence of their reversal nuclear proliferation with reasonable and well-founded evidence, which was widely echoed by the member states of the organization.
On the same day a year ago, the United States, Britain and Australia insisted on forming a small circle of "Auscus" despite opposition from the world. The core plan is that the United States and Britain will assist Australia in building at least 8 nuclear submarines. For this reason, the Australian side tore up the contract with France worth 90 billion Australian dollars, and was denounced by the French as "bentangered" and "a liar".
Over the past year, the cooperation between the United States, Britain and Australia nuclear submarines has been strongly condemned and opposed by the international community. Many analysts pointed out that the transfer of nuclear weapons materials involved in the cooperation between the three countries is essentially nuclear proliferation and poses a major threat to global security. Bem, director of the International and Security Affairs Program at the Australian Institute, believes that in the long run, Ocus "may increase the risk of nuclear war ." Melaku, a senior researcher at the Ethiopian Institute of Strategic Studies, compared the cooperation between three countries' nuclear submarines to "opening a new 'Pandora's box'", pointing out that this will stimulate some countries to engage in a nuclear arms race and ultimately stir up the security situation in the entire region.
The United States, Britain and Australia are both parties to the " Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons ". They should fulfill their non-proliferation obligations. Nuclear submarine cooperation must be authorized by the International Atomic Energy Agency member states. Faced with the condemnation and opposition from the international community, the three countries ignored deaf ears and forced them to advance by any means. The "seven major issues" listed by China this time exposes their tricks and the essence of nuclear proliferation.
Overall, these problems are mainly divided into two categories. One is confusing the public and trying to downplay the "original sin" of nuclear proliferation by changing concepts; the other is political kidnapping, attempting to coerce the secretariat of the institution and use the institution's director-general to "whitewash".
First look at the first category. For example, at the 10th Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons held in August, the United States, Britain and Australia submitted the so-called "cooperation under the Ocus Partnership", trying to use the "navy power reactor" as an excuse to cover up the essence of nuclear proliferation, and package the illegal transfer of nuclear weapons materials into legal and harmless behavior, misleading the international community.
Let’s look at the second category. In order to force the "contract approval", the United States, Britain and Australia bypassed all members of the organization and negotiated with the organization's secretariat without authorization, attempting to coerce the secretariat to propose a safeguard and supervision plan to exempt the cooperation between the three countries of nuclear submarines, and then forced it to pass with its own votes in the board of directors. At the same time, the three countries also used the Director-General to issue one-sided misleading reports to endorse nuclear proliferation.
According to relevant treaties of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Secretariat and the Director-General should and should only act in accordance with the authorization of the member states. Things like the cooperation between the United States, Britain and Australia can only decide on the cooperation of nuclear submarines as sovereign states. Wang Qun, a permanent representative of China's United Nations and other international organizations in Vienna, gave an example in an interview recently: Just as banks cannot handle black money by themselves, they do not have this law enforcement ability, and of course they cannot "whitewash" black money of unknown origin. The United States, Britain and Australia started a new trend, but it was actually a division within the organization.
International Atomic Energy Agency Data map
Whether playing text games or doing secret operations, the United States, Britain and Australia cannot cover up the "original sin" of nuclear proliferation. An analysis report pointed out that the nuclear submarine reactors of the United States and Britain currently use weapons-grade highly enriched uranium with an abundance of more than 90%. The international community generally believes that the nuclear material they transfer to Australia will also be weapons-grade highly enriched uranium. According to international arms control experts, these transferred weapon-grade nuclear materials can be used to create up to 64 to 80 nuclear weapons. It can be seen that the cooperation between the United States, Britain and Australia is a blatant nuclear proliferation act, with a bad nature and serious harm.
At the same time, the "double standard" style of the small circles in the United States, Britain and Australia has also been strongly criticized by the international community. The American National Interest magazine recently published an article saying that the "Ocus" cooperation exposed Washington's double standard, that is, allowing Australia to obtain nuclear-powered submarines, but took a tough stance on the Iranian nuclear program. In addition, while emphasizing the "rules-based international order", the United States has successively withdrawn from major arms control treaties such as the Intermediate-Fuel Treaty and the Open Sky Treaty , which is blatantly violating the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Who are the disruptors of world peace and the disruptor of international rules? It's self-evident.
The world is turbulent today, and the risk of nuclear proliferation is rising. UN Secretary-General Guterres even issued a warning that there is only a "misunderstanding" or "misjudgment" between human beings and nuclear weapons destroy the world. Maintaining nuclear security is the common responsibility of all countries. The small circles in the United States, Britain and Australia are going against the trend and want to introduce "nuclear sharing" disaster into the Asia-Pacific region, and the international community will never sit idly by.
(International Sharp Commentary)
