(August 2, 2024)

Mr. Chair,

The Chinese Delegation appreciates the tireless efforts made by you, your team and the Secretariat to promote substantive outcome of this session. The Chinese Delegation also noted the wish of the Chair to reflect the work of this session by a factual summary. We would like to thank you, Mr. Chair, for your efforts to seek consensus by taking on board the views of various States Parties and to conduct extensive consultation in this regard.

As you said at the beginning that your work is to make everyone unsatisfied and seek compromise. As far as our delegation is concerned, given the fundamental differences among States Parties, in particular the concerns expressed by some colleagues just now, it would be difficult to reach consensus on the Chair's summary at this stage, and there is still a distance before we can agree upon a comprehensive, balance and factual summary of the discussions on some substantive issues.

Mr. Chair,

We noticed that you have tried to describe the views by a quantitative qualification, including "States Parties", "some States Parties", "many States Parties", and "one State Party", et cetera. While we understand the very good intention on your part in doing so, we nevertheless believe that this may cause controversies as indicated by some colleagues just now. As a matter of fact, it is difficult to reflect accurately by such a quantitative reflection. For instance, in Paragraph 21, "one State Party encouraged the nuclear-weapon States to diminish the role of nuclear weapons in their national security policies, abandon the nuclear deterrence policy based on the first use of nuclear weapons". As a matter of fact, many States Parties made similar calls. It is just one example to testify that it is not very accurate to use a quantitative approach in describing the views of the States Parties.

Mr. Chair,

The Chinese Delegation has made statements at the general debate and cluster discussions of this session, and submitted four working paper which comprehensively reflect China's positions and propositions on the topics discussed during this session. While we thank Mr. Chair for taking on board the proposals by China, we still regret that some important views and propositions have not been duly reflected. Due to time limit, I would like to cite only a few examples. For instance, China stressed the nuclear disarmament must be based on the principle of "maintaining global strategic stability". In the latest draft, some adjustments are made to such proposition. In our statement and working paper, we repeatedly ask one State Party to abandon the development and deployment of global anti-missile defense system, and express our concern on AUKUS nuclear submarine cooperation which we advocated for an inter-government process to deal with. Regarding the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue, China stated its consistent position to explore effective ways to address the concerns of all parties in a balanced manner in accordance with the "dual-track" concept and the principle of a phased and synchronous approach. Regrettably, such propositions and views are not fully reflected in the current text.

In spite of the above-mentioned concerns, we nevertheless will adopt a constructive attitude to participate in the discussion and support your work, so that we can have a smooth ending of the session.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.