News Made Clear · Loading…
News Made Clear · Loading…
The Assembly backed the IAEA by 150 votes to two, but its chief said inspections must return to Iran and warned of continuing risks at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia plant.
Review information is loading.
The UN General Assembly adopted a resolution reaffirming support for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on 23 October, by 150 votes to two, with one abstention. The broad backing came as the agency’s chief called for inspectors to return to Iran and warned of continuing nuclear safety risks in Ukraine.
Russia and North Korea voted against the resolution; Cuba abstained. An earlier, separate vote retained a paragraph taking note with appreciation of the IAEA’s annual report by 137 votes to six, with one abstention. Iran opposed that paragraph but was not among the two countries voting against the resolution as a whole.
Russia’s UN mission said it supported the IAEA’s technical mandate but objected to the draft resolution, arguing that it failed to make clear which recent IAEA General Conference resolutions had been adopted by vote rather than consensus. North Korea’s representative rejected the agency’s authority over its nuclear programme, saying his country was neither an IAEA member nor a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
IAEA director general Rafael Grossi said the agency had completed most of the technical preparations needed to verify Iran’s nuclear activities. He urged a prompt return of inspectors and a diplomatic agreement. The preparations are not the same as inspections being carried out — a distinction that matters amid unresolved questions over Iran’s nuclear programme.
Grossi also said the agency had gained access to previously restricted facilities in Syria and that all nuclear material there was now under monitoring and verification. He described progress in resolving questions about Syria’s earlier nuclear activities.
On Ukraine, he warned of risks at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. The IAEA said on 16 October that an eighth local ceasefire it had brokered was enabling repairs to a backup transformer damaged by military activity. The work was intended to strengthen the plant’s connection to its only remaining external power line; the agency also warned that backup diesel supplies were running low.
5 listed sources · explore evidence, limitations and provenance.
Sign in to give this article a thumbs up or down.
Private test discussion. Comments are readers’ views and are not yet automatically fact-checked. Editing is available for 60 seconds after posting.
Ask your question with @newsmadeclear or @nmc. You may receive 5 starter credits once after checks on your confirmed email and browser. The offer is once per person; extra accounts do not entitle you to another bonus. There is no monthly refill. Previous balances remain. A question costs 1 credit, including additional research you permit. A source you provide that demonstrably improves the article earns 5 credits. If your question helps Astra find the missing source and improve the article, you receive 1 credit back.
Sign in with a confirmed reader account and choose a username to read comments and participate.
Sorting applies to top-level comments; replies remain oldest first. New comments and likes can change the order. Refresh for the current ranking.
Loading comments…
Interested in advertising with News Made Clear? Explore our pilot.