▾

External sources (not reviewed)

The United States turned down numerous peace proposals and initiatives put forward by the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, such as the proposal for the conclusion of a peace treaty between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the United States (1970s), the tripartite talks proposal to include south Korea in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea-United States talks (1980s) and the proposal for the establishment of a new peace mechanism (1990s).

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea would do its best to pave the way for improved inter-Korean relations and to achieve national reconciliation and unity.

Representatives of the following members and associate members made statements: Armenia; Australia; Bangladesh; Brunei Darussalam; Cambodia; China; Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; Fiji; Hong Kong, China; India; Indonesia; Iran (Islamic Republic of); Japan; Kazakhstan; Lao People’s Democratic Republic; Malaysia; Mongolia; Myanmar; Nepal; Pakistan; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Republic of Korea; Russian Federation; Samoa; Singapore; Solomon Islands; Sri Lanka; Thailand; Tonga; Tuvalu; Vanuatu; and Viet Nam.

The representatives of the following countries made statements during the general exchange of views: Algeria, Australia, Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile (on behalf of the Rio Group), China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ecuador, Egypt, France, Hungary (on behalf of the European Union), India, Indonesia, Indonesia (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Montenegro, Nepal, Nigeria, Nigeria (on behalf of the Group of African States), Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Senegal, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) and Viet Nam.

Members also raised issues with respect to institutional strengthening in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the fund disbursement issues raised in decision 66/15, and with respect to the need for voluntary reporting of FOB prices.

[...] [...] and security of humanitarian personnel and United Nations and associated personnel; and requested the Secretary-General to submit to the Assembly at its sixty-fifth session a comprehensive and updated report on the safety and security of humanitarian personnel and [...] [...]

(e) The State party’s relationship to and cooperation with UNHCR, in particular regarding cases involving persons who have crossed the border between China and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Meanwhile, on the issue of humanitarian access, while the United Nations and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation needs assessment report identified 1 million people in need of humanitarian assistance in the [...] [...]

Statements in the general debate were made by the following States members of the Committee on Information: Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bangladesh, Benin, Brazil, Chile (on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the Rio Group), China, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Israel, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Mexico, Pakistan, Peru, the Philippines, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, Senegal, Spain (on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the European Union), the Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Tunisia, the United States of America, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Yemen (on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the Group of 77 and China) and Zambia.

Immediate freezing of all “assets” or “funds”, as defined by Law No. 92 of 17 June 2008 and its subsequent amendments, which are owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by the persons and entities designated by the Security Council or by the Committee and listed in the enclosure to the annex to document S/2009/364, or by persons or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or by entities owned or controlled by them; the prohibition of the transfer of such “assets” or “funds” to the natural or legal persons, entities or bodies being responsible for the nuclear, other weapons of mass destructionrelated and ballistic missile-related programmes of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, or for the benefit of such persons or entities, or to persons and entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or to entities owned or controlled by them.

Representatives of the following members of the Commission attended the meeting: Bangladesh; Bhutan; Cambodia; China; Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; France; India; Iran (Islamic Republic of); Japan; Kazakhstan; Malaysia; Mongolia; Myanmar; Nepal; Pakistan; Philippines; Republic of Korea; Russian Federation; Sri Lanka; Thailand; and United States of America.

Draft resolution 35 C/COM SC/DR.1 (submitted by: Austria, Belgium, Plurinational State of Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Congo, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Finland, Iceland, Libya, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, New Zealand, Netherlands, Norway, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Portugal, Samoa, Senegal, Slovenia, Sweden, Tuvalu, Uruguay; Co-sponsored by: Barbados, Belgium, Costa Rica, Germany, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Monaco, Pakistan, Solomon Islands, Suriname, and Zambia).

It did not recognize and therefore categorically rejected the so-called “resolutions” against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, as well as the mandate of “special rapporteur” imposed by them.

Algeria, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Comoros, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guinea, Hungary, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Montenegro, Morocco, Nicaragua, Norway, Oman, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Yemen and Palestine: draft resolution

[...] [...] violations, secure humanitarian access, and facilitate [...] [...]

[...] [...] situation of the Palestinian people, which remains that of a dire humanitarian crisis, as well as on efforts aimed at rehabilitating and developing [...] [...]

[...] [...] international humanitarian law in order to ensure full respect for the principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence, and the pressing need to facilitate access for humanitarian personnel and [...] [...]

His delegation particularly welcomed the unified stance of the Conference with regard to the nuclear issue in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which posed a serious threat to the international community.

[...] [...] medical and humanitarian personnel and goods, throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and about the consequent violation of the human rights of the Palestinian people and the negative impact on their socio-economic situation, which remains that of a dire humanitarian crisis, particularly [...]

Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Chad, China, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Egypt, Gabon, Gambia, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

In view of the challenges posed by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and by the nuclear programme of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the ultimate aim must be to ensure compliance with the Treaty, which was further weakened by its lack of universality.

[...] [...] international humanitarian, human rights, refugee [...]

With regard to the institutional strengthening progress report for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, a number of members applauded the work done to improve transparency and suggested that, as a next step, UNEP should provide additional information to increase transparency even further, consult with other implementing agencies that might have suggestions, and resubmit the report.

The Executive Board will also have before it for discussion 10 draft country programme documents for Swaziland in the Africa region; Iraq and the Occupied Palestinian Territory in the Arab States region; Cambodia, China and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the Asia and the Pacific region; and Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia and Turkey in the Eastern Europe and Central Asia regions.

At the 12th meeting, on 20 October, the representative of the Russian Federation, on behalf of Armenia, Belarus, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Cyprus, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Guatemala, Kazakhstan, Myanmar, New Zealand, Pakistan, the Russian Federation, the Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) and Viet Nam, introduced a draft resolution entitled “Transparency and confidence-building measures in outer space activities” (A/C.1/63/L.44).

[...] [...] SecretaryGeneral any information regarding its representatives to the Conference: Armenia, Bahamas, Belize, Cook Islands, Democratic People’s Republic [...] [...]

Prohibition of the direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea of materials, equipment, goods and technology, including dual-use goods, as set out in the lists in the annexes to documents S/2006/814, S/2006/815 and S/2006/816 or of other materials, equipment, goods and technology, determined by the Security Council or by the Committee, which could contribute to the nuclear, ballistic missile-related or other weapons of mass destruction-related programmes of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

In addition, Security Council resolutions 1718 (2006) and 1874 (2009) clearly demand that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes — and I stress, all existing nuclear programmes, irrespective of their nature — in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner.

Under this item, the Executive Board will be asked to: (a) take note of the first oneyear extensions of the country programmes for Albania, Bangladesh, Cape Verde, Chad, Ghana, Guyana, Kyrgyzstan, Mauritania, Seychelles, South Africa, Ukraine and Viet Nam; (b) take note of the six-month extension of the country programme for the United Republic of Tanzania; (c) approve the two-year extension of the country programmes for Namibia, Nepal and Sierra Leone and the second one-year extension of the country programme for Zimbabwe; and (d) comment on the draft regional programme document for Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States and the draft country programme documents for Azerbaijan, Belarus, Cambodia, China, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Georgia, Iraq, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Pakistan, Serbia, Swaziland and Turkey, prior to their finalization.