Read on Twitter
So what's the deal with competing safeguards resolutions at #IAEAGC? Late last week, Russia presented text almost identical to that of the EU who traditionally table the safeguards resolution, with two key differences. (thread)
RUS again takes aim at the state level concept/approach, so its draft requests #IAEA DG to submit another report on the SLC for the Board's review & action. In the meantime, IAEA should suspend SLA implementation for "other states." 
Presumably, "other states" means states for which #IAEA hasn't implemented SLAs yet, otherwise Para 31 is completely contradictory to Para 30.
The second difference is that Russia eliminated any mention of the Member States Support Programmes. Several member states assists the Agency thru research, tech development & operational support for verification. See: iaea.org/newscenter/new…
Russia apparently thinks the US & others exert undue influence on the IAEA in safeguards implementation thru such programmes. (What, Russia & conspiracy theories?)
As far as I know, states couldn't even start negotiating over these differences last night. It's just not clear which text the Committee of the Whole should use as the basis.
A proposal to incorporate Russia's Para 30 into the EU draft and proceed from there was declined. Iran, Venezuela some others support using Russia's draft.
Russia is also not alone in its suspicions about the SLAs, but I'm guessing the method it chose this year is off-putting for a number of those states.
In the end, there may not be a safeguards resolution this year. It's not good for atmosphere & continued tensions b/w RUS & the West, but the impact on the work of the IAEA S-guards department likely none, at least in the short term. /fin
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
