Fourth Committee Considers Effects of Atomic Radiation, Reaffirms Commitment to UN Scientific Committee, Hears Reports on Information, Peacekeeping
Reaffirming the important work of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) today approved without a vote a resolution concerning that body, as speakers underscored the imperative of concerted and apolitical scientific work on this matter while also considering how to improve their working methods.
By the terms of the draft resolution titled “Effects of atomic radiation” (document A/C.4/79/L.5), the Assembly would commend the Scientific Committee for the valuable contribution that it has been making since its inception to wider knowledge and understanding of the levels, effects and risks of exposure to ionizing radiation and for fulfilling its original mandate with scientific authority and independence of judgment. By other terms, it would express strong expectations that, despite liquidity challenges faced by the United Nations, the regular budget of the Scientific Committee will be allocated in full.
Introducing that text, the representative of Belgium highlighted the Scientific Committee’s “apolitical and technical nature” as “a global public good that helps shape informed policymaking”. Since its establishment in 1955, the Committee has addressed significant events such as the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents, medical radiation, occupational exposure, and broader environmental radiation concerns. Noting that the resolution emphasizes the need for sufficient funding, she also drew attention to the experience and qualifications of Belgian scientist Dr. Sarah Baatout who chairs the Committee. “Her career spans decades of groundbreaking research and leadership within both national and international settings,” she added.
The Fourth Committee also heard from Dr. Baatout today as she introduced the Scientific Committee’s report (document A/79/46). Noting that over its 68-year history, the Scientific Committee has published 113 scientific annexes and five white papers, she said it works closely with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and World Health Organization (WHO) to develop safety standards and offer guidance to ensure radiation safety across various sectors, from medicine to industry. In its 2024 session held in Vienna, it approved two important reports on the evaluation of second primary cancer after radiation and of public exposure to ionizing radiation. It also identified priorities for its future programme of work in 2025-2029.
Pointing to considerable delays caused by limited availability of resources, she noted that three scientific evaluations that were planned to begin during 2020-2024 have not yet started. Voicing concern about the Scientific Committee’s reduced regular budget allocation in 2024, she expressed gratitude for voluntary contributions — however, such funding methods are unpredictable and unsustainable. The next session will take place in June 2025 in Vienna, she said, noting that its work is fundamental to international radiation safety and effects decisions by Governments as well as national and international bodies.
In the ensuing general debate, delegates took the floor to reaffirm commitment to the Scientific Committee’s work and called for more training and education activities. “In an increasingly divided world,” said the representative of Canada, also on behalf of Australia and New Zealand, “UNSCEAR is a body that has continued to garner consensus support of the Fourth Committee”. Speaking in her national capacity, she stressed that the Scientific Committee’s publications are among its “greatest strengths and contributions to the international community”.
The representative of the European Union, speaking in its capacity as observer, noted that continuous international collaboration is essential to strengthen preparedness and response to potential radiological events. The Scientific Committee’s work has been “instrumental in advancing international scientific understanding of the potentially harmful effects of ionizing radiation in all exposure situations,” he added.
Also calling for increased cooperation, the representative of Viet Nam said the Scientific Committee must partner with regional organizations, including the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) network, as well as countries affected by nuclear activities. It is essential to empower local scientists and health officials to monitor and respond to radiation exposure more effectively. This will not only enhance global preparedness but also ensure that assessments reflect the realities on the ground, he said.
India’s delegate welcomed the report on public exposure to ionizing radiation, which concluded that the characteristic annual doses from nuclear power production are low. “We consider this report very timely in the light of the fact that India has ambitious plans to increase our share of nuclear power capacity,” she said, adding that this is crucial to provide long-term energy security in a sustainable manner.
The representative of Iraq, welcoming the Scientific Committee’s efforts to increase awareness, said it must reflect the latest developments in its reports. He encouraged all Member States and UN institutions to provide relevant data to the Scientific Committee, while emphasizing the radiation effects caused by the recent wars in Iraq, which have resulted in a large number of cancers and environmental catastrophes.
The pervasive nature of radioactive fallout knows no borders, Timor-Leste’s delegate said, recalling his country ’s experience of conflict and the use of napalm bombs against its civilians. Nuclear testing and unfortunate accidents resulting from nuclear energy utilization have impacted not only public health but also the environment, he said, underscoring the need for an enhanced global monitoring system to assess the residual effect of atomic radiation, particularly in regions affected by nuclear testing and accidents.
The representative of Ukraine, recalling the catastrophic effects of radiation after the Chernobyl disaster, stressed that the high-quality scientific research is critical not only for understanding the long-term consequences of such accidents but also for preventing similar risks in the future. He praised the Scientific Committee’s focus on research that covers human-made accidents as well as cases of medical and natural exposure, including the potential impact of military actions on nuclear safety.
The Russian Federation’s delegate stressed that the Scientific Committee’s work should have an exclusively scientific character and must be conducted in the interests of sustainable development. The inclusion in the report of “political value judgements” and topics outside its mandate are unacceptable, she said, adding that attempts to study the radiological consequences of nuclear conflicts will only “create pointless politicized discussions for which the Committee is not intended at all”.
Argentina’s delegate objected to funding the Scientific Committee’s work through voluntary contributions to a trust fund, adding that this financing mechanism could affect the independence of the Scientific Committee. He also called on the Scientific Committee to study the high radiological impact of the production of non-nuclear electricity, especially from alternative energy sources.
The representative of Cuba, noting that last year marked the seventy-ninth anniversary of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, stressed that “the total elimination of nuclear weapons is the only effective way to ensure humankind will never suffer from this impact”. Japan’s delegate expressed appreciation for the Scientific Committee’s findings on the levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station.
Also today, the Committee also considered how to improve working methods as it took up the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly and the report of the Committee for Programme and Coordination. The Chair praised delegates’ efforts to speak within the agreed time limits as a best practice that should be continued. She also highlighted the effective use of the e-delegate secure platform and underscored the need to maintain the schedule to ensure that resources are used optimally, given the liquidity crisis.
The Fourth Committee also heard narrative reports concerning two of its agenda items — peacekeeping and information — on which the Committee for Programme and Coordination was unable to make recommendations in its report.
Noting the current “pivotal moment for information integrity”, Ian Phillips, Director of the News and Media Division of the Department of Global Communications, said “people across the world are crying out for a more humane online sphere”. The Organization is laser-focused on studying how the current information environment impacts efforts to make a better world. The Department seeks to lead the global narrative on major issues by delivering timely and authoritative information. Further, through targeted campaigns, it seeks to inspire global engagement on critical issues from the climate emergency to peace and security, he said, highlighting a new campaign called “The Future Thanks You”.
David Haeri, Director of the Policy, Evaluation and Training Division of the Department of Peace Operations, highlighted the ongoing contributions of UN peacekeeping missions, which have deployed more than 2 million peacekeepers over the past 75 years. “Peacekeeping is fundamentally a partnership endeavour,” he said, noting challenging operational environments and new threats. The programme plan for 2025 focuses on reforms to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of peacekeeping through the Secretary-General’s Action for Peacekeeping (A4P), A4P+ initiatives as well as the Pact for the Future, he said, adding that the programme plan reaffirms the centrality of peacekeeping as a political tool.
In the general exchange of views that followed, delegates stressed that programme planning must be consensus-based and offered suggestions for improving the Committee’s working methods. Any modification to working methods or programme planning should be consensus-based, the representative of El Salvador said, while Mexico’s delegate stressed that it is the Fifth Committee that is responsible for administrative and budgetary matters.