Mr. Chairman,
We align ourselves to the intervention delivered by Indonesia, on behalf of the NAM Member States Parties to the NPT.
Cuba reaffirms that the total elimination of nuclear weapons is the only absolute guarantee against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. We are convinced that as long as nuclear weapons exist, the risk of their proliferation and possible use will also persist.
However, until the total elimination of nuclear weapons is achieved, we note that there is an urgent need to promptly reach agreement on a universal, unconditional and legally binding instrument to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.
Such an instrument should be clear and unambiguous, and respond to the concerns of all Parties. The right of non-nuclear-weapon States not to be attacked with nuclear weapons or threatened with their use by nuclear-weapon States must be recognized.
We do not share the arguments that declarations made by nuclear-weapon States are sufficient, or that security assurances should only be provided in the context of nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZ).
Given their geographical limitation, security assurances given to nuclear-weapon-free zone member States cannot be a substitute for universal and legally binding security assurances.
Moreover, unilateral pledges or acts are as changeable as governments and their policies, so non-nuclear weapons States cannot trust the security afforded by this approach.
Furthermore, the interpretative declarations of some Nuclear Weapon States to the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean, the Treaty of Tlatetlolco, which constitute in actuality reservations, forbidden by the Treaty, demonstrate the need for a universal instrument.
Mr. President,
Cuba recalls that the demand for security guarantees was raised by the non-nuclear-weapon States in the 1960s and crystallized in 1968 during the last phase of the NPT negotiations. The response of the nuclear-weapon States, reflected in Security Council resolutions 255 (1968) and 984 (1995), continues to be considered incomplete, partial and conditional by the non-nuclear-weapon States.
Mr. Chairman,
Our demand remains unchanged.
It is imperative to conclude a universal and legally binding instrument providing security assurances to the non-nuclear-weapon States. Our delegation will be ready to contribute to these efforts.
Thank you very much