Mr. Chairman,
We would like to convey our appreciation for the submission of the Secretary-General's reports on the estimates regarding special political missions, good offices and other political initiatives authorized by the General Assembly or by the Security Council. We likewise thank Mr. Carlos Ruiz Massieu for the related reports of the Advisory Committee.
Cuba endorses the statement by Ecuador on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.
Mr. Chairman,
The creation of the Special Political Missions is decided, in most cases, by the Security Council. However, such missions are financed through the Regular Budget, which is an unsustainable practice. In light of this, we consider it is understandable that these missions shall be financed in the same way as peacekeeping operations, which includes the use of their scale of assessments.
The Secretary-General has proposed for the biennium 2018-2019 a budget of 5,405 million dollars, before re-costing. This represents an increase of only 0.2% with respect to the budget outline approved in resolution 71/274, which undoubtedly represents a decrease of 3.8% in relation to the resources approved for the biennium 2016-2017.
In this scenario, where a minority of delegations advocates to impose a policy of zero nominal growth, and even a drastic reduction of the budget is intended, resources are proposed for a value of 1,109.6 million dollars for special political missions. Once again it is striking that the level of resources allocated to these missions amounts to more than 20% of the regular budget. This is proof of the imbalance existing in the resources allocated to the different priorities established by the General Assembly.
Mr. Chairman,
We refer to the Secretary-General's report on the estimates for Thematic Cluster I: Special and personal envoys and special advisers to the Secretary-General, contained in document A / 72/371 / Add.1, in particular to section II B concerning the Special Adviser to the Secretary General on the Prevention of Genocide. Cuba does not agree with the Secretary General's proposal to include activities and results related to the concept of the responsibility to protect, in the estimates of special political missions; specifically, under the proposal relating to the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide.
We do not know so far that there is a resolution adopted by the General Assembly, the highest democratic body of our Organization, through which the post of Special Advisor on the Responsibility to Protect has been created. As expressed in paragraph 31 of the Secretary General's report, "On August 31st, 2007, in a letter addressed to the President of the Security Council (S / 2007/721), the Secretary General stated his intention to appoint a Special Adviser in charge of the responsibility to protect ". An exchange of letters, just that Mr. Chairman, and not a decision of the Member States, is the genesis of this post.
Mr. Chairman,
We believe that the appointment of a Special Adviser on the responsibility to protect is a deviation from the letter and spirit of operative paragraphs 138 and 139 of UNGA resolution 60/1. We consider that there is no legal basis for the implementation of activities or the prediction of products related to the responsibility to protect. Let us recall that in paragraph 2 of resolution 63/308, the General Assembly decided "to keep the responsibility to protect under review". As we have stated on previous occasions, it is our view that no formal intergovernmental debates or reviews have been developed in this regard. The General Assembly has not specifically approved a definition on this concept.
While examining Chapter II B of the Secretary General's Report, the level of resources associated with the activities and products linked to the Special Adviser on the responsibility to protect cannot be clearly and transparently defined, which are mixed with those of the Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide. The same applies for the narrative about the work description for both Advisors. This kind of ambiguous information makes it difficult for Member States to know precisely if the mission of the Special Adviser of the Secretary General on the Prevention of Genocide fully complies with the mandates granted or if, on the contrary, it arrogates the right to carry out activities with objectives that are not approved by the Member States.
Mr. Chairman,
The so-called principle of the responsibility to protect continues to present serious concerns for many countries, particularly small and developing countries, due to the lack of consensus and definitions on various elements of the same. On September 15, during the debate at the General Assembly, on the inclusion of this topic in the agenda of the current session, it was demonstrated that this is a concept that lacks consensus among the membership of our Organization.
Additionally, it is an issue that can be easily manipulated for political purposes, as has been the case of the sad examples recorded throughout history and which show that, under the aegis of the responsibility to protect, international law, the sovereignty of the State and its primary responsibility for the welfare of its population have been undermined.
All that have been previously discussed, Mr. Chairman, is more than enough motivation for Cuba to oppose this concept of responsibility to protect as well as the creation and maintenance of the post of the Special Advisor for the same.
Mr. Chairman,
Cuba is the victim of an unjust economic, commercial and financial blockade, which by its nature and scope, qualifies as an act of genocide, under Article II of the Geneva Convention of 1948 on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. With this in mind, the position assumed by my country on this matter should in no way be interpreted as a rejection to the work of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, whose functions have the full support of our delegation, as part of the permanent principled position of the Cuban government against genocide.
Mr. Chairman,
In accordance with the elements previously indicated, my delegation will be actively involved in question and answer sessions and will make specific proposals to modify the presentation of the Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide. In the framework of informal consultations, we will further go into additional elements and we will make proposals for concrete amendments to the Secretary General's proposal.
Thank you very much.