Menu
Permanent Mission to UN
 

Statement by Cuba on the report of the Secretary-General on Human Security (A/66/763) 4 June 2012.

Mr. President,

First and foremost, we wish to express our appreciation for the convening of this meeting and the presentation of the Report of the Secretary-General on this important matter.

Concerning this document, it is necessary to recognize that, as compared to previous reports, this is a well prepared report that better sets out Member States’ views on the subject.

It takes into account the views expressed by Cuba, and includes almost all the proposals submitted in 2012 regarding the elements that should be necessarily included in a definition of Human Security.

It should be recalled that, up to date, Member States’ agreements on the matter appear in paragraph 143 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome as well as in GA Resolution 64/291, and that reference has been made to the need to develop and agree on a notion or a definition of Human Security. However, the report presented to us does not contain a proposed notion or definition of Human Security, but suggests a so-called common understanding. In our opinion, there is a big difference between the two approaches, since a common understanding is broader and ambiguous. That has practical implications, because reaching a common understanding may entail a difficult discussion so as to include all positions on Human Security.

Mr. President,

Allow me to reiterate the key elements of our position on Human Security. In this respect, we stress the notion should meet the following requirements:

-    It should be different from the Responsibility to Protect and its application.

-    It should not entail the threat or use of force.

-    It should be applied with full and strict respect for the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, including the full respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States, and the non-interference in their internal affairs, which are essentially within their competence.

-    It should not entail new legal obligations for States.

-    It should include economic, social and cultural rights.

-    It should recognize that political, economic, social, and cultural conditions vary considerably from one country to another, and therefore they are the ones to design and implement their responses in line with their conditions.

As expressed before, we believe the main global threats to Human Security are the arms race and the danger of nuclear war, climate change, and a persistent unjust and dysfunctional international economic order.

There can be no Human Security without sustainable development. As long as there is food and energy insecurity, there will be no Human Security. Significant challenges such as global warming, the rise in the sea level, depleted fossil fuels, the irrational use of water and energy sources, among others, pose very serious threats to the security of human beings.

There will be no Human Security either, as long as nuclear disarmament is not achieved, and the major powers continue to spend a lot more in producing weapons than in saving lives; as long as selectivity, partiality, and double-standards regarding human rights do not cease to exist; as long as economic, social, and cultural rights are disregarded and the right to development is not promoted as a priority of the countries of the South.

Lastly, allow me to reiterate the importance for the decision-making process on this matter to be carried out in the framework of the General Assembly, in an open and transparent manner, and without impositions or unnecessary haste. On the contrary, a thorough and deep analysis must prevail at all times, taking into consideration the legitimate interests and concerns of all Member States. Only in that way can we reach a consensus agreement that is satisfactory to all.  

Thank you.
 

5 Héroes