Mr. Coordinator

India congratulates you my dear friend and colleague for coordinating the work of Subsidiary Body 4. You, and Egypt, will have the full support of my delegation.

The history of discussions on the matter, within the Conference and elsewhere, has been a long one, and one of unfulfilled aspirations, for legally binding negative security assurances.

Mr. Coordinator

Nuclear weapons pose the gravest danger to humanity and the best assurance against their use or threat of use is their complete elimination.

Until this objective is reached, there exists an obligation to assure non-nuclear weapon states against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons, a call which was also made by the Final Document of SSOD-1.

Mr. Coordinator,

India has been consistent in its support for global, verifiable and non-discriminatory nuclear disarmament. Pending nuclear disarmament, India believes that non-nuclear weapon states have a legitimate right to be assured against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.

As part of our doctrine of credible minimum nuclear deterrence, we have espoused the policy of “No First Use” against nuclear weapon states and non-use against non-nuclear weapon states.

We are prepared to convert these undertakings into multilateral legal arrangements.

Mr. Coordinator

As long as States that possess nuclear weapons continue to believe that nuclear weapons constitute a critical element of their security strategy, the goal of the complete elimination of nuclear weapons will remain elusive and distant. Therefore, reducing the salience of nuclear weapons in strategic and security doctrines and policies is essential for realizing the goal of complete elimination of nuclear weapons.

Alignment of nuclear doctrines to a posture of ‘no-first-use’ and non-use against non-nuclear-weapon States will be an important step towards achieving this objective.

Legally binding assurances on the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states will not only contribute to mitigating the sense of insecurity among non-nuclear weapon states, thereby strengthening the non-proliferation regime, but also in terms of reducing nuclear danger.

Mr. Coordinator

Since 1998, India has sponsored a UNGA resolution on ‘Reducing Nuclear Danger’, drawing attention to the hair-trigger alert of nuclear weapons and calling for steps to reduce the risk of unintentional or accidental use of nuclear weapons, including through de-alerting and de-targeting of nuclear weapons.

For over four decades, the UNGA has adopted India’s resolution on a “Convention on the Prohibition of the use of Nuclear Weapons”, requesting the CD to commence negotiations on an international convention prohibiting the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons under any circumstances.

India has traditionally supported the UNGA resolution on Negative Security Assurances presented annually, which recommends that the Conference continue intensive negotiations on the subject. India also joined the G21’s working papers submitted to the Conference on Negative Security Assurances.

Mr. Coordinator

For India, the discussion on Negative Security Assurances cannot be limited to the context of a single treaty.

In addition, the consideration of the issue within the narrow straitjacket of NWFZs would also not do justice to the wide variety of concerns that emanate from the global nature of threat posed by nuclear weapons.

India maintains that the CD, given its mandate and membership, remains the most appropriate forum for negotiating a legally binding instrument on negative security assurances.