A/73/PV.30 General Assembly

Grenada aligns itself with the statements delivered on behalf of the Caribbean Community, the Group of 77 and China, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (see A/73/PV.29). Grenada takes the floor to speak in its national capacity on agenda item 43, entitled “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba”. At the outset, I would like to acknowledge the presence of Mr. Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba. Grenada maintains its unequivocal opposition to the imposition of the economic, commercial and financial embargo against the Government and the people of Cuba. This is a matter of grave concern to Grenada. Grenada shares in the widespread sentiment of the global community condemning such unilateral measures imposed on sovereign States. Because such actions are contrary to the tenets of the Charter of the United Nations, the embargo itself runs counter to the principles that the constitutive document sets forth. In recent years, we have witnessed with hope and commendation the strides taken by the United States Government to re-establish diplomatic relations with Cuba and further implement several policy changes. But, alas, we have also witnessed the reversal of those measures. Grenada views the reversal of rapprochement efforts between the United States of America and the Republic of Cuba as unfortunate. We therefore urge both parties to return to good-faith dialogue. We continue to stand in firm opposition to laws and measures that encroach on and hinder the sovereignty, territorial integrity and equality, international trade or navigation of any State. Today, we renew our clarion call for all necessary steps to be taken to repeal or invalidate the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed on the Government and the people of Cuba. Grenada continues to believe that, with the support of multilateralism in this community of nations, there is still hope for the return to the normalization of relations between the two Governments in the spirit of true and sincere reconciliation and for this unilateral imposition to become a vestige of the past. For it is only in unity that we can earnestly fight to overcome the seemingly monumental difficulties in this world. Grenada therefore calls for the immediate lifting of the unfair economic, commercial and financial embargo on the Republic of Cuba, and reiterates its unwavering support for draft resolution A/73/L.3 on the necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba.

We align ourselves with the statements made yesterday by the representatives of Morocco, Egypt and Venezuela, on behalf of the Group of African States, the Group of 77 and China and the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, respectively (see A/73/PV.29). At the outset, I wish Mr. Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba, a very warm welcome and a pleasant stay among us. As on previous occasions throughout the years, Equatorial Guinea is very pleased to take the floor on such an important issue as the need to lift the embargo against Cuba. As in previous years and with persistence, our delegation unequivocally joins in the clamour of the voices of 191 of the 193 States Members of the United Nations calling for an end to an embargo that has gone on for more than half a century and has been harming the noble Cuban people economically, commercially, culturally and socially. To illustrate the evolution of the situation and countries’ positions with statistics, in 1992 59 States voted in favour of that year’s resolution, to 3 against, with 71 abstentions and 46 absent (resolution 47/19). In 2000, 167 voted in favour, to 3 against, with 4 abstentions and 15 absent (resolution 55/20). In 2015, 191 countries voted in favour, to 2 against, with no abstentions (resolution 70/5). In 2016, 191 countries voted in favour, to none against, with 2 abstentions (resolution 71/5). In 2017, 191 countries voted in favour, to 2 against, with no abstentions (resolution 72/4). When, in 2016, aware of the global clamour and overwhelming call for an end to the embargo, the Government of the United States, through then- President Barack Obama, took initiatives and decisions for the realization of that near-unanimous global demand from among the Members of the United Nations, the world population in general and the Cuban people in particular, we were filled with optimism to finally see the fulfilment of such a long-awaited desire. In fact, the diplomatic missions of both countries were opened and trips to the United States and Cuba were conducted by top leaders of both countries. Commercial flights were resumed and other measures were taken, which suggested a promising horizon for the total unblocking of and the end of the unilateral isolation imposed against Cuba. It is with the positive developments of the years 2015 and 2016 in mind that our delegation takes advantage of this meeting to once again — as it has done and will continue to do — launch an appeal to the Government of the United States to continue along the path already laid out by President Obama by fully implementing resolution 72/4, on the immediate lifting of the blockade against Cuba in all its aspects. We are counting on the United States Government to listen to these appeals and this clamour and, as a result, agree to pursue and strengthen the actions already initiated, so that when the seventy-fourth session of the General Assembly is held in 2019, this issue will no longer be on the agenda, and so that it will be, by then, relegated to the annals of history. Despite the unilateral embargo and isolation imposed by the United States, Cuba has been able to achieve very high levels in the human development index, with an active and very fruitful South-South cooperation programme with dozens of countries from different parts of the planet — including my country, the Republic of Equatorial Guinea — with broad educational and health cooperation. If it reached excellent levels of development in the health, education, sociocultural and other sectors, can we imagine the heights this brave country could have reached had it not suffered this unjust embargo and blockade? Without this embargo and blockade, Cuba would deploy all its productive, scientific, commercial, cultural, social, health, educational and sports potential involved, and its impact would be much greater, with benefits not only for Cuba and the countries with which it cooperates, but for many more countries in the community of nations. In conclusion, the Republic of Equatorial Guinea reiterates that it condemns and opposes the embargo against Cuba, expresses its total solidarity with the Government and the people of Cuba, and once again calls on the current United States Government to use the mechanisms already established by the previous Administration and within the framework of the United Nations by proceeding to the unconditional lifting of the embargo against Cuba.

First of all, my delegation wishes to welcome Mr. Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba. The Myanmar delegation aligns itself with the statements made by the representatives of Venezuela, Egypt and Singapore, on behalf of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, Group of 77 and China, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, respectively. My delegation joins the overwhelming majority of United Nations Members in calling for an end to the unilateral economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba, which has no justification whatsoever in a multilateral rules-based system. Myanmar believes in the fundamental principles of sovereign equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of other States and the peaceful settlement of disputes, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. We are against the extraterritorial application of the blockade and the politicization of human rights issues, as they run counter to international law and the Charter of the United Nations. My delegation has therefore consistently supported and voted in favour of the annual resolution on this topic for the past 26 years, and we will continue to do so today. The unilateral economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States against Cuba over the past 56 years has caused considerable suffering to the people of Cuba. The embargo has significantly affected the economic, social and environmental development of the Cuban people, particularly its women and children. We fully understand and sympathize with the people of Cuba in their suffering and hardship, as, in the recent past and for over two decades, we were also subjected to unilateral sanctions. It is therefore with great hope that we welcomed the rapprochement between Cuba and the United States with the resumption of diplomatic relations and the subsequent official visit of President Obama to Havana in 2016. Furthermore, the United States abstained in the voting on resolution 75/5 of 26 October 2016. All of these developments were positive and encouraging steps towards ending the 56-year unilateral embargo, which would have benefited both countries. Myanmar would like to encourage the United States and Cuba to continue dialogue and negotiations to achieve the full normalization of bilateral relations based on the principles of sovereign equality and mutual respect. The total lifting of the embargo would alleviate the economic and social hardship of the Cuban people, thereby helping their efforts to achieve the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and leave no one behind. It would also contribute to the economic development of both countries — the United States and Cuba — as well as to the peace, stability and development of the region as a whole. We are convinced that the United States and Cuba have the wisdom and capacity to overcome this protracted political problem between their two countries. Myanmar will continue to support every constructive effort to end the embargo as soon as possible.

I now give the floor to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba.

I wish to express my condolences to the people and the authorities of the City of Pittsburgh, the State of Pennsylvania and the United States for the events that transpired in the Tree of Life Synagogue, in which 11 people were killed. We also express our condolences to the people and the Government of Indonesia for the air disaster that occurred on 29 October, in which 189 people lost their lives. On 25 June, Adam López Macias, a 181-day-old boy, underwent surgery to correct a life-threatening congenital heart defect, the transposition of the great arteries, an anatomical problem in which the arteries are reversed. The surgery lasted five hours. His unstable condition, subsequent hypotension, or low blood pressure, and bradycardia, a slow heartbeat, meant that he had to remain with his small sternum open until 29 June, that is, for 96 hours. The embargo prevents Cuban children suffering from postoperative low cardiac output due to insufficient blood being pumped by the heart — the most frequent complication of paediatric heart surgery  — from receiving the best treatment, that is, the advanced paediatric ventricular assist device, which the United States companies HeartWare Inc., located in Massachusetts, and Thoratec Corporation, located in Pleasanton, California, manufacture and protect with patents. How can one measure the suffering of the small boy and his family? Adam recovered thanks to the professionalism and dedication of the Cuban medical staff and the efforts of an entire country. On 13 December 2017, Rosa Esther Navarro Ramirez, who was born at 37 weeks, had to undergo surgery. At the time, she was 14 months old, and had anomalous pulmonary venous drainage, that is, when oxygenated blood mixes with deoxygenated blood. The girl then suffered from ventricular fibrillation  — a rapid and irregular heartbeat — and, during 27 days of great distress for her parents, was treated for pulmonary hypertension, or increased blood pressure in the small lung arteries, without being able to receive the appropriate drug — inhaled nitric oxide, which cannot be readily obtained in an emergency and transported by aeroplane, since it is flammable and combustible and requires special conditions for transportation by sea. If there had been no embargo, the medicine could have swiftly been requested from the United States company Datex Ohmeda, which produces the beneficial drug and the system by which it is administered. Rosita was saved despite the cruelty of that policy. A 13-year-old girl from Guantánamo with a malignant spinal tumour and a 5-year-old boy from Havana with a tumour between the brainstem and the cerebellum, whose names I clearly must not disclose, could not be treated with the optimal drug temozolomide, which is manufactured in the United States, although they have fortunately recovered from their conditions. The company Illumina is the world leader in next-generation sequencing, which ensures the most accurate cancer diagnosis and is the basis for precision medicine and the specialized treatment of patients. The suppliers of specialized drugs usually require that type of diagnosis in order to administer them. In 2017, 224 people per 100,000 inhabitants died in Cuba because they did not have access to those treatments due to the embargo. In the past year, more than 30 United States companies, including Agilent, Cook Medical and Thermo Fisher Scientific, refused to sell drugs, supplies and equipment essential to our health system through the company Medicuba or did not respond to its repeated requests. No mother in this Hall or on this planet can help but be moved by the cases I have described. The human harm caused by the embargo, which qualifies as an act of genocide under article 2 (b) and (c) of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948, is incalculable. It is even a violation of international humanitarian law. The human suffering cannot be measured. The purpose of the embargo, anchored in the Cold War, has remained unchanged over time. The infamous classified memorandum of 6 April 1960 from the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Lester Mallory, guides the current United States Administration’s Cuba policy, stating: “There is no effective political opposition ... The only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship ... every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba... denying money and supplies to Cuba to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.” As an exception, we welcome the recent signing of an agreement, under a special licence that has existed since 2016, that established a joint venture between the marketing agency of the Cuban Centre of Molecular Immunology and the Roswell Park Cancer Center, which will allow for therapeutic vaccines manufactured with Cuban technology to treat head, neck and lung cancer to be sold in the United States. Under a special licence issued in 2017, Cuba will also be allowed to buy 81,000 doses of the hormonal contraceptive Mesigyna from a United States subsidiary of the Bayer company. Moreover, the embargo is the main obstacle to the flow of information and broader access to the Internet and information and communication technologies for all Cubans, since it hinders connectivity and makes it more expensive in the archipelago, restricts access to their platforms and technologies and uses cyberspace for actions aimed at regime change. The embargo also obstructs cultural, academic, scientific, sports and civil society exchanges. In exercising that hostile policy, the United States Government, under unbelievable pretexts and for truly political reasons, fails to comply with the number of immigrant visas for Cubans agreed as part of the migration agreements in force. It has made family reunification and temporary visits by Cubans to their country more difficult and increased the cost and has restricted family ties. The blockade is a flagrant, massive and systematic violation of Cubans’ human rights, and has been and continues to be a major impediment to several generations who yearn for their well-being and prosperity. These policies also affect Cubans residing in the United States. Furthermore, the blockade is oppressive for United States citizens, as it unjustly and arbitrarily restricts the freedom to travel to Cuba — the only destination in the world forbidden to them. The United States Government is crudely manipulating and politicizing the universal desire for human rights for all and for the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals through draft amendments A/73/L.9 through A/73/L.16, which it has proposed with the sole purpose of adulterating the nature and focus of the annual resolution against the blockade, which the Assembly has adopted 26 times, and the goal of fabricating a pretext to find some sort of international endorsement to continue to tighten it, which the Assembly will not allow. A shameless memorandum that the State Department circulated last week to accredited diplomats, which I have in my hands, acknowledges that, “Our proposed amendments are intended to address the underlying reason for the embargo.” In the same document, the State Department points out with unabashed cynicism, “Last year, direct reference was made to the United States embargo undermining collective efforts to implement the Sustainable Development Goals. We heard [the delegations] loud and clear. Cuba’s actions clearly threaten those Goals, and, in order to fully implement them, we need [those delegations’] support on amendments.” That acknowledges the lack of respect that the Ambassador of the United States to the United Nations and the State Department have for the United Nations, multilateralism and the General Assembly, which, last year, she called a “political theatre” (A/72/ PV.38, p. 9). This recently circulated memorandum truly makes a mockery of multilateralism, decency in international politics and the great, universal and democratic Assembly. I also call attention to the fact that the memorandum misleadingly implies that the text of the amendments was previously agreed so as to surreptitiously introduce other contents referring to another issue, by another body and another country. Once again, we see the practice of lying, deceit and immorality in political discourse. Draft amendment A/73/L.7, which originally was a single amendment comprised of eight paragraphs, was later transformed into eight separate amendments, with the sole intention of creating confusion, wasting time and wearing out the Assembly. It is an unethical ploy. If the United States Government wanted to consider and put to the vote initiatives related to human rights or to the Sustainable Development Goals, we would be willing to do that immediately under the auspices of any body, at any time and under any relevant agenda item. We will continue to encourage dialogue and cooperation as the only way to foment progress in the exercise of human rights, and we will continue to actively and constructively participate in the Human Rights Council and its Universal Periodic Review and maintain our cooperation with every one of its universal mechanisms. The United States Government does not have the least moral authority to criticize Cuba or any other country in the area of human rights. We reject the repeated manipulation of them for political ends and the double standards that go along with it. The United States Government is responsible for crimes against humanity. It was that country that used a nuclear weapon on a civilian population. It develops weapons of mass destruction. It is currently starting a new arms race. It is perfecting nuclear weapons, extremely lethal conventional weapons and lethal autonomous weapons, and it is militarizing cyberspace and outer space. The United States Government is the one that has established military dictatorships and organized bloody coups d’état. With the wars that its Government has waged in recent years, it has caused the deaths of millions of people, many of whom were innocent civilians, as well as waves of refugees and the consequent human suffering. Its Government has resorted to extrajudicial executions, kidnapping and torture. It is holding prisoners indefinitely in legal limbo, without recourse to legal defence, courts or due process at the naval base in Guantanamo — territory that it illegally usurped from us. The Government of the United States has committed human rights violations against its own citizens, particularly African-Americans and Hispanics, minorities, refugees and migrants. Within a country of great opulence, 40 million United States citizens live in poverty, and 52 million Americans live in impoverished communities. More than half a million of its citizens sleep in the street, which the Ambassador does not mention. Some 12 per cent of Americans do not have medical insurance, and 1 million low-income persons will be deprived of it by their Government. Quality education is not accessible to the majority of people, whom their Government neither represents nor champions. Equal opportunities in the United States are a pipe dream. The Government that the United States delegation is part of is one comprised of millionaires who adopt brutal policies. For the same job, women earn 82 per cent of what men make, while African-American women earn 64 per cent, and Hispanic women, 62 per cent. Accusations of sexual harassment are widespread. The average wealth of white families is seven times greater than that of families of African descent. The mortality rate for African-American children less than one year of age is double that for white children. African-American mothers are three to four times more likely to die in childbirth than white mothers, and half of them would survive with better medical care, which the State Department never calls for. There is a difference in racial patterns in the United States prison population, in the length of prison sentences, in the use of capital punishment, which is also applied to minors and mentally disabled persons, and in appalling deaths by the discharge of police weapons. The United States Government builds walls, separates minors, including young children, from their migrant parents and locks them up in cages. False information and the monopolization of digital communication platforms and content creation are increasing. The United States Government intervenes unscrupulously in the electoral processes and internal affairs of the majority of our States. It is attempting to overthrow the legitimate Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela by force, while waging a brutal defamation campaign, threatening military action and calling for violence and a coup d’état. It is intervening in and attempting to destabilize the Republic of Nicaragua. It is interfering in the internal affairs of the Plurinational State of Bolivia. The Government of the United States is seeking to exercise imperial domination in our Americas, invoking once again the outdated, aggressive and dangerous Monroe Doctrine and resorting to gunboat diplomacy. It has redeployed its Fourth Fleet and increased the number and capacities of its military bases in the region. The United States is party to only 30 per cent of major human rights instruments and does not recognize the rights to life, peace, development, security or food, nor does it recognize the rights of children. It is hardly surprising that it has withdrawn from the Human Rights Council. Corporate special interests have hijacked the United States political system, which is corrupt by definition. Words and political discourse do matter. They are important. By demonizing and making enemies through propaganda targeting political opponents, institutions, social groups and nations, they fuel and propagate division, violence, hate crimes and wars. The impunity enjoyed by the arms lobby is to blame for the increase in murders, including those involving teenagers. We have seen worsening levels of dirty politics, indecency, amorality, lying, the gerrymandering of electoral districts for political ends and voter manipulation. Six million low-income Americans were prevented from voting in the previous presidential elections, and they will probably be prevented from voting next Tuesday. In Florida, 21 per cent of African-American voters are disenfranchised. The quantifiable cumulative damage caused by the almost six-decade-long blockade amounts to $933.678 billion, adjusting for the devaluation of the dollar against the price of gold. In present-day dollars, the blockade has caused more than $134.499 billion in financial damages. In the past year alone, it has led to losses of approximately $4.321 billion for Cuba. Had Cuba received revenues it was unable to receive from the export of goods and services and not incurred costs associated with the geographical reorientation of trade, which requires our country to maintain extremely large inventories, Cuba’s gross domestic product would have increased at an approximate average annual rate of 10 per cent, in current-day prices, over the past decade. Faced with such challenges, Cuba has managed to make economic progress and provides broad and supportive international cooperation — which the United States Government is increasingly hindering — despite the blockade and forbidden access to multilateral credit, while at the same time reaching internationally recognized levels of human development and social justice. The blockade continues to be the main obstacle to the implementation of both the 2030 national plan and the Sustainable Development Goals. It undermines the exercise of the right of the Cuban people to self-determination, peace, development, security and justice. The blockade constitutes a violation of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international law. It is an act of aggression and economic war in breach of peace and the international order. It also violates the internationally recognized rules of trade and freedom of navigation. It violates the principles of the Proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace and runs contrary to the consensus reached by the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States and the world. It engenders the isolation of and discredits the Government of the United States and calls for the judicious rejection of the international community. We are living in a time of increasing threats to international peace and security, the proliferation of unconventional wars, gross violations of the sovereignty of States, policies of domination through the use of force, attempts to reimpose the unipolar order, of breaches of international law, the ominous and arbitrary breaking of international treaties, and propagation of unilateral sanctions and trade wars, essentially caused by the predatory and supremacist nature of United States imperialism, based as always on the principles of neoliberalism, the philosophy of dispossession and so-called peace based on force. As a result, grave international issues are becoming more acute, poverty and inequality are on the rise, the irrational and unsustainable production and consumption cycles of capitalism are harder felt, climate change is accelerating unstoppably, together with all of its negative consequences, and the nuclear threat is at a dangerously heightened level. Moreover, the extraterritorial imposition of the blockade has been ferociously intensified, especially with regard to crippling measures affecting the financial transactions and banking and credit operations of Cuba at the international level. More than a hundred banks have requested the closure of the accounts of our embassies and representative offices abroad. They have either withheld funds destined for Cuba or refused to execute transfers from and to our country, including funds intended for humanitarian purposes, such as those intended to deal with the impact of Hurricane Irma in Cuba, or for Cuban solidarity cooperation projects in other nations. The blockade runs contrary to the Charter and international law, and its aggressively extraterritorial implementation harms the sovereignty of all States. Since the 1898 military occupation of Cuba by the United States to hinder our independence, which had already been won in a prolonged and epic struggle, our relationship has been marked by the efforts of the Government of the United States to control the fate of Cuba in the face of the unwavering determination of the Cuban people to defend our independence and self-determination. Today, Cuba is a fully independent nation. Master of its destiny, it develops relations based on respect and enjoys bonds of friendship and cooperation with all the countries of the world. We have achieved that through the sacrifices of several generations, and we will defend it at any cost. In terms of our relations with the United States, we have diplomatic relations and some instances of official dialogue, and we are developing some mutually advantageous cooperation in a limited number of areas. But the defining characteristic of our bilateral relationship continues to be the economic, commercial financial blockade that punishes all the people of Cuba and comes from a place of domination, ideological intolerance and political revenge. Amid the deep differences that exist between Cuba and the Government of the United States, we are willing to pursue a peaceful coexistence that is based on mutual respect, sovereign equality and the benefit of both peoples. The Cuban people will continue to freely determine our internal affairs in close unity, just as we are doing in the public debate on the draft of the new Constitution and as we will do in the upcoming referendum to adopt it. There is no space — nor will there be any space — for the interference of a foreign Power. I must make it known that the escalation of statements, acts and threats from the United States Government against Cuba has no other aim than to foster a climate of greater bilateral tension, and that, in this scenario, public figures with long histories of conspiracy to provoke bilateral crises are becoming increasingly visible. As President Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez stated on 26 September in this Hall, “Cuba will always remain willing to engage in dialogue and cooperation based on respect and equal treatment. We will never make concessions that affect our national sovereignty and independence. We will not barter our principles or accept conditions.” (A/73/PV.8, p. 35) Cubans of all generations will adhere with invariable loyalty to the example of José Martí and proclaim with his same conviction that, the south and north seas would merge and a serpent would hatch from an eagle’s egg before we would yield in our efforts to make the homeland free and prosperous.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this item. The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 43. The General Assembly shall now resume its consideration of agenda item 43 to take action on the draft resolution issued as document A/73/L.3 and the draft amendments contained in documents A/73/L.9 to L.16. I now give the floor to His Excellency Mr. Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba, to introduce draft resolution A/73/L.3.

We deeply thank all those who have expressed their rejection of the blockade imposed against our country. To the citizens of all nations, and to the growing majority of Americans who have joined us in this cause for peace, justice, goodwill and human dignity, and in the name of the heroic, selfless and supportive Cuban people, I ask those present to vote in favour of the draft resolution contained in document A/73/L.3, on the necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba. The process of adopting the draft resolution has begun, and I understand that any intervention with regard to the substance would be in violation of the rules. Madam President, I hope that you will enforce those rules.

I now give the floor to the representative of the United States to introduce the draft amendments contained in documents A/73/L.9 to A/73/L.16.

This is the twenty-seventh year that the General Assembly has held this vote. Every year, with the exception of one, the United States has voted against this draft resolution. As this draft resolution is currently constructed, the United States will oppose it again today. Cuba and its allies do the same thing every year. They propose a draft resolution blaming Cuba’s poverty, repression and lack of freedom on the United States. They falsely blame America for all kinds of evil things, even genocide. But this draft resolution changes nothing. It does not help a single Cuban family. It does not feed a single Cuban child. It does not free a single Cuban political prisoner. Those who support this draft resolution every year have it wrong. Our reason for the embargo is and always has been Cuba’s denial of freedom and the most basic human rights to the Cuban people. The United States will continue to stand with the Cuban people until their rights and freedoms are restored. Period. We will not back down. Last year, we were joined by just one nation in voting against resolution 72/4, and that is fine; we were in very good company. We have no problem with standing alone on behalf of the things that we believe in and will proudly do so again today if necessary. But the most regrettable fact of this draft resolution each year is not that the United States may not stand alone in opposing it, but that the draft resolution is a waste of everyone’s time. It is one more time that countries feel they can poke the United States in the eye. But they are not hurting the United States when they do this; they are literally hurting the Cuban people by telling the regime that their treatment of their people is acceptable. For 27 years we have had this debate, and nothing has changed in Cuba — at least nothing for the better. Supporters of draft resolution A/73/L.3 claim that a change in the policy of the United States would somehow transform life for the Cuban people. But the Government of Cuba does not agree. It responded to the softening of our Cuba policy under President Obama with more, not less, political repression of its people. The sorry state of liberty and human rights in Cuba is not lost on anyone in this Hall, even as countries vote to blindly support the same resolution every year. The proof is in the statements delivered by countries during this annual debate. Many of us care deeply about the lack of freedom of expression and assembly in Cuba, the arbitrary arrests and detentions, and the status of women and labour. We have listened carefully to our fellow countries’ statements in this debate, studied their comments from last year, and taken their messages to heart. We read last year’s statement by the European Union and we agree with it wholeheartedly. The European Union called on Cuba to “fully grant its citizens internationally recognized civil, political, and economic rights and freedoms, including freedom of assembly, freedom of expression, and free access to information” (A/72/ PV.38 p. 27). Yesterday, multiple representatives, speaking both for their own countries and for regional groups, expressed concern for the realization in Cuba of the goals of prosperity, human rights and human dignity contained in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (see A/73/PV.29). Last year, the Permanent Representative of Gabon, speaking for the Group of African States, expressed the same concern (see A/72/PV.38). The Ambassador of Singapore, speaking for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, also expressed the desire to end poverty and promote human rights and gender equality in Cuba, in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (ibid.) The Permanent Representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, speaking for the Caribbean Community, echoed that support, as did the Ambassador of Côte d’Ivoire, speaking for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and the Venezuelan ambassador, speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement (ibid.). Furthermore, in their national capacities, the Permanent Representatives of India, South Africa, Mexico, Indonesia, Chad and St. Kitts and Nevis all advocated Cuba’s achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (see A/72/PV.38 and A/72/PV.39). We have studied Member States’ expressions of support for freedom and human rights in other countries where, like Cuba, they are denied. For example, there are striking parallels between the suffering of the Cuban people under the Castro dictatorship and its successors and the suffering of the Iranian people under the dictatorship of the mullahs in Tehran. Like the Castro regime, the Iranian regime violently represses dissent, imprisons and kills its political opponents, and abuses women, and religious and ethnic minorities. Like the Castro dictatorship, the Tehran Government has rigged its economy in favour of its regime and its cronies. And both Governments use these stolen funds to finance their aggression abroad. Each year, the General Assembly adopts a draft resolution condemning the Iranian regime’s violations of human rights. Last year, resolution 72/189 was adopted with the support of 81 Member States. Eighty- one countries made the decision to use the Assembly’s time and prestige to do what the United Nations does best — what it is meant to do. Eighty-one countries put the weight of the international community behind the principles of peace, security and human rights in Iran. They did not just pay lip service to those principles; they put them in a draft resolution, which they then put to a vote. They won. But most importantly, the cause of human rights in Iran won. The time has long passed for the General Assembly to do the same for Cuba and for the same reasons. How can delegations feel strongly about Iran and not about Cuba? Countries that are concerned about the arrest of political opponents and journalists, the lack of access to the Internet, and the absolute authority of the Government to restrict travel both within and from Cuba should have the opportunity to vote to put themselves and the Assembly on record. The United Nations does not have the ability or the authority to end the United States embargo of Cuba. But the United Nations has the unique ability to send a moral message to the Cuban dictatorship. We should use our megaphone to do something that has the potential to actually improve the lives of the Cuban people. The United States has proposed a series of amendments to draft resolution А/73/L.3. These amendments have been taken directly from the Member States. They are their expressions of hope for human rights in Cuba. The content has been supplied by the Member States; the words of these draft resolutions are their words. This year, delegations will be asked to vote not just on the American embargo, but also on Cuba’s political prisoners, the country’s lack of freedom of expression, and its oppression of workers. This year, delegations have the opportunity to do something that will send an unmistakable message to the people of Cuba that the world is not ignoring their suffering. For decades, the General Assembly has failed to demonstrate leadership in advocating a better life for the Cuban people. Today, it can show leadership. I call on the Assembly to vote to affirm the human rights and freedoms of the Cuban people that it extends to so many other countries. I call on Member States to vote in favour on each and every amendment proposed by the United States. We call on the General Assembly today to show the world that it stands for human rights and human dignity. To the people of Cuba, I once again say that the United States will continue to stand with them, regardless of what others do. We will stand with them until the day comes that we can stand together as free peoples in our shared neighbourhood.

We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/73/L.3 and draft amendments A/73/L.9 to A/73/L.16. Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of vote before the voting, may I remind delegations that explanations of vote should be limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. I would ask delegations that take the floor to explain their vote to do so only once, that is, either before or after the consideration of all draft documents presented for a vote.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its member States. The candidate countries the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Albania; the country of the Stabilization and Association process and potential candidate Bosnia and Herzegovina; and the European Free Trade Association country Liechtenstein, member of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this statement. The economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States on Cuba has a damaging impact on the economic situation of the country and negatively affects the living standards of the Cuban people. External trade and foreign investment will play a crucial role in setting the country on a path towards sustainable growth. The EU therefore considers that lifting the embargo could facilitate the opening of the Cuban economy for the benefit of the Cuban people. The EU believes that positive change in Cuba is best brought about by closer engagement at all levels — Government, economy and civil society — but also through people-to-people exchanges. We therefore deeply regret the reintroduction of restrictions on United States relations with Cuba by the current United States Administration. The measures restricting individual self-directed travel in particular not only curtail the possibility for engagement with the Cuban people, but also are hitting Cuba’s burgeoning private sector, which has benefited the most from such individual visits. Beyond the damaging impact of the embargo on ordinary Cubans, unilateral United States sanctions and other unilateral administrative and judicial measures are also negatively affecting EU economic interests. We have firmly and continuously opposed any such measures, owing to their extraterritorial impact on the European Union, in violation of commonly accepted rules of international trade. We cannot accept that unilaterally imposed measures impede our economic and commercial relations with Cuba. The EU Council of Ministers therefore adopted a regulation and a joint action to protect against undue interference and problems for EU citizens, businesses and non-governmental organizations residing, working or operating in Cuba. It is crucial that the United States continue to fully respect and implement the agreement reached at the summit between the European Union and the United States held in London in May 1998. This agreement covers waivers to Titles III and IV of the Helms-Burton Act, a commitment by the United States Government to resist future extraterritorial legislation of that kind, and an understanding regarding disciplines for the strengthening of investment protection. For the EU, opening doors and closer engagement are the way to go with Cuba. The date of 1 November 2018 marks the first anniversary of the provisional application of the EU-Cuba Political Dialogue and Cooperation Agreement (PDCA). The agreement has put our bilateral relationship on a new and solid legal footing and sets out an agenda of critical engagement with Cuba that will also allow us to support and accompany Cuba on its path of reform and modernization. We are also enhancing dialogue and cooperation on issues on which we still have fundamental differences. To this end, the PDCA has established a human rights dialogue as a key pillar of our relationship. The first formal meeting of the Dialogue, which was held in a constructive and open atmosphere, took place last month. We reiterate our call on the Cuban Government to fully grant its citizens internationally recognized civil, political and economic rights and freedoms, including the freedom of assembly, the freedom of expression and free access to information, to ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and to extend invitations to United Nations special rapporteurs to visit Cuba. We take due note of the amendments proposed by the United States. Such concerns were indeed brought up by several EU member States at the recent Universal Periodic Review of Cuba at the Human Rights Council. However, the EU considers that they have no place in the present draft resolution, which addresses a different, largely economic topic. In a particularly sensitive context, separate subjects should not be mixed. Any amendments not directly related to the subject matter should be avoided, as they risk unduly confusing the issue. Following the generational leadership change that took place in Cuba last April and in the context of the ongoing constitutional reform process, we call on Cuba to pursue a comprehensive reform and modernization agenda, extend economic and social reforms, and implement such reforms in a manner that will address the key concerns of the Cuban population and the legitimate aspirations of the Cuban people for greater opportunities to participate in the shaping of their country’s future. With the EU-Cuba Political Dialogue and Cooperation Agreement, the EU offers Cuba a consistent and reliable partnership to support it as it seeks to reform its political and economic model, pursue sustainable development and find common solutions to global challenges, while we continue to vigorously promote democracy and respect for human rights. It is our considered view that the United States embargo does not contribute to promoting these aims, but impedes their achievement. Against this background, the States members of the European Union will vote unanimously in favour of draft resolution A/73/L.3.

As it has always done, Canada will vote in favour of the draft resolution on the necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed by the United States of America against Cuba (A/73/L.3). With respect to the proposed United States amendments to draft resolution A/73/L.3, Canada will vote against them. (spoke in French) Canada wishes to clarify that by voting against these amendments, it is not voting on the substance of the amendments themselves. The reason Canada is voting against these amendments proposed by the United States is that this draft resolution is not the appropriate framework in which to consider Cuba’s compliance with its international human rights obligations.

Not long ago, in the General Assembly Hall and from this very rostrum, the whole world paused as leader after leader praised one of the greatest human beings that ever lived, Nelson Mandela. We extolled his virtues, his principles and the peace and reconciliation that he preached and lived by. At the end of the day, we all committed ourselves to a decade of peace. It was a beautiful moment and, to borrow the words of the former President of the United States, Barack Obama, “a teachable moment”. Mandela’s life, his philosophy and what he stood for can be summed up in one word, ubuntu, which means humanness or conscience. Humanness is not found in the big declarations we make or the grand projects and programmes that we craft as philanthropic gestures. Rather, it is in the simple, small, mundane, day-to-day things we do to each other, for each other, with each other and against each other that our humanness, our ubuntu, is defined. As we consider the draft resolution before us on the necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba (A/73/L.3), let us ask ourselves in good conscience, are we living up to the test and the standard of ubuntu, of humanness, that we all extolled Mandela for living up to? My country, Zambia, has many differences with how Cuba is run day by day, as well as with how the United States of America is run day by day. Indeed, we have many differences with how every country in the world is run day by day. However, what we know and are prepared to defend without equivocation is that these differences in perspective on life and on governance are the right of the people of each country to decide for themselves, in accordance with their history, their culture and their circumstances. What is not in contention, and should never be in contention is that the thread of life, the thread of humanness that runs in every Cuban, is the same thread that runs in every one of us and in every American. I learned recently how the American law- enforcement community resented the use of the phrase “mass incarceration” to describe the phenomenon of the high incidence of a sector of the population being imprisoned compared to other sectors. They said that every person arrested was arrested as an individual and tried as an individual for each crime committed and on the specific evidence relating to each crime for which each individual was charged. Just as the United States law enforcement community rejects that group characterization, so too should the United States Government not continue with the group punishment of the people of Cuba, with the embargo imposed on ordinary people who have committed no crime whatsoever against the Government or the people of the United States. When we stand at this rostrum and say what we are saying, we are not doing so as a lynch mob baying for the blood of the United States. We have a saying in my country: one who tells someone how ugly they are is a good friend. The United States is a good friend. We say these things to appeal to its sense of ubuntu — humanness — in the treatment of the people of Cuba. We say these things to appeal to the United States to live up to the high standards that it has set for itself — the standard of democracy that compels all of us, if we choose to practice democracy, to accept the decision of the majority. For, time after time, the overwhelming majority of the world — the Members of the United Nations — has voted in favour of this resolution calling on the United States to lift the embargo. The United States is a big, powerful country — a great country. As stated in the Bible, to whom much is given, much is expected. Greatness lies not in the ability to subdue, but in the ability to uplift and inspire. Greatness lies not in the ability to destroy, but in the ability to repair and build. Greatness lies not in the ability to benefit from power, but in the ability to use power to protect the small and the weak and to enable the unable. I beseech all of us to learn from the palm tree that withstands storm after storm. That greatness lies not in the ability to stand straight and rigid, but in the ability to stoop low, to the level of one whom the gales of winds have knocked down, and lift them up. My delegation will vote in favour of the draft resolution.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote before the voting. The General Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/73/L.3, entitled “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba”. In accordance with rule 90 of the rules of procedure, the Assembly will first take a decision on the draft amendments contained in documents A/73/L.9 to A/73/L.16, one by one. Before proceeding to take a decision on draft resolution A/73/L.3 and draft amendments A/73/L.9 to A/73/L.16, I wish to inform members that I have been approached by several delegations concerning the majority required for the adoption of the draft proposals. Having taken note of the statements made by Member States in the debate, I shall put to the consideration of the Assembly the question of whether a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting is required for the adoption of draft resolution A/73/L.3 and the amendments contained in documents A/73/L.9 to A/73/L.16, in accordance with rules 83 and 84 of the rules of procedure. I shall first give the floor to delegations that wish to take the floor in explanation of vote before the voting.

Before adopting any decision, it should be crystal clear to all Member States that proposals presented under item 43 of the agenda of the seventy-third session of the General Assembly, on the necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed against Cuba, are important questions by virtue of rule 83 of the General Assembly’s rules of procedure. In assigning the agenda items of the seventy- third session of the General Assembly, as indicated in document A/73/252, the Assembly defined item 43 — as it has done for more than a decade — under the heading of “Maintenance of international peace and security”. Rule 84 of the General Assembly’s rules of procedure, establishes that “Decisions of the General Assembly on amendments to proposals relating to important questions, and on parts of such proposals put to the vote separately, shall be made by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting.” Therefore, in order to be adopted, draft resolution A/73/L.3 and the draft amendments contained in documents A/73/L.9, A/73/L.10, A/73/L.11, A/73/L.12, A/73/L.13, A/73/L.14, A/73/L.15 and A/73/L.16 require the support of a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting. As the Assembly has seen, I am requesting, in accordance with the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, that item 43 be considered an important question and that all of those decisions, including on the draft amendments, be adopted only by a two-thirds majority. Cuba would appreciate that countries vote in favour of the motion by voting yes to this proposal made by Cuba.

At this point, I would like to clarify that, in accordance with Article 18, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations, this question will be settled by a simple majority of the members present and voting.

A simple majority is required for the adoption of the United States-proposed draft amendments. Cuba’s draft resolution and our amendments do not rise to the standard required for a two-thirds majority. They are solely about economic, human rights and social issues. I would refer the membership to a decision made by the Assembly on 22 June, in which the Assembly decided that a resolution on the Republic of Moldova (resolution 72/282) would be subject to a simple majority of the members present and voting. If that resolution, on Russia’s military forces in Moldova, was subject to a simple majority, then surely this one, on economic, human rights and social issues, with its related draft amendments, is also subject to a simple majority. I urge all Member States to vote against a decision that a two-thirds majority is required.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote before the voting. We will now proceed to take a decision on the question of whether a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting is required for the adoption of draft resolution A/73/L.3 its draft amendments.

The Assembly has decided that a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting is required for the adoption of draft resolution A/73/L.3. Therefore, pursuant to rule 84 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting is also required for the adoption of draft amendments A/73/L.9 to A/73/L.16. We will now proceed to take a decision on draft resolution A/73/L.3 and draft amendments A/73/L.9 to A/73/L.16. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft amendment contained in document A/73/L.9. A recorded vote has been requested.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft amendment contained in document A/73/L.10. A recorded vote has been requested.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft amendment contained in document A/73/L.11. A recorded vote has been requested.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft amendment contained in document A/73/L.12. A recorded vote has been requested.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft amendment contained in document A/73/L.13. A recorded vote has been requested.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft amendment contained in document A/73/L.14. A recorded vote has been requested.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft amendment contained in document A/73/L.15. A recorded vote has been requested.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft amendment contained in document A/73/L.16. A recorded vote has been requested.

We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/73/L.3, as a whole. A recorded vote has been requested.

Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of vote after the voting, may I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I am always taken aback when I hear applause in the Chamber at moments like this because there are no winners here today; there are only losers. The United Nations has lost. It has rejected the opportunity to speak on behalf of human rights. The Charter of the United Nations commits every country here to the promotion of peace, security and human rights, and that Charter was betrayed today. Once again, we were reminded why so many people believe that faith in the United Nations is often misplaced. The countries that profess to believe in human rights have lost, too. They have earned a justified measure of doubt that they will act to defend their beliefs. And, most of all, the Cuban people have lost. They have been left once again to the brutal whims of the Castro dictatorship. They have been abandoned by the United Nations and by most of the world’s Governments. But the Cuban people are not alone today. The United States of America stands with them. The people of Cuba are our neighbours and our friends, and they are fellow children of God. The American people will stand with them until they are restored the rights that God has given us all, rights that no Government can legitimately deny its people. While today’s votes were not admirable, they were highly illuminating. That light contributes to the cause of truth, which is the essential basis of freedom and human rights.

At the outset, I should like thank the Permanent Representative of the United States for presenting the draft amendments that were submitted during today’s meeting. Uruguay chose to abstain in the voting on the draft amendments that were proposed. My delegation will not speak on the content of the paragraphs submitted to a vote, but rather on their appropriateness and objective. Uruguay is a firm defender of human rights and has always worked actively to promote them. Uruguay has also been a part of collective efforts to ensure their incorporation into the Sustainable Development Goals as well as their actual implementation. We will continue to do so in all of the appropriate forums where these topics are taken up. We understand that it would not be appropriate in this specific case to incorporate the draft amendments that refer to these matters in a resolution whose text has been supported practically unanimously by the entire membership for more than a quarter of a century. First of all, the matters referred to in the draft amendments were not issues that were part of resolution 73/8. The topic of the resolution that we are dealing with is specific and targeted: it refers to the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed against Cuba. Secondly, including those changes would have distorted the essence of the resolution. The changes would dilute the main and specific objective, which is to put an end to the unilateral coercive measures that have been applied for more than 50 years against that Caribbean country. The draft amendments would have diverted the focus of the resolution on the lifting of the blockade. Because they dealt with issues that were related to human rights, Uruguay could not vote against them. That is the reason we abstained. The blockade cannot be justified in any way. This resolution must continue to be brief, clear and blunt, expressing very clearly and firmly that the embargo is unacceptable and illegitimate because it violates international law and goes against the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. With respect to the resolution to put an end to the embargo, first of all we would like to welcome the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba, Mr. Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, and thank him for the detailed introduction of the resolution. As Uruguay has always done, my country voted once again in favour of the resolution put forward by the Cuban delegation, in the understanding that that the unilateral economic, financial and commercial embargo against the country goes against international law and violates the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter. The position of Uruguay is a part of a context of respect for the sovereign equality of States, non-intervention, as well as the peaceful dispute settlement, principles that lie at the core of my country’s foreign policy. As a matter of principle, Uruguay rejects and does not acknowledge the extraterritorial application of the domestic laws of other States, or of any other direct or indirect mechanism that would constitute a unilateral action by any State, and whose objective would be to sanction the decisions adopted in political, economic, commercial, social and cultural matters, or other matters of another sovereign State. In that respect my country does not support the implementation of the course of unilateral measures applied by the United States against Cuba. Uruguay also believes that the unilateral sanctions and extraterritorial laws imposed against Cuba lead to very serious consequences for the economic development of the country and undermine the well- being of its population, as they impede their legitimate right to development and cause material damage against the dignity and sovereignty of the Cuban people. By voting in favour of the resolution, Uruguay reiterates its commitment to multilateralism, which we see as a legitimate means of resolving disputes between States and as an effective tool to promote international cooperation. The process of rapprochement between Cuba and the United States and the measures of mutual détente that were adopted some time ago with a view to improving the bilateral climate were a historic step. They constituted unprecedented progress and demonstrated that understanding is possible. Uruguay regrets the current chill in relations between the two countries, and we kindly urge a return to the path of a bilateral dialogue, which would lead to the benefits of peace, understanding and stability in our region.

I would like to begin by thanking the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba for his expression of condolences and sympathies with respect to the recent aviation incident in Indonesia. The General Assembly has consistently opposed the imposition of unilateral economic measures as an instrument of political and economic coercion. Therefore, it is regrettable that the General Assembly has to meet once again to consider and vote on lifting the embargo. Indonesia reaffirms its fundamental belief that unilateral economic measures as a means of political and economic coercion against country and, in this regard, the continued imposition of an economic, commercial and financial embargo against Cuba, contradict the main principles of international law, including the Charter of the United Nations, the norms and principles governing peaceful relations among States, the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the principle of non-intervention and non-interference in each other’s domestic affairs, as well as international humanitarian law. Indonesia therefore joined the majority of the States Members of the United Nations by voting in favour of resolution 73/8, as proposed by Cuba. Indonesia is concerned about the prolonged negative impacts of the blockade on economic and social development in Cuba. The blockade remains an obstacle to the fulfilment of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development for the Cuban people. We support efforts to ensure that the Government and the people of Cuba can achieve sustainable development and be an integral part of the global economic, trade and financial system. Towards that goal, we call for dialogue and cooperation and the removal of the embargo on Cuba.

In making this explanation of vote I wish to refer to the statement made by the President of the Republic of Ecuador, Mr. Lenin Moreno Garcés, in the general debate on 25 September. In that statement, he cited a passage from the Declaration of Independence of the United States on the intrinsic equality of all, in the sense that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (A/73/PV.6, p.13). In that regard, it is incomprehensible that a country, the Constitution of which is based on those principles and concepts — values that are the foundation of the international human rights regime — should maintain in force the provisions of the economic, commercial and financial blockade against Cuba. Ecuador therefore once again reiterates its concern that this issue has remained under consideration by the General Assembly for more than a quarter of a century, without a clear signal regarding the total repeal of the provisions of the blockade. The report of the Secretary-General (A/73/85), which compiles the responses of Governments, organs and agencies of the United Nations system and entities participating as observers in the General Assembly, highlights the adverse socioeconomic effects on Cuba of the implementation of the measures, as well as the almost unanimous support of the international community for ending the embargo. The embargo continues to undermine the common desire for harmonious coexistence among countries, particularly now as collective efforts seek to consolidate and accelerate processes towards the full implementation of 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its goals. My country, in accordance with the principles of international law, in line with the Charter of the United Nations and regardless of political or ideological orientations, has consistently voted in favour of this resolution submitted by Cuba.

Australia agrees with the United States that Cuba has human rights issues to address. Australia recently put its concerns on record through the statement it delivered at the 2018 Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review of Cuba. We do not, however, believe that using resolution 73/8, entitled “Necessity of ending the economic commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba”, is the appropriate way to raise those human rights concerns. Australia therefore abstained in the voting on the draft amendments and, consistent with our long-standing position, voted in favour of the resolution.

Costa Rica reaffirms its absolute commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. Consistent with its policy of peace, commitment to multilateralism and strict respect for international law, my country reiterated its historic support for Cuba by voting in favour of resolution 73/8 today. Costa Rica has remained consistent in its position, both at the regional and international levels, on the need to lift the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed on Cuba, which directly affects the Cuban people. With respect to the draft amendments that were presented to the draft resolution, which were voted on prior to the resolution, Costa Rica felt that those proposals would alter the scope of the resolution and distort it, which is why we abstained in the voting in order to maintain the integrity and ultimate purpose of the resolution. I would like to conclude by reiterating our conviction that it is only through a frank, open and transparent dialogue, within the framework of international law, can differences between countries be addressed and resolved. In voting against the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed on Cuba, Costa Rica has reaffirmed its complete rejection of unilateral measures that any State would take against another.

First of all, I would like to welcome the presence of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba, Mr. Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, and thank him for his very detailed introduction of resolution 73/8. Argentina fully associates itself with the statements made by the representatives of Egypt, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, and El Salvador, on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, and wishes to make the following remarks in its national capacity. Argentina’s historic position is that the United States economic, commercial and financial embargo against Cuba, which is contrary to international law, in particular the principles of sovereign equality of States, non-intervention in internal affairs, freedom of international trade and navigation and peaceful settlement of disputes, must be ended. As part of its full commitment to the Charter of the United Nations, international law and multilateralism, Argentina opposes the use of unilateral coercive measures, the extraterritorial application of national laws and the adoption of discriminatory commercial practices. Consequently, Argentina has traditionally supported the resolutions against the blockade and has spoken out on every occasion that the issue has arisen, both in regional forums and other international organizations. We regret that the laws underpinning the blockade continue to be in force and that their application continues to constitute an obstacle to the full development of the Cuban people. The adoption of this new resolution 73/8 by a large majority reiterates the unequivocal message of the international community. Argentina reaffirms its conviction that dialogue without preconditions between the two parties, which implies the mutual recognition of both Governments as legitimate and equal interlocutors, will make it possible to resolve all outstanding issues between the United States and Cuba, including the lifting of the blockade.

Allow me to begin by welcoming Minister for Foreign Affairs Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla and by thanking the Secretary-General for presenting his report (A/73/85), published on 29 August. Panama once again voted in favour of the resolution entitled “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba”, thereby renewing our historic support for the lifting of restrictive measures that negatively impact Cuba’s full economic and social development. As a country that promotes dialogue based on common respect, the peaceful settlement of disputes, as well as free trade and the transparent practice of international trade, we encourage friendly and cooperative relations among States, based on international law, sovereign equality, non-interference and non-intervention and the self-determination of peoples as fundamental principles of the Charter of the United Nations. My Government has followed with attention and has expressed its full support for the economic opening and modernization of Cuba, as they presage the positive impact and opportunities they are generating for the benefit of its population. We have therefore adopted measures that strengthen the economic, commercial and tourism exchange between our countries. More recently, we have promoted significant business engagement, which was supported by the participation of President Juan Carlos Varela Rodríguez in the Havana International Fair, as a sign of Panama’s determined support to strengthen relations between our countries. Bearing in mind the global objective that we have set with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the purpose of leaving no one behind, my country and 12 million Cubans hope that dialogue without preconditions, in full compliance with our obligations under the Charter of the United Nations, including the application of the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of another State, is the key to achieving well-being and social justice. As a result of Panama witnessing, on its own soil, the historic 2015 rapprochement between Cuba and the United States — both countries friends of the people and the Government of Panama — which led to a new stage in the normalization of their relations, my country firmly believes that only the re-establishment of a bilateral dialogue between the two Governments can contribute to reaching understanding and achieving cordial relations, which the international community has been promoting for decades. I conclude by expressing Panama’s support for resolution 73/8, which was introduced and adopted today, in favour of Cuba. I reaffirm the steadfast and determined support of my country to contribute constructively to overcoming the impasse that distances two brotherly countries from our region.

Peru voted in favour of resolution 73/8 and against the draft amendments to the text because we felt that it was important to maintain the integrity of the resolution that was introduced by the Cuban delegation, which is identical in scope to the resolution that the General Assembly has consistently adopted since 1992 and in which we call for an end to the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed by the United States of America against Cuba — a blockade that Peru opposes. However, want to be clear that we did so without prejudice to our traditional and unconditional respect for and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms, as stated in the Constitution of Peru, in addition to being a priority of our foreign policy.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote after the voting. Before giving the floor to the speaker in the exercise of the right of reply, I should like to remind members that statements in the exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to five minutes for the second, and should be made by delegations from their seats.

The statement made by the representative of the United States leaves my delegation with no choice but to exercise its right of reply. We deeply regret that this forum has been used as an opportunity to make reference to my country with fallacies that confirm the pathological tendency of the United States to distort reality when it comes to States that do not submit to or follow its contradictory policies. We reject such desperate efforts to take advantage of this international forum and manipulate any issue for political purposes. The United States has flagrantly violated international law, including by its withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — the Iranian nuclear deal. Moreover, it disregards Security Council resolution 2231 (2015), which was unanimously adopted, including by the United States, grossly violates human rights, demonstrates lunatic unilateralism and exercises a warmongering policy. All of that is of great concern and a threat to both regional and international peace and security. The United States has no moral authority to impose its views on my country through its economic, commercial and financial blockade, under which the Government of the United States is violating the human rights of more than 80 million Iranians. The United States is therefore in no position to lecture or impose its will on anyone. We have strongly condemned the contradictory and interventionist policy of that country, in particular its devastating intervention in the Middle East. It is unfortunate that its abuse of the United Nations, in particular the General Assembly, has become a pathological tendency and prevailing tradition to advance its political ends. It is worth noting that credible United Nation treaty bodies have expressed deep concerns in their concluding observations about discrimination against racial, ethnic and national minorities, especially Latino and African-American persons, in the United States. Alongside the overwhelming majority of the international community, which opposed or did not consciously support similar moves in the past, we are firmly convinced that such an ill-intended practice has nothing to do with the humanitarian cause or human rights and will harm the credibility of the United Nations and its relevant mechanisms. We expect that the United States officials present here will take the opportunity to sincerely apologize for their unilateral and arrogant, as well as unlawful, acts that violate human rights in Cuba, my country and other States on which they have imposed sanctions, which they have invaded or in which they have somehow intervened. American disregard of international law and norms, as well as its disregard for its commitments, are arousing indignation and resentment worldwide.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 43?