text: Treaty. Negative security assurances have been at the centre of this debate. Sweden has continuously underlined the importance of such assurances, pending CD/PV.550 9 (Mr. Hyltenius, Sweden) compl~te nuclear disarmament. Sweden has also deplored the sterility of the debate and the lack of results with regard to the work that has taken place in the Conference on Disarmament on this issue. It should be considered a natural and legitimate right of States that have foregone nuclear weapons through an international, legally binding connnitment to receive equally binding assurances from the nuclear-weapon Powers that they will not be attacked or threatened with such weapons. The matter should not really be made more complicated than that. The non-nuclear-weapon States have long been demanding and expecting this kind of straightforward, unequivocal assurance. Existing assurances, with their reservations and ambiguities, do not meet this need. With the NPT review conference in mind, an initiative on negative security assurances by the nuclear-weapon States during this year's CD session would be very timely indeed. The protection of nuclear installations against military attacks has become an agenda item in its own right, the subject of negotiations with a view to concluding a treaty. The experience of the tragic Chernobyl accident gives us some idea of what can happen if a large nuclear facility is attacked and hit. One must note, however, that Chernobyl was not a worst-case scenario. For example, there were no acute radiation deaths outside the plant in 1986. A carefully planned and executed attack on a nuclear power station in a densely populated area in central Europe, for instance, could well cause thousands of early radiation casualties and hundreds of thousands of subsequent cancer deaths. Furthermore, vast areas of land would be contaminated and made unusable for a very long time. These conclusions, which 
analysis: The text discusses the concept of negative security assurances in the context of nuclear disarmament and the protection of non-nuclear-weapon states. It highlights the importance of such assurances in preventing the use of nuclear weapons and the devastating consequences of an attack on a nuclear facility. The text also mentions the Chernobyl accident as an example of the potential harm caused by such an attack.