Bolivia, 2009

Once again, we meet at the United Nations to share

concerns, problems and experiences and to discuss the

various ways in which we can serve our peoples

worldwide.

Since this morning I have listened closely to

statements, starting with that of the Secretary-

General — to whom I offer a special, revolutionary

greeting — until this moment, when we just heard the

President of Iran. In all of these statements, there has

been great convergence on problems such as the

financial crisis, problems arising from the

environmental crisis and problems concerning stability

and institutionalization of democracies in a number of

countries. There have also been ideas and proposals

such as those offered by the Secretary-General, who

called for unity among Presidents and unity within the

United Nations. I fully agree that it is important that

we Presidents and Governments unite to meet the

demands of our peoples, in order to resolve these

crises.

I would say that in my country the crises have

been imposed from above and from outside. We need

unity within the United Nations for the sake of the

equality of our peoples; we need unity for dignity; we

need unity above all to tackle the deep economic

divergences, the deep asymmetries between continents,

between families and between countries. But it must be

unity in a context of complementarity, in order to meet

our peoples’ demands.

There is an ongoing debate on the financial crisis

and on climate change, as well as on the problems of

democracy and the energy and food crises. I welcome a

number of the statements that addressed and focused

on the origins of this crisis. But the majority of

Presidents and the majority of the statements referred

only to the effects, not to the causes.

I would like to speak frankly to the Assembly —

my listeners here, and to all others who are following

the debates taking place in this global forum. I would

like to say that the origin of these crises was the

unbridled accumulation of capital in a few hands, the

irretrievable looting of natural resources and the

commercialization of Mother Earth. And above all, I

believe their origin lies in an economic model, an

economic system, namely, capitalism.

If we do not tell our peoples the truth about the

origin of this crisis, then we will be misleading

ourselves and the international community too. We will

be misleading our peoples, who have great

expectations of their Presidents and Governments and

of forums such as this one.

Although we are promoting and seeking peace, in

the light of our experience, we know that we will not

find social peace while there is economic inequality,

and all the less when there are military bases in some

countries. These may be located on many continents,

including Latin America and South America. How can

we hold discussions when United States military bases

provoke distrust among peoples?

I would like to briefly tell the Assembly that I

was a victim of the military bases operating in my

country before assuming the presidency, before the

social movements were not merely opposed to policies

but also actors in a new country of equality and social

justice. All of us were victims of the United States

military presence in Bolivia, and as victims we know

what uniformed armed United States personnel can do

in South American countries. For that reason, I would

like to say that when there is a United States military

base, particularly in Latin America — I do not know

about their conduct in Europe or on other continents,

but in Latin America, the presence of military bases is

no guarantee of social peace or of democracy.

Certainly, it cannot guarantee the integration of our

countries, much less of the peoples who are seeking to

bring about deep-wrought changes in our social,

economic and cultural structures.

09-52228 38

Now we have Honduras. If there is a United

States military base in Honduras, why can this military

base not guarantee democracy? It cannot because there

are Presidents who change these countries, which are

constantly threatened by military bases.

I hail the courage of our colleague, President

Zelaya of Honduras, who is democratically and

pacifically resisting with the aim of restoring

democracy. My respect and admiration go to him as he

strives together with his defiant people to uphold

democracy. How good it would be if the United

Nations, this great international organization, were to

adopt a resolution issuing an ultimatum to the military

dictatorship in Honduras to withdraw and restore the

only internationally recognized President.

I am convinced that the United States Southern

Command does not accept Latin American countries or

their Presidents that are seeking liberation. I have even

heard from some friends, comrades and brothers that

they supported the dictatorships in Bolivia and

elsewhere in Latin America. They say that the only

reason there has been no coup d’état in the United

States is that there is no United States Embassy in the

United States. There are coups d’état occurring

everywhere, but let me say that in September last year

there was an attempted coup d’état in Bolivia, and

thanks to the union forces and the involvement of the

international community, particularly from the southern

cone, we were able to halt that civilian — not

military — coup d’état.

For these reasons, we are convinced that military

bases cannot guarantee democracy, integration or

social peace.

We have also been discussing the subject of

climate change, and I would like to take this

opportunity to propose a number of issues to the

Assembly which are of the utmost importance for all of

us who inhabit Mother Earth. For the indigenous

movement, this is Mother Earth — or, for many others,

planet Earth or the environment. For those of us who

live in harmony with Mother Earth, not just in harmony

with human beings, Mother Earth is something sacred.

It is Mother Earth which gives life, which provides

water, natural resources, oxygen. We all promote the

well-being of our peoples. We are struggling and

fighting and working for the well-being of our peoples,

but first of all, we must ensure the well-being of

Mother Earth.

If we cannot guarantee the well-being of Mother

Earth, then it will be impossible to guarantee the well-

being of our countrymen or of all the peoples on planet

Earth. I have reached the conclusion that Mother

Earth — or planet Earth — can and will exist forever

with or without human life. But human life cannot

exist without planet Earth — Mother Earth.

After having listened to many statements and

after having listened to my brothers, I have reached the

conclusion that at this point in time, in this new

twenty-first century, it will be more important than

ever before to defend the rights of Mother Earth than to

defend human rights.

If we do not protect the rights of Mother Earth,

there will be no point in defending human rights. I am

prepared to discuss this concept, and sooner or later

everyone will understand why it is so important to

defend the rights of Mother Earth.

As we are currently discussing climate change, I

propose to Presidents, representatives and all our other

brothers and sisters who are listening throughout the

world our very simple, three-point proposal.

First, the developed countries must acknowledge

and pay the climate debt that they and all humankind

owe Planet Earth.

Secondly, a court for climate justice must be

established to try and to punish those who fail to meet

their commitments and those who continue to damage

Planet Earth. We need a structure that can quantify the

damage caused by some countries and transnational

companies, and therefore it is important that such a

court for climate justice be established.

The third proposal is one of those that have been

developed above all by rural and indigenous

movements: the United Nations must draw up a

declaration of the rights of Mother Earth, in order to

defend the right to life, the right to the regeneration of

bio-capacity, the right to a clean life and the right to

harmony and the coexistence of us all.

I hope that these proposals will be taken into

account during the discussions in Copenhagen. We also

hope that Copenhagen will provide a grand solution to

resolve the serious problems that affect us all, in all the

countries of the world.

I also take this opportunity to take up some of the

proposals made by a number of Presidents. If we want

39 09-52228

to change the world, we must first change the United

Nations. If we want to effect change in our countries,

seeking equality and dignity for our compatriots, why

not first change the structures of the United Nations?

Listening to what many other Presidents said

about the Security Council, I felt that there were many

points of agreement. We need a real democratization of

the United Nations, for which I make the following

suggestions.

The status of permanent membership of the

Security Council and the right to veto must be

abolished. It is not possible in the twenty-first century

to maintain outdated totalitarian practices going back

to the time of monarchies. All countries must have the

same rights within the United Nations. Those who

proclaim themselves to be the leaders of democracy

should give up their privileges and accept true

democratization of the Security Council. We must be

responsible with democracy and begin to democratize

the United Nations.

I shall soon end my short intervention, as I do not

wish to exceed my time limit, in keeping with the

discipline that our peoples teach us. But first I am sorry

to have state a truth that may upset the Government of

the United States. I had great hopes of President

Obama. I welcome his closure of Guantanamo, which

represents progress. But in addition the economic

blockade of Cuba should be ended. That is my

respectful request to the Government and people of the

United States.

Bolivia, like Latin America as a whole, used to

enjoy certain tariff preferences, but under ex-President

Bush they were removed, because we were accused of

not combating drug-trafficking and poverty. We know

that that was a political decision, but ex-President Bush

never took into account Bolivian norms or our

Constitution.

Now, under President Obama’s Government, we

see documents which include references to our new

Constitution, which, for the first time in the 183 years’

existence of the Republic, was approved by a vote of

the Bolivian people. There is a reference to article 56

and respect for private property. That strikes me as

direct interference by the United States Government in

the Constitution and other norms and standards, and I

roundly reject it. What we want is diplomatic relations

not of interference, but of cooperation and investment.

While the new Constitution for the first time

guarantees private property and State property,

fundamentally it guarantees collective property —

property held by associations and cooperatives, and

communal lands belonging to the indigenous, native

movement.

In addition, an accusation is made against me in a

United States report stating that current challenges

include the explicit acceptance and encouragement of

coca production at the highest levels of the Bolivian

Government. That is to say that I encourage the

cultivation of coca. It should be understood that

growing the coca leaf is one thing and that cocaine is

quite another. We do not defend cocaine; we shall fight

it. Indeed, our proposal is zero cocaine. What I have

just said does not mean having free cultivation of the

coca leaf, though in its natural state it is beneficial and

healthy for human life.

We have launched a campaign on decriminalizing

the traditional consumption of the coca leaf. I

guarantee that there will never be free cultivation of

coca, but neither will there a zero coca leaf policy. But

there is a zero cocaine policy. It cannot be said that I

encourage coca cultivation in Bolivia. That is not true.

The Assembly will know that I come from the

trade union and social movements, and that I was a

union leader. Now President, fortuitously and for the

time being, I am extremely concerned that it is said

that the Government will dismantle the union

movement by decree. How could I eliminate the

unions, when they and the social movements are the

backbone of the Evo Morales Government? I have built

union headquarters and encouraged unions, workers

and indigenous peoples, and yet I am accused of

dismantling the unions.

President Obama may not be aware of the

documents to which I have referred, which perhaps

come from the State Department. I perfectly

understand that sometimes when change is desired it is

difficult to change State structures. But after reading

the documents very carefully I wonder how it is

possible for someone who has suffered discrimination

to discriminate against another. At least in Latin

America, the so-called Afro-Americans and

Afro-Bolivians are the sectors most discriminated

against in society, together with the so-called Indians

or indigenous people. We are called “negroes” and

“Indians”. I do not understand how a black person who

has been discriminated against and excluded can

09-52228 40

discriminate against and exclude an Indian. It is a

matter of grave concern.

It is to be hoped that those historic errors can be

rectified, not for the good of the President, and not just

for the good of Bolivians, but for the image of peoples,

such as the people of the United States. I well

understand that sometimes it is not easy to change

structures which may work against our peoples.

Finally, I refer to some historical demands, such

as the return of our access to the sea. Our two peoples,

our brother republics, Chile and Bolivia, feel sufficient

trust in each other to seek to resolve the issue of

maritime access. I hope that it can be settled bilaterally.

If not, intervention by the international community will

be needed. Progress has been made. I feel that there is

trust, which is needed in order to resolve any problem.

Otherwise, important steps must be taken.

I thank my brothers and sisters for listening to

me. I would like to continue to share their experience,

proposals and concerns for the good of mankind as a

whole.