Costa Rica, 1982

Mr. President, I am pleased to join in the expressions of pleasure at

your election. Your brilliant record makes you well qualified to

occupy your lofty post and skilfully to conduct our complex

proceedings. I am also very pleased that a Latin American has been

called upon to be the Secretary-General. His fame is well earned. His

election not only crowns a life devoted to the common good and to

harmony among nations but also heralds a new current sweeping through

Latin America which suggests that the people of our area will play a

more fruitful, vigorous, Imaginative and co-operative part

represented in world affairs, particularly in the United Nations.

What the Secretary-General has accomplished in a short time is new

and encouraging. His report on the work of the Organization speaks

directly of matters of high importance with clarity and precision,

and it contains sharp, frank and very valuable observations.

The leadership provided by the Secretary-General goes precisely in

the direction that my Government feels the United Nations should move

in. In order to restore much of the faith in the Organization which

has been lost, especially that of the common man of the Member

States, the United Nations must participate more directly and in a

more decisive and inventive manner in order to prevent serious

conflicts and to resolve them when the violence which has been

unleashed requires that we reiterate in a dramatic manner the

commitment to peace with States made when they signed the Charter.

Violence makes it impossible to achieve peace by means of persuasion,

good offices and mediation. Member States must make a special effort,

based on good faith and corresponding deeds, to see that the

machinery provided by the Charter is used to prevent and resolve

conflicts. Moreover, they have a duty to; do so, a legal and moral

duty. Repeated failure to respect the purposes of the Charter only

causes profound disenchantment with the United Nations at precisely

the time when action by the Organization is needed to moderate the

conduct of its Members. Those Members seen to be in the grip of

atavistic forces that have stigmatized the twentieth century. But the

twentieth century should be remembered as one of the most significant

centuries in the history of mankind because of its dazzling

achievements, which should be used to move man forward in the

constant, ceaseless effort to reach a higher level and to live in

peace.

My Government is aware, of course, of the difficulties which stand in

the way of the achievement of this goal, especially at the present

time, which is dominated by exacerbated nationalism instead of by the

noble, visionary, universalist purposes and principles of the United

Nations. There can be no doubt that each and every one of us must

make an effort, an outstanding effort, to halt the devastating wave

of violence which has shaken the world, in spite of the existence of

an impressive system of international organizations, the center of

which is the United Nations, devoted to the promotion of

international harmony.

To some extent the peoples of the world are being deceived when they

disregard the United Nations in the frontal assault on war, guerrilla

warfare, terrorism, torture and foreign intervention in the internal

affairs of States. Also, the peoples of the world are in fact being

thwarted when the United Nations is not allowed to stop repression of

democratic movements which seek changes in unjust economic and social

structures by peaceful electoral methods.

Violations of human rights, violations of civil, political, economic,

social and cultural rights must receive priority attention by the

United Nations. More vigorous action is needed, for we have gone

beyond the stage of mere declarations which proclaim and define those

rights and now an effort must be made, realistically and with a keen

sense of urgency, to perfect and put into practice the international

instruments which have been created to promote the fundamental

freedoms of every person everywhere.

In this connection it is fitting to stress one of the most impressive

of the revolutions that have occurred in the past three decades, but

one which has gone largely unnoticed by the majority of the peoples

of the world. I am referring, of course, to the fact that it has

finally been recognized that the individual is a subject of

international public law and can resort to the appropriate

jurisdictional bodies on human rights when domestic means of

protection have been exhausted, do not exist, or have serious

imperfections. Within the United Nations, the Human Rights Committee

must be strengthened and, above all, the Optional Protocol to the

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights must be

ratified. Both instruments must be signed and ratified by all Members

of the United Nations, because that would benefit the man in the

street in all nations and be a victory of far-reaching consequences.

The average citizen of the nations represented here trusts the good

judgment of those who govern to ensure the well-being to which he is

entitled, but which he may not obtain because he is not aware of the

new machinery which could be used and cannot bring pressure to bear

on his Government to abide by the commitments entered into when it

signed the Charter. Human rights were not in the Charter, then the

Organization of United Nations, it should be remembered, are

indissolubly linked, their primary characteristic, which makes it

different from any other organization created before 1945 and which

makes it possible for it to fight against the scourge of war.

We must take a similar stand on other international instruments

relating to the protection of human rights, such as the International

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,

in particular and also the procedures used by the Commission on

Human Rights, of which Costa Rica is a member, must be improved. The

Commission must be freed from political interests and influences

which all too frequently disrupt and even obstruct its work and

thereby prejudice the interests of the thousands of individuals who

look to that body as a last resort to protect them from arbitrary

action by their rulers.

The Government of Costa Rica applauds the decision to convert the

Division on Human Rights into a Centre and we think that this is a

decision that reflects a desire better to protect and defend all

freedoms by perfecting existing instruments and designing new ones on

the basis of experience. For example, before assuming my present post

I had the honor of being appointed by the Commission on Human Rights

and by the Secretary-General to act on two recent occasions in an

African country as rapporteur and as an expert, respectively, while

collaborating with the Government in the improvement of institutions

protecting fundamental freedoms after that country had suffered under

a cruel dictatorship. Fortunately, very positive results were

achieved. I mention this because it makes it quite clear that the

Commission can find new courses of action to carry out its important

task and because this sheds new light on Costa Rica's initiative as

regards the creation of the post of United Nations High Commissioner

for Human Rights. Experience has shown that when United Nations

procedures are particularly flexible and diverse in carrying out its

essential mandate to promote and protect human rights those rights

can be better protected and more people understand what the

Organization is for and what it is all about. People also then feel

encouraged and cope more vigorously and perseveringly with adversity,

anguish, humiliation and the kind of pain that they experience on a

daily basis as they strive to ensure that those that govern them

respect their dignity.

Of course all human rights are important. Without them international

peace is an illusion. At the moment, however, I want to refer to the

right to vote, the right to work and the right to life. And I want to

make a general comment on economic and social rights, which also play

a major role in the important task of creating a community of nations

more free from tension and combating the present erosion of efforts

in support of peace.

The right to vote ensures the right to political participation in all

areas at all levels. It makes it possible for the people of the world

to be the true forgers of their destiny instead of this being done by

minority cliques and those that have seized power and the

representation of the majorities on the pretext of the alleged

inability of those that know what is best for the development of the

personality of the nation and how to contribute intelligently to the

common well- being. The right to vote for government. By means of the

vote the right to self-determination, embodied by the United Nations

in a number of most important documents, is exercised.

For this purpose nothing can replace free periodical and fair

elections. The use of violence, such as terrorism and guerrilla

warfare, can certainly not replace the right to vote. The former is a

blot on modem society, although it has a long history. Among some

totalitarian forces there is a tendency to exalt terrorism as a means

of social struggle. But fortunately, mankind has reacted vigorously

against any justification of this kind of political and social

action. Mankind supports instead a democratic struggle for the

dignity of all human beings and particularly those that have been

excluded from the productive mainstream of society. We must take

advantage of this healthy universal reaction to perfect national and

international juridical means of dealing with this very serious

threat to peace. The latter, guerrilla warfare, which also has a long

history, has become a very important factor nowadays. There is

sometimes a great deal of ambivalence about guerrilla warfare. When

it is a question of peoples exercising their right to rebellion, it

is often a last resort in defending their fundamental freedoms. On

the other hand, when the right to vote is a possibility and when

there are other ways of ensuring the smooth functioning of democracy,

guerrilla warfare appears to be a totalitarian weapon which disrupts

society in a profound and often irreparable manner. It is thus an

ally of anarchy which destroys any effort to bring about the common

good.

Therefore, in order to replace bullets by votes, it was decided, at

the meeting of Foreign Ministers on 4 October in San Jose, Costa

Rica, to create a body to promote and advise on the subject of

democratic elections, the purpose of which would be to ensure an

electoral system throughout the continent, promote and foster this

process in the Americas and provide advice on the practice of the

system to countries requesting it.

The recent tragic events relating to the courageous trade union,

Solidarity, in Poland have aroused world public opinion regarding the

subject of the right to work. Costa Rica believes that the United

Nations should promote days of study on work and other rights related

to it, such as the freedom to create trade unions independent of

Governments. My Government suggests that the United Nations arrange a

seminar with high-level participation to consider in depth the

admirable encyclical of His Holiness Pope John Paul II as a

contribution to peace. The encyclical will arouse the awareness of

the peoples and may ensure that Governments reach appropriate

decisions which will mitigate the tension that leads to social

injustice and endangers peace. In the hope that this idea of a

seminar will be accepted by the United Nations, the Government of

Costa Rica takes this opportunity of offering its capital as the

headquarters.

We should bear in mind the basic thinking of His Holiness, or at

least this essential part: in particular, makes possible pluralist

participation in the choice "Commitment to justice must be closely

linked with commitment to peace in the modem world."

This is linked to the role of work and the worker in the quest for peace:

"... human work is a key, probably the essential key, to the whole

social question, if we try to see that question really from the point

of view of man's good. And if the solution-or rather, the gradual

solution-of the social question, which keeps coming up and becomes

ever more complex, must be sought in the direction of 'making life

more human', then the key, namely human work, acquires fundamental

and decisive importance."

Furthermore, another cardinal principle enunciated by John Paul II

should also be stressed here-the ethical value of work

"which clearly and directly remains linked to the fact that the one

who carries it out is a person, a conscious and free subject, that is

to say, a subject who decides about himself."

And here the Pope of the workers pauses to emphasize the subjective

dimension of work, rising from its dignity:

"... the basis for determining the value of human work is not

primarily the kind of work being done, but the fact that the one who

is doing it is a person."

114. Equally enlightening are some other thoughts which I shall now

sum up. First, rejection of "materialistic and economistic thought",

which equates work with goods and is the source of unheard of,

inhumane exploitation, even today, when the concept of capitalism at

any cost has been tempered. Hence, a different approach must be

adopted-one which comprehends the working man:

"... in accordance with the true dignity of his work-that is to

say,... as subject and maker, and, for this very reason, as the true

purpose of the whole process of production."

Secondly, the strengthening of worker solidarity, not only because

there are many different kinds of work and because there are still

many injustices which derive from the liberal socio-political system,

but also because:

"On the world level, the development of civilization and of

communications has made possible a more complete diagnosis of the

living and working conditions of man globally, but it has also

revealed other forms of injustice, much more extensive than those

which in the last century stimulated unity between workers for

particular solidarity in the working world. This is true in countries

which have completed a certain process of industrial revolution. It

is also true in countries where the main working milieu continues to

be agriculture or other similar occupations."

Thirdly, work, at the same time as it promotes a hierarchy of duties, is:

"... a source of rights on the part of the worker. These rights must

be examined in the broad context of human rights as a whole, which

are connatural with man." His Holiness also defends the right to

association for the defense of the vital interests of "those employed

in the various professions".

The right to life, furthermore, has aroused and continues to arouse

considerable polemics in all countries, in regard to the question of

the death penalty. The United Nations has not remained on the

sidelines of that important discussion, as is shown by the

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In order to

shed new light on the subject of capital punishment and to link it,

as it must be linked, to the struggle for the protection of

fundamental human rights, the Government of Costa Rica has convened a

world congress to commemorate the one hundredth anniversary of the

abolition of the death penalty in Costa Rica. My Government and the

people of Costa Rica hope that many will participate in the

conference. We wish to create a climate which would lead to the

abolition of such a drastic punishment, which is so prone to error

and arbitrary use. Costa Rica would be greatly honored if the

Secretary- General would be present at the opening of that congress

in December this year. My Government also supports the efforts of all

countries which advocate abolition of the death penalty and

particularly the efforts by the delegations of the Federal Republic

of Germany and Sweden.

As I have already stressed, economic, social and cultural rights are

no less important and deserve our full attention. The comparison

between those rights and civil and political rights-a comparison that

was valid in an earlier time for the purpose of stressing the former,

is outmoded. It is today generally recognized that the enjoyment of

social justice in liberty is indispensable. But if economic, social

and cultural rights, enshrined in the International Covenant, are to

be enjoyed, there must be transformations in the structures of

States, which is much more difficult to achieve than changes needed

to bring about the enjoyment of this other set of rights. Such

structures are the heirs to odious privileges of the few, which have

been prejudicial to the rights of the many dispossessed. They also

represent cruel forms of repression, perhaps more ruthless and

inhumane than those generated by lack of respect for the fundamental

rights and freedoms of men and citizens, because they intensify the

pain and despair of the weakest. Moreover, the changes that are

needed to bring about the enjoyment of economic and social rights

require more time and more financial and technological resources, as

well as a degree of national and international consensus that is much

greater and more solid in nature. For that reason, the United Nations

must concern itself with showing Member States that here, too, there

are real causes of discontent that affect world peace in a direct way

and with devastating force. Governments would thus be' come more

interested in the social reforms that are

required.

The Government of Costa Rica is also concerned about other problems

that tend to work against peace. With greater eloquence than mine,

representatives have referred to the catastrophic developments in the

world economy, which have had a devastating effect on the development

and political stability of the vast majority of States Members of the

United Nations. Today I should like to add my voice to the powerful

voices that have spoken out in alarm and protest against this state

of affairs. In particular I should like to highlight the situation in

Latin America.

The year 1981 was one of the worst of the post-war period from the

economic standpoint. All the indices suggest that there will be a

greater deterioration in the immediate future. The stagnation of our

economies, the galloping inflation which characterizes most of our

economies, the deterioration in the terms of trade and the serious

disequilibrium in the balance of payments which accompanies it

disrupt social peace and make it more difficult to find democratic

political solutions to the serious problems besetting many countries.

Our region has seen its external debt doubled in only three years,

and today it exceeds $240 billion. This is the result of an attempt

to replace a lack of dynamism in exports, brought about to some

extent by the weak demand of the developed countries, by an influx of

capital, with increasingly higher interest rates.

In the circumstances, it is disappointing that today there is not the

necessary political consensus to ensure a take-off in global

negotiations. Recognizing the structural problems which characterize

international economic relations and emphasizing that a global

discussion of these problems is necessary, we share the opinion of

those that say it is urgent that short-term action be taken to

prevent the complete collapse of the weaker economies.

For this reason it is necessary that we start work on an emergency

programme encompassing, infer a//a, the following actions: first,

initiatives to increase the flow of trade by means of eliminating

barriers to the exports of the developing countries and by means of

greater South-South exchange; secondly, the creation of compensatory

funds to reduce the impact of the deterioration in the terms of

trade; thirdly, better promotion of joint investment by the

industrialized and developing countries in the latter; fourthly, the

increase, on a generous and disinterested basis, of the flow of

resources towards multilateral financing bodies and technological

co-operation to improve the liquidity of the developing countries;

and, fifthly, the promotion of greater understanding and tolerance in

those bodies as regards the implementation of economic measures in

such a way as to ensure a better balance between the objectives of

reactivation and of stabilization.

We should like to stress that the adoption of a programme such as the

one just mentioned should not be seen as a substitute for greater

efforts leading to the creation of a new economic order. We believe,

however, that these measures are in keeping with the spirit of the

new order, that they would help to establish a climate more conducive

to the success of initiatives concerning the structural change that

we desire and that they would create necessary conditions-although

perhaps not all the conditions-for the peace and security which our

peoples deserve.

In this respect, the meeting of Foreign Ministers held at San Jose on

4 October drew

"... the attention of the industrialized democratic countries to the

need to increase co-operation with the democratic countries of the

region, with bold and effective initiatives which will contribute to

the efforts to ensure recovery and economic and social development

which are being made by the countries of the region concerned".

In addition to those that I have mentioned, there are, of course,

many other reasons why the general picture of present international

relations so gloomy. The situation in the Middle East requires that

we dedicate ourselves, free from the heavy burden of prejudices,

obstacles and past events, to the search for peace for that tormented

region. My Government hopes that all the States of the Middle East

will make the changes and reach the agreements necessary, for an

honorable lasting peace that will guarantee the sovereignty,

security, peace and well-being of all the States of the area. This

applies in particular to the noble people of Lebanon, who deserve to

be allowed to return to the condition of their glorious past. At the

same time, the Government of Costa Rica is confident that the

long-suffering and noble people of Palestine will in the not too

distant future see the end of their present precarious existence.

Then Palestinians will be able, like all other nations, to enjoy

peace, work and respect for their dignity, in harmony with their

neighbors and with universal recognition of their many virtues.

For the subjugated peoples of South Africa and Namibia my country

hopes that the hour of liberation will soon come. To this end, the

increasingly active participation of the international community,

encouraged and guided by the United Nations, is essential.

My Government feels great satisfaction at the constructive efforts

being made by the Government of the Republic of Korea to bring about

the reunification of that country on the basis of its recent

proposals. Whatever is done must be in line with the aims and

purposes of the United Nations regarding the reunification of Korea.

Costa Rica recognizes the peace-loving and hard-working nature of the

friendly and noble people of the Republic of Korea.

Costa Rica welcomes the fact that the dear sister Republic of

Argentina has taken the initiative in pressing its just claim to the

Malvinas Islands in this United Nations forum and hopes that the

negotiations will prove fruitful. The association of the

Secretary-General with the dialogue, in accordance with a proposal of

which Costa Rica was a sponsor, is a guarantee that the parties will

reach an honorable and peaceful final agreement.

Costa Rica shows the concern expressed in this Hall at what is

happening in Cyprus, Afghanistan and Kampuchea, where situations in

violation of the principles of the Charter continue.

I should now like to take up the subject specifically referred to by

the Secretary-General in his report on the work of the Organization.

I refer to what he has called "the prevailing convulsion of Central

America".

More than four decades ago we, the democratic sectors promoting

social change and freedom in Central America anticipated the present

crisis in the area. Our predictions were based on the existence of

economic and social structures and systems of military government

which legalized them. They constituted forms of oppression whose

inevitable end result would be the rebellion of peoples fighting

against the lack of social justice and for freedom. Today the

explosion of popular wrath has assumed a virulent form as a result of

that anti-democratic record.

But what was perhaps not anticipated was the international

circumstances prevailing during the final confrontation between the

peoples and the dictatorships. We did not anticipate all the

implications of this global confrontation today between democracy and

totalitarianism, a confrontation that would thoroughly disrupt

efforts to adapt these new forces to present realities in Central

America. What was particularly unexpected was that, on behalf of

freedom, social justice and democracy, an effort would be made after

the predictable rebellion to establish another unanticipated form of

totalitarianism, thereby flouting the very ideals which impelled the

forces of change. Yet that is precisely what is happening today. This

other form of totalitarianism, bolstered by open intervention by

forces outside the Central American area, has only sharpened the

conflict, polarized political ideas and created new formidable

obstacles to democratic, representative and pluralistic government

devoted to social justice, without the need for the bloodshed and

confrontation now rending the peoples of the Central American nations

apart.

In an effort to produce a realistic way out of the present crisis

besetting Central America, the President of Costa Rica, Luis Alberto

Monge, on the very day he assumed power on 8 May of this year, began

to put into practice what he had advocated in his electoral campaign,

namely, a broad alliance of democratic forces and Governments in

order to confront the totalitarian offense and promote the values,

machinery and goals of representative, pluralistic and participatory

democracy for clearly social purposes. For this purpose, infer in a

joint declaration of the heads of State attending the ceremony of the

transfer of power on 8 May, it was agreed, on Costa Rica's

initiative, that there would be created a good offices group which

would have as its special mandate the study of the various peace

initiatives that had been presented by various Governments in order

to bring about the relaxation of tension in Central America, as well

as other proposals that might be presented for the same purpose in

the future. Ever since, my country has stressed the need for this

kind of machinery or one similar to it that would make it possible

for the parties directly involved in the conflict to sit at the

negotiating table. And so it was that the Government of Costa Rica

decided to convene a meeting of foreign ministers of countries

interested in the pro-, motion of democracy in Central America and in

the Caribbean whose Governments have been legitimized through

elections.

On 4 October, at San Jose, at the invitation of the Costa Rican

Government there met representatives of Belize, Colombia, the

Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Honduras, Jamaica, Panama, the

United States and Costa Rica. The Governments of Mexico and Venezuela

were also invited. Panama and the

Dominican Republic participated as observers, and the latter signed

the Final Act. At the conclusions of the deliberations on the main

factors obstructing democratic processes in the area, faith was

reaffirmed in representative, pluralistic and participatory democracy

and the foundation was laid for the promotion of democracy and peace

in our area.

Regarding that democracy, the participating ministers declared:

"Their faith in and acceptance of the principles of representative,

pluralistic and participatory democracy, which thus understood

constitute a way of life, thought and action, with room for differing

social and economic systems and structures, but having a common

denominator, namely, respect for life, personal security, freedom of

thought, freedom of the press and of religion, and the right to work

and to proper remuneration, just living conditions, the free exercise

of the right to vote and other human, civil, political, economic,

social and cultural rights."

As regards the promotion of peace in the area, the Ministers stated

"Their conviction that in order to foster peace and regional stability it is

necessary to promote internally political awareness leading to the

creation of democratic, representative, pluralistic and participatory

systems; the establishment of machinery for multilateral and

permanent dialogue; absolute respect for borders defined in existing

treaties, respect for which is the best way of preventing border

disputes and incidents, with due account being taken, where

necessary, of traditional lines of jurisdiction. There must also be

respect for the independence and territorial integrity of States; use

or threats to use force to settle conflicts must be rejected; the

arms race must cease and, on a full basis of reciprocity, external

factors obstructing a lasting and stable peace must be eliminated."

In addition, the ministers felt that it was necessary to emphasize

certain actions of particular importance which were essential in

formulating a realistic, viable peace plan. For this reason, they

stated that:

"... it is essential for a peace plan that each country, in the

region and outside of it, carry out the following actions: first, to

create and maintain institutions of government which are truly

democratic, based on the popular will as expressed in free and

untainted elections, based on the principle that the Government is

responsible to the governed; secondly, to respect human rights,

especially the right to life and security of person, and fundamental

freedoms, freedom of expression, information, assembly and worship,

and the right to organize political parties, labor unions and other

groups and associations; thirdly, to foster national reconciliation

wherever profound divisions within society have occurred, by

extending opportunities to participate within the framework of

democratic institutions and procedures; fourthly, to respect the

principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of States and

the right of peoples to self-determination; fifthly, to prevent the

use of the territory of a country to support, supply, train or

supervise terrorists or subversive elements acting in other States,

putting an end to the traffic in weapons and materials, and

refraining from direct or indirect support for terrorists or

subversive or other activities designed to bring about the violent

overthrow of the Government of another State; sixthly, to limit

weapons and the scale of military and security forces to levels which

are strictly necessary for the maintenance of public order and

national defense; seventhly, to ensure, in accordance with reciprocal

and fully verifiable terms, international control of all ports of

entry and other border areas which are of strategic importance;

eighthly, to effect withdrawal, on a fully reciprocal basis, from the

Central American area of all foreign military and security advisors

and personnel, and the banning of imports of heavy weapons of an

obviously offensive nature in accordance with procedures which ensure

proper verification.

"These actions represent an integrated framework in each State which

is essential for the promotion of regional peace and stability."

As already stated, it is, of course, quite clear that without

appropriate means or machinery to analyses this peace plan and other

proposals with the same purpose, they all run the risk of being

ineffective, and that would be tragic. For that reason, at the San

Jose meeting which I have referred to, the ministers agreed "to set

themselves up as a Forum for Peace and Democracy", a forum which

could be extended through the inclusion or the collaboration of other

democratic States. The Forum could recommend specific actions to

representatives of participating countries, and they should report on

the results and transmit the final act of the meeting to other

States, so that they can present any appropriate comments and views.

The representatives asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Costa

Rica to transmit the final act, on behalf of the participating

Governments, to the Governments of the region and to other

Governments concerned, in order to obtain their views on the

principles and conditions for peace set forth therein.

They decided to convene a new meeting as soon as possible in order to

assess the progress being made in implementing the aims of the

declaration.

The Forum for Peace and Democracy is an expression of a common will;

it does not constitute an official body, and therefore has the

necessary flexibility and dynamism to carry out its great task. The

nucleus of the Forum is made up of Belize, Colombia, El Salvador,

Honduras, Jamaica, the Dominican Republic, the United States and

Costa Rica. Whatever democratic countries from the area wish to

become members of the Forum may do so, and a second group can be made

up of democratic countries which wish to co-operate with the Forum

without actually belonging to it. Here I should like to stress that

the Forum was created so that there might be the participation in it

of all countries involved in conflicts in Central America that

disrupt peace, so that they could explain their views and make peace

proposals; and this has already been done by Nicaragua, Honduras,

Mexico, the United States and Panama individually, and by Mexico and

Venezuela jointly, apart from the eight other countries that met at

San Jose and created the Forum and proposed the aforementioned plan

for regional peace.

As part of the mandate assigned to me at the San Jose meeting, I have

already circulated its final act and I am now taking the steps

required to enable the Forum to be used as a practical instrument for

waging this great peace offensive of the democracies. We hope that,

with the support of those peoples who desire peace, democracy,

freedom and social justice, this new initiative of the Forum for

Peace and Democracy will meet with a warm response and understanding,

because we believe that this is the broadest, most comprehensive and

most viable means of achieving the ends we all so much desire.

Costa Rica is a country with long diplomatic traditions; we are

peace-loving and unarmed. We neither want nor are able to become

involved in any armed conflict in Central America. But neither can we

refrain from contributing to peace efforts in Central America. Costa

Rica's security depends on security and peace in the region. For this

reason Costa Rica has sincerely and eagerly devoted its efforts to

convening the meeting of foreign ministers concerned for peace and

democracy in Central America and the Caribbean, whose Governments are

the result of the electoral process. As I have already stated, that

meeting took place on 4 October in the capital of my country. For

that reason also, Costa Rica, on 8 May of this year, proposed the

creation of the Forum for Peace and Democracy, which began to

function at that San Jose meeting.

For the first time ever, there is now a procedure whereby all parties

concerned can sit down together and, without any delays or excuses,

engage in a frank, constructive dialogue. If any party does not avail

itself of that opportunity, one can only conclude that, essentially,

there are elements more interested in seeking violent confrontation.

I am confident, however, that this peace initiative of ours and the

machinery to implement it will be accepted by everyone. The peoples

of the region, which yearn for peace, security and democracy, have

their eyes turned to us to see how we, the leaders of their

Governments, fulfil our lofty duties.

On this glorious anniversary of the discovery of America, I conclude

my statement with a tribute to Spain and to its extraordinary people

which has given us its values and taught us, through the centuries,

how to overcome all adversity in the persevering quest for the

dignity and happiness of every human being.