Peru, 1995

Mr. President, on this important occasion, allow me to

extend the congratulations of the people and Government

of Peru upon your distinguished and well-deserved

election to preside over the work of the fiftieth session of

the General Assembly. We are confident that your broad

experience and ability will make Portugal’s presidency a

high-water mark in this exceptional anniversary marking

half a century of the United Nations Organization.

Peru, like all the nations gathered here, is facing a

time of awesome changes in social, political and

economic practices and in international equilibria as this

century draws to a close. Those changes have altered our

vision of the world and introduced positive elements of

cardinal importance, but have also left questions and

shadows that cause the greatest concern. Moreover, the

shared approaches that have characterized these last few

years do not in themselves resolve many of the

substantive problems of the international system, such as

those pertaining to collective security, economic and

social development and the defence of the perennial

values that guarantee a worthy and peaceful life for

peoples and individuals.

During the space of a decade my country

experienced the worst social, political and economic crisis

in its 174 years of history as an independent nation. A

painful and futile internal conflict, brought on by

intransigence and ideological utopianism, added to the

waste of public resources and Governments overwhelmed

by the nation’s problems, led Peru into a deep internal

crisis with grave international consequences. Over the last

10

five years, the Government of President Alberto Fujimori

has succeeded in overcoming the internal confrontation,

restoring a healthy and vigorous economic order and re-

establishing Peru’s international ties. In this context, it is

very important to stress that we have set forth on the way

to turning external difficulties into patterns of normalcy and

the potential consolidation of our relations with

neighbouring countries, with which we wish above all to

cultivate cooperation.

All of us here are aware that threats to international

peace and security arise from the deterioration of the social,

economic and institutional fabric of States, and that their

worst effects, such as internal armed conflicts, drug

trafficking, corruption and the inevitable sequel of those

ills, poverty, are the seed-bed in which international

conflicts tend to germinate. And all sensible people also

know that the antidote to those ills is to be found in the

permanent values common to all of mankind’s great

civilizations, the values that should guide the effective

effort of the international community to overcome those

acute evils.

We have left behind the international system

dominated by the cold war between the super-Powers and

the absurd faith in philosophical and political determinism.

If we wish to build a world of justice and peace, we must

dispense with the rhetorical exercises to which we became

accustomed during that fortunately bygone era. We need

objective points of reference for the international system

that will avoid unilateral interpretations or interpretations

that disregard the principles in force to bring about civilized

coexistence among nations. And this requires us to refute

the cynical idea that the values of the international system

do not exist, or that they are entirely subordinate to

relations of force between nations.

All of this implies taking initiatives to enhance and

defend objective principles of international law, as the only

possible foundation for the present international system. We

see with great concern how ethnic, geographical and

utopian myths and revisionisms are becoming a boundless

source of suffering for millions of men and women in our

time, gravely disturbing fragile international balances.

The struggle of the Cold War undermined the legal

principles concerning avoidance of the use of force, respect

for international treaties and the principle of

non-intervention. Today, we have a duty to look upon

international law with a new gaze; we must understand that,

although international law does not in itself resolve the

world’s problems, it will make this world safer and more

habitable, and ensure that its points of reference are more

stable. We have before us the intellectual challenge of

clarifying the content of the central rules of international

law in order to strengthen their legitimacy, and we also

have the obligation to improve the effectiveness of

international law, in both bilateral and multilateral

relations.

At the same time, we must not overlook the fact that

the security and development of nations rests, today more

than ever, upon respect for the social and intellectual

features that are peculiar to each culture, unquestionably

falling within a universal conception based on respect for

individual freedoms. We must resist attempts to impose

uniform “models” that prejudge and discriminate between

the world’s varying cultural forms. We must seek unity in

diversity and must not accept conditionalities that are

often advanced by groups foreign to the democratic

representation of States, whose effects upon our cultures

are negative.

There are those who argue that, having overcome the

ideological conflict that divided the world for 45 years,

we are now entering into a conflict of civilizations as the

last phase in the evolution of the modern world’s

conflicts. Without accepting the determinism implicit in

that view, we cannot fail to observe that a lack of respect

for the cultural diversity of the human species could

indeed become a source of profound disputes.

There has also been talk of the vanishing sovereignty

of States as a fait accompli, and it is claimed that this

would legitimize asymmetrical intervention by some

nations in the lives of other nations. The word

“sovereignty” evokes armies, ships and cannons and has

an ominous ring to it. However, if we take an objective

view of the matter, we cannot affirm that this is so. In its

essence, sovereignty is above all plenary legal and

political competence within a constitutional order. If we

are today actively seeking integration in many regions of

the world and if States, through various multilateral

treaties, are diminishing their jurisdiction over certain

aspects of their economic and social life, that is taking

place because States, in the exercise of that plenary

competence known as sovereignty, are voluntarily

delegating the exercise of specific jurisdictions to an

international organization for the greater good of a

particular international space. In so doing, States do not

derogate from their constitutions nor do they lose their

capacity to conclude international treaties as they see fit

or to legislate on countless other matters. And so we

believe that those who are seeking new legal and political

11

definitions of sovereignty should take care to respect its

essence, which is nothing other than respect for the

constitutional independence of the various countries of the

world.

Peru opted for a republican and democratic regime

based on a division of powers and officials elected by free

and universal suffrage. Its government is a limited

government that leaves broad areas of social, political and

economic life open to the free choice of its citizens.

However, this limited Government is not a minimal State

without social functions, for it has active responsibilities

and an important agenda to pursue in order to free the

poorest citizens from a culture of dependency and integrate

them fully into the life of the country. Peru seeks to

harmonize transmission of the valuable cultural traditions of

its people with the imperative needs of an open regionalism

and the defence of a coherent, legitimate and just

international order.

Basing itself upon those principles and aspirations,

Peru welcomes the thinking that is taking place during this

fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations and believes that

the Organization should give serious thought to its future

and to the course which international society is taking, so

as to achieve a more complete vision encompassing

different international realities based upon mutual respect

and fairness among Member States. We must take into

account the new regional realities and seek machinery that

is functional, economical and efficient, not hampered by

secondary issues or limited to powerlessly denouncing the

contradictions of the international system, in order to ensure

that the United Nations can be faithful to the purposes and

principles that inspired its creation.

We believe that we must discard the pragmatism that

styles itself realism and defend the fundamental principles

of a balanced and just international order. Peruvians believe

in defending the perennial values of mankind, individual

freedoms, international law as an objective benchmark for

international order, respect for the world’s cultures and the

constitutional independence of all the world’s nations. With

these beliefs, we pledge ourselves anew to the renewal of

the international system.