Colombia, 1994

It is a great honour for me, as President of

Colombia, to speak in the General Assembly, which, as the

Organization reaches the fiftieth anniversary of its

establishment, remains the principal forum for the

discussion of topics of concern to mankind and for the

search for peaceful solutions to its distressing problems.

Fifty years ago, when the United Nations system was

created, the world hoped that the spectre of war was finally

being laid to rest. But lack of understanding between

nations, ideological fanaticism and the politics of force led

to the world’s polarization into two antagonistic blocs. For

many years, the cold war put on ice the hopes held at the

beginning for developing a world-wide system of

coexistence. Such coexistence reappears today when we

see a black person at the helm of South Africa; when we

see Palestinians and Jews discussing fruit groves in the hills

of the Golan; and when we see all Berliners drinking good

Colombian coffee on the spot where the wall of infamy

once stood.

Before the end of this century, we shall have to strive

to resolve peacefully the most important conflict to outlive

the cold war: the conflict with the brotherly Republic of

Cuba.

We now have the happy opportunity of reviving the

spirit of the San Francisco Charter and of reinitiating the

deferred task of building a new world system based on

solidarity, respect for the self-determination of peoples

and the real search for better living conditions for all - as

was stated a few years ago before the General Assembly,

by a distinguished Colombian, Indalecio Liévano Aguirre,

in his capacity as its President.

The history of the 1990s must not be one more

record of the frustration of our aspirations to peace, well-

being and justice. Our objective can be nothing less than

the human person. Our actions must be directed towards

the struggle against poverty and for the attainment of

social justice. Our commitment is to make the arbitrary

use of power and abuses of human rights things of the

past.

But this task - this vital task - is not free of threats.

Neoprotectionism threatens the free-trade prospects of

developing countries. It is true that tariff protectionism

has come to an end, but a new and dangerous form of

protectionism is now emerging: non-tariff protectionism:

barriers to the export of plants and vegetables, customs

barriers, quotas, anti-dumping clauses, social clauses, the

rationale of "reasons of State", and fears of losing

elections. We developing countries are no longer

struggling against the barbed wire of hostile tariff

barriers: we are struggling against an army of invisible

enemies moved by the most diverse interests and

systematically opposed to the rhetorical aspiration to free

trade - an aspiration that would seem to have something

in common with our feelings about paradise: we all want

to get there, but not quite yet.

Impoverishment is another threat. Granted, we are

all committed to the openness of our economies, but that

must not mean that we can ignore the need to manage the

obvious social costs. Unemployment, the postponement

of social investment programmes and neglect of the living

conditions of the rural population can ultimately

delegitimize in vast regions of the world - this, at least, is

true of Latin America - the efforts made over many years

to democratize our political systems. The only thing

more serious than poverty is impoverishment, and it is

beginning to make itself felt in many parts of the world.

Either we leaders renew our commitment to the people or

the social costs of economic change will in the end

destroy our achievements in political consolidation.

Finally, there is the threat of the formation of blocs.

The development of economic blocs runs counter to the

6

idea of a world based on the democratic rules of free trade

for all on an equal footing. What is at stake today is not

the exchange of goods and services but rather the exchange

of the means necessary to produce those goods and

services.

Selective appropriation of the means of production

puts those of us in the developing countries in the worst of

worlds. We do not have the means of production nor do

we have fair access to them, but we do have the arduous

responsibility of competing on an equal footing with the

world’s most industrialized countries.

It is not a matter of repeating the third-world litany of

complaints and demands. The point here is to define new

rules that can enable us to gain access to technology and to

finance our infrastructures on favourable terms, that can

enable us to reach acceptable levels of competitiveness, that

can enable us to break with dependency on the cartels of

service companies and to buy market outlets in a world

where what counts and what is important is not producing,

but selling.

That aspiration to develop new conditions that can

enable us to play a vital role within the new spectrum of

world forces must take the shape of a new development

model for our countries, an alternative model which I

should like to discuss with you this afternoon in this Hall.

I am speaking of an alternative model that will be an

alternative to the protectionist system of the 1960s, for the

globalization of the economy requires not only open and

competitive economies but an alternative to the

neoliberalism that irresponsibly leaves it to the market to

correct all imbalances.

I am speaking of an alternative to the old assistance

populism, for there must be social change based on

economic criteria, and for an alternative to fierce

capitalism, which sets up the rule of every man for himself

as a form of social selectionism.

I am speaking of an alternative to the blind criteria of

public interventionism as well as an alternative to attempts

to sell out the State to the highest self-interested bidders, to

the Government abandoning its own responsibilities with

regard to the unprotected masses.

I am speaking of an alternative to anachronistic

concepts of representative democracy but also of an

alternative for meeting attempts to reduce the free play of

democracy to sterile confrontation between private interests.

The objective of this alternative model, the model of

the South, should be the establishment of a new and more

productive citizen in the economy, a citizen who

participates to a greater degree in politics and who is

more supportive in the social sphere.

Words and phrases like "social investment", "good

governmen t" , "ag r i cu l tu ra l deve lopmen t" ,

"competitiveness", "harmonization" and "gradualness" are

all part of a new alternative vocabulary that will enable us

to speak the language of a new identity, of our own

identity as countries seeking our own way.

The new model of development, if it is to be

genuine and not simply an abstraction, must take into

account some basic elements.

First, it must allow for the modernization of our

productive structures. We gain nothing if we continue to

open markets when we have nothing to sell, because we

produce nothing or very little.

Modernization goes hand in hand with the

development of an adequate infrastructure of

transportation and communications and the optimum use

of energy sources.

We must develop new conditions of productivity,

especially in the field of technology, and adopt more

efficient and environmentally sustainable production

processes. The world today is not divided between the

haves and the have-nots but, rather, between those who

know and those who do not, and we, the developing

countries, are among those who lack knowledge. We

must buy, develop and assimilate new technologies.

Secondly, there is the concept of social solidarity.

Our greatest challenge in this sphere is to give legitimacy

to a new economic system through real social-

development proposals. Investing in the human being is

the best business. Investment in health, education and

housing is highly profitable, not only in social terms but -

especially - in economic terms.

Thirdly, in addressing those two great revolutions of

competitiveness and solidarity it is necessary to change

the ideas of those who today act as agents of the

economic process.

What should the role of Government be? Above and

beyond the dilemma of privatization or nationalization,

the dilemma of whether or not to reduce the size of

7

Government, it is imperative that Government work, and

that it do so honestly. Good governance must be our goal

in reforming Government.

Good Government means building a new type of

Government, one that promotes efficiency. It means the

training of technically skilled bureaucracies. It means

transparency and the streamlining of administrative

procedures in such a way that the roots of corruption are

extirpated. It means administrative decentralization and

citizen participation, and it means the organizing of civil

society on bases other than the old contradictions between

capital and labour.

Fourthly, and lastly, we must bear in mind that this

process is occurring in the context of the globalization of

the world economy and of interindependence among

peoples. The principal problems affecting every country

today are no longer merely national in nature; they are

global, and for that reason they require the coordinated

action of all nations.

The new cooperation the international community

requires is based on adjusting domestic policies to global

objectives within a framework of respect for the

sovereignty of States, the principles of international law and

domestic legislation. Only if we can attain a new concept

of cooperation will we avoid the pitfall of interventionism,

which threatens to make its way through the open door of

interdependence and globalization. Cooperation, as an

alternative to intervention, is the route that can ensure for

the community of nations the fulfilment of its aspirations

for peace and stability.

I come from Colombia, a country that respects

international law and the principles that ensure peaceful

coexistence; a country that has placed its faith in Latin

American and Caribbean integration; a country with a

dynamic Constitution and an economy sound as few others

in Latin America; a country that is moving forward thanks

to the sacrifices and steadfast labour of its people, creative

people avid for progress and imbued with a sense of the

magic of life about which García Márques, our Nobel

laureate, has written; a country searching for peace because

it so loves life.

The times we are now living in are times of crisis, but

also of opportunities. In Colombia we have had to learn to

live with terrible difficulties, always inspired by the biblical

invitation to maintain a vision as a people in order to

prevail as a nation.

I know that some here must have asked themselves

why I have not referred in this speech to the problem

with which my country is everywhere associated: the

problem of drug trafficking. I have not done so because

in Colombia we believe that we are entitled to be

recognized by other, positive factors: those that identify

us as an honest, hard-working people that offers respect

to friendly countries and expects respect in return.

Of course, we have struggled and will continue to

struggle out of conviction, while paying a high price to

fight the scourge of mankind that is drug trafficking. But

I must confess that we sometimes feel alone in this task.

We feel alone when we see the drug consumption rates

increase in countries that request our help to defeat a

problem whose origins and consequences concern all of

us. We feel alone, very much alone, when we see

mayors who are avowed chronic drug users elected by

popular vote. We feel alone when, after extensive efforts

to eradicate illicit crops, the doors are closed to us when

it comes to selling exactly those products that we have

managed to cultivate, with great effort, as alternative

crops.

Therefore, in the midst of this lonely struggle that

has left many victims dead in the fields, a struggle of

which I count myself a fortunate survivor, what many of

us want is for Colombia to be looked at from a different

perspective - that it be recognized for the soundness of its

economy, that Colombia be taken into account when it

comes to investment decisions. We want those present

here to get to know the Colombian people - my people.

We want visitors to see our country so that many more

people the world over will be as much in love with my

country as are those of us who were born, who live and

who will die in that privileged corner of Latin America -

Colombia.