Haiti, 2009

Allow me at

the outset to convey my congratulations to the

President of the General Assembly and to wish him

very fruitful work.

Can you imagine a General Assembly where the

representatives of States and Governments who follow

one another on this rostrum would bring us only good

news, inform us that our world is doing better and that

most development indicators are at their best level

ever? We are very far indeed from such an ideal.

It would even seem that, in addition to numerous

crises of all kinds — food, energy, financial and so

forth — that are already exacting a very high toll on

our populations, some of us must now get used to

recurrent upheavals resulting from natural disasters.

Each time, we have to rebuild the same ruined

infrastructure; we have to restore the same productive

capacities that have been swept away by cyclones and

floods. And, for lack of sufficient resources, the

reconstruction process is never launched in time. We

find we are having to prepare for the return of these

disasters even before our communities have recovered

from the previous ones. This, evidently, is the new life

cycle that vulnerable countries such as ours must be

prepared for. With, of course, insufficient resources at

their disposal.

39 09-52425

This situation is no accident. It is the direct

consequence of a development and governance model

that nations recognized as powerful have imposed on

the rest of the world for centuries: a development and

governance model that is largely concerned with the

welfare of money and too little with the welfare of

people; a development model that, even in very rich

countries, imposes a precarious existence on major

sections of the population, which lack health care,

decent housing and even a good education.

Why should the whole of humankind accept that

half the inhabitants of our planet should live with these

privations, in hunger and misery, with no prospect of

improvement in their situation? Why should the whole

of humankind accept that our planet should be

endangered irresponsibly, that species should be

condemned to extinction or that, through climate

change, our populations should become more

vulnerable to natural disasters merely because of

selfish economic choices by a small minority of

polluters?

What substance can we give to our membership

in this human community that the United Nations seeks

to champion? To paraphrase George Orwell, beyond a

certain level of inequality, there is no common world

anymore. The glaring inequalities that characterize our

countries’ situations are an obstacle to the formation of

the great family that the United Nations should be.

The time has come to oppose the globalization of

profit at any price, which has become the new credo,

and to replace it with the globalization of solidarity,

which alone will ensure the eradication of poverty, as

required by this Assembly.

Here, I should reiterate to members that the true

vehicle for peace, stability and security is development.

The aid received by our countries will be ineffective

and a source of great frustration for donors and

beneficiaries unless it is part of a plan to create and

develop the productive potential of our countries. That

is the only way to put an end to the cycle of poverty

and dependence.

Haitians, like many other peoples of the South,

are a hardworking, clever and entrepreneurial people

equipped with great resilience forged by dealing with

daily setbacks and able to utilize to the extreme and

optimize the scant resources made available to them.

Our peoples yearn to mobilize that potential and that

capacity to take the path of sustainable development.

Developing our countries is thus a possible

endeavour. However, all the efforts under way could

remain ineffective unless we are able to develop a new

paradigm for international cooperation — a paradigm

requiring that we transcend the logic of human

assistance and recognize the capacity of poor peoples

to engage in business and produce wealth, using the

means and opportunities afforded them to strengthen

their productive capacity. Without such a new vision,

which breaks with the culture of perpetual

humanitarian assistance, peace and stability will

remain precarious and fleeting achievements.

Permit me to add a few words about Haiti,

because my country is the focus of particular attention

by the Security Council. Over the past three years,

despite the negative effects of numerous international

crises on our economy, significant progress has been

made, in particular in the areas of security, respect for

human rights, the investment climate, eliminating

corruption and building a friendly society in which

dialogue occupies a central place, supported and

reported on by totally free and independent media.

That progress must be deepened and expanded. That is

why United Nations support is necessary for us.

In his report to the Security Council, the

Secretary-General recommended that the mandate of

the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti

(MINUSTAH) be extended for another year. That

proposal is most welcome, and we fully endorse it. We

are convinced that the right balance among its military,

police and administrative components will best place

MINUSTAH to assist our country more effectively in

consolidating an atmosphere of peace and stability,

without making it indifferent to our struggle to rebuild

and to reduce poverty and vulnerability. I thank the

Secretary-General for having chosen Bill Clinton as his

Special Envoy to our country. I also thank the former

President, a friend of Haiti, for having agreed to help

us.

Many summits organized under United Nations

auspices produce resolutions and commitments that are

consigned to oblivion or indifference when the time

comes to implement them. It is our shared

responsibility to work to ensure that this general debate

is not pure ritual in which, from this lofty rostrum, we

use rhetoric to share our ideas about major

international issues, express our good intentions, make

tempting promises and leave again without any real

09-52425 40

desire to take appropriate measures to keep our

commitments.

For example, will we accept the fact that the

President of Honduras, José Manuel Zelaya,

legitimately elected by his people, has been deposed by

the military and that the many resolutions adopted by

various regional organizations condemning that coup

d’état remain dead letters? Similarly, every year for

more than 15 years now, the General Assembly has

adopted a resolution condemning the embargo against

the Cuban people. The continuation of that embargo

runs counter to all the values that we promote to make

international trade a tool for human development.

When will rhetoric be replaced by action?