Peru, 1993

In 1990 the Peruvian people - heirs to an ancient culture,

who, like other peoples of the third world, suffered the

consequences of colonialism and later various frustrations

caused by our history - began to ask themselves more and

more why they had not reached a truly dignified level of

existence comparable to that of the developed countries.

Why was it that a rich nation, known for its

hard-working population and enjoying apparent democracy,

should have to suffer from hyperinflation, isolation from the

international financial community, terrorism, drug-trafficking,

corruption and internal and external debt? In short, why was

it ungovernable?

The so-called traditional democracy, which solved none

of Peru’s serious problems, had been nothing more than a

struggle between privileged minorities, the elite and party

leaders who took turns in power while the country sank

deeper and deeper into misery.

Nations, however, do not disintegrate in such crises;

rather, they are roused to carry out moral and material

reconstruction. Such has been the case in Peru.

I ask myself, and I ask all those present, the

representatives of all the nations of the world, "Which is the

first priority: the narrow, blind defence of an institutional

formality that is now worthless and obsolete, or a better

destiny for millions of human beings?"

Forty-eighth session - 1 October l993 7

We in Peru have experienced this disjunction which the

Government of President Boris Yeltsin in Russia is

experiencing so dramatically today.

Why should we fear making corrections in the course

of our history, however radical they may be? To govern is

to confront problems firmly, and not to defer, much less to

evade, decisions.

In exceptional circumstances, when the civilized

existence and survival of a nation is at stake, each country

has to find its own course and its own solutions and then

reconstruct its democracy in touch with its own reality.

Failing this, it will simply become ungovernable - a situation

that most often leads to anarchy, which in turn inevitably

generates violence.

The institutions of Peru’s incipient political system

proved to be among the most inefficient on the continent.

That was the context within which Shining Path and the

Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement came into existence.

The model for Shining Path is Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge.

This is why, for 10 years, that group’s activities were

directed toward destroying the existing system: industries,

laboratories, electrical towers, machinery, bridges, highways

and public buildings, costing the country US$ 25 billion in

material damages and losses. New York learned what

terrorist insanity is all about with the criminal attack on the

World Trade Center - an isolated case, thank goodness.

We had reached a clear and elemental disjunction:

either we stopped the crisis and the terrorism which steadily

nourished it, or the country would collapse completely. My

responsibility was to govern, not to serve as Peru’s undertaker.

Our anti-terrorist strategy has led to the reinstatement

of the principle of authority throughout the country,

particularly in places as dissimilar as state universities and

penitentiaries.

After being captured a year ago, Abimael Guzmán

made a fiery proclamation to all his followers to continue

relentlessly the war against the Peruvian State and its

society. Today, in a 180-degree turn, he appeals to your

speaker, the President of Peru, in order to retract his

previous atrocious objectives. This shows essentially that he

has inevitably come to terms with the total defeat of his

totalitarian project.

In fact, I recently received a revealing communication

from the leader of Shining Path, Abimael Guzmán, who is

in jail, in which he asked for "a peace agreement". I repeat,

Abimael Guzmán Reynoso has asked the President of Peru

to talk about a "peace agreement". But a "peace agreement"

implies negotiation between two belligerent groups

considered to be equal - equal not only militarily but also

from a moral and ethical standpoint. This is inadmissible,

for there can be no negotiations with a genocidal terrorist group -

described as such by the United Nations itself - whose

leader, having been captured, tried and sentenced last year

to life imprisonment, has absolutely no power to negotiate.

Moreover, there is no correlation of forces between the

Peruvian State and these criminals that could put them on an

equal footing. There can be no doubt that it has been

completely recognized that the State, the Armed Forces, the

National Police and the people of Peru are prevailing over

terrorism.

The Government of Peru is fully aware of its obligation

to respect the international principles of the Geneva

Convention. Nevertheless, it will make no concession in any

way that would jeopardize the process of restoring peace

completely to Peru. Through the attainment of peace in our

country and the definitive eradication of terrorism, we are

also preventing the spread of terrorism to the rest of the

Southern Cone of our continent.

The Peruvian Government and its people will tirelessly

continue their effort to fight terrorist violence, with or

without requests from the heads of these organizations. If

they really wish peace to be achieved as soon as possible,

they should immediately and unconditionally stop terrorist

actions and their methods of propagation, as a preliminary

step enabling the Peruvian State to prevent further bloodshed

and suffering for the Peruvian people and to take the further

steps required to facilitate the process by which the

Government will fully consolidate national peace before the

date I promised to my fellow citizens, that is, 1995.

Twenty-five thousand deaths; hundreds of thousands of

refugee peasants displaced from their villages; thousands of

widows and orphans; hundreds of handicapped and maimed,

including civilian, police and military; thousands of children

who have grown up in the middle of a cruel war; $25 billion

of material waste; an entire country paralysed by terror and

uncertainty: this is the sum of 13 fateful years, during

which a State considered to be democratic appeared not to

exist in the face of totalitarian terror. The end of this

vicious circle is approaching after 17 months - barely 17 months -

of the counter-terrorist strategy developed by my

8 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session

Government. Now we can talk about the State and

democracy in Peru.

In our country, a new and exemplary democracy is

being devised. It has some unusual elements: the common

man’s awareness of his chronic exclusion from the

mainstream of civic life; his experience and sacrifice as a

survivor of one of the century’s worst economic crises; and

his equally successful involvement in the war against the

nation’s terrorist threat - within the framework of the full

exercise of his right to self-defence and the universal rights

of the individual and of every citizen.

Peru can once again see the light of day. The

nightmare of war is now behind us. Those who doubted that

this was possible must now admit that it has happened and

must recognize that the decisions taken in April 1992 were

absolutely necessary. Peru is beginning to be a viable

country again - an attractive country visited by thousands of

tourists, who can confidently bear witness to its new look,

a country with hope, one into which foreign capital is

flowing, thereby generating more employment and wealth.

In the near future, the Peruvian people will have the historic

opportunity to decide upon a constitution incorporating the

thoroughgoing reforms that will guarantee peace and

progress in our country. This will be the end of a grim

cycle. Peru is now a country open to the world - one which,

like other countries all over the planet, is beginning fully to

exercise its right to be a free and prosperous nation through

the implementation of a true democracy and of a system of

government that will benefit our people.