It is an honour, Mr. President, for me to address the
General Assembly. Things have changed since I was first
here, and not only because time has passed and we have
all become a little older — not that old age is a problem.
The problem is how we approach it and, indeed, how we
approach disability. That is why Ecuador believes that,
in the context of the 2015 and post-2015 development
agenda, we should include quantitative targets with
measurable goals for persons with disabilities, together
with international cooperation. Let us never again
adopt a development agenda that fails to take account
of persons with disabilities and their families. We must
take specific measures to incorporate disability at
the global, regional and national levels with a view to
achieving verifiable results.
As I was saying, things have changed since my first
visit to the General Assembly Hall. Many words have
reverberated within its walls, and ended up who knows
where. Much has been said, and perhaps even the
most patient among us is becoming a little exhausted.
Our address, which may contain many impromptu
comments, states things as we find them. I see, as others
perhaps have, that every day it is becoming increasingly
difficult to reach this colourful, cosmopolitan city. I do
not think that is what its inhabitants want, for with their
clamour they seem to be celebrating the diversity of the
world that is characteristic of New York. It is in fact the
bureaucrats that put obstacles in our way, drawing lines
that are frequently difficult to cross.
What shall we do in future years in the face of the
obstacles that sometimes isolate the United Nations
Headquarters? How can we, with the agreement of
all, ensure that the Charter of the United Nations is
respected? The host country, which is well aware how
diverse the Organization is, wants to be the sole arbiter
of who can come and who cannot, on the basis of its
own likes and dislikes.
That very powerful State has also taken it upon
itself to spy on us, on the pretext of safeguarding its own
security. It is true that human beings everywhere have
lived through times of fear and terror. There is good
reason to be vigilant. But the history of humankind,
and consequently of the Organization, is in part the
recording of an evolution in the rights of every one of
us. We have been building and reinforcing rights that
we consider to already have been established, such as
the privacy and inviolability of communications. It is
therefore regrettable that, at a time when technological
advances have enabled every man and every woman
to communicate with every other man and every other
woman throughout the world, an Administration has set
up a global surveillance system that knows no borders,
that does not differentiate between friends and enemies
and that fails to distinguish between criminals and law-
abiding citizens.
Let us be frank: it is not the existence of a system
that intrudes upon the private life of every person in
the world that surprises us. We all in fact suspected
that such a system existed. No, it is its sheer scope
that confounds us — a global espionage system
that knows no limits, without even respect for the
bounds of common decency, and without regard for
the sovereignty of States and the right to privacy and
freedom of expression of all citizens.
It cannot be denied that the bonds of trust between
States and Governments, which underpin negotiations,
among other things, and effective agreements to combat
international organized crime, including terrorism, have
been seriously compromised by the unrestrained actions
of the United States, which has taken it upon itself to spy
on our communications. Many of the countries affected
have requested, on behalf of their Governments and
citizens, that the United States Government account
for its universal espionage programmes, but have not to
date received a satisfactory response.
On numerous occasions, we have heard the
representatives of the United States Government
express to the United Nations their readiness to discuss
the issue. My delegation is willing to initiate such a
discussion forthwith, in a frank, clear and open fashion,
and believes that there is no better forum for doing
so than the Assembly and its Committees, without
excluding such other entities as the Human Rights
Council.
Because we believe that this is the forum in which
to defend the right of all peoples to be respected,
beginning with respect for their territorial integrity, we
are reitereating, for the umpteenth time, that the time
has come for the Israeli settlements to cease and for
Palestine to be respected and recognized within the
1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
Along the same lines, we would like to make
a democratic appeal: 188 of the Organization’s 193
Member States have clearly stated that it is time to end
the unjust embargo that the United States has imposed
on Cuba. Cuba is part of the Bolivarian Alliance for
the Peoples of Our Americas. Cuba is a member State
of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean
States. Cuba is part of the international community,
and its people cannot continue to suffer the harmful
consequences of that embargo.
We also would like to reiterate our belief that
dialogue can resolve the Malvinas Islands conflict. The
United Kingdom must accede to what has been called
for at the United Nations so often, that is, to sit at the
negotiating table and leave the history of overseas
territories to the shameful past. The Malvinas lie
very close to Argentina, and quite far from the United
Kingdom.
Allow me briefly to mention that, in my country,
we have recognized the rights of nature. We have to
wager on different things. We must rein in the capacity
to devastate of those who want unlimited growth even
at the cost of ecological balances. Once disrupted,
nature itself will restore those balances and all of us
will be cast out, with not even a trace remaining of what
we arrogantly call civilization.
We have therefore decided to raise our voice
against the high-handedness of some multinational
firms — and in that regard have had the support of other
Governments — whose unbridled pursuit of unlimited
profit subjugates human beings for the sake of capital,
damages the environment and violates human rights, all
the while having us believe that it is possible to bring a
State and its people to its knees.
Ecuador has stood up to the defamatory campaign
of one such company. In 2011, Chevron was ordered
to pay $19 billion in response to the claim lodged by
30,000 inhabitants of my country who were affected by
the devastating pollution that firm left behind in the
Amazon. I should make it clear that it was not the State
of Ecuador that sued the corporation, it was our people.
We must also denounce the overwhelming statistics
showing how arbitration tribunals fail countries such
as mine, which, paradoxically, can serve to shed
light on the web of intersecting interests among
businesses, arbitrators and lawyers associated with
such tribunals. We in South America have undertaken
various initiatives, such as the establishment of a
dispute-settlement centre within the Union of South
American Nations. The centre will play a key role in
reconfiguring the balance between national public
interests and multinational private profits.
My country condemns the violence being
experienced in Syria, as well as serious violations of
international law and human rights, regardless of their
source. From the outset, Ecuador has argued that a
military solution is not a way out of the crisis in Syria.
We must always address armed conflicts head-on,
setting aside any manipulation in sole pursuit of outside
interests. We should allow comprehensive solutions
based on international law to bear fruit and flourish.
In that context, the situation in Syria, a millennial
nation facing a terrible period, deserves our sincere
and sustained attention, for hundreds of thousands of
human lives have been lost and thousands of others
constantly confront danger.
Ecuador welcomes as a positive step Syria’s recent
accession to the Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of
Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction. We look
forward to the final results of the investigations by the
United Nations on all claims of chemical weapons in
Syria, because only on the basis of those results can
the international community be confident of having a
sufficiently broad and much more credible overview.
As an executive member of the Organization for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, Ecuador joined the
consensus on the adoption of the decision on chemical
weapons in the Syrian Arab Republic. We did so because
we believed that decision reflected the endeavours of
the international community to preserve peace, defend
the lives of Syrian citizens and move towards a political
solution to the crisis.
We also note, and we consider it very important,
that the Security Council’s decision should not be
interpreted by any State as a justification for unilateral
action that violates international law, which prohibits
the use or the threat of the use of force and calls for
respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial
integrity of States. As a State party to the Chemical
Weapons Convention, we condemn the use of chemical
weapons in the Syrian Arab Republic by any party. We
also reiterate the obligation of States to refrain from
providing any type of military support to non-State
actors.
Those are some of the topics that cause us major
concern. There will be more, voiced by others, so
that we can ultimately approach the world with hope
and restore our human capacity to be able to continue
believing in what inspired the establishment of the
United Nations: dialogue for the sake of peace, as well
as democracy, justice, inclusion and equality and as an
antidote to war.