Mr. President, I am pleased to join in the expressions of pleasure at
your election. Your brilliant record makes you well qualified to
occupy your lofty post and skilfully to conduct our complex
proceedings. I am also very pleased that a Latin American has been
called upon to be the Secretary-General. His fame is well earned. His
election not only crowns a life devoted to the common good and to
harmony among nations but also heralds a new current sweeping through
Latin America which suggests that the people of our area will play a
more fruitful, vigorous, Imaginative and co-operative part
represented in world affairs, particularly in the United Nations.
What the Secretary-General has accomplished in a short time is new
and encouraging. His report on the work of the Organization speaks
directly of matters of high importance with clarity and precision,
and it contains sharp, frank and very valuable observations.
The leadership provided by the Secretary-General goes precisely in
the direction that my Government feels the United Nations should move
in. In order to restore much of the faith in the Organization which
has been lost, especially that of the common man of the Member
States, the United Nations must participate more directly and in a
more decisive and inventive manner in order to prevent serious
conflicts and to resolve them when the violence which has been
unleashed requires that we reiterate in a dramatic manner the
commitment to peace with States made when they signed the Charter.
Violence makes it impossible to achieve peace by means of persuasion,
good offices and mediation. Member States must make a special effort,
based on good faith and corresponding deeds, to see that the
machinery provided by the Charter is used to prevent and resolve
conflicts. Moreover, they have a duty to; do so, a legal and moral
duty. Repeated failure to respect the purposes of the Charter only
causes profound disenchantment with the United Nations at precisely
the time when action by the Organization is needed to moderate the
conduct of its Members. Those Members seen to be in the grip of
atavistic forces that have stigmatized the twentieth century. But the
twentieth century should be remembered as one of the most significant
centuries in the history of mankind because of its dazzling
achievements, which should be used to move man forward in the
constant, ceaseless effort to reach a higher level and to live in
peace.
My Government is aware, of course, of the difficulties which stand in
the way of the achievement of this goal, especially at the present
time, which is dominated by exacerbated nationalism instead of by the
noble, visionary, universalist purposes and principles of the United
Nations. There can be no doubt that each and every one of us must
make an effort, an outstanding effort, to halt the devastating wave
of violence which has shaken the world, in spite of the existence of
an impressive system of international organizations, the center of
which is the United Nations, devoted to the promotion of
international harmony.
To some extent the peoples of the world are being deceived when they
disregard the United Nations in the frontal assault on war, guerrilla
warfare, terrorism, torture and foreign intervention in the internal
affairs of States. Also, the peoples of the world are in fact being
thwarted when the United Nations is not allowed to stop repression of
democratic movements which seek changes in unjust economic and social
structures by peaceful electoral methods.
Violations of human rights, violations of civil, political, economic,
social and cultural rights must receive priority attention by the
United Nations. More vigorous action is needed, for we have gone
beyond the stage of mere declarations which proclaim and define those
rights and now an effort must be made, realistically and with a keen
sense of urgency, to perfect and put into practice the international
instruments which have been created to promote the fundamental
freedoms of every person everywhere.
In this connection it is fitting to stress one of the most impressive
of the revolutions that have occurred in the past three decades, but
one which has gone largely unnoticed by the majority of the peoples
of the world. I am referring, of course, to the fact that it has
finally been recognized that the individual is a subject of
international public law and can resort to the appropriate
jurisdictional bodies on human rights when domestic means of
protection have been exhausted, do not exist, or have serious
imperfections. Within the United Nations, the Human Rights Committee
must be strengthened and, above all, the Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights must be
ratified. Both instruments must be signed and ratified by all Members
of the United Nations, because that would benefit the man in the
street in all nations and be a victory of far-reaching consequences.
The average citizen of the nations represented here trusts the good
judgment of those who govern to ensure the well-being to which he is
entitled, but which he may not obtain because he is not aware of the
new machinery which could be used and cannot bring pressure to bear
on his Government to abide by the commitments entered into when it
signed the Charter. Human rights were not in the Charter, then the
Organization of United Nations, it should be remembered, are
indissolubly linked, their primary characteristic, which makes it
different from any other organization created before 1945 and which
makes it possible for it to fight against the scourge of war.
We must take a similar stand on other international instruments
relating to the protection of human rights, such as the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,
in particular and also the procedures used by the Commission on
Human Rights, of which Costa Rica is a member, must be improved. The
Commission must be freed from political interests and influences
which all too frequently disrupt and even obstruct its work and
thereby prejudice the interests of the thousands of individuals who
look to that body as a last resort to protect them from arbitrary
action by their rulers.
The Government of Costa Rica applauds the decision to convert the
Division on Human Rights into a Centre and we think that this is a
decision that reflects a desire better to protect and defend all
freedoms by perfecting existing instruments and designing new ones on
the basis of experience. For example, before assuming my present post
I had the honor of being appointed by the Commission on Human Rights
and by the Secretary-General to act on two recent occasions in an
African country as rapporteur and as an expert, respectively, while
collaborating with the Government in the improvement of institutions
protecting fundamental freedoms after that country had suffered under
a cruel dictatorship. Fortunately, very positive results were
achieved. I mention this because it makes it quite clear that the
Commission can find new courses of action to carry out its important
task and because this sheds new light on Costa Rica's initiative as
regards the creation of the post of United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights. Experience has shown that when United Nations
procedures are particularly flexible and diverse in carrying out its
essential mandate to promote and protect human rights those rights
can be better protected and more people understand what the
Organization is for and what it is all about. People also then feel
encouraged and cope more vigorously and perseveringly with adversity,
anguish, humiliation and the kind of pain that they experience on a
daily basis as they strive to ensure that those that govern them
respect their dignity.
Of course all human rights are important. Without them international
peace is an illusion. At the moment, however, I want to refer to the
right to vote, the right to work and the right to life. And I want to
make a general comment on economic and social rights, which also play
a major role in the important task of creating a community of nations
more free from tension and combating the present erosion of efforts
in support of peace.
The right to vote ensures the right to political participation in all
areas at all levels. It makes it possible for the people of the world
to be the true forgers of their destiny instead of this being done by
minority cliques and those that have seized power and the
representation of the majorities on the pretext of the alleged
inability of those that know what is best for the development of the
personality of the nation and how to contribute intelligently to the
common well- being. The right to vote for government. By means of the
vote the right to self-determination, embodied by the United Nations
in a number of most important documents, is exercised.
For this purpose nothing can replace free periodical and fair
elections. The use of violence, such as terrorism and guerrilla
warfare, can certainly not replace the right to vote. The former is a
blot on modem society, although it has a long history. Among some
totalitarian forces there is a tendency to exalt terrorism as a means
of social struggle. But fortunately, mankind has reacted vigorously
against any justification of this kind of political and social
action. Mankind supports instead a democratic struggle for the
dignity of all human beings and particularly those that have been
excluded from the productive mainstream of society. We must take
advantage of this healthy universal reaction to perfect national and
international juridical means of dealing with this very serious
threat to peace. The latter, guerrilla warfare, which also has a long
history, has become a very important factor nowadays. There is
sometimes a great deal of ambivalence about guerrilla warfare. When
it is a question of peoples exercising their right to rebellion, it
is often a last resort in defending their fundamental freedoms. On
the other hand, when the right to vote is a possibility and when
there are other ways of ensuring the smooth functioning of democracy,
guerrilla warfare appears to be a totalitarian weapon which disrupts
society in a profound and often irreparable manner. It is thus an
ally of anarchy which destroys any effort to bring about the common
good.
Therefore, in order to replace bullets by votes, it was decided, at
the meeting of Foreign Ministers on 4 October in San Jose, Costa
Rica, to create a body to promote and advise on the subject of
democratic elections, the purpose of which would be to ensure an
electoral system throughout the continent, promote and foster this
process in the Americas and provide advice on the practice of the
system to countries requesting it.
The recent tragic events relating to the courageous trade union,
Solidarity, in Poland have aroused world public opinion regarding the
subject of the right to work. Costa Rica believes that the United
Nations should promote days of study on work and other rights related
to it, such as the freedom to create trade unions independent of
Governments. My Government suggests that the United Nations arrange a
seminar with high-level participation to consider in depth the
admirable encyclical of His Holiness Pope John Paul II as a
contribution to peace. The encyclical will arouse the awareness of
the peoples and may ensure that Governments reach appropriate
decisions which will mitigate the tension that leads to social
injustice and endangers peace. In the hope that this idea of a
seminar will be accepted by the United Nations, the Government of
Costa Rica takes this opportunity of offering its capital as the
headquarters.
We should bear in mind the basic thinking of His Holiness, or at
least this essential part: in particular, makes possible pluralist
participation in the choice "Commitment to justice must be closely
linked with commitment to peace in the modem world."
This is linked to the role of work and the worker in the quest for peace:
"... human work is a key, probably the essential key, to the whole
social question, if we try to see that question really from the point
of view of man's good. And if the solution-or rather, the gradual
solution-of the social question, which keeps coming up and becomes
ever more complex, must be sought in the direction of 'making life
more human', then the key, namely human work, acquires fundamental
and decisive importance."
Furthermore, another cardinal principle enunciated by John Paul II
should also be stressed here-the ethical value of work
"which clearly and directly remains linked to the fact that the one
who carries it out is a person, a conscious and free subject, that is
to say, a subject who decides about himself."
And here the Pope of the workers pauses to emphasize the subjective
dimension of work, rising from its dignity:
"... the basis for determining the value of human work is not
primarily the kind of work being done, but the fact that the one who
is doing it is a person."
114. Equally enlightening are some other thoughts which I shall now
sum up. First, rejection of "materialistic and economistic thought",
which equates work with goods and is the source of unheard of,
inhumane exploitation, even today, when the concept of capitalism at
any cost has been tempered. Hence, a different approach must be
adopted-one which comprehends the working man:
"... in accordance with the true dignity of his work-that is to
say,... as subject and maker, and, for this very reason, as the true
purpose of the whole process of production."
Secondly, the strengthening of worker solidarity, not only because
there are many different kinds of work and because there are still
many injustices which derive from the liberal socio-political system,
but also because:
"On the world level, the development of civilization and of
communications has made possible a more complete diagnosis of the
living and working conditions of man globally, but it has also
revealed other forms of injustice, much more extensive than those
which in the last century stimulated unity between workers for
particular solidarity in the working world. This is true in countries
which have completed a certain process of industrial revolution. It
is also true in countries where the main working milieu continues to
be agriculture or other similar occupations."
Thirdly, work, at the same time as it promotes a hierarchy of duties, is:
"... a source of rights on the part of the worker. These rights must
be examined in the broad context of human rights as a whole, which
are connatural with man." His Holiness also defends the right to
association for the defense of the vital interests of "those employed
in the various professions".
The right to life, furthermore, has aroused and continues to arouse
considerable polemics in all countries, in regard to the question of
the death penalty. The United Nations has not remained on the
sidelines of that important discussion, as is shown by the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In order to
shed new light on the subject of capital punishment and to link it,
as it must be linked, to the struggle for the protection of
fundamental human rights, the Government of Costa Rica has convened a
world congress to commemorate the one hundredth anniversary of the
abolition of the death penalty in Costa Rica. My Government and the
people of Costa Rica hope that many will participate in the
conference. We wish to create a climate which would lead to the
abolition of such a drastic punishment, which is so prone to error
and arbitrary use. Costa Rica would be greatly honored if the
Secretary- General would be present at the opening of that congress
in December this year. My Government also supports the efforts of all
countries which advocate abolition of the death penalty and
particularly the efforts by the delegations of the Federal Republic
of Germany and Sweden.
As I have already stressed, economic, social and cultural rights are
no less important and deserve our full attention. The comparison
between those rights and civil and political rights-a comparison that
was valid in an earlier time for the purpose of stressing the former,
is outmoded. It is today generally recognized that the enjoyment of
social justice in liberty is indispensable. But if economic, social
and cultural rights, enshrined in the International Covenant, are to
be enjoyed, there must be transformations in the structures of
States, which is much more difficult to achieve than changes needed
to bring about the enjoyment of this other set of rights. Such
structures are the heirs to odious privileges of the few, which have
been prejudicial to the rights of the many dispossessed. They also
represent cruel forms of repression, perhaps more ruthless and
inhumane than those generated by lack of respect for the fundamental
rights and freedoms of men and citizens, because they intensify the
pain and despair of the weakest. Moreover, the changes that are
needed to bring about the enjoyment of economic and social rights
require more time and more financial and technological resources, as
well as a degree of national and international consensus that is much
greater and more solid in nature. For that reason, the United Nations
must concern itself with showing Member States that here, too, there
are real causes of discontent that affect world peace in a direct way
and with devastating force. Governments would thus be' come more
interested in the social reforms that are
required.
The Government of Costa Rica is also concerned about other problems
that tend to work against peace. With greater eloquence than mine,
representatives have referred to the catastrophic developments in the
world economy, which have had a devastating effect on the development
and political stability of the vast majority of States Members of the
United Nations. Today I should like to add my voice to the powerful
voices that have spoken out in alarm and protest against this state
of affairs. In particular I should like to highlight the situation in
Latin America.
The year 1981 was one of the worst of the post-war period from the
economic standpoint. All the indices suggest that there will be a
greater deterioration in the immediate future. The stagnation of our
economies, the galloping inflation which characterizes most of our
economies, the deterioration in the terms of trade and the serious
disequilibrium in the balance of payments which accompanies it
disrupt social peace and make it more difficult to find democratic
political solutions to the serious problems besetting many countries.
Our region has seen its external debt doubled in only three years,
and today it exceeds $240 billion. This is the result of an attempt
to replace a lack of dynamism in exports, brought about to some
extent by the weak demand of the developed countries, by an influx of
capital, with increasingly higher interest rates.
In the circumstances, it is disappointing that today there is not the
necessary political consensus to ensure a take-off in global
negotiations. Recognizing the structural problems which characterize
international economic relations and emphasizing that a global
discussion of these problems is necessary, we share the opinion of
those that say it is urgent that short-term action be taken to
prevent the complete collapse of the weaker economies.
For this reason it is necessary that we start work on an emergency
programme encompassing, infer a//a, the following actions: first,
initiatives to increase the flow of trade by means of eliminating
barriers to the exports of the developing countries and by means of
greater South-South exchange; secondly, the creation of compensatory
funds to reduce the impact of the deterioration in the terms of
trade; thirdly, better promotion of joint investment by the
industrialized and developing countries in the latter; fourthly, the
increase, on a generous and disinterested basis, of the flow of
resources towards multilateral financing bodies and technological
co-operation to improve the liquidity of the developing countries;
and, fifthly, the promotion of greater understanding and tolerance in
those bodies as regards the implementation of economic measures in
such a way as to ensure a better balance between the objectives of
reactivation and of stabilization.
We should like to stress that the adoption of a programme such as the
one just mentioned should not be seen as a substitute for greater
efforts leading to the creation of a new economic order. We believe,
however, that these measures are in keeping with the spirit of the
new order, that they would help to establish a climate more conducive
to the success of initiatives concerning the structural change that
we desire and that they would create necessary conditions-although
perhaps not all the conditions-for the peace and security which our
peoples deserve.
In this respect, the meeting of Foreign Ministers held at San Jose on
4 October drew
"... the attention of the industrialized democratic countries to the
need to increase co-operation with the democratic countries of the
region, with bold and effective initiatives which will contribute to
the efforts to ensure recovery and economic and social development
which are being made by the countries of the region concerned".
In addition to those that I have mentioned, there are, of course,
many other reasons why the general picture of present international
relations so gloomy. The situation in the Middle East requires that
we dedicate ourselves, free from the heavy burden of prejudices,
obstacles and past events, to the search for peace for that tormented
region. My Government hopes that all the States of the Middle East
will make the changes and reach the agreements necessary, for an
honorable lasting peace that will guarantee the sovereignty,
security, peace and well-being of all the States of the area. This
applies in particular to the noble people of Lebanon, who deserve to
be allowed to return to the condition of their glorious past. At the
same time, the Government of Costa Rica is confident that the
long-suffering and noble people of Palestine will in the not too
distant future see the end of their present precarious existence.
Then Palestinians will be able, like all other nations, to enjoy
peace, work and respect for their dignity, in harmony with their
neighbors and with universal recognition of their many virtues.
For the subjugated peoples of South Africa and Namibia my country
hopes that the hour of liberation will soon come. To this end, the
increasingly active participation of the international community,
encouraged and guided by the United Nations, is essential.
My Government feels great satisfaction at the constructive efforts
being made by the Government of the Republic of Korea to bring about
the reunification of that country on the basis of its recent
proposals. Whatever is done must be in line with the aims and
purposes of the United Nations regarding the reunification of Korea.
Costa Rica recognizes the peace-loving and hard-working nature of the
friendly and noble people of the Republic of Korea.
Costa Rica welcomes the fact that the dear sister Republic of
Argentina has taken the initiative in pressing its just claim to the
Malvinas Islands in this United Nations forum and hopes that the
negotiations will prove fruitful. The association of the
Secretary-General with the dialogue, in accordance with a proposal of
which Costa Rica was a sponsor, is a guarantee that the parties will
reach an honorable and peaceful final agreement.
Costa Rica shows the concern expressed in this Hall at what is
happening in Cyprus, Afghanistan and Kampuchea, where situations in
violation of the principles of the Charter continue.
I should now like to take up the subject specifically referred to by
the Secretary-General in his report on the work of the Organization.
I refer to what he has called "the prevailing convulsion of Central
America".
More than four decades ago we, the democratic sectors promoting
social change and freedom in Central America anticipated the present
crisis in the area. Our predictions were based on the existence of
economic and social structures and systems of military government
which legalized them. They constituted forms of oppression whose
inevitable end result would be the rebellion of peoples fighting
against the lack of social justice and for freedom. Today the
explosion of popular wrath has assumed a virulent form as a result of
that anti-democratic record.
But what was perhaps not anticipated was the international
circumstances prevailing during the final confrontation between the
peoples and the dictatorships. We did not anticipate all the
implications of this global confrontation today between democracy and
totalitarianism, a confrontation that would thoroughly disrupt
efforts to adapt these new forces to present realities in Central
America. What was particularly unexpected was that, on behalf of
freedom, social justice and democracy, an effort would be made after
the predictable rebellion to establish another unanticipated form of
totalitarianism, thereby flouting the very ideals which impelled the
forces of change. Yet that is precisely what is happening today. This
other form of totalitarianism, bolstered by open intervention by
forces outside the Central American area, has only sharpened the
conflict, polarized political ideas and created new formidable
obstacles to democratic, representative and pluralistic government
devoted to social justice, without the need for the bloodshed and
confrontation now rending the peoples of the Central American nations
apart.
In an effort to produce a realistic way out of the present crisis
besetting Central America, the President of Costa Rica, Luis Alberto
Monge, on the very day he assumed power on 8 May of this year, began
to put into practice what he had advocated in his electoral campaign,
namely, a broad alliance of democratic forces and Governments in
order to confront the totalitarian offense and promote the values,
machinery and goals of representative, pluralistic and participatory
democracy for clearly social purposes. For this purpose, infer in a
joint declaration of the heads of State attending the ceremony of the
transfer of power on 8 May, it was agreed, on Costa Rica's
initiative, that there would be created a good offices group which
would have as its special mandate the study of the various peace
initiatives that had been presented by various Governments in order
to bring about the relaxation of tension in Central America, as well
as other proposals that might be presented for the same purpose in
the future. Ever since, my country has stressed the need for this
kind of machinery or one similar to it that would make it possible
for the parties directly involved in the conflict to sit at the
negotiating table. And so it was that the Government of Costa Rica
decided to convene a meeting of foreign ministers of countries
interested in the pro-, motion of democracy in Central America and in
the Caribbean whose Governments have been legitimized through
elections.
On 4 October, at San Jose, at the invitation of the Costa Rican
Government there met representatives of Belize, Colombia, the
Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Honduras, Jamaica, Panama, the
United States and Costa Rica. The Governments of Mexico and Venezuela
were also invited. Panama and the
Dominican Republic participated as observers, and the latter signed
the Final Act. At the conclusions of the deliberations on the main
factors obstructing democratic processes in the area, faith was
reaffirmed in representative, pluralistic and participatory democracy
and the foundation was laid for the promotion of democracy and peace
in our area.
Regarding that democracy, the participating ministers declared:
"Their faith in and acceptance of the principles of representative,
pluralistic and participatory democracy, which thus understood
constitute a way of life, thought and action, with room for differing
social and economic systems and structures, but having a common
denominator, namely, respect for life, personal security, freedom of
thought, freedom of the press and of religion, and the right to work
and to proper remuneration, just living conditions, the free exercise
of the right to vote and other human, civil, political, economic,
social and cultural rights."
As regards the promotion of peace in the area, the Ministers stated
"Their conviction that in order to foster peace and regional stability it is
necessary to promote internally political awareness leading to the
creation of democratic, representative, pluralistic and participatory
systems; the establishment of machinery for multilateral and
permanent dialogue; absolute respect for borders defined in existing
treaties, respect for which is the best way of preventing border
disputes and incidents, with due account being taken, where
necessary, of traditional lines of jurisdiction. There must also be
respect for the independence and territorial integrity of States; use
or threats to use force to settle conflicts must be rejected; the
arms race must cease and, on a full basis of reciprocity, external
factors obstructing a lasting and stable peace must be eliminated."
In addition, the ministers felt that it was necessary to emphasize
certain actions of particular importance which were essential in
formulating a realistic, viable peace plan. For this reason, they
stated that:
"... it is essential for a peace plan that each country, in the
region and outside of it, carry out the following actions: first, to
create and maintain institutions of government which are truly
democratic, based on the popular will as expressed in free and
untainted elections, based on the principle that the Government is
responsible to the governed; secondly, to respect human rights,
especially the right to life and security of person, and fundamental
freedoms, freedom of expression, information, assembly and worship,
and the right to organize political parties, labor unions and other
groups and associations; thirdly, to foster national reconciliation
wherever profound divisions within society have occurred, by
extending opportunities to participate within the framework of
democratic institutions and procedures; fourthly, to respect the
principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of States and
the right of peoples to self-determination; fifthly, to prevent the
use of the territory of a country to support, supply, train or
supervise terrorists or subversive elements acting in other States,
putting an end to the traffic in weapons and materials, and
refraining from direct or indirect support for terrorists or
subversive or other activities designed to bring about the violent
overthrow of the Government of another State; sixthly, to limit
weapons and the scale of military and security forces to levels which
are strictly necessary for the maintenance of public order and
national defense; seventhly, to ensure, in accordance with reciprocal
and fully verifiable terms, international control of all ports of
entry and other border areas which are of strategic importance;
eighthly, to effect withdrawal, on a fully reciprocal basis, from the
Central American area of all foreign military and security advisors
and personnel, and the banning of imports of heavy weapons of an
obviously offensive nature in accordance with procedures which ensure
proper verification.
"These actions represent an integrated framework in each State which
is essential for the promotion of regional peace and stability."
As already stated, it is, of course, quite clear that without
appropriate means or machinery to analyses this peace plan and other
proposals with the same purpose, they all run the risk of being
ineffective, and that would be tragic. For that reason, at the San
Jose meeting which I have referred to, the ministers agreed "to set
themselves up as a Forum for Peace and Democracy", a forum which
could be extended through the inclusion or the collaboration of other
democratic States. The Forum could recommend specific actions to
representatives of participating countries, and they should report on
the results and transmit the final act of the meeting to other
States, so that they can present any appropriate comments and views.
The representatives asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Costa
Rica to transmit the final act, on behalf of the participating
Governments, to the Governments of the region and to other
Governments concerned, in order to obtain their views on the
principles and conditions for peace set forth therein.
They decided to convene a new meeting as soon as possible in order to
assess the progress being made in implementing the aims of the
declaration.
The Forum for Peace and Democracy is an expression of a common will;
it does not constitute an official body, and therefore has the
necessary flexibility and dynamism to carry out its great task. The
nucleus of the Forum is made up of Belize, Colombia, El Salvador,
Honduras, Jamaica, the Dominican Republic, the United States and
Costa Rica. Whatever democratic countries from the area wish to
become members of the Forum may do so, and a second group can be made
up of democratic countries which wish to co-operate with the Forum
without actually belonging to it. Here I should like to stress that
the Forum was created so that there might be the participation in it
of all countries involved in conflicts in Central America that
disrupt peace, so that they could explain their views and make peace
proposals; and this has already been done by Nicaragua, Honduras,
Mexico, the United States and Panama individually, and by Mexico and
Venezuela jointly, apart from the eight other countries that met at
San Jose and created the Forum and proposed the aforementioned plan
for regional peace.
As part of the mandate assigned to me at the San Jose meeting, I have
already circulated its final act and I am now taking the steps
required to enable the Forum to be used as a practical instrument for
waging this great peace offensive of the democracies. We hope that,
with the support of those peoples who desire peace, democracy,
freedom and social justice, this new initiative of the Forum for
Peace and Democracy will meet with a warm response and understanding,
because we believe that this is the broadest, most comprehensive and
most viable means of achieving the ends we all so much desire.
Costa Rica is a country with long diplomatic traditions; we are
peace-loving and unarmed. We neither want nor are able to become
involved in any armed conflict in Central America. But neither can we
refrain from contributing to peace efforts in Central America. Costa
Rica's security depends on security and peace in the region. For this
reason Costa Rica has sincerely and eagerly devoted its efforts to
convening the meeting of foreign ministers concerned for peace and
democracy in Central America and the Caribbean, whose Governments are
the result of the electoral process. As I have already stated, that
meeting took place on 4 October in the capital of my country. For
that reason also, Costa Rica, on 8 May of this year, proposed the
creation of the Forum for Peace and Democracy, which began to
function at that San Jose meeting.
For the first time ever, there is now a procedure whereby all parties
concerned can sit down together and, without any delays or excuses,
engage in a frank, constructive dialogue. If any party does not avail
itself of that opportunity, one can only conclude that, essentially,
there are elements more interested in seeking violent confrontation.
I am confident, however, that this peace initiative of ours and the
machinery to implement it will be accepted by everyone. The peoples
of the region, which yearn for peace, security and democracy, have
their eyes turned to us to see how we, the leaders of their
Governments, fulfil our lofty duties.
On this glorious anniversary of the discovery of America, I conclude
my statement with a tribute to Spain and to its extraordinary people
which has given us its values and taught us, through the centuries,
how to overcome all adversity in the persevering quest for the
dignity and happiness of every human being.