YouSaid · the spoken record

Evo Morales Ayma

lines on the record: 286
first: 2007-09-24
most recent: 2019-09-24
sittings or episodes: 13
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“We fought, we mobilized, we raised awareness among the Bolivian people as to the importance of retaking or nationalizing that natural resource. On 1 May 2006, we nationalized that industry without any misgivings. That act changed the national economy. In 2006, our international reserves stood at $1.7 billion. Our international reserves now stand at more than $13 billion. In 2005, YPFB had $300 million in revenue. This year, it has $3.5 billion. In 2005, total public investments amounted to $600 million. Out of that $600 million, 70 per cent came from aid and loans and only 30 per cent came from the national treasury. This year State investments will amount to approximately $6 billion, with an additional $6 billion in private investments. How did that change come about in such a short period of time? Of course, Bolivia is a small country.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“The biggest company in Bolivia is Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales Bolivianos (YPFB). For 20 years, neoliberal Governments worked to privatize our natural resources. They sold our natural resources, especially oil, to transnational corporations. Bolivia received only 18 per cent of all the profits, while 82 per cent went to transnational corporations. In addition, what did the contracts signed by neoliberal Governments say? Who was the owner? The oil transnational corporations acquired the right of ownership at the mouth of the well. The Governments would tell us that the oil and gas continued to be ours as long as it was under the ground. But once it came to the mouth of the well, it belonged to the transnational corporations.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“Social programmes and structural changes have allowed us to change Bolivia. One example is telecommunications. Bolivia has 339 municipalities. In 2006, telephone coverage or mobile phone coverage in rural areas existed in only 90 municipalities. The day after tomorrow, I am going to inaugurate mobile communication in the last municipality, the furthest from the cities, in the Bolivian Amazon. Now my brothers and sisters living in rural areas have telephones or mobile phones in all 339 municipalities. Entel, our telephone service, had been privatized. We took it back, nationalized it, and began to invest in it in order to provide better service. We have made progress for the following reason. As President, I received a mandate from the Bolivian people to recover or nationalize our natural resources.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“For the second year in a row, we have invested $300,000 per municipality, and that has been rather helpful, in addition to other programmes by the Ministry of the Environment and Water, in particular in cities and in rural areas. Those programmes for drinking water mean that we have achieved our goal in 2012, not in 2015. Hopefully, by 2015 we will have achieved 90 or 100 per cent drinking water coverage. That is our programme. Another of the Goals pertains to coverage in terms of hospital births. The MDG target for 2015 is 70 per cent. I am here to report that by 2009 we had achieved 70 per cent coverage, not to mention other programmes such as the one that provides subsidies for pregnant women and children under the age of two. We are making good progress, although with slow steps. Why has there been such rapid change?”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“The numbers from international organizations confirm that, last year, 10 per cent of the population went from extreme poverty to the middle class. That is 1 million Bolivians. The second figure to note is that, according to the MDG targets, 78.5 per cent of the population should have access to safe drinking water by 2015. I would like to say that, as a result of our programme, this year we reached 78.5 per cent of the country, especially the indigenous rural communities. We have a programme called “My Water” to promote greater investments in water. What I did personally was to bring together all of the projects on safe drinking water or water for irrigation from every municipality in the country.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“That is the least of it. What we are interested in is the United Nations data. Honestly, the United Nations works in a transparent manner to recognize the work that our Government has done to reduce coca cultivation. I would also like to take this opportunity to talk about the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Bolivia was previously a little-known country that had been abandoned, living on foreign aid. We welcomed foreign aid. I would just like to present what we have achieved since we took charge in Bolivia, in the context of the MDGs. Bolivia was supposed to reduce extreme poverty to 24.1 per cent by 2015. I would like to report that, by 2011, we had reduced extreme poverty to 20 per cent. We have a plan. By the time Bolivia celebrates its bicentennial, we will have eradicated extreme poverty.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“Now, while maintaining respect for human rights and appealing to the conscience of my coca-producing brothers and sisters, we have had a net reduction. Coca cultivation has increased in some countries, which are subsequently decertified by the United States of America. But the United States has also decertified a country like Bolivia, even though it has reduced the cultivation of coca by 12 per cent. Do we then have to plant more coca for the Government of the United States to certify us? One cannot understand it. Of course, since we are an anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist people and Government, we have been decertified. That decertification is a political statement; it does not take into account the efforts made by the Bolivian people through its Government. We are not interested in whether we are certified or not.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“I respectfully request that the Assembly, acting on behalf of the United Nations, correct a historical prejudicial act. Unfortunately, since there is an illegal market for coca leaf, that is, a market for cocaine or drugs, a portion of the harvest is diverted to the illegal market — but we are fighting that. We in Bolivia say that there will be no free cultivation of coca, but there cannot be zero coca leaf. I commend the United Nations for issuing a report a few weeks ago affirming that, for the first time, Bolivia had reduced the cultivation of coca by more than 12 per cent. That is a Government achievement without any dead or wounded; previously, that kind of reduction resulted in many dead and wounded.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“Although the coca leaf has medicinal and ritual properties, it has been penalized under the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. Therefore, Bolivia, which wishes to remain faithful to its commitment to fight drug trafficking, has requested adherence to the Single Convention with a reservation that preserves the right to use coca leaf for cultural purposes, especially medicinal purposes, within our territory. In some states of the United States, it is legal to sell cocaine, but the United States does not allow us to consume coca leaf — which is not cocaine. I welcome the support for the proposal on the part of many countries of the continent and the world — non-aligned countries — recognizing, after thousands of years, the consumption of coca leaf as legal.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“I do not understand how one can speak of peace while there are economic inequalities in the world. While there is an economic policy that concentrates capital in the hands of a few and which impoverishes many, there will never be justice, there will never be peace or respect for human rights. Indeed, the economic models that concentrate capital in a few hands provoke injustice and create uprisings. I feel that now is the best time — I am referring to various meetings at the United Nations — to gain better understanding of the situation of all the peoples of the world. We had requested the revision of some important international treaties concerning a very important product for the indigenous peoples of the Andean region, the coca leaf.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“Where there are natural resources, like oil, in the hands of the people, they have to intervene under any pretext — terrorism, dictatorship or drug trafficking — all of it to recover or to plunder the natural resources. Furthermore, I would also like to launch an appeal for the immediate release of five Cuban anti-terrorist political prisoners in the United States. Their release would show a political will to defend human rights. The President of the United States could release them; the power to do so is in his hands. I hope that justice will be done to our five Cuban brothers, who have been imprisoned unjustly. In truth, I do not understand it when the presidents who speak in defence of human rights are never the ones who respect human, either within or outside their own countries.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“There have been so many interventions, so many dead and wounded, so much killing — under the pretext of defending democracy. Moments ago, a fellow president spoke about an intervention in Libya to restore democracy, which is a lie. They intervened in Libya not for its people but to recover oil for the Powers. We have to be sincere and straightforward with humankind, but where there are presidents who stay in power without practicing democracy but are in favour of capitalism and imperialism, there is no intervention because they are allies of the United States Government; they are allies of the empire; they are allies of capitalism.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“The embargo has been condemned by almost all of humankind and the international community, including the allies of the United States of America, for its extraterritorial character and its imposition in violation of humanitarian and international law. Bolivia also denounces the unjust inclusion of Cuba on the list unilaterally assembled by the United States in its report entitled “State Sponsors of Terrorism”, the purpose of which is to justify the embargo and continue imposing new sanctions on the regime and the people of Cuba. What authority does the Government of the United States have to include a country in the list of terrorist countries? Do not all the peoples of the world realize that the number one terrorist country practicing State terrorism is the Government of the United States?”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“That is due to pride on the part of the rulers, not of the American people. The rulers are never going to respect those resolutions, but they speak of democracy and of defending democracy. In that connection, I must express our full backing for the Cuban people. Their commander, former President Fidel Castro, the most caring person in the world that I have ever known — and I admire that revolutionary people — is, despite the embargo, engaged in continuous battle at the side of his people. It is not possible that in the twenty-first century an economic embargo continues against the Cuban people, a genocidal embargo that has failed and which violates the rights of an entire people.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“I remember when I was still a trade union leader, we conducted campaigns to have the external debt of underdeveloped countries — at that time, they were called underdeveloped countries, instead of developing countries — cancelled. Now I realize that our debt as poor countries can be paid, but the debts of capitalism are impossible to pay. That is what the world we are living in today shows. We speak here of democracy. We have to defend democracy and, in order to do that, we have to intervene in some countries. But if we really wanted to be democratic, we would respect all of the resolutions of the United Nations. Just to cite an example, does the Government of the United States of America respect United Nations resolutions on the economic embargo against Cuba? It has never respected them.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“There seems to be a rebellion on the part of States against powers, authority and capitalism. I am very pleased, because when I came here for the first time in 2006, only the countries of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Countries of Our America, with great ideological, political and programmatic clarity, stated that everything was for the people. I know some countries on other continents — very timid and fearful countries — feel that today are losing their fear of the Powers. I would like to say to them, to their representatives and to their Presidents that we should not be afraid. We should not be afraid of empires or capitalism. Capitalism and imperialism are not the solution to life or to humanity. We are living in times of the crisis of capitalism, of a crisis in food.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“Yesterday I listened to the various statements on issues related to democracy, human rights and peace, and I feel that the statements we make here as Presidents show that we agree in theory. All of us here are great defenders of human rights who want peace and defend democracy. But we are divided. The United Nations is not united, and that makes a great difference. I listened very carefully to the statement made by Secretary- General Ban Ki-moon telling us that we have to change the world. We very much agree that we have to change the world. But how can we change the world if we do not change the United Nations? How can the United Nations be responsible for interventionism on many continents? I have listened to two or three addresses by several countries, and I was very pleased.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“Bolivia appeals once again to the Government of Chile, here before the Assembly, to resolve definitively the issue of our landlocked status through peaceful settlement mechanisms. We call on the international community to support us in that endeavour, so that this conflict, which does great harm to the integration of the American continent, may finally come to an end. Among the Bolivian people, among children and grandparents alike, there is a strong sense of the need to recover our sea corridor. Bolivia was born with a sea, and it is not possible that oligarchies and transnational companies, in order to plunder our natural resources, can be allowed also to wrest from us our territory. We need the support of all those at the helm of the United Nations to put an end to a historical injustice on the part of international Powers.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“How did the United States return the Panama Canal to Panama when, through the first treaty, it had to be the owner of the Canal in perpetuity? And how is it possible for Chile not to return Bolivia’s sea corridor? I wish also to take this opportunity to say that today, in this millennium, is a time of integration and of focus on the protection of humankind, not a time of domestic or external colonialism. That is why I wish to reaffirm once again that the Malvinas are for Argentina and the sea is for Bolivia. These demands, conflicts and disputes have to be resolved peacefully, and Bolivia is a peace-loving country, in keeping with the State’s new political Constitution.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“I say that because when we state that Chile must return our sea corridor, we are asked, what treaty? I therefore wish to take this opportunity to speak of a treaty signed in 1903 between the United States and Panama on the Panama Canal. In 1903, a treaty on the Panama Canal was signed under which the United States was authorized to build the Panama Canal and received sovereignty, in perpetuity, over the territories on both sides of the Canal and the area of the Canal. In other words, according to the Treaty of 1903, that country would be the owner for all eternity of the Panama Canal. However, a renegotiated treaty was signed in 1977 that gradually transferred sovereignty over the Canal zone from the United States to Panama, and in 1999 Panama recovered control and administration of the Canal through the Panama Canal Authority.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“In the early 1900s, a treaty was signed that has not been complied with. It is for that reason that I have come here to take advantage of the theme of our debate, the peaceful settlement of disputes, to say that major disputes among States have been resolved and injustices rectified through the resolve and goodwill of the relevant authorities. Chile cannot disregard Bolivia’s rights or the pronouncements of an entire continent, much less prolong indefinitely our forcibly imposed landlocked status. An unjust, imposed and non-implemented treaty cannot be allowed to continue to harm a people that is only calling for justice and for an end to its country’s status as a landlocked country. The intangibility of treaties means that they are not dogma. Treaties, like all other creations of human beings, can be changed.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“The meetings we hold at the United Nations are always very important events at which we debate social, environmental, political and economic issues throughout the world. I commend the President of the General Assembly on having chosen as our central theme the peaceful settlement of disputes throughout the world. I wish to take the great opportunity of my presence here today at the United Nations to inform the Assembly about a dispute between Chile and Bolivia. In 1879, as the result of an unjust war — an unjust invasion — masterminded by Chilean oligarchical interests, with the participation of transnational corporations with an eye on Bolivia’s natural resources, we lost our corridor to the Pacific Ocean. Bolivia was founded in 1825 and lost access to the sea in 1879.”
2012-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 67 (2012)
“We therefore call for a new 10 commandments concerning social demands, financial systems, natural resources, basic services, production, and dignity and sovereignty. On that basis we should begin to re- establish the United Nations so that it can be the highest instance to settle issues of peace, poverty, dignity and sovereignty. I hope that my experience as President of Bolivia will be useful to all those present. At the same time, I come to learn from many of them so that I may continue working for the equality and dignity of the Bolivian people.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“But we also have the great responsibility of defending the rights of Mother Earth. I continue to be convinced that the best way to defend human rights is to defend the rights of Mother Earth. Here we have the great responsibility of looking after the rights of Mother Earth. Only 60 years ago the Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; it was only 60 years ago that the United Nations realized that the human being also has rights. After political rights, economic rights, the rights of indigenous peoples, now we have the enormous responsibility of defending the rights of Mother Earth. We are also convinced that infinite growth on a finite planet is unsustainable and impossible. The limit to growth is the regenerative capacity of the planet’s ecosystems.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“What do capitalist or imperialist countries do? They seek any pretext to invade a country and make off with its natural resources. This morning the President of the United States said that Iraq was already free and would govern itself. The Iraqis will be able to govern themselves, of course, but in whose hands is the oil now? The fall of autocracy in Libya was hailed, and now there is democracy, but in whose hands is Libyan oil? The world and the Libyans have come to realize that reason for the invasion and the bombings was not to bring about the fall of Al-Qadhafi by rebels but a desire for Libyan oil. Next year we can review the situation and see which countries have their hands on Libyan oil. There is a desire to overcome the crisis of capitalism by making off with our oil, gas and other natural resources.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“It is the most powerful, those with the greatest advantages. Transnational companies are always the winners. The losers are the small producers, families wanting to rise through their own efforts. Therefore, we are trying in the region to implement policies of complementarity and solidarity, and not of competition. With naked competition we shall never be able to solve the problem of poverty. Finally on this matter, the crisis of capitalism has no exit. When I was a young boy much mention was made of the foreign debt of poor countries. It was said that it could never be paid. Now the situation is quite the opposite: the debts of the poor countries can easily be settled, but the crisis of capitalism is a bottomless hole. The crisis of capitalism is not just because of circumstances; it is structural.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“One of the crises on the margin of the crisis of capitalism is the food crisis. New international financial structures give opportunities to people with low incomes by providing microcredits to small producers. We have some experience in Bolivia, where credits at zero interest have been given to producers of rice, wheat, corn and soy at zero interest. Food producers can even pay their debts with their products. Soft credits are given to encourage food production. Yet the international banks never take the small producer into account; they never pay any heed to cooperatives, to associations, which can very well contribute if given the chance. There are new ways to encourage production through fair trade. We have to put an end to the so-called competitive market. In a competition who 15 11-50847 wins?”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“The market is what drives drug trafficking, and the market is here. Who is decertifying the United States because it has not cut down the market? This morning President Calderón of Mexico said that the drug market continues to grow. Why is no responsibility taken for eliminating the market? As long as there is a market coca leaves and other products will be turned into drugs. A great responsibility must be borne. Here I make an appeal. Let us fight with shared responsibility. Why do we not put an end to banking confidentiality? The biggest drug traffickers put their millions of dollars not in briefcases or backpacks but in the banks. Why is there fear of banking secrecy? In Bolivia we are not afraid. Banking confidentiality must be ended if we want to fight drug trafficking head on.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“They are trying to confuse the people, trying to conduct a dirty campaign against my Government and against the State of Bolivia. What does the United States do? It decertifies Bolivia and Venezuela. What moral authority does it have to certify or decertify nations of Latin America, when the United States is the world’s leading drug consumer, when the United States is one of the world’s producers of marijuana — in some years the biggest? What authority does it have to certify or decertify any country? This is another way of trying to scare countries or punish them. However, Bolivia, very responsibly, continues to fight drug trafficking. A report by the State Department recognizes that there has been a net reduction in coca cultivation, with improved interdiction. Where is the market?”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“Presidents and Governments meet to resolve internal problems. This is a great liberation for us. I also take this opportunity to touch on a central topic: the fight against drug trafficking. United States imperialism is using the war on drugs for political ends. The United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in Bolivia was not fighting drug trafficking; it was controlling it for political purposes. The DEA would implicate union leaders or anti-imperialist political leaders. Many politicians have been saved from that dirty work of the empire in attempting to implicate us in drug trafficking, which still goes on. Last week some parts of the United States media said that my aircraft had been detained in the United States with traces of cocaine. How false!”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“The 1904 Treaty did not lead to either peace or friendship, because for more than a century Bolivia had no access to a sovereign port of its own. I take this opportunity to call on the United Nations, other international organizations and especially the region to support us, so that we can return with sovereignty to the Pacific Ocean. In addition, there is another movement of countries taking place, that of the countries of Latin America with the Caribbean. I would say that it is a new Organization of American States, without the United States, in order to free us of certain impositions, with the benefit of our experience in UNASUR. I say that because we no longer find ourselves obliged, when there are conflicts between countries and within democracies, to have somebody coming from outside and above to re-establish order.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“11-50847 14 Bolivia has right and reason on its side in going to an international tribunal, because our landlocked state results from an unjust war, an invasion. For Bolivia, calling for a solution in the international sphere means for Bolivia redressing a historic injustice. Bolivia is a friendly, peaceful State which gives priority to dialogue with its neighbours. We therefore keep open channels for bilateral negotiation with Chile, without, however, renouncing the right to go to an international court. There is regional involvement as well, since this is not just a bilateral problem, but is a regional problem as well. Peoples are not responsible for the landlocked state of Bolivia. Those responsible are, as always, the oligarchies, the transnationals, which wish to protect their access to natural resources.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“The Bank of the South will be completely different from the usurious banks that feather their own nests and make money through speculation. That must end. Regional integration will free us from the domination of those banks. It is important for us to go further in that integration. In Bolivia we have barriers to overcome, and other countries of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) also have problems. For example, we have a historic demand upon Chile for a sovereign corridor to the Pacific. We decided to have recourse to international tribunals to ask for that access. Resolution 37/10 of 15 November 1982 establishes in its annex, the Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, that recourse to an international tribunal to settle disputes between States should not be considered an unfriendly act.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“Then we began to invest through the State company, Yacimientos, without borrowing a single dollar, and the Carrasco Cochabamba pipeline is now under construction. But if the transnational had continued to be responsible, we would certainly have had to guarantee a loan for it. As the Assembly is aware, I come from the indigenous peasant movement. When our families talk about a company, they think of it as something that has a lot of money and is made up of millionaires. So I could not understand how a company could ask the Government to lend it money for an investment. The international financial institutions deal through companies, but who has to pay? It is the peoples, the States. So we must create other financial institutions. Fortunately, we are making good progress in South America.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“It made loans conditional. It told Governments that if they privatized refineries and telecommunications they would give credits of $30 million to $40 million. A usurious bank, conditional credits and credits requiring security are no solution. No credits were given to States, or to the productive sector. They were all for services and trade. Above all, they went to the transnationals. When I became President, one of the transnational oil companies told me that the Government would have to guarantee a credit of $100 million to build a pipeline. I wondered about the purpose. Finally, the oil company, Transredes, was conspiring politically, and we therefore decided to nationalize its properties — oil and gas pipelines. We expelled it.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“How is it possible in this new millennium, in the twenty-first century, for there still to be foreign military bases all around the world? How is it possible for there still to be interventions decided upon by the Security Council? That situation is a threat to humanity, an attack on the dignity of all the countries of the world. That is why we must develop proposals for the United Nations that will make it possible not only to free all the people living on this planet, but to restore dignity to them. My fourth point concerns international financial institutions. I remember that when I was a union leader Governments could never obtain the resources for investment. We were told that Bolivia did not have the capacity to borrow. Bolivia did not have easy access to international loans. But what did the International Monetary Fund do?”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“In Bolivia I too have to put up with a United States military base. And what do the uniformed United States outsiders do? They command the national police and the armed forces, because of political decisions of former Presidents, those who preceded me in the Palacio Quemada, as it is known in some sectors of society. The Chimore airport could not be used without the permission of the United States embassy. That woke us up to the importance of defending the dignity and sovereignty of our peoples. What I have described gave rise to a great movement, not only social and cultural, but also electoral. It led to a political liberation movement, a movement to return dignity to all Bolivians, and to my attaining the presidency. When I became President, I closed the military base.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“Prices are going up because we do not yet control agricultural production. Since the State has controlled basic services in Bolivia, electricity, telephone and drinking 13 11-50847 water tariffs have not risen, because they are basic. Public utilities must be the responsibility of the State, and not of the private sector. How can we allow water, the stuff of life, to be in private hands? I welcome the support we have received from the General Assembly for water to be a human right and express thanks on behalf of the people and Government of Bolivia. It is our responsibility to implement throughout the world the concept of water as a human right, thus supporting the least privileged when it comes to water. My third point concerns the constant struggle of peoples for dignity and sovereignty.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“Recovering natural resources, having them in the hands of the State, is very important for improving the economy; we cannot privatize natural resources and hand them over to the transnationals. We can have partners. That is fine. But companies cannot be the owners of our natural resources. The State, the people, must be the owner. I mention this experience because thanks to our decision, responding to the call of the Bolivian people, we started to change the national economy. I have a second point. Basic public services can never be provided by private businesses. I am speaking of water, energy, electricity and the telephone service. This morning, someone said that the prices of agricultural products are rising by 25 per cent or 30 per cent — even 50 per cent in some cases — and have been doing so for four or five years.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“How our economy has changed! From 1948 until 2005 Bolivia never had a fiscal surplus; it was in deficit. In our first year in charge — 2006 — we achieved a fiscal surplus. We also created bonds for children and the elderly. We started to democratize our economy, apart from increasing investment. For the 180 years after Bolivia was founded in 1825, what international reserves did we have until 2005? The answer is $1.7 billion. Over 180 years, Governments of all kinds — liberal, military dictatorships, neo-liberal — were able to save for Bolivia only $1.7 billion. In less than six years we have saved over $10 billion; Bolivia now has $11.7 billion in international reserves. In 2005, we were the next to last country in terms of international reserves. Now we have improved, thanks to the recovery and nationalization of hydrocarbons.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“On 1 May 2006, we nationalized and recovered our natural resources through a supreme decree. From then on our national economy began to change. From then on Bolivia stopped being a beggar State. Before 2006 — I say this very sincerely — Bolivia was a small country sometimes considered an underdeveloped or developing country; it does not matter what term is used. We have just 10 million inhabitants. Investment in Bolivia in 2005 was only $600 million, and more than 50 per cent of it was credits or international cooperation. Less than 50 per cent consisted of our own resources. How much investment has there been this year? The answer is $3.6 billion, with 20 per cent or 30 per cent of that being through international cooperation or credits, while almost 80 per cent is our own resources, thanks to our recovery of hydrocarbons, gas.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“They can never be handed over to transnational companies, whether they be minerals, oil or other natural resources. Before I became President, hydrocarbons were in the hands of transnational companies. What did the contracts say? They declared that the owner assumed the right of ownership at the mouth of the well. Governments told us that as long as the resource — gas, oil — was underground it belonged to all Bolivians, but the minute it came out of the ground it belonged instead to the transnational companies. In the contracts they concocted the idea that the contract holder acquired ownership at the mouth of the well; as soon as the oil and gas came out of the ground they no longer belonged to Bolivians. That was a constant pillaging of our natural resources.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“When there are anti-imperialist Presidents with anti-capitalist Governments, the empire tries to create internal conflicts with what appear to be major confrontations, making it appear in the media that a certain President should fall, or it tries to divide a country to justify intervention. When there was a coup d’état in Honduras and there were killings in Palestine, where was NATO? Where was the Security Council? They were nowhere to be found. For those and many other reasons, it is important to think again about re-establishing the United Nations. How can we Presidents and Governments face our responsibility of freeing our countries? Let me speak of some important aspects of my experience as President. First, our natural resources can never be privatized.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“Of course, Palestine has our full support. Bolivia not only supports recognition of Palestine at the United Nations, but also wishes to welcome Palestine to the United Nations. Here I have a profound observation. When Israel bombs, attacks, kills and takes Palestinian land, there is no Security Council for 11-50847 12 that; there is no international organization that can stop those bombings and killings, the genocide in Palestine. When there was a coup d’état in Honduras, where were the military bases to defend a President elected by the Honduran people? Where was the Security Council or the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to defend democracy in Honduras? It is time for us to think deeply about this.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“The Security Council will never ensure that such United Nations resolutions are respected; the United Nations cannot ensure respect for that decision of the whole world to lift the blockade against Cuba. I cannot understand how the resolutions of an Organization of all the countries of the world are not respected. What, then, is the United Nations? It is time for an in-depth debate on founding afresh this great Organization, the largest in the world. We should debate its role so that the United Nations is recognized and respected by the peoples of the world. That can happen only with the re-establishment of the United Nations as a body which fights for the equality of all the inhabitants of planet Earth, for the dignity of all those whom we represent at the United Nations. I have heard a number of interventions about Palestine.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“But it is the Insecurity Council for Presidents, peoples or Governments who seek liberation — not only cultural liberation, but also economic liberation: the recovery of their economic resources. Those are the deep divisions between the Presidents from the various continents who are taking part in our debates. If we want the Organization to have the authority to see that its resolutions are respected, we should think of founding afresh the United Nations. We cannot continue on the current footing. Why do I say that? Every year at the United Nations, almost 100 per cent of the Member States — the United States and Israel being the exceptions — decide that the economic blockade of Cuba should be ended. Who ensures that that decision is respected?”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“In countries with many natural resources, particularly related to energy, we are threatened by foreign intervention, when Presidents, Governments and peoples are not pro-capitalist or pro-imperialist. And then there is talk about a lasting peace. How can there be a lasting peace where there are United States military bases? How can there be lasting peace when there are military interventions? I believe that our United Nations is subordinate to the Security Council. What is the use of the United Nations if a group of countries decides on interventions, on killings? It is a Security Council for whom? It is a Security Council for Presidents, Governments, peoples who are pro-imperialist or pro-capitalist.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“Furthermore, imperialism seeks to control the sources of energy throughout the world, and to that end it has instruments to impose, control and constantly invade. And it is not just now; it has always been so. I remember when I was a child seeing rebellions of peoples against the capitalist system, against economic models that involved the permanent pillaging of our natural resources. Left-leaning union leaders and political leaders were accused of being Communists in order to arrest them. There was military intervention against social forces. People were confined, exiled, killed, persecuted and jailed, accused of being socialists, Maoists, Leninists and Marxist-Leninists. I feel that that has ended. We are no longer accused of being Marxists or Leninists, but now drug- trafficking and terrorism are given as excuses.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“We have a right to deep differences about life, but I believe that our Organization, the United Nations, has a duty to make it possible to align the constant work of Governments to guarantee peace and the equality and dignity of all those living on plant Earth. When I say that there is a deep difference between the culture of life and the culture of death, I feel that it will be difficult for us to come to an understanding with economic policies that concentrate capital in the hands of a few. Data show that 1 per cent of the world’s population holds 50 per cent of its wealth. If there are such deep differences, how can we resolve the problem of poverty? And if we cannot put an end to poverty how can we guarantee lasting peace?”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)
“Being present at this forum is very important to express what we think, what we feel and what we work on, but it is also important to express major differences between Presidents and between Governments, our differences on policies, programmes, projects, 11 11-50847 principles and values with some countries in this world. This morning we heard the statements of some Presidents, and I realized that there are enormous differences between the so-called small countries, developing countries, underdeveloped countries, compared with some Powers. For example, in the debate here at the United Nations there is a clear difference between the culture of life and the culture of death, between truth and falsehood and between peace and war. Of course, we all have the right to have our differences.”
2011-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 66 (2011)