San
Cristóbal, Venezuela, April 14,
2005
Ladies and
gentlemen:
I deeply
value the opportunity to meet with
you today on the Colombian-Venezuelan
border, recognized as being the
most active border in the Andean
Community countries, to speak
about the subject of Border
Integration and Territorial
Competitiveness among the Member
Countries.
I would like
to start off by pointing out that
the Strategic Design I proposed
for the Andean Community at the
beginning of my term as Secretary
General, and which received the
backing of the Andean Presidents
at the Quito Summit (July 2004),
recognizes the vital importance of
border development for Andean
integration and, in this
connection, incorporates and gives
continuity to the efforts
undertaken in this area by the
Member countries and the General
Secretariat as of the year 1999.
The proposed
Strategic Design presents Andean
integration as the link between
the external agenda adopted by our
countries to confront
globalization, and the internal
agenda whose challenges are
development, the antipoverty
effort and social cohesion. There
are three key areas of action in
this context: the deepening of
trade integration; the
reincorporation of the development
dimension with a competitiveness
and social inclusion approach; and
political cooperation on the
social agenda.
The
development of our borders is an
issue that cuts transversally
across these three key areas of
action of our integration process.
By way of example, in order to
promote trade between our
countries, it is first necessary
to facilitate the movement of
goods, persons and services in
border areas by implementing in
practice actions that promote
respect for Andean legislation.
Furthermore, it is impossible to
accomplish the objective of
increasing the subregion’s
competitiveness without a project
for the comprehensive development
of our borders, paradoxically
known as being marginal areas for
the most part. And lastly, borders
constitute vital areas for
decentralized political
cooperation on themes like
governance and security and for
the implementation of projects to
promote social cohesion.
During the
early years of the Andean
Integration process, land borders
were viewed with interest and
began to take on importance. It
was soon discovered, however, that
the borders did not operate like
“open doors,” like “hinges”
intended to efficiently coordinate
the flow of goods, but, on the
contrary, served as veritable
“obstacles” to commercial trade.
The difficulties appeared one
after another, first in the form
of the compulsory transfer of
cargo at border crossings;
excessive and often repetitive
formalities; lack of efficient
cargo, transport and crew services;
informal or unregistered trade;
delays lasting several days to
obtain permission to bring goods
into or through the country --all
of which served to discourage
intra-Andean trade.
The centrally-oriented
development model in effect to one
extent or another in all of our
countries kept borders from
receiving priority attention as
part of development initiatives,
making them, in practice, marginal
areas in regions practically
divorced form society and the
economy in each country. For that
reason, local actors reinforced
their social, cultural and
economic ties in an effort to
benefit in any way from existing
differences among national laws as
to customs, monetary, tax, labor
and other matters that are an
everyday occurrence in these
border areas.
The 1990s
were particularly illustrative of
the crises in border economies,
not only for the reasons already
described, but because of the
appearance of other problems
connected with the countries’
domestic security or the growing
impact of globalization.
Andean
integration, as a shared
development strategy of the five
countries, was not sufficiently
deepened to find solutions to this
crisis. Too much emphasis placed
on finding solutions to the
problem of international
transportation at land border
crossings resulted in a flood of
proposed solutions “within the
transportation sector,” reflecting
a failure to understand that the
solution to the border problem is
not sectoral, but comprehensive,
and related to all of the elements
of the border situation.
For us, in an
integration and development
perspective, the border, more than
a precise territorial cut along an
imaginary line, is a process, an
experience, characterized by the
intense relationship and even the
interdependence of the various
expressions of social life among
groups of people who live close to
each other, but belong to two
sovereign nations. In the context
of this definition, the border is
always a space for shared
action characterized basically
by the everyday nature of
the relationship between social
and economic actors.
As a result,
the borders operate, in a
practical sense, like another
territory, a kind of “third
country” where a common culture,
age-old family bonds, real
economic ties shared over the
years are more important that the
inflexibility of each State’s
regulatory system and institutions,
above and beyond the legitimate
sovereign reach of each.
In an
integration and development
perspective, therefore, the border
can only be understood with a
binational outlook and its
problems and potentials can be
better addressed through the
shared efforts of the bordering
States, actively accompanied by
Andean Integration, whenever its
involvement is possible and to be
desired.
Please allow
me to offer you three dimensions
of the importance of borders to
our integration process.
In the first
place, I consider borders
important to Andean integration
because in the end analysis our
process is a strategy for jointly
reaching integral and shared
development targets. Article 1 of
the Cartagena Agreement itself
establishes its objective as being
“…to promote the balanced and
harmonious development of the
Member Countries.” What balanced
and harmonious development can we
aspire to as an integration bloc
unless we address, as a Community,
the serious regional imbalances
within our countries, where border
regions tend to appear as net
losers in the integration effort
in comparison with others --usually
interior industrialized regions--
that are the most active in intra-Community
trade flows?
In the second
place, borders are vital for
strengthening the Andean
Integration process because they
are the true “hinges” in our
intent to increase trade, tourist
and service flows between our
countries. The fact is, however,
that what we have demanded from
the border areas for the benefit
of integration is far more than
what we have done for them. We
have asked them for a qualitative
transformation, to stop acting as
obstacles to trade, to reinforce
the endowment of efficient
services for trade and tourist
flows that originate in and end up
outside that area. The central and
political levels, however, have
failed to make available to them
the necessary tools for fulfilling
these requests.
In the third
place, I consider it just as
important to identify a role for
the border areas that will involve
their active participation in
efforts to expand and diversify
the exportable supply of Andean
country goods and services in
order to improve the terms of
participation of the region as a
whole in the global economy. In
this necessary integration with
the world, some development
centers that link up the interior
regions with our Pacific and
Atlantic ports over common borders
should permit the latter to be
consolidated true “spaces for
decentralized development”, a
projection in which their
privileged geographic position
constitutes an obvious asset.
In is with
this vision and in this
perspective that the General
Secretariat since 1999 has been
promoting the enactment of a
series of measures to recognize
the importance of and the role
these border areas should play
within the Community integration
process and providing them, from
the vantage point of Andean
Integration, with some useful
instruments for achieving these
aims. In May 1999, the Andean
Foreign Ministers approved
Decision 459 “Community Policy on
Border Integration and Development,”
which establishes its end purposes
and objectives and creates basic
institutions, represented by the
Andean Council of Foreign
Ministers, which directs that
policy; the High-Level Working
Group for Border Integration and
Development, which coordinates and
proposes to the Andean Council the
necessary programs and actions
plans; and the Andean Community
General Secretariat, which fosters
and oversees the execution of this
policy.
The result of
the efforts of the High-Level
Group and of the Andean Council
policy decision was the approval,
in June 2001, of Decision 501
“Border Integration Zones (BIZ) in
the Andean Community”, the key
legal provision in the development
of this process, in that it
commits our countries to create,
by country pairs, some territorial
spheres consisting of segments of
their common borders “…for which
policies shall be adopted and
plans, programs, and projects
shall be executed jointly and
coordinately to boost sustainable
development and border integration
for their mutual benefit in
accordance with the
characteristics of each of them,”
as the first article of this
Decision establishes.
Pursuant to
this Decision, I have the pleasure,
as part of this visit, to
officially deliver to the
Governments of Colombia and
Venezuela a draft definition and
delimitation of what would be the
first Colombian-Venezuelan Border
Integration Zone. This initiative
has been prepared with technical
and financial support from the
Andean Community General
Secretariat and the Offices of the
Governors of Northern Santander
and Táchira and the academic input
and professional assistance of
professors and researchers from
three universities in this border
area: the Universidad Francisco de
Paula Santander and the
Universidad Libre de Colombia –
Seccional Cúcuta, for Colombia,
and the Universidad de los Andes
of Venezuela, through its Border
and Integration Studies Center (CEFI-ULA).
In order for
border integration to constitute,
in a practical dimension, an
instrument to support regional-border
development and an important
mechanism of Andean integration
and of the bilateral relations
among our countries, we must
foster the creation of a
promotional investment regime that
will make it viable to formally
create and operate border
integration enterprises and to
conceive and execute public
projects of a binational border
nature.
In this
connection, the General
Secretariat and the High-Level
Working Group for Border
Integration and Development have
recently drawn up two draft
Decisions known respectively as
the “Uniform Regime on
Multinational Andean Border
Integration and Development
Corporations (COMAF)” and “Public
Border Integration and Development
Projects” that we expect to see
approved shortly.
The Cúcuta –
San Cristóbal urban hub is a nodal
point of the Andean Hub, part of
that formidable hemispheric
infrastructure project created by
the South American Regional
Infrastructure Integration
Initiative (IIRSA), a basic
program for the construction of
the South American Community of
Nations and its consolidation as a
major strategy for decentralized
development. This is the same
border over which two-thirds of
Colombian-Venezuelan trade is
channeled and which, by the way,
represents nearly one-half the
total trade among the Andean
Community countries. Thousands of
citizens from the two countries
move back and forth every day
across the border to work in
companies engaged in a wide range
of economic activities,
demonstrating the drive and
importance of this “de facto”
integration.
It should be
recalled that the approval in
August 1942 of the Colombian-Venezuelan
Border Regime Bylaws perfected in
1959 by the Treaty of Tonchalá
instituted a border regime in this
region that constituted a
pioneering model of such border
regimes for the South American
countries. It was for the
implementation of this regime in
the region that the Andean
Parliament created the Border
Region Assembly in March 1987 and
it was here, in Northern Santander
and in Táchira that intellectuals
and the regional Academy began to
propose in the 1980s the
establishment of a Border
Integration Zone regime as an
instrument for promoting
development with a shared vision.
We are
convinced, because of this, that
this border is not only a mirror
in which all other borders in the
Andean region can see themselves
reflected, but that it should --for
that same reason-- become an
advanced laboratory of sorts in
which, through the sum of the
contributions and capacities of
local actors, national and
regional governments, integration
bodies and financial and
cooperating agencies, we can
overcome all of the obstacles to
integration and border development
that are still present and
consolidate its territorial
competitiveness.
And when I
say territorial competitiveness, I
mean, in a broad sense, a
situation in which this binational
region prepares itself to cope
with market competition while, at
the same time, guaranteeing its
environmental, economic, social
and cultural viability. This calls
for taking account of the
resources of the territory in
striving for global coherence; the
active involvement of agents and
institutions; the integration of
the sectors of activity in a logic
of knowledge and innovation; and
cooperation with other regions in
which the coordination of the
region with the global context is
the final aim.
The Andean
Community General Secretariat is
willing to offer its broadest
assistance for this undertaking,
which doubtlessly constitutes a
huge challenge. I sincerely hope
that the dialogues in which we
will engage as of this moment will
be directed basically toward
consolidating these networks that
will enable us to gradually
approach this great goal that will
not only be an accomplishment of
Colombian-Venezuelan binational
integration, but also one of the
most important targets of Andean
Integration.
Thank-you
very much.