Address by Ambassador Allan Wagner Tizón, Secretary General of the Andean Community, at the opening of the Twenty-eighth Regular Session of the Andean Parliament General Assembly

Bogotá, May 18, 2006

This important session of the Andean Parliament coincides with the main week of celebrations of the thirty-seventh anniversary of the Agreement of Cartagena this coming May 26. 

This is obviously not the moment for a major celebration.  In recent weeks, we have witnessed the growing signs of a crisis that in my judgment can be traced to glaring differences among the Member Countries over the development model and type of participation in the world economy they consider most beneficial for their nations.   

There have been political differences among the Members in the past also, but these have been resolved through dialogue and the joint search for constructive and flexible solutions.  A case in point is that of Peru in the 90s, when a temporary regime was agreed upon to enable that country to defer certain obligations under the Cartagena Agreement which, in time, it was able to honor.

Only in the case of Chile in 1976 --in the early years of our integration process-- did a deeply-rooted political difference with the other Members arise that led, after intensive and fruitless negotiations, to that country’s denunciation of the Cartagena Agreement, leaving only a very few ties with the Member Countries.  It is interesting to note here that this situation occurred when the new Chilean regime that took power after a bloody coup d’état implemented a substantially different economic policy from that applied by the other Member Countries and from the model implicit in the Agreement of Cartagena and in the Commission’s decisions.  To what can we attribute this clash of interests?  They can be traced in particular to the approach to development and to participation in the world economy. 

The present crisis has emerged as Latin America embarks upon what we could call a new “social time.” Given the negative results in terms of welfare produced by the “Washington Consensus” recipes, the main concern of national political agendas today is to obtain tangible results in reducing the poverty and inequality that prevail in our societies within timeframes that are politically acceptable. In short, it is now a matter of overcoming the exclusion of vast sectors of our populations from the political system, from the benefits of economic growth and even from prevailing cultural norms. 

Different proposals have emerged in this context about how to improve upon or even to change the economic model, in order to reach these social targets and also to obtain a more inclusive State and society, all of this with the dizzying speed imposed by a year of presidential elections throughout the region.  The region’s integration model is also being questioned, particularly because of the challenges raised by a world globalization process in which the laggard are rapidly excluded from the fastest growing international economic and trade flows.  

The paradox in this struggle for equity is that despite the existence of good possibilities for working together to achieve the key objectives of development with social justice, competitive and socially inclusive participation in the world economy, and integration at the service of the people, disagreements that eat away at our unity and threaten our integration project have made an appearance.   

I am convinced that the crisis worsens when existing differences fail to be addressed through friendly and constructive dialogues aimed at a mutual understanding of needs and aspirations, when --in short-- pluralism as a necessary principle of Community coexistence is abandoned.

I think there is an urgent need to return to building consensuses at all levels of the Andean Integration System by redirecting the debate --which is both necessary and welcome,-- to center on the heart of the present crisis: the type of development model and of participation in the world economy we want for our countries and the role played by the integration process in terms of those objectives, in order to ensure the social inclusion of our nations and that they are benefited.

I think it is also necessary to recall that, thanks to the consensuses obtained by the Presidents at the Summits of Quirama, Quito and Lima, Andean integration today has a multidimensional agenda that goes beyond trade issues and that has retrieved socially inclusive development matters for the Community Project.  Furthermore, new actors are participating increasingly in the implementation of these agenda items, particularly SMEs and local governments, which today are at the forefront of the subregional integration process. 

At the same time, the agreement adopted by the Andean Community and the European Union within the framework of the biregional summit held last week in Vienna has opened the door to an Association Agreement that would enable us to reinforce our unity, deepen our integration and bring our countries closer to European development and integration models that center more on human beings than on the mere operation of the market, which would constitute an important development during this “social time” for our region.  To this end, the CAN and the EU have set a deadline of July 20, 2006 for holding all necessary meetings for this purpose.

In order to reach this target, it will be necessary to complete all of the work that has been carried out over the past twelve months to evaluate the necessary conditions for a “bloc to bloc” agreement between the two groups.  For us, this will mean taking certain necessary decisions to deepen our own integration process and to perfect our enlarged market, giving us the opportunity for a political reflection about the challenges the Andean Community faces in the new context and the treatment of pending issues, particularly the impact on Andean legislation and trade of the free trade agreements concluded by Colombia and Peru with the United States, so that we can take measures to enable all of the Member Countries to maintain the benefits of their participation in the integration process and to reinforce our Community’s internal cohesion.   

It will be necessary, as well, before the July 20, 2006 deadline, to clarify and define with the European Union the bases for the negotiation of the Association Agreement between the two blocs that includes political dialogue, cooperation and a trade agreement.  The challenge we face here is to obtain conditions that will allow all of the Member Countries to participate in this Association Agreement with the European Union, by incorporating flexible measures --and even different speeds-- in response to the asymmetries that exist within our region.  This would allow our Community to make the most of all the political, economic and social benefits deriving from that strategic association.    

Lastly, we must build the most favorable scenario possible, together with Venezuela, given that country’s decision to denounce the Cartagena Agreement, in the event that it is not reversed.  Many and very important relations have been developed over these decades that rest on Andean Community legislation.  All of the organs and institutions of the Andean Integration System should set themselves the task of  safeguarding those relations insofar as possible, for they represent 4,700 million dollars in trade and account for thousands of jobs in the subregion, together with programs in the areas of development and competitiveness, energy and the environment, political cooperation and social cohesion.    

I am certain that we will fulfill our nations’ expectations if we safeguard these relations that are grounded in the deepest level of our common Andean identity because integration is an inescapable historical process that goes beyond individuals and momentary situations.  Furthermore, if we truly wish to build a South American Community of Nations, it would be foolish to destroy what we already have, only to have to rebuild it afterwards. 

I am convinced that this impasse requires the active involvement of all political and social forces to revitalize the Community consensus that integration serves as the coordinating element for our countries’ socially inclusive development and participation in the world economy and, at the same time, as a vehicle for the convergence of the various national processes.    

I also believe that at this moment of transcendental definitions, we have a historic opportunity to reduce the accumulated deficit of citizen participation.  For that reason, I consider it extremely favorable that this forum for reflection has been convened by the Andean Parliament, as the Andean Integration System’s deliberating body, which has been growing stronger with the decision of the Member Countries to move toward the direct election of their Parliamentarians.  

The Andean Parliament is an expression of a broad plurality of positions and its legitimacy stems from the people and the building of consensuses among very different political actors in our countries.  It is, perhaps, the best reason for trusting in the possibility of the recovery of dialogue and trust and, above all, for building up Andean and South American integration as the most powerful instrument for achieving our nations’ wellbeing. 

Thank-you very much.