Document. At the G20 summit, Javer Milei delivered a speech on the renovation of global governance which expresses a vision opposed to the directions currently taken. An essential document to read to understand the political revolution underway in Argentina and the consequences it may have in the Western world.
Original text published on the Casa Rosada website. Translation of Conflicts.
Statement by the President of the Argentine Republic, Javier Milei, during Session II of the G20 Leaders’ Summit
Session II: “Reform of global governance institutions”.
Dear members of this assembly,
The international bodies and forums that constitute the international community today were created in the spirit that all concerned nations could come together to cooperate on a voluntary basis, as equals and autonomous, in order, among other things, to safeguard the fundamental rights of people.
This principle is enshrined in the first article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that “ all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights ».
Yet today, almost 70 years after the inauguration of this system of international cooperation in which we and the rest of the nations of the world participate, it is time to recognize that this model is outdated, it is time to recognize that this model is in crisis, because it has long been in contradiction with its initial objective.
Nearly 70 years after the inauguration of this system of international cooperation in which we and the rest of the nations of the world participate, it is time to recognize that this model is outdated
First of all, because we have failed to fulfill the mandate of voluntary international cooperation between equals.
Today, what prevails in the international community is a pattern of taxation. This is not a symmetrical and autonomous cooperation.
Secondly, and most importantly, because many policies insistently promoted by the international community violate the most fundamental rights of the world’s citizens, namely the rights to life, liberty and private property.
Thinking about the slogan of this exhibition, I believe that the concept of “global governance” has become the label for this failure.
Because today, even if many do not dare to say it out loud, there are many who, within the international community, consider that “global governance” is synonymous with impositions of all kinds on our nations and our citizens.
Whether it is barriers to production and trade, censorship mandates on freedom of expression, cultural impositions or conditions of access to the credit market.
The problem is that these definitions are not agreements between the parties, but requirements, because those who dare to have their own point of view are punished.
For us, consensus is always based on healthy disagreement and vigorous debate. But today, the disagreement is scandalous, and the debate is neither vigorous nor healthy. There is no sovereign equality that allows this and, as a result, the international regime becomes a corset that suffocates us.
The proof is that, in various quarters, we have even been accused of promoting hate speech, of being undemocratic or of representing a danger to human rights, simply because we have a dissenting opinion.
This means that the mechanisms of global governance do not provide a channel for conversation between equals. They offer only two paths: submission or rebellion.
The mechanisms of global governance do not provide a channel for conversation between equals. They offer only two paths: submission or rebellion.
Well, rather than being slaves, we prefer rebellion. I therefore take this opportunity to clarify this administration’s position on some of the slogans of the misnamed “global governance.”
If it comes to restricting freedom of opinion, don’t count on us [no cuenten con nosotros en version originale].
If it means encroaching on people’s property rights through taxation and regulation, don’t count us out.
If it’s about limiting the right of countries to freely exploit their natural resources, don’t count on us.
If it means inventing privileges for sex, race, class or any other minority, and denying the principle of equality before the law, don’t count on us.
If it’s about imposing greater state intervention in the economy, we’re out.
We believe that international cooperation can be beneficial for all, yes, but this requires respect for the sovereignty of nations and the individual rights of their citizens.
After all, this is the very essence of our freedom agenda, and it is the direction we believe any effort to reform the institutions of global governance should take.
Just like there was a space race in the 20the century, we believe that the next decades will be marked by another race. A race towards taxation and deregulation, where countries that preserve the freedom of individuals will prosper. Those who liberate the productive forces. Those who reward innovation instead of punishing it. In other words, those who attack the truths that the international community has neglected in recent decades.
Today, we pledge to be at the forefront of this race.
And we have faith and hope that the international community will return to the principles that gave it life: the voluntary cooperation of sovereign nations on an equal footing, in defense of the freedom of individuals.
I thank you all.
