“Paraguay is an open wound.” With those words, the writer Rafael Barrett described the country in El dolor paraguayo more than a century ago. He was not speaking of weakness, but of a wound caused by the abuse of power, corruption, and the distance between the State and its people.
More than a hundred years later, Paraguay continues to face a question that Barrett would understand perfectly: will it remain a country of enormous potential hampered by weak institutions or will it finally consolidate a fully functional democracy?
The National Constitution of 1992 establishes a fundamental principle: “The Republic of Paraguay is forever free and independent“. That independence pertains to territory, as one would expect, but it also encompasses the institutional plane. In other words, it implies the State’s capacity to act in the public interest and not for private interests.
Paraguay has shown at various times that it can move in that direction. Personally, I have had the privilege of working alongside Paraguayans committed to that future. As deputy director of USAID Paraguay, I led the Northern Zone Initiative, in coordination with the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Health and the Presidency of the Republic, to strengthen the State’s presence in regions historically neglected.
I also sat on the board of the Tropical Forest Conservation Fund, supporting the protection of the Alto Paraná Atlantic Forest, one of the most important ecosystems in South America. And I collaborated with the Paraguayan Foundation in developing the Poverty Elimination Barometer, a Paraguayan innovation that transformed how thousands of families understand and confront poverty.
Those experiences made one thing clear: Paraguay lacks neither talent, resources nor patriotism. The challenge has been to build institutions that are sufficiently solid, predictable and trustworthy to sustain long-term democratic and economic development.
Writer Augusto Roa Bastos once warned about the dangers of a society that ends up normalizing forms of domination and political dependence. Today, his warning remains relevant.
Corruption has a moral dimension and concrete consequences for investment, public trust, service quality and democratic legitimacy. It also helps explain why Paraguay, despite decades of relative macroeconomic stability, has not yet reached deeper levels of institutional trust.
It is not that the country is doomed to repeat that pattern. The democratic transition of 1989 showed that Paraguay is capable of major historical transformations. At the same time, the 1992 Constitution represented another decisive moment: an attempt to build rules stronger than people and political circumstances.
“Paraguay, despite decades of relative macroeconomic stability, has not yet reached deeper levels of institutional trust”
Today Paraguay faces a turning point that will set a trend for the coming decades. This challenge goes beyond economic growth or political stability. We are talking about fully consolidating the rule of law, strengthening institutional independence and ensuring that the law is applied with the same force for all.
Democracies are strengthened through elections and also through institutions capable of generating trust, limiting abuses of power and sustaining clear rules over time. Paraguay today has a significant opportunity. It has resources, relative stability and a civil society that is much more active and aware than in previous decades.
Will it be able to translate that potential into institutions strong enough to consolidate a more transparent, modern and fully trustworthy democracy? That decision, as always, rests with the Paraguayan people.
