GRANMA INTERNACIONAL DIGITAL

© Copyright GRANMA INTERNATIONAL DIGITAL EDITION. La Havana. Cuba
Total or partial reproduction of the articles in this Website is autorized,
as long as the source of the copyright,

We form part of that globalized world and our
destiny is the same as the destiny of all those countries

SPEECH GIVEN BY PRESIDENT FIDEL CASTRO RUZ, FIRST SECRETARY OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF CUBA, AT THE FIRST WORK SESSION OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CARIBBEAN STATES SUMMIT IN SANTO DOMINGO, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, ON APRIL 17, 1999, YEAR OF THE 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE TRIUMPH OF THE REVOLUTION.

(TRANSLATION OF THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE COUNCIL OF STATE)

Since you are asking me to speak, although I haven't as yet been able to make a synthesis of everything that has been proposed here, I'm going to say a few things, with the promise of being brief. (LAUGHTER)

I was meditating, while the other colleagues were speaking, on the diversity of circumstances involving the history, life and interests of all the countries meeting here, and how difficult it is to find a common language.

It seemed necessary to me to clarify some concepts on what the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Caribbean Basin Initiative, the Africa, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group and the Lomé Convention signify for each one of us.

Sometimes I have the impression that we're a number of citizens standing on a street corner who want to go somewhere and take the first bus that passes; one bus one day, another bus another day, often going in all different directions.

Interests clash, that is undeniable, and we should start by being aware of that. Some of those clashes have come to the forefront here.

We don't have a clear vision of the future world. For example, what does the World Trade Organization [WTO] really signify for us? And everyone wanted a large world trade organization. That movement even started in Havana a long time ago.

How do I perceive the WTO at this moment? Really, I see it, and I'm saying this in all frankness, as a terrible instrument for the recolonization and exploitation of the world. How can one justify a policy which tends to eliminate the modest forms of preferential treatment that the 70 Lomé countries were able to obtain with great difficulty? Because as a country in the Third World family, we are concerned not only about our own problems, those of the Caribbean and Latin America, but also those of Africa and other parts of the world, because we form part of that globalized world, and our destiny is the same as that of all those countries.

Why wrest, overnight, the livelihood of numerous small Caribbean economies sustained by banana production, to benefit a large U.S. transnational that - as everybody knows - is behind that claim before the WTO, given that the United States neither produces bananas nor exports bananas; it's simply a large consumer of bananas, at the lowest price possible.

We Cubans form part of the Latin American family. I know that Guatemala grows bananas, and Honduras, and Ecuador as well, along with Mexico and various other countries.

In relation to that problem, I have often thought about what our position should be. I didn't hesitate, when I reflected on it, to support the Caribbean position. Does this mean that we are distancing ourselves from or ignoring the interests of the Central American countries? No, not at all; but I see a conflict of interest here.

Taking into account that those Caribbean islands, some more and others less, export barely 1.5% - if I'm not mistaken, perhaps it's less - of the bananas consumed in the world, I have to ask myself why this should become the apple of discord, if these are interests which can be reconciled, if we are able to and should support the Central American countries on many issues, in many aspects. Right now we are supporting them on the idea of an integral economic and social development, and we are supporting them in the fight to cancel their debts; we are asking the developed world to contribute all the resources needed by Central America after the hurricane. We understand its situation, its need for integral development, in social and human terms as well as economic terms.

There are many ways in which we can support them, because we have common interests, and it seems to me that this conflict is a solvable conflict. The degree of participation by the Caribbean countries is relatively insignificant, their land is limited. Moreover, when I think about the fact that there are two or three large U.S. transnationals controlling the world's banana trade, I wonder why one has to sacrifice tens of thousands of families in Jamaica - I've seen them - and in other Caribbean countries cultivating two or three hectares of bananas. When a decision like that is made in the WTO, such humane considerations are not taken into account. When I see that they're going to sweep away the Lomé preferences, I'm really horrified, because what's Africa going to live on? How can they snatch away those preferences? I do not believe that that's the way, we have to demand resources, we have to unite to make demands, to protest, to express the realities of the world in which we're living.

How much is spent on arms? How much is spent on luxuries? How much is spent on aircraft carriers, battleships, fighter planes, missiles, the conquest of space, etc., etc.? And, on the other hand, how much is spent on development?

The industrialized countries - Leonel [Fernández] mentioned this - are looking out for their own interests. He talked about issues related to duty-free zones, offshore assembly plants, that's really what essentially interests them and, as I see it, they want to convert the Third World into a massive duty-free zone, where nothing is paid apart from wages, and low wages; not even taxes, because they ask for exemptions. They have set us all up to compete with each other to see who offers the most facilities and who charges less taxes. These are the common interests not just of the Caribbean Basin countries, but of the entire Third World.

However, I think that in spite of the differences of interests, of situations, of history, that we may have, the best thing that we can do is what we're doing here, meeting and discussing.

On Margarita island [the venue of the 1997 Ibero-American Summit], I could see that that there was a problem in the Caribbean, when I noticed the efforts that the Dominican Republic has made with the Central American countries, and I realized that Central America and the Caribbean really felt that they had been put aside by the hand of God.

There was discussion about MERCOSUR, an excellent idea and we applauded it; an effort with the Andean Pact. To me it's absolutely clear that today all of South America has to unite, and I always ask the leaders, and not only the leaders of countries, but also the leaders of international agencies, when they're going to unite and what are the obstacles blocking the merger of MERCOSUR and the Andean Pact.

I have put it to many friends in South America - [Hugo] Chávez knows it, President Pastrana knows it, the president of Brazil knows it - that the Caribbean and Central America really feel left out, and I realized that at the Margarita summit when we were left out, when the representative from Puerto Rico spoke and said what was going on. (SOMEBODY SAYS THAT IT WAS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF COSTA RICA) Yes, it was Costa Rica. If only we could include Puerto Rico as well, because it's as Latin American as any one of us and as Caribbean as any one of us; but we all know the reasons why it cannot be at this meeting.

THE CARIBBEAN CANNOT BE LEFT OUT, CENTRAL AMERICA CANNOT BE LEFT OUT

I was saying to you that the Caribbean cannot be left out; Central America cannot be left out. And I wasn't thinking about Cuba; Cuba's was left out a long time ago, over 40 years ago; we were left out before, and now we're left out in a different way, because we became truly independent and became the masters of our own country. That's why they banished us form the OAS [Organization of American States] almost 40 years ago, and that's the reason why there are words here that I don't understand or even know what they mean. For example, what does the World Bank mean for us? What does the Inter-American Bank mean, headed as it is by our great and revered friend Iglesias? What does the Americas Summit signify, what's that? You must know more about that than me; perhaps because, for some reason, you're much better than all of us and more saintly than all of us and haven't emerged from the depths of hell, you may at least know what the Americas Summit and some of those things are. We've almost forgotten about that.

The FTAA? What's the FTAA to us? I am very grateful to [Percival] Patterson for recalling and having mentioned a very subtle, very prudent and very discreet word when he asked why certain countries have to be excluded. Really, it isn't certain countries: his only error was to talk in the plural, because there's only one excluded country, (LAUGHTER), and that's Cuba.

But, luckily, in our misfortune we have learned to make do with what we have, to live modestly but with great dignity, sharing what we have amongst ourselves and sharing a little of the little we have with others, whenever possible.

For that reason, when we were talking of hurricanes and other things, we recalled the history of recent months, the effort that our small, blockaded country has made to contribute to confronting the difficulties brought on by the hurricanes. I don't want to talk about that, why talk about that? We don't want to make propaganda, far from it, we work quietly. We work quietly not only on issues that at times, well, are known, but in our conversations with Europeans, with U.S. leaders; because, in spite of everything, some of them visit us, you know? And some of them are prestigious, intelligent people. And I talk with them about everything, I can have conversations with them ranging from the problems of the world and the real situation in the world, to the possibility that one day all those super-inflated stock markets could deflate, provoking a worse disaster for the United States than that of 1929. Because if you make mathematical calculations you can reach that conclusion, that it could explode one day, and you have to think about that as well.

In the same way, I can talk with them about any conflict whatsoever, about the situation in Russia, about why they're going to lead that country to an explosion, or remind them that the West has extracted 300 billion dollars from Russia and we know where it's invested. And Europe knows it, that's never talked about, while they're haggling over a 20-billion-dollar credit, which is a drop in the bucket, knowing as I do the situation in that country, which was the engine of the crisis that erupted in Southeast Asia, which had already begun to break out in Mexico, and was contained with a great effort; it reached there, and afterwards reached Russia.

When I was here in Santo Domingo, at the meeting with university students that same day - I think it was August 19 - I told you that the Russian economy was going to explode. I didn't know then that it was exploding at that very moment, we learned of it a few days afterwards, the subsequent trauma, the shock, the drop of 512 points in the United States' famous Dow Jones Index in one day and how, as a consequence of that, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank were shaken. And all of you certainly heard the self-criticism made by members of the International Monetary Fund at the October 5 and 6 meetings in New York, and the World Bank's protests in relation to its role of aiding social development. You are aware of all that. Then came the threat to Brazil and the rest of Latin America.

I DON'T BELIEVE IN ANY OF THE PRECEPTS OF
THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND CATECHISM

So as not to say too much, I'm going to tell you that I don't believe in any of the precepts of the International Monetary Fund catechism, it's ruination.

I was listening to the president of Costa Rica, who is an economist, and he was complaining that reserves were diminishing. They're not diminishing; they're disappearing overnight. Countries like Malaysia, which had a 40-billion-dollar reserve which disappeared in two days, had to rebel; and the gold reserves of Korea, one of those extremely famous Asian tigers, South Korea, disappeared in a few minutes; and those of Thailand disappeared in a few minutes; and those of Brazil, if the West and the United States hadn't realized that that was going to be the beginning of the end, and went to Brazil's aid. You already know what happened, its 70-billion-dollar reserves were reduced to 35 billion. The value of all the privatization, of the telephone system, of the large mineral deposits which were, moreover, profitable enterprises, disappeared in three weeks.

Those are the world's truths. Today, nobody can be sure what's going to happen. Leonel was speaking about high-tech industries; however, in the case of those industries which were growing in the Southeast Asian countries, microchip prices fell from two dollars to 10 cents in a matter of days, because everyone was producing computers, television sets and even automobiles, as if existing production capacity weren't sufficient.

You put it very well (REFERRING TO LEONEL) when you asked where the customers were. Well, yes, we know that jeans are produced. They have us producing jeans, shoes and craft items, lots of labor, but who knows where the customers are.

Up to 40 billion jeans could be produced. There is no order in the world economy. I don't know if the International Monetary Fund or somebody had to do something, or if one day there will be some coordination. World development today is chaos, anarchy, they have everyone producing jeans, up to 40 billion jeans; but 30 billion of those 40 billion are going to be surplus, because Africans aren't able to dress in jeans, or to use computers, as Clinton dreams - he said it there at the WTO conference, I heard him from a few meters away.

He recalled Karl Marx for us. (LAUGHTER) And you know why? Because Karl Marx dreamed of a single class, and Clinton does too; but Marx dreamed of a class of workers and Clinton's dreaming of a world transformed into one big middle class, in the style of California, Los Angeles, San Francisco: everybody with computers, twocars, a house, five telephones. And it's a fact that Tokyo has more telephones than all of Africa, and that Manhattan has more telephones than all of Africa with its 700 million inhabitants, and that without telephones computers are virtually worthless, because there's no Internet.

It's a fact that only 2% of the population of Latin America has access to Internet, that's for rich people. And when are we going to attain that world?

A few days ago I met with the president of Niger - who, unfortunately, died or was killed very recently, possibly accidentally, the reasons are not yet known - and he told me that his country's infant mortality rate was 213 children for every 1000 live births.

Some of you, or virtually all of you will understand, to a greater or lesser degree, what that means; but there's the other data of 87% illiteracy and only a 16% educational coverage. When are the people of Niger going to learn how to communicate by telephone, to utilize the Internet and to all become middle-class citizens?

From time to time I ask people from the rich nations how the AIDS problem is going to be solved in Africa, where - based on the prices of those medicines in the United States - 300 billion dollars a year are needed just to keep alive, for a few years more, those who have been infected with that virus. That's a luxury reserved for the wealthy countries.

In Cuba we used to use the expression "a luxury for whites." But in the United States, a rich nation, blacks do not have those facilities, nor do Native Americans, nor those of mixed race. That's for the rich and nobody else; they are the dreams of the rich, like the conquest of Mars and all that, and many of our peoples don't even have one little schoolhouse.

It's a similar situation in Niger. We proposed a health care program for Niger, which we are also promoting for a whole region of the poorest countries of northern Africa, because we want to prove what can be done with human resources. We don't have money, don't ask us to lend you 10 dollars, because I can assure you that we cannot lend it; but we have human capital, with which we can cooperate with the Caribbean and Central American countries, and also with other parts of the world that we cannot leave out, with which we should be united.

We are meeting here, and the Central Americans are fighting with the Caribbean countries over the banana issue, the Latin Americans are fighting with the other countries that belong to the Lomé Convention, because the WTO is eliminating all the preferences. What are we left with?

The rich countries are giving less and less for development. There was talk of 0.7% in the good times, where there was still a cold war and competition; when all that ended, there was no talk about 0.8%, or 0.7%, or 0.5%; they are barely giving 0.4%. And the country which gives the least, the United States, is the richest of all, is contributing a mere 0.1% or 0.2%, that's the truth, while speculation is growing to such levels that the daily buying and selling of currency totals a minimum of one trillion dollars, speculating with currency, speculating with shares, speculating with everything.

WE SHOULD AT LEAST START BY MEETING TOGETHER,
WORKING TOGETHER, ENLIGHTENING EACH OTHER

You mentioned (REFERRING TO LEONEL) the word "casino." Yes, this world is a giant casino, and chaotic. And I'm not saying this to dishearten anyone here, far from it, but really to transmit the idea that we must at least start by meeting together, working together and enlightening each other.

At every one of these meetings, a lot of things are clarified for me, I learn, I listen, I see problems, concerns, points of view. And it has to be shouted to the skies that we must unite not only within the Caribbean and Central America, but also with South America. They need it as much as we do, because although they are almost all large countries and have better economies, from the technological point of view or in terms of financial resources they have nothing in comparison with the rich giants.

We need to unite, and this meeting should have just as much importance as the Río meeting with Europe. I believe it is a major advance that they have remembered us and we can seek some margin of maneuver at least, by not having to depend on just one power to the North. It has huge significance and I believe, Leonel, really, that if we can take away from here an agreement for working groups to set about intensively preparing the common positions of Central America, the Caribbean and South America for the European Union meeting, that would be the best thing we could do between now and June, or July, I don't know at the moment when the meeting is, because it's been changed several times.

That will be a historic moment, when we all meet there with Europe, because Europe is also feeling threatened. At war for 500 years, it is now united because it cannot live separated. Even Switzerland, which is so individualistic, so independent, wants to join in the use of the euro and become a member of the European Union. Those countries, which are tremendously rich, will not be able to survive in the century being talked about if they don't unite. This is the real lesson.

I don't want to spend more time on this, just to say that, really, I have listened with much attention and much interest to everything that's been said; I think that everyone who has spoken has said something interesting.

In a special way - I think that you'll agree with me - it's worth acknowledging something that has been a motive for joy, and that is the presence here of Hugo Chávez, the president of Venezuela, who, with a sea of people behind him, is determined to change living standards in his country. It is a country that really could be more developed than Sweden; it has a lot more resources than Sweden, it has skills, it has universities. And he knows very well, and we all know - he said so - that the index of critical poverty in Venezuela is over 80%, the middle classes are not advancing toward any stabilization, the middle-class band C has already moved into the poverty sector. Things are incredible; he wants to change all that. But to me, his words came across as very caring, very sane, very spontaneous.

Yesterday, Chávez proposed something to me and said it really in two words. We had never talked about it, nor have we ever asked for anything, because we do not like to ask, we can say that in all sincerity. We have grown accustomed to not receiving, to isolation, to apartheid and, moreover, to trying to fulfill our moral duties to others, conscious of the fact that we form part of the human species.

MARTI SAID THAT THE NATION IS HUMANITY, WHICH IS A MUCH BROADER CONCEPT

Somebody said that Martí spoke of the nation as Latin America; Martí said more, he said: "Nation is humanity," which is a much broader concept.

The youthful president of Venezuela is a faithful follower of Bolívar, and he reflected that thinking here. But he had said to us, just yesterday he said to me, if you will give me permission I'll say it and, if not, I'll shut up. (LAUGHTER) Since you said it yourself, I feel I have the right to say it. He said that he wanted to include other countries, I don't know which ones, I would imagine quite a few; but he said that he wanted Cuba to receive the same benefits received by the countries included in the San José Pact. I was astonished, shocked, overwhelmed, because it hadn't even occurred to me to ask that, really. (APPLAUSE)

And I will say more, let Cuba be the last country he is concerned about; if there are others within the Caribbean that have less resources than Cuba, give them priority and leave Cuba until last, simply, until you have better oil prices and better conditions. We're prepared to wait; we've been waiting for 40 years, Chávez; but we are touched by your idea, and I'm sure that everyone here will receive it with great pleasure.

But I've observed well, I've been observing for 40 years. At least I have the privilege of stability (LAUGHTER); possibly Patterson also has the privilege of stability and, in Europe, Thatcher had it for 15 or 16 years; Kohl had it for 16 years and wanted to have 20. (LAUGHTER) Really, I don't want anything, it is fate that has given me a task and I have followed it, while there is a consensus, which is the essential democratic principle; really, nobody lacking the consensus of the people should occupy any position, or have any responsibility. So that's what I think, that other people have been around for a time.

I come in for criticism because they've put me there, or I put myself there without wanting to, I don't know; because it occurred to us to make a revolution on the doorstep of the United States and we carried out a very rough battle. Stability has helped us survive, but when my comrades decide - in the first place - or when I can't continue, you can be sure that I won't be boring you here. If I come at all it will be as a virtually forgotten guest, as is generally the case when one has stepped down. But don't forget, you have always awarded the former statesmen with a little round of applause (LAUGHTER), I've already seen that, and we have applauded the Salvadoran here, with great pleasure. He never applauds me, you know, I want you to know that (LAUGHTER), but I always applaud him; courtesy doesn't cost anything, and one has to fight for unity and all those things.

I want to emphasize this. The idea of establishing a university of the Caribbean in Venezuela pleased me greatly; then we would have two; Chávez, you can count on our cooperation. We have placed Cuban universities at the service of the Caribbean, and the Caribbean leaders know that there is no limit in terms of the number of engineers, architects and doctors that they want to train.

In a matter of weeks, after the two hurricanes, a Latin American School of Medicine has been created, it already has almost 1000 students. In September, approximately 1800 Latin American students will begin classes, without including the Haitians, because of the complications of teaching in more than one language. So we're going to organize another school for Haiti in the part of our island that's closest to their country, in eastern Cuba, where they'll have to learn Spanish first.

Caribbean students are in all our country's universities and there are no limits on numbers. And that idea of Chávez' makes me extremely happy, because he understands the significance of human capital and the importance of training in this era ,in order to occupy a place in the world.

I also want to thank Patterson very much for his recollections and his words, which I listened to with great interest.

And I'm infinitely grateful to all of you for your patience in listening to me.

Thank you.

(OVATION)