ARTICLE BY FIDEL
That which can never be forgotten
• Thoughts by Compañero Fidel
regarding an article published in the Sunday edition
of the The New York Times, which evaluates
the path the country should follow in relation to
its policy toward Cuba, in the opinion of the
newspaper
Yesterday morning, on Sunday October 12, the Sunday
internet edition of The New York Times – a newspaper
which under certain circumstances follows the
political line most convenient to its country’s
interests – published an article entitled “Obama
should end the embargo on Cuba;” with opinions as to
how, in its view, the country should proceed.
There are times when such articles are written by
some prestigious journalist, such as someone I had
the privilege of meeting personally during the first
days of our struggle in the Sierra Maestra with the
remainder of a unit which had been almost totally
eliminated by Batista’s air force and army. We were
at that time quite inexperienced; we didn’t even
realize that giving the impression of strength to
the press would be something that could merit
critique.
That is not what the brave war correspondent,
Herbert Matthews, thought with a story which made
his name during the difficult times of the fight
against fascism.
Our supposed fighting ability in February 1957 was a
little less, but still more than sufficient to wear
down and overthrow the regime.
Carlos Rafael Rodríguez, leader of the People’s
Socialist Party, was witness to what, after the
Battle of Jigüe in which an entire unit of select
troops were forced to surrender after 10 days of
combat, I expressed regarding my fear that the
regime’s forces would surrender in July 1958, when
the elite troops hastily retreated from the Sierra
Maestra, despite being trained and equipped by our
northern neighbors. We had discovered an effective
way of defeating them.
I
could not help but expand a little on this point as
I wished to explain the spirit with which I read the
aforementioned article of the U.S. newspaper, last
Sunday. I will cite the most important parts in
quotations:
“Scanning a map of the world must give President
Obama a sinking feeling as he contemplates the
dismal state of troubled bilateral relationships his
administration has sought to turn around. He would
be smart to take a hard look at Cuba, where a major
policy shift could yield a significant foreign
policy success.
“For the first time in more than 50 years, shifting
politics in the United States and changing policies
in Cuba make it politically feasible to re-establish
formal diplomatic relations and dismantle the
senseless embargo. The Castro regime has long blamed
the embargo for its shortcomings, and has kept
ordinary Cubans largely cut off from the world. Mr.
Obama should seize this opportunity to end a long
era of enmity and help a population that has
suffered enormously since Washington ended
diplomatic relations in 1961, two years after Fidel
Castro assumed power.
“…a devastated economy has forced Cuba to make
reforms — a process that has gained urgency with the
economic crisis in Venezuela, which gives Cuba
heavily subsidized oil. Officials in Havana, fearing
that Venezuela could cut its aid, have taken
significant steps to liberalize and diversify the
island’s tightly controlled economy.
“They have begun allowing citizens to take
private-sector jobs and own property. This spring,
Cuba’s National Assembly passed a law to encourage
foreign investment in the country. With Brazilian
capital, Cuba is building a seaport, a major project
that will be economically viable only if American
sanctions are lifted. And in April, Cuban diplomats
began negotiating a cooperation agreement with the
European Union. They have shown up at the initial
meetings prepared, eager and mindful that the
Europeans will insist on greater reforms and
freedoms.
“The authoritarian government still harasses and
detains dissidents. It has yet to explain the
suspicious circumstances surrounding the death of
the political activist Oswaldo Payá.”
As you can see a slanderous and cheep accusation.
“Travel restrictions were relaxed last year,
enabling prominent dissidents to travel abroad.
There is slightly more tolerance for criticism of
the leadership, though many fear speaking openly and
demanding greater rights.
“The pace of reforms has been slow and there has
been backsliding. Still, these changes show Cuba is
positioning itself for a post-embargo era. The
government has said it would welcome renewed
diplomatic relations with the United States and
would not set preconditions.
“As a first step, the Obama administration should
remove Cuba from the State Department’s list of
nations that sponsor terrorist organizations, which
includes Iran, Sudan and Syria. Cuba was put on the
list in 1982 for backing terrorist groups in Latin
America, which it no longer does. American officials
recognize that Havana is playing a constructive role
in the conflict in Colombia by hosting peace talks
between the government and guerrilla leaders.
“Starting in 1961, Washington has imposed sanctions
in an effort to oust the Castro regime. Over the
decades, it became clear to many American policy
makers that the embargo was an utter failure. But
any proposal to end the embargo angered
Cuban-American voters, a constituency that has had
an outsize role in national elections (…)The
generation that adamantly supports the embargo is
dying off. Younger Cuban-Americans hold starkly
different views, having come to see the sanctions as
more damaging than helpful. A recent poll found that
a slight majority of Cuban-Americans in Miami now
oppose the embargo. A significant majority of them
favor restoring diplomatic ties, mirroring the views
of other Americans.
“Cuba and the United States already have diplomatic
missions, called interests sections, which operate
much like embassies. However, under the current
arrangement, American diplomats have few
opportunities to travel outside the capital to
engage with ordinary Cubans, and their access to the
Cuban government is very limited.
“The Obama administration in 2009 took important
steps to ease the embargo, a patchwork of laws and
policies, making it easier for Cubans in the United
States to send remittances to relatives in Cuba and
authorizing more Cuban-Americans to travel there.
And it has paved the way for initiatives to expand
Internet access and cell phone coverage on the
island.
“For instance, it could lift caps on remittances,
allow Americans to finance private Cuban businesses
and expand opportunities for travel to the island.
“It could also help American companies that are
interested in developing the island’s
telecommunications network but remain wary of the
legal and political risks..
“Failing to engage with Cuba now will likely cede
this market to competitors. The presidents of China
and Russia traveled to Cuba in separate visits in
July, and both leaders pledged to expand ties.
“It would better position Washington to press the
Cubans on democratic reforms, and could stem a new
wave of migration to the United States driven by
hopelessness.
“Closer ties could also bring a breakthrough on the
case of an American development contractor, Alan
Gross, who has been unjustly imprisoned by Cuba for
nearly five years. More broadly, it would create
opportunities to empower ordinary Cubans, gradually
eroding the government’s ability to control their
lives.
“…Western Hemisphere heads of state will meet in
Panama City for the seventh Summit of the Americas.
Latin American governments insisted that Cuba, the
Caribbean’s most populous island and one of the most
educated societies in the hemisphere, be invited,
breaking with its traditional exclusion at the
insistence of Washington.
“Given the many crises around the world, the White
House may want to avoid a major shift in Cuba
policy. Yet engaging with Cuba and starting to
unlock the potential of its citizens could end up
being among the administration’s most consequential
foreign-policy legacies.
“Normalizing relations with Havana would improve
Washington’s relationships with governments in Latin
America, and resolve an irritant that has stymied
initiatives in the hemisphere..”
“…The Obama administration is leery of Cuba’s
presence at the meeting and Mr. Obama has not
committed to attending.
“He must — and he should see it as an opportunity to
make history.”
One of the most educated societies in the
hemisphere!!!! This is indeed recognition. But why
doesn’t it mention this straight away, that in no
way is this society comparable to that which Harry
S. Truman bequeathed to us when his ally and great
public treasury looter Fulgencio Batista took power
on March 10, 1952, only 50 days after the general
election. This can never be forgotten.
The article is obviously written with great skill,
seeking the greatest benefit for U.S. policy in a
complex situation, in the midst of increasing
political, economic, financial and commercial
problems. To these are added the effects of rapid
climate change; commercial competition; the speed,
precision and destructive power of weapons which
threaten the survival of mankind. What is written
today has a very different connotation to that which
was written just 40 years ago when our planet was
already forced to stockpile and withhold water and
food from the equivalent of half the world’s current
population. This without mentioning the fight
against Ebola which is threatening the health of
millions of people.
Add to this that in a few days the global community
will reveal before the United Nations whether it
agrees with the blockade against Cuba or not.
Fidel
Castro Ruz
October 13, 2014
8:30
p.m.
|
