|
KEN LIVINGSTONE, MAYOR OF LONDON
Every U.S. administration has failed
to understand the Cuban Revolution
• In
an interview with the CubaSí magazine,
Livingstone explains why he went to Cuba in November
2006, why the attacks on his visit are unfounded and
offers his opinion of Fidel Castro
•
CUBASÍ:
Why
did you go to Cuba and was the trip successful form
the point of view of you achieving what you set out
to do?
Ken
Livingstone:
Originally I was invited by Lord Moynihan, the Chair
of the British Olympic Association, to visit Cuba
during the World Sport for All Congress. As the host
city for the 2012 Games, London is developing close
relations with other key Olympic players. Cuba is a
significant sporting nation both globally and
particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Although they only have one–fifth of the population
of Britain they win as many medals as we do. We have
a lot to learn from this.
The
President of the Havana City Provincial Assembly –
Juan Contino Aslan, the mayor of Havana – was a very
kind host and ensured that we had a number of
extremely useful discussions with representatives of
the government. I was struck by the desire of Cuban
representatives to get a full picture of how Cuba is
currently seen in Europe and also by the Cubans’
criticisms of the current European policy towards
the island, which is deeply counterproductive and
ineffective.
There were a lot of attacks from London Assembly
members and the press about visiting Cuba, but
frankly this is just double standards. There is no
reason why Cuba should be singled out for
controversy except for people coming at
international issues from a very right wing
perspective.
CubaSí:
What
are your impressions of the current situation in
Cuba? Did anything particularly stand out for you
this time?
Ken
Livingstone:
I
have been to Cuba twice in 1995 and 1999, and what
stood out for me compared to the two times I have
visited before was the general improvement in the
economic situation. Things are visibly much less
tight.
I
also think that in the initial stages of the
‘special period’ there was an increase in some of
the negatives associated with tourism but the Cubans
have done a great deal to address this. I was struck
by the comments of the Minister of Investment and
International Co-operation, Marta Lomas, who spoke
very favourably about tourists from Britain.
Depending on which figures you take, the second or
third largest number of tourists to Cuba are from
Britain. Their direct experience of Cuba obviously
goes some way to countering the rubbish that we read
in the papers about the situation there.
In
addition, the improvements that are being made in
Habana Viejo are particularly striking. The
programme of restoration has made very significant
strides since the last time I was there.
What
really stood out for me was hearing first hand from
people working in the medical services just how
appalling the U.S. blockade is. When you meet people
who are treating eye disorders and blindness on a
huge scale and they describe how difficult it is to
get the equipment they need except through indirect
routes because of the blockade you get a feel for
the scale of the injustice that is being imposed on
Cuba. Similarly the description of how the blockade
works in terms of the embargo on Cuban nickel, where
the American authorities go to extraordinary lengths
to prevent steel containing Cuban nickel from
getting into the USA, is bizarre and petty.
There is one thing that hits you as soon as you
arrive and really made an impression on me this
time. Everywhere you go the Cubans have installed
energy saving light bulbs. They have got their
energy bills down and they are contributing to
reducing the causes of climate change at the same
time. There is a lesson here about how we make the
case for measures to tackle climate change – we need
to show that saving the planet can save people money
too. The work they Cubans are doing to get their
energy bills down is very notable.
On a
personal note the most moving part of my visit was
meeting the families of the ‘Miami Five’, who are
still imprisoned in U.S. jails. These men were
attempting to uncover and stop terrorist actions.
What this meeting reminded me of most, in terms of
the bravery of the families, was meeting the Irish
victims of wrongful imprisonment during the 1970s
and 80s here in Britain.
CubaSí:
You
have gone on record as being a supporter of the
Cuban Revolution. What is it that you most like
about it and why?
Ken
Livingstone:
Cuba’s revolution was one of the most important
events of the 20th century. It has given a powerful
signal around the world that neo-conservativism and
extreme economic liberalism can be rejected in favor
of investing in the needs of the population. This is
why, whatever criticisms many commentators have of
Cuba, it maintains such a huge level of interest and
attraction to millions people around the world
particularly in those places – the majority of the
planet – outside the richest countries.
There have been 10 U.S. presidents since the Cuban
revolution, all of whom have maintained broadly the
same policy approach to the island. Each of these
administrations in my view has failed to understand
that the revolution reflected the national interests
and needs of the Cuban people and is not therefore
some artificial ideological construct.
What
the Cubans have shown is an understanding that the
interests of the Cuban people are not served by
insularity but by internationalism. The thing that
most expresses this is the aid the Cubans gave to
the Angolans. That a country that was the subject of
such an unjust attack in the form of the blockade
can devote resources on such a scale to supporting
the Angolans is one of the most extraordinary acts
of practical solidarity in history. There was no
direct benefit to the Cubans of what they did, but
they understood that a defeat for the most
right-wing and reactionary forces in the world would
ultimately benefit everyone – including Cubans – in
the ‘Third World’. This basic internationalism is a
very striking and defining feature of Cuba.
CubaSí:
You
have said that if you win the election again in
2009, when it is the anniversary of the
revolutionary triumph, you will organize a big Cuba
festival in London. How big? And what sort of events
are you thinking of putting on?
Ken
Livingstone:
This
is one of the issues I raised with the Cubans during
my visit and I want to continue this dialogue so
that we can work out exactly what to do. I would
very much like London to host a festival that
reflects Cuban history, culture, art and music
during 2009. London is an international city by
definition, and as we get closer to the Olympics we
will celebrate many cultures from many countries.
There is growing interest in Cuba’s particular
contribution to Latin America and the Caribbean
because of the political developments that are now
taking place there. What Cuba has done, and what it
is now doing, have a big relationship to the
political process in that region and I think that as
a city we need to understand that more and enjoy the
very significant cultural aspects of that. If you
take Cuban music, or cinema, these have had a much
bigger impact on western society than is always
recognized or understood. I think we should take the
opportunity of the fifty years anniversary to
reflect on these things.
CubaSí:
Finally, what is your view of the situation
post-Fidel? The U.S. Commission for Assistance to a
Free Cuba plans a big international push to try and
force the successor government in Havana to change
to a multi-party free-market system. How do you
think the British government ought to respond to
this idea?
Ken
Livingstone:
I
honestly think that part of the problem with U.S.
foreign policy is that American administrations have
talked themselves into believing their own
propaganda. There is no way a society like Cuba’s
could function as a one-man show. Castro is not so
stupid as to try to run every part of Cuban society
directly from his office. He leads, and he takes a
very direct interest in all aspects of Cuban life,
but he also surrounds himself with very experienced
people and has ensured that there is a functioning
leadership around him. Effectively he has himself
been managing the transition for some time.
When, in July, when Castro handed over the
Presidency to Raul, the U.S. believed that the
country would not be able to sustain a change of
leader without major political upheaval. It is now
five months later and there is considerable
stability. |
