Inspired by the principles of Malcolm X / Malik El-Hajj Shabazz. A 'Third Worldist' perspective focusing on the increasing pace of south-south co-operation which is challenging and defeating US hegemony, and the struggles of those oppressed by neo-colonialism and white supremacy (racism) who fight for their social, political and cultural freedom 'by any means necessary'
TWO days ago, at almost six o’clock in the evening Cuban time and when, given its geographical location, night had already fallen in Haiti, television stations began to broadcast the news that a violent earthquake – measuring 7.3 on the Richter scale – had severely struck Port-au-Prince. The seismic phenomenon originated from a tectonic fault located in the sea just 15 kilometers from the Haitian capital, a city where 80% of the population inhabit fragile homes built of adobe and mud.
The news continued almost without interruption for hours. There was no footage, but it was confirmed that many public buildings, hospitals, schools and more solidly-constructed facilities were reported collapsed. I have read that an earthquake of the magnitude of 7.3 is equivalent to the energy released by an explosion of 400,000 tons of TNT.
Tragic descriptions were transmitted. Wounded people in the streets were crying out for medical help, surrounded by ruins under which their relatives were buried. No one, however, was able to broadcast a single image for several hours.
The news took all of us by surprise. Many of us have frequently heard about hurricanes and severe flooding in Haiti, but were not aware of the fact that this neighboring country ran the risk of a massive earthquake. It has come to light on this occasion that 200 years ago, a massive earthquake similarly affected this city, which would have been the home of just a few thousand inhabitants at that time.
At midnight, there was still no mention of an approximate figure in terms of victims. High-ranking United Nations officials and several heads of government discussed the moving events and announced that they would send emergency brigades to help. Given that MINUSTAH (United Stabilization Mission in Haiti) troops are deployed there – UN forces from various countries – some defense ministers were talking about possible casualties among their personnel.
It was only yesterday, Wednesday morning, when the sad news began to arrive of enormous human losses among the population, and even institutions such as the United Nations mentioned that some of their buildings in that country had collapsed, a word that does not say anything in itself but could mean a lot.
For hours, increasingly more traumatic news continued to arrive about the situation in this sister nation. Figures related to the number of fatal victims were discussed, which fluctuated, according to various versions, between 30,000 and 100,000. The images are devastating; it is evident that the catastrophic event has been given widespread coverage around the world, and many governments, sincerely moved by the disaster, are making efforts to cooperate according to their resources.
The tragedy has genuinely moved a significant number of people, particularly those in which that quality is innate. But perhaps very few of them have stopped to consider why Haiti is such a poor country. Why does almost 50% of its population depend on family remittances sent from abroad? Why not analyze the realities that led Haiti to its current situation and this enormous suffering as well?
The most curious aspect of this story is that no one has said a single word to recall the fact that Haiti was the first country in which 400,000 Africans, enslaved and trafficked by Europeans, rose up against 30,000 white slave masters on the sugar and coffee plantations, thus undertaking the first great social revolution in our hemisphere. Pages of insurmountable glory were written there. Napoleon’s most eminent general was defeated there. Haiti is the net product of colonialism and imperialism, of more than one century of the employment of its human resources in the toughest forms of work, of military interventions and the extraction of its natural resources.
This historic oversight would not be so serious if it were not for the real fact that Haiti constitutes the disgrace of our era, in a world where the exploitation and pillage of the vast majority of the planet’s inhabitants prevails.
Billions of people in Latin American, Africa and Asia are suffering similar shortages although perhaps not to such a degree as in the case of Haiti.
Situations like that of that country should not exist in any part of the planet, where tens of thousands of cities and towns abound in similar or worse conditions, by virtue of an unjust international economic and political order imposed on the world. The world population is not only threatened by natural disasters such as that of Haiti, which is a just a pallid shadow of what could take place in the planet as a result of climate change, which really was the object of ridicule, derision, and deception in Copenhagen.
It is only just to say to all the countries and institutions that have lost citizens or personnel because of the natural disaster in Haiti: we do not doubt that in this case, the greatest effort will be made to save human lives and alleviate the pain of this long-suffering people. We cannot blame them for the natural phenomenon that has taken place there, even if we do not agree with the policy adopted with Haiti.
But I have to express the opinion that it is now time to look for real and lasting solutions for that sister nation.
In the field of healthcare and other areas, Cuba – despite being a poor and blockaded country – has been cooperating with the Haitian people for many years. Around 400 doctors and healthcare experts are offering their services free of charge to the Haitian people. Our doctors are working every day in 227 of the country’s 337 communes. On the other hand, at least 400 young Haitians have trained as doctors in our homeland. They will now work with the reinforcement brigade which traveled there yesterday to save lives in this critical situation. Thus, without any special effort being made, up to 1,000 doctors and healthcare experts can be mobilized, almost all of whom are already there willing to cooperate with any other state that wishes to save the lives of the Haitian people and rehabilitate the injured.
Another significant number of young Haitians are currently studying medicine in Cuba.
We are also cooperating with the Haitian people in other areas within our reach. However, there can be no other form of cooperation worthy of being described as such than fighting in the field of ideas and political action in order to put an end to the limitless tragedy suffered by a large number of nations such as Haiti.
The head of our medical brigade reported: "The situation is difficult, but we have already started saving lives." He made that statement in a succinct message hours after his arrival yesterday in Port-au-Prince with additional medical reinforcements.
Later that night, he reported that Cuban doctors and ELAM’s Haitian graduates were being deployed throughout the country. They had already seen more than 1,000 patients in Port-au-Prince, immediately establishing and putting into operation a hospital that had not collapsed and using field hospitals where necessary. They were preparing to swiftly set up other centers for emergency care.
We feel a wholesome pride for the cooperation that, in these tragic instances, Cuba doctors and young Haitian doctors who trained in Cuba are offering our brothers and sisters in Haiti!
NEWS arriving from the Danish capital paints a picture of chaos. After planning an event in which around 40,000 people were to participate, the hosts have no way of keeping their promise. Evo, who was the first of the ALBA presidents to arrive there, expressed certain profound truths emanating from the millenary culture of his people.
According to the news agencies, he affirmed that he had received a mandate from the Bolivian people to oppose any agreement if the final declaration fails not meet expectations. He explained that climate change is not the cause but the effect, that we have an obligation to defend the rights of Mother Earth against the model of capitalist development, the culture of life against the culture of death. He spoke of the climate debt that the rich countries must pay to the poor countries, and the return of atmospheric space seized from the latter.
He described as "ridiculous" the figure of $10 billion dollars offered per year up until 2012 when, in reality, hundreds of billions of dollars are needed every year. He also accused the United States of spending trillions of dollars on exporting terrorism to Iraq and Afghanistan and establishing military bases in Latin America.
The president of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela addressed the Summit on December 16th, at 8:40 a.m. Cuban time. He made a brilliant speech that received tremendous applause. His remarks were categorical.
Contesting a document proposed to the Summit by the Danish minister chairing the conference, he stated:
"…it is a text that comes from nothing, we do not accept any other text unless it comes out of the working groups which are the legitimate texts that have been discussed with such intensity during these two years."
"There is a group of countries which believe themselves superior to us from the South, to us from the Third World…"
"…we are not surprised: there is no democracy in the world and we are here, once again, in the face of powerful evidence of a world imperial dictatorship."
"…I was reading some of the slogans painted in the streets by the young people…One: ‘Let’s not change the climate, let’s change the system’…Another: ‘If the climate was a bank, they would have saved it already.’"
"Obama… received the Nobel Peace prize virtually the same day that he was sending an additional 30,000 soldiers to kill innocent people in Afghanistan."
"We were raising our hands to accompany Brazil, India, Bolivia and China, in their interesting position … but, well, we were not given the floor…"
"The rich are destroying the Earth… do they have plans to go to another planet?"
"Climate change is, without any doubt, the most devastating environmental problem of the present century."
"The United States could amount to possibly 300 million inhabitants; China has a population that is almost five times larger than the United States. The United States consumes more than 20 million barrels of oil per day. Chine barely reaches 5 or 6 million barrels per day. One can’t ask the same of the United States and China."
"… reducing contaminating gas emissions and achieving a long-term cooperation agreement […] seems to have failed, for now. What is the reason for that? […] the irresponsible attitude and the lack of political will on the part of the most powerful nations of the planet."
"…the gap that separates the rich countries from the poor is still expanding despite the existence of the Millennium Goals, the Monterrey Summit on finance, all of these summits – as the president of Senegal said, denouncing a great truth, promises and promises and promises that have been unfulfilled, while the world continues along its destructive path."
"…The total income of the 500 richest individuals on the planet is greater than the income of the 416 million poorest people."
"Infant mortality stands at 47 per 1,000 live births; but the figure for the rich countries is just 5 ..."
"…For how long are we going to allow millions of children to continue dying from curable diseases?"
"Some 2.6 billion people live without health services,"
"Brazilian Leonardo Boff wrote: ‘that the fittest survive over the ashes of the weakest.’"
Jean Jacob Rousseau [sic] said: ""Between the weak and the strong, it is freedom which oppresses." For this reason, the empire talks of freedom, in order to invade, to murder, to annihilate, to exploit, that is its freedom. And Rousseau goes on: "it is the law which sets free."
"For how long are we going to allow armed conflicts that massacre millions of innocent human beings, with the aim of awarding the resources of other nations to the more powerful ones?"
"Almost two centuries ago, Simón Bolívar, the Liberator said:
‘If nature opposes, we will fight against her and make her obey us.’"
"This planet is billions of years old, and has existed for billions of years without us, the human race: that is to say, it does not need us to exist. Now, we cannot live without the Earth…"
Evo addressed the conference in the morning of today, Thursday. His speech will also never be forgotten.
He very candidly opened his remarks by saying: "I wish to say how upset we are over the lack of organization and the delays in this international gathering…"
His basic ideas were the following:
"When we ask the hosts what is going on, […] we are told it is the United Nations; when we ask the United Nations what is going on, they say it is Denmark, so we don’t know who is disorganizing this international event…" "…I’m very shocked because only the effects and not the causes of climate change are being discussed."
"If we fail to identify where the destruction of the environment is coming from […] we will never be able to solve this problem…"
"…two cultures are under discussion here: the culture of life and the culture of death; the culture of death, which is capitalism. We, the indigenous peoples, say that it is living better, better at the cost of others.’"
"…living well is living in solidarity, in equality, in complementation, in reciprocity…"
"These two different ways of life, these two cultures of life are in debate when we it comes to climate change, and if we do not decide which is the better way of living or of life, it is certain that we are never going to resolve this issue, because we have problems with life: luxury and consumerism damage humanity and sometimes we don’t want to admit the truth in this kind of international event."
"…in our way of life being truthful is sacred, and we are not practicing the truths here."
"…in our Constitution it reads ama sua, ama llulla, ama quella, which means do not steal, do not lie, do not be weak."
"…Mother Earth or Nature exist and will continue to exist without the human race, but human beings can’t live without planet Earth, therefore, it is our duty to defend the right of Mother Earth."
"…I applaud the United Nations because this year, it has finally established the International Day of Mother Earth."
"…a mother is sacred, a mother is our life; a mother cannot be rented, cannot be sold or assaulted, she must be respected."
"We have profound differences with the Western model, and that is under discussion at this moment."
"We are in Europe, and you know that many Bolivian families, many Latin American families come to Europe. Why do they come here? To improve their living conditions. In Bolivia, they might be earning $100 or $200 per month; but that family, that person comes here to take care of an elderly European grandfather or grandmother and earns $1,000 a month."
"These are the asymmetries that exist among continents and we are obliged to discuss ways in which to achieve a certain equilibrium, […] reducing these profound asymmetries that exist among families, among countries, and especially continents."
""When […] our brothers and sisters come here to survive or to improve their living conditions they are expelled. There are papers which are known as repatriation documents […] but when those elderly Europeans arrived in Latin America all those years ago, they were never expelled. My families, my brothers do not come here to seize control of mines, nor do they possess thousands of hectares in order to become landowners. In the past, no visas or passports were required to come to Abya Yala, now called, America."
"…the rich nations should welcome all migrants who are affected by climate change instead of forcing them to return to their countries as they are doing at the moment…"
"…our obligation is to save all of humanity and not half of humanity."
"…the FTAA, the Free Trade Area of the Americas, […] is not a Free Trade Area of the Americas, but a free colonization area of the Americas…"
Evo suggested the following questions, among others, for a worldwide referendum on climate change:
"..Do you agree to reestablishing a harmonious relationship with Nature, recognizing the rights of Mother Earth...?"
"…Are you in agreement with changing this system of excessive consumerism and waste, that is, the capitalist system...?"
"…Do you agree that the developed countries should reduce and reabsorb their greenhouse gas emissions…?"
"…Do you agree on transferring everything that is currently being spent in wars to create a budget higher than the defense budget to tackle the problem of climate change…?"
As is widely known, the UN Agreement on Climate Change was signed in the Japanese city of Kyoto in 1997. This protocol obliged 38 industrialized nations to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by a certain percentage in relation to those emitted in 1990. The countries of the European Union committed themselves to 8%, a move which came into effect in 2005, when most of the signatory countries had already ratified it. George W. Bush, then president of the United States – the largest producer of greenhouse gases and responsible for a quarter of total emissions – had rejected the agreement from mid-2001 onward.
The other members of the United Nations continued with their efforts. The research centers continued with their work. It is now evident that a major disaster is threatening our species. Perhaps the worst aspect is that the blind egotism of a privileged and rich minority is attempting to lay the burden of the necessary sacrifices on the vast majority of the planet’s inhabitants.
That contradiction is reflected in Copenhagen. Thousands of people are there, fiercely defending their points of view.
The Danish police are resorting to brutal methods to crush resistance; many protesters are being preventively arrested. I spoke on the phone with our Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez, who was at a solidarity rally in Copenhagen with Chávez, Evo, Lazo and other ALBA representatives. I asked him who those people were that the Danish police suppressed with such hate, twisting back their arms and beating them repeatedly across the back. He said they were Danish citizens and people from other European nations as well as members of the social movements who were demanding from the Summit an immediate solution to deal with climate change. He also told me that debates in the Summit were to continue until midnight. It was already night in Copenhagen when I spoke with him. The time difference is six hours.
Our comrades in the Danish capital have informed us that an even worse situation is expected tomorrow morning, Friday 18th. At 10:00 a.m. the UN Summit is to be adjourned for two hours while the Danish prime minister meets with 20 heads of state invited by him to discuss "global problems" with Obama. That is what they have called the meeting, which is aimed at imposing an agreement on climate change.
Even though all of the official delegations are to take part, only "invited guests" will be allowed to express their views. Of course, neither Chávez nor Evo are among those entitled to express their opinions. The idea is to give the illustrious Nobel Laureate an opportunity to read his previously drafted speech, preceded by the decision to de adopted in that meeting to postpone the agreement until the end of next year in Mexico City. The social movements will not be permitted to attend. After that show, the "Summit" will resume in the plenary hall until its ignominious closure.
As television channels have broadcast the footage, the world has been able to see the fascist methods used against the people in Copenhagen. The protesters, young people in the main, who have been repressed, have earned the solidarity of the peoples.
Despite the maneuvers and unprincipled lies of the leaders of the empire, the moment of truth is drawing closer. Their own allies are increasingly losing confidence in them. In Mexico, as in Copenhagen or anywhere else in the world, they will be met by the growing resistance of the peoples who have not lost the hope of surviving.
THE Honduran coup d’état promoted by the ultra-right wing of the United States – which was maintaining the structure created by Bush in Central America – and supported by the Department of State, was not developing well due to the energetic resistance of the people. The criminal adventure, unanimously condemned by world opinion and international agencies, could not be sustained.
The memory of the atrocities committed in recent decades by dictatorships that the United States promoted, instructed and armed in our hemisphere, was still fresh. During the Clinton administration and in subsequent years the empire’s efforts were directed toward the plan of imposing the FTA (Free Trade Agreement) on all the Latin American countries via the so-called Summits of the Americas.
The intention to compromise the hemisphere with a free trade agreement failed. The economies of other regions of the world grew at a good rate and the dollar lost its exclusive hegemony as a privileged hard currency. The brutal world financial crisis complicated the situation. It was in those circumstances that the military coup came about in Honduras, one of the poorest countries in the hemisphere. After two weeks of growing popular struggle, the United States maneuvered to gain time. The Department of State assigned Oscar Arias, president of Costa Rica, the task of aiding the military coup in Honduras, under siege from vigorous but peaceful popular pressure. Never had a similar action in Latin America met such a response. The fact that Arias holds the title of Nobel Peace Prize laureate had weight in the calculations of the government of the United States.
The real history of Oscar Arias indicates that he is a neoliberal politician, talented and with a facility for words, extremely calculated and a loyal ally of the United States. From the initial years of the triumph of the Cuban Revolution, the United States government utilized Costa Rica and assigned it resources in order to present it as a showcase of the social advances that could be achieved under capitalism.
That Central American country was utilized as a base for imperialism for its pirate attacks on Cuba. Thousands of Cuban technical personnel and university graduates were extracted from our people, already subjected to a cruel blockade, to provide services in Costa Rica. Relations between Costa Rica and Cuba have been reestablished recently; the country was one of the last two in the hemisphere to do so, which is a matter of satisfaction for us, but that should not deter me from expressing what I think in this historic moment of our America.
Arias, who came from the wealthy and dominant sector of Costa Rica, studied Law and Economy in a central university of his country; he studied and subsequently graduated with a Masters in Political Science from Essex University in the United Kingdom, where he finally obtained the title of Doctor of Political Science. With such academic laurels, President José Figueres Ferrer of the National Liberation Party made him an advisor in 1970, at the age of 30 and, shortly afterward, appointed him minister of Planning, a post in which he was ratified by the president who followed Ferrer, Daniel Oduber. In 1978 he entered Congress as a deputy of that party. He rose to general secretary in 1979 and held the office of president for the first time in 1986.
Years before the triumph of the Cuban Revolution, an armed movement of Costa Rica’s national bourgeoisie under the leadership of José Figueres Ferrer, father of President Figueres Olsen, had eliminated that country’s small coup army, and his struggle had the support of the Cubans. When we were fighting against the Batista dictatorship in the Sierra Maestra, we received some arms and munitions from the Liberation Party created by Figueres Ferrer, but it was too good a friend of the yanquis and soon broke off relations with us. The OAS meeting in San José, Costa Rica, which gave rise to the First Declaration of Havana in 1960, should not be forgotten.
For more than 150 years, since the times of the filibuster William Walker, who appointed himself president of Nicaragua in 1856, all of Central America suffered and is still suffering from the problem of United States interventionism, which has been constant, although the heroic people of Nicaragua have attained an independence that they are prepared to defend to the last breath. It has not known any support from Costa Rica since it achieved independence, although there was one government of that country which, on the eve of the victory of 1979, earned the glory of being in solidarity with the Sandinista National Liberation Front. When Nicaragua was bleeding on account of Reagan’s dirty war, Guatemala and El Salvador had also paid a high price in lives due to the interventionist policy of the United States, which supplied money, weapons, schools and indoctrination for the repressive troops. Daniel [Ortega] told us that the yanquis finally promoted formulas that put an end to the revolutionary resistance of Guatemala and El Salvador.
On more than one occasion Daniel had commented to me, with bitterness, that Arias, fulfilling instructions from the United States, had excluded Nicaragua from the peace negotiations. He met solely with the governments of El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala in order to impose agreements on Nicaragua. For that, Daniel expressed enormous gratitude to Vinicio Cerezo. He likewise told me that the first agreement was signed in a convent in Esquipulas, Guatemala, on August 17, 1987, after two days of intensive talks between the five Central America presidents. I have never spoken publicly about that.
But this time, at the commemoration of the 30th anniversary of the Sandinista victory of July 19, 1979, Daniel explained everything with impressive clarity, as he did with all the themes throughout his speech, which was heard by hundreds of thousands of people and broadcast on radio and television. I use his words textually: "The yanquis appointed him a mediator. We have a profound sympathy with the people of Costa Rica, but I cannot forget that, in those hard years, that the president of Costa Rica convened the Central American presidents and did not invite us." "But the other Central American presidents were more sensible and they told him: ‘There cannot be any peace plan here if Nicaragua is not present.’ In the name of historic truth, the president who had the courage to break the isolation imposed by the yanquis in Central America – where the presidents had been forbidden to talk with the president of Nicaragua and they wanted a military solution – the man who took that valiant step was the president of Guatemala, Vinicio Cerezo. That is the true history."
He immediately added: "The yanquis ran in search of President Oscar Arias, because they know him! to seek a way of gaining time, so that the coup perpetrators begin to make demands that are unacceptable. Since when is a coup leader going to negotiate with a person from whom he is snatching his constitutional rights? Those rights can not be negotiated, President Manuel Zelaya simply has to be reinstated, as stated in the ALBA, Rio Group, SICA, OAS and United Nations agreements. "In our countries we want peaceful solutions. The battle being waged by the people of Honduras at this time is a peaceful battle, in order to avoid any more pain, which has already come about in Honduras," Daniel concluded, textually.
By virtue of the dirty war ordered by Reagan and which, in part – Daniel told me – was financed by drugs sent to the United States, more than 60,000 people lost their lives and a further 5,800 were maimed. Reagan’s dirty war gave rise to the destruction and neglect of 300 schools and 25 health centers; 150 teachers were killed. The cost rose to tens of billions of dollars. Nicaragua was left with only 3.5 million inhabitants, it no longer received the fuel that the USSR was sending it, and the economy became unsustainable. He convened elections and even brought them forward, and respected the decision of the people, who had lost all hope of preserving the conquest of the Revolution. Almost 17 years later, the Sandinistas victoriously returned to government; just two days ago, they commemorated the 30th anniversary of the first victory.
On Saturday, July 18 the Nobel Prize winner proposed the known seven points of his personal peace initiative, which detracted authority from the UN and OAS decisions and were equivalent to an act of rendition on the part of Manuel Zelaya, which were taking sympathy away from him and would debilitate popular support. The constitutional president sent what he qualified as an ultimatum to the coup leaders, to be presented to them by their representatives, at the same time announcing his return to Honduras for Sunday, July 19, entering through any of that country’s departments.
In the early afternoon of that Sunday, the huge Sandinista event took place, with historic denunciations of the policy of the United States. They were truths that could not be anything but transcendental.
The worst thing is that the United States was encountering resistance from the coup government to its sweetening maneuver. We still do not know the precise moment at which the Department of State, for its part, sent a strong message to Micheletti and whether the military commanders were advised of the positions of the government of the United States. The reality is, for anyone who is closely following the events, that Micheletti was insubordinate to peace on the Monday. His representative in San José, Carlos López Conteras, had stated that Arias’ proposal could not be discussed, given that the first point – that is to say, the reestablishment of Zelaya – was not negotiable. The coup civil government had taken its role seriously and didn’t even realize that Zelaya, deprived of all authority, did not constitute any risk whatsoever to the oligarchy and would suffer a heavy blow politically if he accepted the Costa Rican president’s proposal.
On that same Sunday 19th, when Arias asked for another 72 hours to explain his position, Ms. Clinton spoke by telephone with Micheletti and maintained what spokesman Philip Crowley described as a "hard call." Some day we will know what she said, but it was enough to see Micheletti’s face when he spoke at a meeting of his government on Monday, July 20: he really looked like a kindergarten kid who had been scolded by the teacher. The footage and speeches of the meeting could be seen via Telesur. Other footage transmitted was that of the OAS representatives making their speeches in the heart of that institution, committing themselves to wait for the final word of the Nobel Peace laureate on Wednesday. Did they know or not what Clinton had said to Micheletti? Maybe they did, maybe they didn’t. Maybe some, but not all of them knew. People, institutions and concepts had been converted into instruments of Washington’s high and arrogant politics. Never did a speech in the heart of the OAS shine out with such dignity as did the brief but valiant words of Roy Chaderton, the Venezuelan ambassador, in that meeting.
Tomorrow the stony image of Oscar Arias will appear, explaining that they have drawn up such and such a proposed solution in order to avoid violence. I think that even Arias himself has fallen into the large trap set up by the Department of State. We shall see what he does tomorrow.
However, it is the people of Honduras who will have the last word. Representatives of the social organizations and the new forces are not the instruments of anybody within or outside of the country, they know the needs and the suffering of the people; their awareness and their courage has multiplied; many citizens who were idle have joined them; and those honest members of the traditional parties who believe in freedom, justice and human dignity will judge the leaders on the basis of the position that they adopted at this historic minute. That attitude of the military in the face of the yanqui ultimatums is as yet unknown, or what messages are reaching the officers; there is only one point of patriotic and honorable reference: loyalty to the people, who have endured with heroism the tear gas grenades, blows and shootings.
Without anyone being able to guarantee what the last caprice of the empire will be; whether, on the basis of the final decisions adopted, Zelaya will return legally or illegally, the Hondurans will doubtless give him a great reception, because it will be a measure of the victory that they have already achieved with their struggles. Nobody doubts that only the Honduran people will be capable of constructing their own history!
ON Thursday, June 4, at the Al-Azhar Islamic University in Cairo, Obama gave a speech of special interest for those of us who are carefully following his political actions, given the tremendous power of the superpower that he is leading. I am using his own words to note what, in my judgment, were the basic ideas that he expressed, thus synthesizing his speech in the interest of time. We need to know not just that he spoke, but also what he spoke about.
"We meet at a time of tension between the United States andMuslims around the world, tension rooted in historicalforces that go beyond any current policy debate…
"The relationship between Islam and the West includescenturies of co-existence and co-operation, but alsoconflict and religious wars.""…colonialism denied rights and opportunities to manyMuslims… the Cold War in which Muslim-majority countrieswere too often treated as proxies without regard to theirown aspirations."
"Violent extremists have exploited these tensions…""…has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitablyhostile not only to America and Western countries, but alsoto human rights.""I have come here to seek a new beginning between theUnited States and Muslims around the world; one based uponmutual interest and mutual respect…" "…they overlap, and share common principles of justice andprogress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings."
"No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor canI answer in the time that I have all the complex questionsthat brought us to this point." "As the Holy Quran tellsus: ‘Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.’""I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan familythat includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spentseveral years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaanat the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man,I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignityand peace in their Muslim faith."
"It was Islam at places like Al-Azhar University thatcarried the light of learning through so many centuries,paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment.""…since our founding, American Muslims have enriched theUnited States.""They have fought in our wars, served in government, stoodfor civil rights…"
"And I consider it part of my responsibility as presidentof the United States to fight against negative stereotypesof Islam wherever they appear.""…America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interestedempire.""The dream of opportunity for all people has not come truefor everyone in America…""Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people.""When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk."
"When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk ofnuclear attack rises for all nations.""…any world order that elevates one nation or group ofpeople over another will inevitably fail.""In Ankara, I made clear that America is not and never willbe at war with Islam.""…we reject the same thing that people of all faithsreject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children."
"…some question or justify the events of 9/11.""The victims were innocent men, women and children fromAmerica…"
"Make no mistake: We do not want to keep our troops inAfghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It isagonizing for America to lose our young men and women. Itis costly and politically difficult to continue thisconflict. We would gladly bring every single one of ourtroops home if we could be confident that there were notviolent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determinedto kill as many Americans as they possibly can.""The Holy Quran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, itis as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves aperson, it is as if he has saved all mankind.""Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provokedstrong differences in my country and around the world.""…I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded Americaof the need to use diplomacy and build internationalconsensus to resolve our problems whenever possible.""Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraqforge a better future - and to leave Iraq to Iraqis.""I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue nobases, and no claim on their territory or resources.""Iraq's sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered theremoval of our combat brigades by next August. ""…combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to removeall our troops from Iraq by 2012."
"…9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country.""…in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals.""I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by theUnited States, and I have ordered the prison at GuantánamoBay closed by early next year.""America will defend itself respectful of the sovereigntyof nations and the rule of law.
"The second major source oftension that we need to discuss is the situation betweenIsraelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.""America's strong bonds with Israel are well-known. Thisbond is unbreakable.""On the other hand, it is also undeniable that thePalestinian people, Muslims and Christians, have sufferedin pursuit of a homeland. For more than 60 years they haveendured the pain of dislocation.""Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, andneighboring lands for a life of peace and security thatthey have never been able to lead.""…let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinianpeople is intolerable. America will not turn our backs onthe legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity,opportunity, and a state of their own.""…two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with apainful history that makes compromise elusive.""It is easy to point fingers, for Palestinians to point tothe displacement brought by Israel's founding, and forIsraelis to point to the constant hostility and attacksthroughout its history from within its borders.""But if we see this conflict only from one side or theother, then we will be blind to the truth…""…the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sidesto be met through two states, where Israelis andPalestinians each live in peace and security.""For centuries, black people in America suffered the lashof the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation.But it was not violence that won full and equal rights.""Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize pastagreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist.""…Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right toexist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The UnitedStates does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israelisettlements.""This construction violates previous agreements andundermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for thesesettlements to stop.""Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure thatPalestinians can live, and work, and develop theirsociety.""Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people mustbe part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concretesteps to enable such progress."
"The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used todistract the people of Arab nations from other problems.""The third source of tension is our shared interest in therights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.""In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played arole in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iraniangovernment.""Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role inacts of hostage-taking and violence against US troops andcivilians.""Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made itclear to Iran's leaders and people that my country isprepared to move forward. The question, now, is not whatIran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.""It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but wewill proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. Therewill be many issues to discuss between our two countries,and we are willing to move forward without preconditions onthe basis of mutual respect.""I understand those who protest that some countries haveweapons that others do not. No single nation should pickand choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is whyI strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a worldin which no nations hold nuclear weapons.""…any nation - including Iran - should have the right toaccess peaceful nuclear power if it complies with itsresponsibilities under the nuclear Non-ProliferationTreaty."
The fundamental objective of his visit to that Islamic University of Egypt is contained in these first three issues. One cannot blame the new president of the United States for the situation created in the Middle East. It is evident that he wishes to find a way out of the colossal mess created there by his predecessors and on account of the very development of events over the last 100 years.
Not even Obama could have imagined, when he was working in the African-American communities of Chicago, that the terrible effects of a financial crisis would be added to the factors that made possible his election as president in a heavily racist society.
He is assuming the post at an exceptionally complex moment for his country and the world. He is trying to solve problems that he possibly considers less complex than they really are. Centuries of colonial and capitalist exploitation have given rise to a world in which a handful of superdeveloped and rich countries coexists with another immensely poor majority, which supply raw materials and a workforce. If you add China and India, two genuinely emerging nations, the struggle for natural resources and markets is shaping an entirely new situation on the planet where human survival itself is still to be resolved.
Obama’s African roots, his modest origins and his amazing ascent are arousing hopes in many people who, like shipwrecked souls, are seeking salvation in the midst of the storm.
His affirmation that "any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail" is correct; or when he states that "people of all faiths reject the killing of innocent men, women, and children;" or ratifies before the world his opposition to the use of torture.
Generally speaking, a number of the statements I have noted are correct in theory; he clearly perceives the need for all countries, without exception of course, to renounce nuclear weapons. Well-known and influential figures in the United States see in this a great danger, as technology and the sciences generalize access to radioactive material and ways of utilizing it, including in small quantities.
It is still early days to pass judgments on his degree of commitment to the ideas he is proposing and up to what point he is determined to sustain, for example, the intention to seek a peace agreement on just bases and with guarantees for all states in the Middle East.
The current president’s greatest difficulty is that the principles that he is preaching are in contradiction with the policy that the superpower has followed for close to seven decades, since the end of the final hostilities of World War II in August 1945. At this point, I will leave aside the aggressive and expansionist policy applied to the peoples of Latin America and in particular to Cuba, when it [the United States] was still far from being the most powerful nation in the world. Every one of the norms that Obama preached in Cairo is in contradiction with the interventions and wars promoted by the United States. The first of them was the famous Cold War, which he mentions in his speech, unleashed by the government of his country. The ideological differences with the USSR did not justify the hostility toward that state, which contributed more than 25 million lives to the struggle against Nazism. Obama would not be remembering in these days the 65th anniversary of the Normandy landings and the liberation of Europe without the blood shed by millions of soldiers who died fighting against the elite troops of Nazism. It was soldiers from the Soviet army who liberated the survivors of the famous Osviecim concentration camp. The world did not know what was going on, in spite of the fact that more than a few people in Western official circles were aware of the facts. Thus, millions of Russian children, women and the elderly lost their lives as a consequence of the brutal Nazi invasion seeking vital space. The West made concessions to Hitler and conspired to launch it: at the end of the day it launched it to occupy and colonize Slav territory. In World War II the Soviets were allies of the United States and not its enemies.
Two atomic bombs were dropped to test their effects on two defenseless cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Those who perished there were, in the majority, Japanese children, women and elderly people.
If one analyzes the wars promoted, backed or carried out by the United States in China, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, many children, women and the elderly were among the millions who died.
The colonial wars of France and Portugal after World War II had the support of the United States; the coup d’états and interventions in Central America, Panama, the Dominican Republic, Grenada, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay, Peru and Argentina were all promoted and supported by the United States.
Israel was not a nuclear power. The creation of a state on territory from which the Jews were expelled to their exodus by the Roman Empire 2,000 years ago, was supported in good faith by the USSR and many other countries in the world. At the triumph of the Cuban Revolution we had relations with that state for more than 10 years, until its wars of conquest against the Palestinians and other Arab peoples led us to breaking them off. Total respect for the Jewish cult and religious activity has been maintained without any interruption whatsoever.
The United States never opposed Israel’s conquest of Arab territories, nor did it protest at the terrorist methods employed against the Palestinians. On the contrary, it created a nuclear power there, one of the most advanced in the world, right in the heart of Arab and Muslim territory, thus creating one of the most dangerous points of the planet in the Middle East.
The superpower likewise used Israel to supply nuclear weapons to the apartheid army of South Africa, in order to use them against the Cuban troops who, alongside the Angolan and Namibian forces, were defending the People’s Republic of Angola. These are relatively recent events that the current president of the United States is undoubtedly aware of. Thus, we are not so distant from the aggressiveness and danger that the Israeli nuclear power signifies for peace.
After the three initial points, Obama devoted his speech in Cairo to philosophizing and to establishing a professorship on U.S. foreign policy:
"The fourth issue that I will address is democracy," hesaid."…let me be clear: no system of government can or should beimposed upon one nation by any other.""America does not presume to know what is best foreveryone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcomeof a peaceful election.""I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn forcertain things: the ability to speak your mind and have asay in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of lawand the equal administration of justice…""Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights,and that is why we will support them everywhere.""The fifth issue that we must address together is religiousfreedom.""Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance… I saw itfirsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christiansworshipped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country.""Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency tomeasure one's own faith by the rejection of another's.""…And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, asthe divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragicviolence, particularly in Iraq.""…it is important for Western countries to avoid impedingMuslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fitfor instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim womanshould wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards anyreligion behind the pretence of liberalism.""I reject the view of some in the West that a woman whochooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I dobelieve that a woman who is denied an education is deniedequality. And it is no coincidence that countries wherewomen are well-educated are far more likely to beprosperous.""…the struggle for women's equality continues in manyaspects of American life, and in countries around theworld.""Our daughters can contribute just as much to society asour sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced byallowing all humanity, men and women, to reach their fullpotential.""The internet and television can bring knowledge andinformation, but also offensive sexuality and mindlessviolence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, butalso huge disruptions and changing communities.""…invest in online learning for teachers and childrenaround the world; and create a new online network, so ateenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with ateenager in Cairo.""…we have a responsibility to join together on behalf ofthe world we seek - a world where extremists no longerthreaten our people, and American troops have come home; aworld where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in astate of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peacefulpurposes…""That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve ittogether.""It is easier to start wars than to end them.""…do unto others as we would have them do unto us.""We have the power to make the world we seek, but only ifwe have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping inmind what has been written.""The Holy Quran tells us, ‘O mankind! We have created youmale and a female; and we have made you into nations andtribes so that you may know one another.’""The Talmud tells us: ‘The whole of the Torah is for thepurpose of promoting peace.’""The Holy Bible tells us, ‘Blessed are the peacemakers, forthey shall be called sons of God.’""The people of the world can live together in peace."
As can be appreciated, on approaching the fourth issue of his speech at Al-Azhar University, Obama falls into a contradiction. After beginning his words with an apothegm, as is his habit, by affirming: "no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other," a principle enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations as a fundamental element of international law, he immediately contradicts himself with a declaration of faith which converts the United States into the supreme judge of democratic values and human rights.
He goes on to allude to issues related to economic development and equality of opportunity. He makes promises to the Arab world; he points to advantages and contradictions. It would really appear to be a public relations campaign with the Muslim countries on the part of the United States which, in any event, is better than threatening to bombard and destroy them.
At the end of the speech, there is quite a mix of issues.
Taking into account the length of the speech, without using written notes, the number of lapses is negligible in comparison with his predecessor, who made mistakes in every paragraph. He has a great capacity for communication.
I am accustomed to observing with interest historical, political and religious ceremonies.
That of Al-Azhar University seemed to me an unreal scene. Not even Pope Benedict XVI would have uttered phrases more ecumenical than those of Obama. For one second I imagined pious Muslim, Catholic, Christian or Jewish believers, or those of any other religion, listening to the president in the wide hall of Al-Azhar University. At any specific moment, they wouldn’t have known if they were in a Catholic cathedral, a Christian church, a mosque or a synagogue.
He left early for Germany. For three days he toured points of political significance. He participated in and spoke at all the commemorative events. He visited museums, received his family and dined in famous restaurants. He possesses an impressive capacity for work. A long time will pass before a similar case is seen.
Distinguished participants in this ministerial meeting:
It is an honor for our people and government to again host a high level meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement. Two years and seven months have passed since the celebration in this same hall of the 14th Summit of Heads of State or Government in September 2006. On that occasion I said:
"On the sound foundations of our historic victories in the struggle for decolonization and the removal of apartheid and with the rich experience of our efforts in favor of a New International Economic Order and of peace, disarmament and the true exercise of the right to development, the Non-Aligned Movement shall now wage heroic battles against unilateralism, double standards and the impunity of the powerful; for a more just and equitable international order to tackle neoliberalism, plundering and pillage; for the survival of the human species instead of the irrational consumerism of the wealthy nations."
The challenges identified then are not only still standing but they are now more dangerous and pressing. Therefore, the necessity for NAM to act in a coordinated fashion is today more imperative and crucial. We are currently afflicted by a deep economic, social, food, energy and environmental crisis that have become global. The international debates are multiplied but they do not engage every country. There is a growing awareness that solutions must be found shortly; however, just and lasting solutions seem elusive. If we fail to act firmly and expeditiously our peoples stand to suffer again the worst consequences of this crisis, and for a longer period of time.
It is impossible to sustain the unfair and irrational consumption patterns that served as the basis to the current international order imposed by a few that we have been forced to respect. A global order inspired in hegemonic pretenses and the selfishness of privileged minorities is neither legitimate nor ethically acceptable. A system that destroys the environment and promotes unequal access to riches cannot last. Underdevelopment is an unavoidable result of the current world order.
Neoliberalism has failed as an economic policy. Today, any objective analysis raises serious questions about the myth of the goodness of the market and its deregulation; the alleged benefits of privatizations and the reduction of the states' economic and redistribution capacity; and the credibility of the financial institutions.
In 1979, thirty years ago, when Cuba first assumed the chairmanship of the Non-Aligned Movement, the leader of the Cuban Revolution comrade Fidel Castro alerted on the negative consequences of spending over 300 billion dollars in weapons and on the existence of a foreign debt of the underdeveloped countries that amounted to almost as much.
On that occasion comrade Fidel estimated that, at the time, that figure would have allowed: ".to build in one year 600 thousand schools to teach 400 million children; or 60 million comfortable houses for 300 million people; or 30 thousand hospitals with 18 million beds; or 20 thousand factories providing jobs to over 20 million workers; or placing 150 million hectares of land under irrigation which with an adequate technical level could feed one billion people."
Of course, nothing was done and the situation has aggravated dramatically. Suffice it to say that currently the annual military expenses exceed the figure of one trillion dollars; the number of unemployed in the world could rise to 230 million during 2009; and in hardly a year -during 2008-the number of people starving in the world mounted from 854 million to 963 million.
The UN has estimated that 80 billion dollars a year for a decade would be enough to eradicate poverty, hunger and the lack of health and education services and houses all over the world. That figure is three times lower than what the South countries spend every year to pay their foreign debt.
The international system of economic relations requires fundamental changes. This was demanded almost 35 years ago by the member countries of our Movement in the Declaration and Plan of Action for the Establishment of a New International Economic Order adopted in the 6th Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly in May 1974.
The solution to the global economic crisis demands a coordinated action with the universal, democratic and equitable participation of all countries. The response cannot be a solution negotiated by the leaders of the most powerful nations without the participation of the United Nations.
The G-20 solution calling for the strengthening of the role and functions of the International Monetary Fund, whose nefarious policies had a decisive effect on the emergence, aggravation and magnitude of the current crisis cannot solve inequality, injustice or the unsustainability of the present system.
The UN High Level Conference on the Economic and Financial Crisis and its Impact on Development scheduled for June 1 to 3, 2009, is the indispensable context to debate and try to find solutions by consensus to this grave situation, and the Non-Aligned Movement should support it.
From its inception, this Movement has shown its willingness to work for peace and security for the community of nations and for defense of International Law. The removal of the weapons of mass destruction, and foremost nuclear disarmament, is still a priority.
The practice of multilateralism requires absolute respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the states and for the self-determination of the peoples. It also demands to dispense with threats and the use of force in international relations, and to do without hegemonic aspirations and imperial behavior. It requires to put an end to foreign occupation and to deny impunity to such criminal aggressions as those of Israel against the Palestinian people.
The Movement should engage in every major debate of the international agenda, in the different venues and multilateral forum and with the broadest participation of its member countries, not to compete with other groups of South countries but to strengthen and complement them.
We need to continue permanently improving the Movement's working methods. The fulfillment of the Plan of Action we have adopted shall be an indispensable tool to determine our priorities and our tasks.
We should all start working right away to ensure a successful 15th Summit of Heads of State or Government in Egypt next July. We should make a critical analysis of everything done until today and set ourselves new goals and objectives in compliance with current and future problems and challenges.
Finally, on behalf of Cuba I wish to express the appreciation of our government and our entire people for the steadfast and unwavering solidarity of the Non-Aligned Movement with the Cuban Revolution, and particularly for its permanent call for the lifting of the unfair U.S. economic, financial and commercial blockade. Although the measures recently announced by President Obama are positive they are of limited scope. The blockade remains intact. There is no political or moral pretext that justifies the continuation of that policy.
Cuba has not imposed any sanction on the United States or its citizens. It is not Cuba that prevents that country's entrepreneurs from doing business with ours. It is not Cuba that chases the financial transactions of the American banks. It is not Cuba that has a military base in the U.S. territory against that people's will, and so on and so forth, --to avoid making an endless list-- therefore, it is not Cuba that should make gestures.
And if they want to discuss everything, as we recently said at an ALBA summit in Venezuela, that is, to discuss everything, everything, everything, we can discuss everything related to us but also everything related to them, on equal footing.
We have insisted that we are willing to discuss everything with the United States government, on equal footing; but we are not willing to negotiate our sovereignty or our political and social system, our right to self-determination or our domestic affairs
The greatest strength of our Movement lies in its unity within our characteristic diversity. Such has been the major premise of the Cuban presidency in the almost three years of its mandate.
I have no doubt that the Non-Aligned Movement will continue to play a fundamental and constructive role in the international debates. Cuba will keep up its efforts to contribute to that objective.
