Reflections of Fidel

Three days ago, in the evening of Thursday 25th, I wrote in my Reflections: “We do not know what will happen tonight or tomorrow in Honduras, but the courageous behavior adopted by Zelaya will go down in history.”

Two paragraphs before I had indicated that: “The situation that might result from whatever occurs in that country will be a test for the OAS and the current US administration.”

The prehistoric Inter-American institution met in Washington the following day and in a halfhearted and spiritless resolution promised to immediately make the necessary efforts to bring about harmony between the contending parties; that is, a negotiation between the putschists and the Constitutional President of Honduras.

The high ranking military chief who was still in command of the Honduran Armed Forces was making public statements different from the President’s position while recognizing his authority in a merely formal way.

The putschists needed barely anything else from the OAS. They couldn’t care less for the presence of a large number of international observers who had traveled to that country to bear witness to a referendum and who had been talking with Zelaya until late into the night. Today, before dawn, they launched on the President’s home about 200 well-trained and equipped professional troops who roughly set aside the members of the Guard of Honor and kidnapped Zelaya –who was sleeping at the moment– taking him to an air base and forcibly putting him on a plane to Costa Rica. At 8:30 a.m. we learned from Telesur of the assault on the Presidential House and the kidnapping. The President was unable to attend the initial activity related to the referendum that was to take place this Sunday and his whereabouts were unknown.

The official television channel was silenced. They wanted to prevent the early spread of the news of the treacherous action through Telesur and Cubavision Internacional, which were reporting the events. Therefore, they first suspended the broadcasting centers and then cut off electricity to the entire country. At the moment, the Supreme Court and the Congress involved in the conspiracy had yet to make public the decisions that justified the plot. They first carried out the indescribable military coup and then legalized it.

The people woke up to a fait accompli and started to react with growing indignation. Zelaya’s destination was unknown. Three hours later the people’s reaction was such that we could see women punching soldiers with their fists and the latter’s weapons falling off their hands as they were nervous and confused. At the beginning, their movements resembled a strange combat with ghosts; later, they tried to cover Telesur’s cameras with their hands and nervously aimed their guns at the reporters. Sometimes, when the people advanced the troops stepped back. At this point, armored vehicles carrying cannons and machineguns were sent in as the people fearlessly discussed with the crews of the armored vehicles. The people’s reaction was amazing.

Approximately at 2:00 in the afternoon, a tamed majority in Congress –in coordination with the putschists– toppled Zelaya, the Constitutional President of Honduras, and appointed a new head of State announcing to the world that the former had resigned and showing a forged signature. A few minutes later, from an airport in Costa Rica, Zelaya related everything that had happened and categorically refuted the news about his resignation. The plotters had placed themselves in a ridiculous situation in the eyes of the world.

Many other things happened today. Cubavision took all of its time to expose the coup and keep our people informed.

Some events were purely fascist in nature and even if expected they are still astonishing.

Honduran Foreign Minister Patricia Rodas was the putschists’ main target, second only to Zelaya. Another detachment was sent to her residence. She was brave and determined, and she acted quickly; she did not waste time and started denouncing the coup in every way possible. Our ambassador contacted Patricia to learn about the situation; other ambassadors did likewise. At a given moment, she asked the diplomatic representatives of Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba to meet with her since she was being fiercely hounded and required diplomatic protection. Our ambassador, who from the first moments was authorized to offer the minister all the constitutional and legal support, proceeded to visit her in her own residence.

When the diplomats were already in her house, the putschist command sent Major Oceguera to put her under arrest. The diplomats stood between the woman and the officer and claimed she was under diplomatic protection and could only be moved accompanied by them. Oceguera discussed with them in a respectful fashion. A few minutes later, 12 or 15 men in uniform and covering their faces with ski masks rushed into the house. The three ambassadors embraced Patricia but the masked men using force managed to separate the Venezuelan and Nicaraguan ambassadors; Hernandez held her so strongly by one arm that the masked men dragged them both to a van and drove to an air base where they finally separated him and took her away. As he was there in custody, Bruno, who had news of the kidnapping called him to the cell phone; one of the masked men tried to violently snatch the phone out of his hands and the Cuban ambassador, who had already been punched in Patricia’s home, shouted: “Don’t push me, cojones!” I don’t remember if the term was ever used by Cervantes, but there is no doubt that ambassador Juan Carlos Hernandez has enriched our language.

Later, he was abandoned in a road far from the Cuban mission not before being warned that something worse could happen to him if he talked. “Nothing can be worse than death,” he answered with dignity, “and still I’m not afraid of you.” Then people from the area helped him to return to the embassy and from there he immediately called Bruno again.

There is no way to negotiate with that putschist high command. They must be asked to abdicate while other younger officers, uninvolved with the oligarchy, take charge of the military command; otherwise, there will never be in Honduras a government “of the people, by the people and for the people.”

There is no hope for the cornered and isolated putschists if the problem is faced with determination.

Even Mrs. Clinton stated this afternoon that Zelaya is the only President of Honduras and the Honduran putschists can’t even breathe without the support of the United States of America.

Zelaya, a man who was in his pyjamas just a few hours ago, will be recognized by the world as the only Constitutional President of Honduras.

Fidel Castro Ruz
June 28, 2009
6:14 PM.

I am halting for a moment the work on a historic episode that I have been writing for the last two weeks to express my solidarity with the constitutionally-elected president of Honduras, José Manuel Zelaya.

It was impressive to see him on Telesur, haranguing the people of Honduras. He energetically denounced the blatantly reactionary attempt to prevent an important popular referendum. That is the “democracy” that imperialism defends. Zelaya has not committed the slightest violation of the law. He did not engage in any act of force. He is the president and commander-general of the Armed Forces of Honduras. What is happening there will be a test for the OAS and for the current United States administration.

Yesterday a meeting of the ALBA took place in Maracay, in the Venezuelan state of Aragua. The Latin American and Caribbean leaders who spoke there shone out both for their eloquence and for their dignity.

Today I was listening to the solid arguments of President Hugo Chávez, denouncing the coup action on Venezolana de Televisión.

We do not know what will happen tonight or tomorrow in Honduras, but the brave conduct of Zelaya will go down in history.

His words reminded us of the speech by President Salvador Allende as warplanes bombarded the Presidential Palace, where he heroically died on September 11, 1973. This time we were seeing another Latin American president entering an air base with his people to demand the ballots for a popular referendum, spuriously confiscated.

That is how a president and a commander-general acts.

The people of Honduras will never forget that gesture!

Fidel Castro Ruz
June 25, 2009
8:15 p.m.

I remember that, when I visited the People’s Republic of Poland, during Gierek’s government, I was taken to Osviecim, the most notorious of all concentration camps. There I learned about the horrible crimes committed by the Nazis against Jewish children, women and senior citizens, which resulted from the implementation of the ideas contained in the book Mein Kampf written by Adolph Hitler. Those ideas had been implemented before at the time when the territory of the USSR was invaded in the quest for ‘living space.’ By that time, the governments of London and Paris incited the Nazi chief against the Soviet State.

The Soviet army liberated the prisoners kept at Osviecim and those of almost all the Nazi concentration camps, condemned those events and took pictures and films which traveled around the world.

Obama spoke at the Buchenwald concentration camp, within the German territory. A grand-uncle of his, who is still alive and was accompanying him at the rally, had helped to release the prisoners of that camp.

The most important activity he carried out in Europe was his attendance to the celebration of the 65th anniversary of the Normandy landing, where he pronounced a second speech. He went out of his way to praise Dwight Eisenhower, who commanded the landing. He recognized, in all fairness, the courage of the American soldiers who fought down a few kilometers of coastline, with the support of the US and the British navy and of thousands of planes that came mostly from the US factories. The paratroopers divisions were not dropped at the most correct positions and therefore the battle extended unnecessarily.

The bulk of Hitler’s army and its elite divisions had been annihilated by Soviet soldiers at the Russian front, after they recovered from the damages caused by the first military attack. The resistance put up by the city of Leningrad to a prolonged siege, the combats waged by the Siberian divisions a few kilometers away from Moscow, and the battles of Stalingrad and of the Kursk salient will go down in the history of wars as some of the most significant and decisive events.

Obama, who spoke at the celebration of the 65th anniversary of the Normandy landing, thanks to which, as can be inferred from his speech, Europe was liberated, dedicated only 15 words to speak about the role played by the USSR –hardly 1.2 words per every two million Soviet citizens who died in that war. That was not fair.

After the end of that bloody war, Iran, which played a significant role in that war given its natural resources and its geographical position, was turned by the United States into its strongest and better armed gendarme in that strategic Asian region.

The Iranian people, led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, with the masses unarmed and ready to make any sacrifice, overthrew the powerful Shah of Iran. That happened during the last two years of the government of Jimmy Carter, who suffered the first consequences of the wrong foreign policy of the United States. That policy shortened his mandate and facilitated Ronald Reagan’s coming to power.

The Shah died on July 27, 1980, in Cairo, the same city where Obama delivered his speech on June 4 last. The absurd war between Iraq and Iran which began in 1980 lasted eight years and was not caused by Khomeini. Reagan got as much as he could out of it. He first sold weapons to Iran. With those weapons and the revenues from drug trafficking he funded the dirty war against Nicaragua, thus evading the decisions adopted by the Congress whereby it refused to grant funds for that cruel adventure that took the life of so many ‘Sandinista’ youths. Reagan then supported Iraq’s war against Iran.

The US government authorized the supply of raw materials, technology and gases for the chemical war against Iran, which killed tens of thousands of soldiers of that country; the civil population was severely affected. American companies collaborated in the manufacturing of chemical weapons. Besides, satellites provided the necessary information for all land operations; 600 000 Iranians and 400 000 Iraqis died in that war; hundreds of billions of dollars were spent by those two major oil producing countries before both parties accepted the peace project drafted by the United Nations.

It is not an easy task for a US President to deliver a speech at the Muslim University of Al-Azhar of Cairo. Nor is it to be expected that the Iranians and the Arabs would feel very enthusiastic about said speech.

Fidel Castro Ruz
June 14, 2009
4:36 p.m.

Yesterday I was listening to the Round Table TV program when it analyzed, among other topics, Operation Peter Pan, one of the most repugnant acts of moral aggression carried out against our country. Patria potestas is an extremely sensitive issue. That was a repugnant low trick. One of the novels by Mikhail Sholokhov that I read some years later included a reference to that kind of slander which had already been used against the Revolution of October 1917.

The mastermind behind that operation against Cuba was Monsignor Walsh, an American Catholic priest who worked under the orders of the bishop of Miami.

The operation began in 1960. As is known, our Revolution had not placed any obstacles whatsoever to prevent those who wanted to leave the country from doing so. The work of the Revolution had to be voluntarily made by a free people. The imperialist response, among many other serious aggressions, was Operation Peter Pan.

When Taladrid was making his comments on that event, he mentioned the name of Angel Fernandez Valera, a professor of Economics. I remembered that when I was on my last senior high school year at Colegio de Belen, a lay professor used to teach us one of the subjects: Political Economy. Obviously, this was not about a Marxism-Leninism course, which was the ideological issue resorted to 18 years later in order to expel Cuba from the OAS. Those were simple and quite elemental classes on bourgeois political economy. What else were we, the white pupils who studied there? The professor who taught those classes two or three times a week was very punctual and never missed a class.

I was surprised by what I heard during the Round Table program. I wonder if that man was the same professor I had met. I called Taladrid and asked for more information. I checked that with him, because I knew that man had been a professor at Colegio de Belen. Luis Baez equally asserts that I had met with that professor somewhere in Havana in 1959 and that I had criticized his attitude, but I did not remember that detail.

Some days ago, Walsh was decorated post mortem for having worked the “feat” of Operation Peter Pan. A few years before he had declared that he had received some telephone calls for him to start with the operation and that he had made some arrangements with the CIA.

By the end of May, Alvaro F. Fernandez, the son of Fernandez Varela, declared to the digital magazine Progreso Semanal that “a few years before he died in Miami, my father brought us together in front of my mother, my sister Maria, her husband and myself, and told us that he had been one of the persons responsible for the drafting of the false Law that gave rise to the hysteria that surrounded the ‘elimination of the patria potestas.’ That is why I know, without a shadow of a doubt, that Operation Peter Pan was a sinister and immoral maneuver designed and longed for by the CIA before the Bay of Pigs invasion.”

A CIA agent brought the false bill to Havana from Miami. Angel Fernandez Varela himself told to the magazine Contrapunto that he had worked for the CIA between 1959 and 1968.

Each of the 14,000 children involved in that tragedy followed their own traumatic path. They were mostly from middle class families. They were not the children of landowners or the wealthy bourgeois; there was no reason why they had to be dragged into that tragedy. By that time there was a Yankee embassy that granted the permits to enter the United States. The Peter Pan children application forms were sent to Cuba in packages and afterwards they were filled up here with the names of the children. None of them required to be saved. Throughout many years the Revolution has allowed the exit of around one million persons. Most of them have left for the United States, the richest country of all, which incentivates the brain drain and the stealing of cultivated persons and skilled labor force.

The United States would not be in the position to do the same with any other country of Latin America. Who else could have been benefited from that diabolical clandestine operation?

Maria de los Angeles Torres, an associate professor of Political Sciences at the DePaul University in Chicago, was a Peter Pan child. Although she is not a revolutionary, she called for the CIA to declassify around 1,500 documents about Operation Peter Pan. The CIA has refused to declassify them under the pretext of national security. This whole issue smells so bad that some are reluctant to unveil it.

Despite that refusal, professor Torres asked and succeeded in that the Presidential Library Lyndon B. Johnson could grant her access to a document issued by the US government in which it refused a proposal made by the High Commissioner of the United Nations whereby the United Nations would cover the transportation costs for the parents of the children who had been sent to the United States. That material was published by the press of that country more than 15 years ago.

Operation Peter Pan was a cynical publicity maneuver that would have been the envy of Goebbels himself, the Nazi minister of Propaganda.

Fidel Castro Ruz
June 11, 2009
4:40 p.m.

On Thursday the 4th of June, at the Islamic University of Al-Azhar in Cairo, Obama gave a speech of special interest to those of us who are closely following his political actions given the enormous might of the superpower he leads. I cite his very own words to indicate what I think are the basic ideas he expressed, thus summarizing his speech to save time. Not only do we have to know that he spoke but also what he said.

“We meet at a time of great tension between the United Status and Muslims around the World…”

“The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of coexistence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars.

“… colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations.”

“Violent extremists have exploited these tensions ”

“… has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights..”

“I’ve come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect.”

“…they overlap, and share common principles … principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”

“…but no single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have this afternoon all the complex questions that brought us to this point.

“As the Holy Quran tells us, “Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.”"

“I’m a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and at the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith..”

“It was Islam … at places like Al-Azhar … that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment”.

“And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, they have served in our government, they have stood for civil rights…”

“And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”

“…America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire.”

“The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for 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 of nuclear attack rises for all nations.”

“…any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail.”

“In Ankara, I made clear that America is not and never will be … at war with Islam.”

“…we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women and children.” “…there’s still some who would question or even justify the events of 9/11.”

“The victims were innocent men, women and children from America …”

“Now, make no mistake: We do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We see no military … we seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan, and now Pakistan, determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can.” “The Holy Quran teaches that whoever kills an innocent is as … it is as if he has killed all mankind. And the Holy Quran also says whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind.”

“Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world.”

“…I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible.”

“Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future … and to leave Iraq to Iraqis.

“I have made it clear to the Iraqi people … (applause) … I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources.

“Iraq’s sovereignty is its own. And that’s why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August.”

“…remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all of our troops from Iraq by 2012.”

“Nine-eleven was an enormous trauma to our country.”

“…in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our traditions and our ideals.”

“I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.”

“…America will defend itself, respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law”

“The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.”

“America’s strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable.”

“On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people … ” Muslims and Christians …” have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than 60 years they’ve endured the pain of dislocation.”

“Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead.”

“So let there be no doubt: The situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. And America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity and a state of their own.”

“…two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive.”

“It’s easy to point fingers …” for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought about by Israel’s founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond.”

“…if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth.”

“The only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.”

“. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of 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 past agreements, recognize Israel’s right to exist.”

“…Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel’s right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine’s. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.”

“This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.”

“And Israel must also live up to its obligation to ensure that Palestinians can live and work and develop their society.”

“Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be a critical part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.”

“The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems.”

“The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.”

“In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government.”

“Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians.”

“Rather than remain trapped in the past, I’ve made it clear to Iran’s leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question now is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.”

“I recognize it will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect.”

“I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nation holds nuclear weapons. And that’s why I strongly reaffirmed America’s commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons.” “…any nation… including Iran…” should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.”

In these three first topics of his speech we find the basic objective of his trip to that Islamic University of Egypt. One cannot blame the new president of the United States for the situation created in the Middle East. It is obvious that he wants to find an exit from the colossal mess created there by his predecessors and by the very development of events over the last 100 years.

Not even Obama could imagine when he was working in the black communities of Chicago that the terrible effects of a financial crisis would combine with the factors that made his election as president in a strongly racist society possible.

He takes office at an exceptionally complex time for his country and the world. He is trying to resolve problems that he perhaps considers to be simpler than they really are. Centuries of colonial and capitalist exploitation have given way to a world where a handful of overdeveloped rich countries coexist with another handful of immensely poor countries that provide raw materials and labor force. If you add China and India, two truly emerging nations, the struggle for natural resources and markets make up an entirely new situation on the planet where human survival itself has yet to be solved.

Obama’s African roots, his humble background and his amazing ascent awaken hope in many who like shipwreck victims try to hold on to a piece of wood in the middle of the storm.

His statement that “any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail” is correct; or when he declares that “people of all faiths reject the killing of innocent men, women and children” or when he reaffirms to the world his opposition to the use of torture. Generally speaking, several of his abovementioned statements are theoretically correct; he clearly perceives the need for all countries, with no exceptions of course, to give up nuclear weapons. Well-known and influential personalities in the US see this as a great danger, as technology and science generalize access to radioactive material and ways of using it, even in small amounts.

It is still early to pass judgment on his degree of commitment to the ideas he presents, and up to which point he stands firm in sustaining, for example, the proposal of looking for a peace agreement built on fair bases, with guarantees for all the states in the Middle East.

The current president’s main difficulty lies in the fact that the principles he is advocating contradict the policy the superpower has pursued for almost seven decades, from the end of the last battles of World War II in August of 1945. I put aside at this moment the aggressive and expansionist policy it applied on the peoples of Latin America, especially Cuba, when it was still far from being the most powerful nation in the world.

Each one of the norms advocated by Obama in Cairo contradicts the interventions and the 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. Ideological differences with the USSR do not justify the hostility towards that state which contributed more than 25 million lives in the war against Nazism. Obama would not be remembering in these days the 65th anniversary of the Normandy landings and the liberation of Europe if it were not for the blood of the Soviet troops. Those who freed the survivors of the famous Osviecim concentration camp were Soviet army soldiers. The world was unaware of what was happening there even though quite a few among Western official circles knew the facts. How millions of Jewish children, women and old people were atrociously murdered, and millions of Russian children, women and old people lost their lives as a result of the brutal Nazi invasion in a quest for living space. The West granted concessions to Hitler and conspired to launch him and they finally pushed him to occupy and colonize Slavic lands. During World War II, the Soviets were US allies, not enemies.

They dropped and tested the effects of two nuclear bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, two defenseless cities. Those who perished there were mainly Japanese children, women and old people.

If one were to analyze the wars promoted, supported or waged by the United States in China, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Kampuchea, among the millions of people who died, many were children, women and old people.

The colonial wars of France and Portugal after W.W. II had the support of the United States; the coups and interventions in Central America, Panama, Santo Domingo, 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 in territory from which the Jews were driven into an exodus by the Roman Empire 2000 years ago was supported in good faith by the USSR as well as other countries in the world. At the triumph of the Cuban Revolution we had relations with that state for more than a decade until its wars of conquest over the Palestinians and other Arab peoples led us to severe them. Total respect for religion and Jewish religious activities has been maintained without any sort of interruption.

The US never opposed Israeli conquest of Arab territories, nor did it protest the terrorist methods used against the Palestinians. On the contrary, it created a nuclear power there, one of the most advanced in the world, in the heart of Arab and Muslim territory, creating in the Middle East one of the planet’s most dangerous places.

The superpower also used Israel to supply nuclear weapons to the armies of apartheid in South Africa, to be used against Cuban troops which alongside Angolan and Namibian forces were defending the Peoples’ Republic of Angola. These are fairly recent events which the current US president surely knows about. Thus we are not foreign to the aggression and the danger the Israeli nuclear potential represents for peace.

After the three initial points of his speech in Cairo, Obama starts philosophizing and lecturing about US foreign policy:

“The fourth issue that I will address is democracy”, he said.

“So let me be clear: No system of government can or should be imposed by one nation on any other.”

“America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election.”

“But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; …”

“These 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 religious freedom.”

“Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance … I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country.”

“Among some Muslims, there’s a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of somebody else’s faith.”

“…fault lines must be closed among Muslims, as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq.”

“…it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit … for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We can’t disguise hostility toward any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.”

“I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well educated are far more likely to be prosperous.”

“…the struggle for women’s equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.”

“I am convinced that our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons. Our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity … men and women … to reach their full potential.”

“The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence into the home. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and change in communities.”

“…invest in online learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a young person in Kansas can communicate instantly with a young person in Cairo.”

“…we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world that we seek … a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes …”

“That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.”

“It’s easier to start wars than to end them.

“that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us

“We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.

“The Holy Quran tells us: “O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another.”

The Talmud tells us: “The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace.”

The Holy Bible tells us: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.” (Applause.)

The people of the world can live together in peace.”

As you can see, tackling the fourth topic in his speech at Al-Azhar University Obama stumbles into a contradiction. After beginning his words with a maxim as is his custom, stating that:

“No system of government can or should be imposed by one nation on any other”, a principle in the Charter of the United Nations as a fundamental element of international law, he immediately contradicts himself with a declaration of faith that turns the United States into the supreme judge over democratic values and human rights.

Then he refers to subjects related to economic development and equal opportunities. He makes promises to the Arab world; he points our advantages and contradictions. It would really appear to be a public relations campaign carried out by the United States with the Muslim countries; in any case, this is better than threatening to destroy them with bombs.

At the end of the speech there is quite a mix of subjects.

If one takes into account the length of the speech, without using paper, the number of lapses is negligible as compared with his predecessor who used to make a mistake in every paragraph. He is a very good communicator.

I tend to observe historical, political and religious ceremonies with interest.

This one at Al-Azhar University seemed to be to be an unreal scene. Not even Pope Benedict XVI had declared such ecumenical phrases as Obama did. For a second I imagined the pious Muslim, Catholic, Christian or Jew, or someone from any other religion, listening to the president in the spacious hall of Al-Azhar University. At a certain moment I couldn’t tell whether he was in a Catholic cathedral, a Christian church, a mosque or a synagogue.

He left early for Germany. For three days he toured politically significant sites. He participated and spoke at commemorative ceremonies. He visited museums, received his family and dined at famous restaurants. He has an impressive working capacity. Some time will go by before we see anything like it again.

Fidel Castro Ruz
June 8, 2009
7:12 p.m.

Yesterday in the afternoon, while thoroughly analyzing the speech delivered by Obama at the Muslim University of Cairo, I received some reports published by the news agencies with the weird information that two retired persons more than 70 years old had been arrested on charges of having been spying for the government of Cuba for 30 years. Almost all the important western press agencies – eight of them- disseminated the news.

The persons accused are Walter Kendall Myers and his wife Gwendolyn Steingraber Myers. It is also said that Walter worked as a specialist in European affairs and that in 1995 -14 years ago- the couple had traveled to Cuba and were received by me. During that time I met with thousands of American citizens for different reasons, either individually or in groups; at times there groups that numbered several hundreds, such as the students who traveled to Cuba on the Semester at Sea cruise ship project, so I could hardly remember any details about a meeting with two persons. Now I realize why George W. Bush prevented the cruise ship students to continue visiting Cuba. They talked with me for many hours, despite the fact that they belonged to high-middle class families.

That accusation points out that the married couple received numerous awards, but at the same time it acknowledges that they never did it for money or personal benefits.

I for one can assert that, as a matter of principle, we have never tortured anyone nor have we paid anyone to obtain any type of information. Those who one way or the other helped to protect the lives of Cuban citizens against terrorist plans and the plots to attempt against the life of their leaders, of the many which were perpetrated by several US administrations, did so moved by the imperatives of their own consciousness and, in my opinion, they deserve every honor in this world.

What is curious is the fact that this news is published 24 hours after the defeat suffered by the US diplomacy at the General Assembly of the OAS.

What is really weird is this: If these persons were under surveillance, because there were some FBI agents who managed to fool them by pretending that they were Cuban spies, why weren’t they arrested before? Why are they arrested now?

Now begins the game of the alleged justice against two persons who have been morally torn to shreds beforehand through accusations that will arrange in advance the behavior of the jury that is to decide whether they are guilty or not guilty. Obviously they will not receive the kind treatment accorded to the terrorists who were recruited by the government of that country to destroy the Cubana airliner with all its passengers inside and to commit horrible crimes against our people. They have also violated the US laws, for many of these despicable terrorist actions were carried out in the US territory.

A whole campaign has already been launched against the married couple; they are portrayed as traitors who could be sanctioned to 35 years imprisonment, a sentence they will have to serve until they are more than 100 years old. The prosecutors will be able to resort to their traditional maneuvers in their quest for political goals.

All of this mess has been created after Obama took office as President of the United States. Perhaps the arrest was influenced not only by the tremendous setback suffered at San Pedro Sula, but also by the news that there have been some contacts between he governments of the United States and Cuba to deal with important issues of common interest.

According to a news report published by ANSA, Walter Kendall Myers declared that he tried to be “very prudent” when picking up or transmitting secrets to Cuba.

Other articles refer to a diary that was found in Gwendolyn’s possession. If all of this were true, I could not but admire her selfless and courageous behavior towards Cuba.

The confrontation with the United States is of an ideological character and has nothing to do with the security of that country.

However, yesterday other three reports from news agencies released information that does have a lot do with the political moral and the security of the United States:

The agency AFP reported that a new debate had taken place on Friday when several Democrat legislators accused the Republican opponents of revealing secret information about torturing techniques, which was made public during a closed door session of the Congress.

The report adds that the Representative from Illinois, Jan Schakowski, pointed out that everybody in the commission understands what a closed door hearing means.

She further stated in a communiqué that the members of this commission acted in an irresponsible manner when they left from the confidential meeting before it ended and went straight ahead to speak to the press.

The news agency AP stated that the federal prosecutors had accused a man for having launched threats against President Barack Obama after he presumably told a bank employee in Utah that his mission was to kill the president.

The local daily Salt Lake Tribune published on Thursday on its website stated that Daniel James Murray had confessed his intentions to a bank cashier on May 27 while he was withdrawing 13 000 dollars from a bank account.

According to the newspaper, no one knows where the accused is. A document submitted yesterday to the justice authorities states that Murray is from New York and that very recently he had traveled to California, Utah, Georgia, Oklahoma, and possibly Texas.

The newspaper further states that the Secret Service claims that Murray has at least 8 registered firearms, and adds that Malcolm Wiley, a spokesman for the Secret Service in Washington, had told The Associated Press that he won’t make any comments in this regard.

According to the AFP news agency, sensitive US military technologies required to manufacture nuclear weapons can easily be acquired in the United States and exported illegally, as advised by the Congress GAO.

In a recent report published by that institution it is stated that, using a front company and false identities, the GAO was able to buy sensitive products, such as infrared goggles used by the US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to identify targets during night time, electrodes to detonate nuclear weapons, electronic sensors used in the manufacturing of hand-made bombs and used chips from remotely controlled missiles.

Isn’t it so that that immense and sophisticated arsenal that has been made available to the market is placing the world at the verge of a precipice?

Don’t you all find the whole story about Cuban espionage quite ridiculous?

Fidel Castro Ruz
June 6, 2009
3:12 p.m.

President Rafael Correa of Ecuador, in a visit to Honduras on the eve of the OAS meeting stated: “I think that the OAS has lost its reason to exist; perhaps it never had a reason to exist.” The news carried by ANSA adds that Correa “predicted ‘the death’ of that organization because of the many errors it had committed.”

He stated “that because of geographic conditions the countries on the American continent cannot ‘all be lumped together,’ and for that reason several months ago Ecuador proposed the creation of the Organization of Latin American States.

“‘It is not possible that the region’s problems are discussed in Washington; let us make something that is our own, without countries alien to our culture, to our values, obviously including counties that were inexplicably separated from the inter-American system, and I refer to the specific case of Cuba, it was a real embarrassment and shows the double standards existing in international relations’”. Upon his arrival in Honduras, both President Zelaya and Correa declared that “the OAS ought to be reformed and reincorporate Cuba or it would have to disappear”.

Another dispatch from the DPA Agency states:

“Reintegrating Cuba into the Organization of American States (OAS) has moved from being a subject per se of the General Assembly of the body in the Honduran city of San Pedro Sula to become, yet again, the excuse for a struggle of interests that go far beyond the limits of the Caribbean island and could question (again) the state of hemispheric relations

“The president of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, put it perfectly clear when he described the hemispheric meeting starting this Tuesday in Honduras in quasi military terms.

“It will be, he said, an ‘interesting battle’ where if it is shown that the OAS ‘continues to be a ministry of the colonies’ which isn’t changing to ’subordinate itself to the will of the governments making it up,’ it will be necessary to consider ‘exiting’ from the body and creating another alternative.”

“‘Latin America is making Cuba the litmus test for the sincerity of the Obama administration’s true rapprochement’ in the region, Julia Sweig, the Cuba expert of the Council of Foreign Relations in Washington, declared to ‘The Washington Post’ on the eve of the encounter in Honduras.”

By resisting the aggressions of the most powerful empire ever to exist, our people struggled for the other sister nations of this continent. The OAS was an accomplice to all the crimes committed against Cuba.

At one time or another, every one of the Latin American countries was victim of interventions and politic and economic aggressions. There is not one that could deny it. It is naive to think that the good intentions of a president of the United States could justify the existence of that institution that opened the doors to the Trojan horse that supported the Summits of the Americas, neoliberalism, drug- trafficking, military bases and economic crises. Ignorance, underdevelopment, economic dependency, poverty, the forced return of those who emigrate in search of jobs, the brain drain, and even the sophisticated weapons of organized crime were the consequences of the interventions and pillage coming from the North. Cuba, a tiny country, has demonstrated that it is possible to resist the blockade and move forward in many areas, even to cooperate with other countries.

The speech given today by President Manuel Zelaya of Honduras at the OAS General Assembly contains principles that may go down in history. He said admirable things about his own country. I shall limit myself to what he said about Cuba.

“At the Assembly of the Organization of American States starting today in San Pedro Sula, Honduras, we must initiate the process of making wise repairs to old errors committed.

“We, Latin Americans here present, a short while ago, a few weeks or months ago, had a great summit meeting of the Rio Group in Salvador de Bahia, Brazil. There we entered into a commitment. That commitment, taken down in writing and by the unanimity of all of Latin America, is that in this San Pedro Sula assembly, by majority of votes or by consensus, that old and time-worn error committed in 1962 to expel the people of Cuba from this organization should be redressed.

“My fellow dignitaries, we should not leave this assembly without abolishing the decree of that eighth meeting which sanctioned an entire people for having proclaimed its socialist ideas and principles, the very same principles that today are being practiced everywhere in the world, including in the United States and in Europe (Applause). Today, the principles of seeking different development alternatives are evident in the change that has occurred in the United States with the election of President Barack Obama.

“We cannot leave this assembly without redressing that error and that infamy because based on this OAS resolution which is now more than four decades old, this sister nation of Cuba has been kept under an unfair and useless blockade, precisely because it hasn’t served any purpose, but it has indeed shown that over there, a few miles away from our country, on a small island, there are a people ready to resist and sacrifice for their independence and sovereignty.

“To not do so would make us accomplices of a resolution in 1962 to expel a state of the Organization of American States simply because it espouses other ideas, other thoughts, and because it proclaims the principles of a different democracy. And we are not going to be accomplices to that.

“We cannot leave this assembly without abolishing what was done in that era.

“Jose Cecilio del Valle, an exceptional Honduran and one of our national heroes, who was called “Wise Man Valle” in our country, said on April 17, 1826, in his famous article -’Sovereignty and Non-intervention’ -we had just declared our independence from Spain: ‘The nations of the world are independent and sovereign. Whatever their territorial size or the number of inhabitants, a nation must treat others in the same way it wishes to be treated by them. A nation does not have the right to intervene in the internal affairs of another nation.’”

With these words spoken by Cecilio del Valle and mentioning Mahatma Gandhi, Jesus Christ, Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln, Morazan, Marti, Sandino and Bolivar, he concluded his address.

Minutes later, at the press conference following the opening of the assembly, he answered questions and reiterated principles. He then gave the floor to Daniel Ortega who was the author of one of the most profound and articulated presentations at the OAS assembly. By invitation of Zelaya, the following also spoke: President Fernando Lugo of Paraguay and Rigoberta Menchu, both expressing themselves in the same vein as Zelaya and Daniel.

The assembly has been in session for hours. At the moment I am finishing this Reflection, practically night-time, there is still no news of the decision. We know that Zelaya’s speech had an influence. Chavez chats with Maduro and urges him to be firm on the fact that no resolution can be passed that places conditions on the repeal of the unfair sanction against Cuba. Never had so much rebellion been seen. It is certainly a tough battle. Many countries depend on the index finger of the hand of the U.S. government, the one pointing to the Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank or any other outfit to punish rebellion. Having waged this battle is in itself a heroic deed of those who are the most rebellious. The date of June 2, 2009 will be remembered by future generations.

Cuba is no enemy to peace, nor is it reluctant to exchanges or cooperation between countries with different political systems, but it has been and will be uncompromising in its defense of its principles.

Fidel Castro Ruz
June 2, 2009
6:56 p.m.

Yesterday on May 31st, an AFP dispatch read: “Cuba has accepted to reopen negotiations with the United States about migration and direct mail service, a new signal of the thaw that is happening just before an Organization of American States (OAS) Summit where the Cuban situation will dominate conversations.

“The head of the Cuban Interests Section in Washington, Jorge Bolaños, communicated on Saturday that Cuba ‘is waiting to reinitiate conversations about emigration and direct mail service,’ said a senior State Department official who remained anonymous.

“From El Salvador where she is attending a ministerial conference on regional trade, Hillary Clinton said that Washington was pleased to resume conversations with Havana on those issues.”

Suddenly a rather undiplomatic sharp remark indicated that:

“‘There will be an open dialogue as soon as there are changes on human rights and movement towards democracy’ in Cuba,”

the EFE agency writes.

What is the kind of “democracy” and “human rights” advocated by the United States? Was it really necessary to launch that humiliating and arrogant warning?

Today when I saw the inauguration of Mauricio Funes on television and he spoke about re-establishing relations with Cuba, deafening applause and shouts of joy erupted in the room unlike anything else that had been heard during his speech. There, among the guests, was Hillary. Earlier, the speaker, who strayed many times from his written speech, had made the mistake of greeting Mrs. Clinton who is Secretary of State, even before Lula da Silva, the president of the South American giant who was sitting there in a group of presidents from our region.

The speaker, even before the end of the extended applause for Cuba -that could perhaps hurt Mrs. Clinton- started to speak and he again mentioned the United States with the best of intentions. However, very few people in that large room applauded that country.

A crucial moment, one that was much applauded in Mauricio’s speech earlier on, happened when he mentioned the distinguished Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero whose tomb he had visited that morning. While he was saying Mass, that defender of the poor had been murdered with impunity by the bloody ARENA Party tyranny imposed on El Salvador by imperialism. In that room there were also legislators and senior officials representing the party that had murdered him; among them several of the few who applauded the United States.

In certain circumstances, not just words do the speaking; so do applauses and silences.

Fidel Castro Ruz
June 1st, 2009
2:36 p.m.