The meeting last Tuesday, October 26 of the UN General Assembly – supposedly the highest political authority on the planet – was convened for a purpose that has been repeated so many times that it is already familiar: "The necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed by the United States of America against Cuba."

It is the resolution that has been most discussed, successfully passed and never fulfilled in the history of the United Nations.

We all know that, if such an accusation were to be leveled against Cuba or any other Latin American or Caribbean country, even if it were ignored, fire and brimstone would rain down on that country. The detestable act with which, with so much clarity and precision, is attributed to the "United States of America" and the end of which we are demanding, is described in international law as an "act of genocide."

The number of occasions on which the General Assembly has voted in favor of the resolution demanding an end to that abusive and criminal action since 1992, has now risen to 19. But, as the number of times that the resolution has been repeated and passed has grown, the number of countries offering their support has also risen, the number of those abstaining has decreased, as has the miniscule group that has voted against it. On this last occasion, just two countries voted against and three abstained, the names of which correspond to tiny states which are, in reality, dependent colonies of the United States.

One fact to take into account is that great changes have taken place in the world since the UN was founded, when the battles of World War II were still not over, a war which cost the lives of 50 million people and vast destruction. Many countries that today constitute a majority at the United Nations were still colonies of European powers that had taken by force the vast majority of the world’s territory and certain continents almost in their entirety. In more than a few cases, hundreds of millions of people from much more ancient civilizations and of a superior culture, were subjected to colonialism in virtue of the superiority of the weapons of the aggressors.

Cuba was no exception.

In this hemisphere, our country was Spain’s last colony - given its wealth of scarce agricultural products and the subsequent great demand for them- produced by the industrious hands of free campesinos and hundreds of thousands of slaves of African origin. When Spain’s other colonies were liberated in the early decades of the 19th century, that nation maintained its colony in Cuba with a fist of iron and using the most despotic methods.

In the second half of that century, our island – on which Spain dreamed of having a stronghold in order to re-conquer its former colonies in South America – was the cradle of a profound national and patriotic sentiment. The Cuban people initiated the battle for their independence almost 70 years after the other sister nations of Latin America, with no other weapons than the machetes used to cut sugar cane, and the spirit and swiftness of Cuban horses. In very little time, the Cuban patriots became fearsome soldiers.

Thirty years later, our long-suffering people were at the point of achieving their historic objectives in the heroic struggle against a decadent but obstinate European power. Despite the enormous number of soldiers that it possessed, the Spanish army was by then incapable of maintaining its possession of the island, where it only controlled the main urban areas and was on the point of collapse.

It was then that the powerful empire – which had never concealed its intention of taking possession of Cuba – intervened in that war after cynically declaring that the "people of the island of Cuba are and by rights should be free and independent."

At the end of the war, our country was denied the right to participate in the peace negotiations. The Spanish government consummated the betrayal of Cuba by placing her in the hands of those who had intervened.

The United States took control of Cuba’s natural resources, its finest land, commerce, the banks, services and the country’s central industries. It transformed us into a neo-colony. We had to withstand that for more than 60 years but we became independent once again and we will never stop fighting. With those antecedents, readers from other countries will better understand the words of our Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez on October 26 this year.

The debate began at ten o’clock in the morning.

First, five countries spoke on behalf of the Group of 77, the Non-Aligned Movement, the African Union, CARICOM and MERCOSUR, all of them supporting the resolution.

Afterward, another 14 countries spoke including two that have populations of over one billion each: China and India, with almost 2.5 billion between the two of them; others with more than 100 million inhabitants such as the Russian Federation, Indonesia and Mexico; another nine with a recognized role in international life: Venezuela, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Algeria, South Africa, the Solomon Islands, Zambia, Gambia, Ghana and Barbados; 19 speeches before that of Bruno.

His speech was categorical. I will cite many entire paragraphs from his speech. He began with a reference to the grave danger of war that is threatening us and added:

"In order to survive, a leap in the consciousness of humanity is essential, one which is only possible via the dissemination of truthful information about these issues, which is hidden or ignored by most politicians, not published by the press, and which people find so horrifying as to seem unbelievable."

"… the U.S. policy against Cuba is devoid of any ethical or legal basis, credibility or support. This is evidenced by the more than 180 votes in this United Nations General Assembly over the last few years, which have demanded an end of the economic, commercial and financial blockade."

"Latin America and the Caribbean have vigorously and unanimously rejected this policy. The Unity Summit which took place in Cancun in February 2010 resolutely stated the same. The leaders of the region have conveyed this feeling directly to the current U.S. president. It is a fact that the express rejection of the blockade and the Helms-Burton Act characterizes, as very few other issues do, the political heritage of the region."

"Equally unequivocal views have been endorsed by the Non-Aligned Movement, the Ibero-American Summits, the European Union and Latin American and Caribbean Summits, the African Union, the ACP Group Summits and virtually any other group of nations which have pronounced themselves in favor of international law and respect for the principles and intentions of the United Nations Charter."

"There is a broad and growing consensus within United States society and Cuban émigrés in that country against the blockade and in favor of a change of policy toward Cuba […] 71% of American citizens favor the normalization of relations between Cuba and the United States…"

"The sanctions against Cuba remain intact and are being fully implemented."

"In the course of the year 2010, the economic siege has been tightened and its everyday impact continues to be visible in all aspects of life in Cuba. It is having particularly serious consequences in areas as sensitive to the population as health and food."

He immediately goes on to note a series of cruel measured that notably affect children with delicate health problems, which the United States government would not be able to refute.

He then says:

"Fines imposed this year by the Treasury and Justice Departments on U.S. and European agencies for their transactions with Cuba, among other states, total more than $800 million dollars."

He continues informing:

"The confiscation of a transfer of more than 107,000 euros belonging to the Cubana de Aviación airline, made via the Banco Popular Español from Madrid to Moscow, constitutes veritable theft."

In continuation, our minister of foreign affairs notes something of much importance in relation to the effects of the gross crime against the Cuban economy, given the tendency to mention historic figures of the amount in dollars of the value of movable or fixed assets, loans, debts or anything else measured in U.S. dollars, without taking into account the constantly decreasing value of the dollar in the last four decades. To give one example, I quote a famous soft drink: Coca Cola – without charging anything for the publicity. Forty years ago it cost 5 cents, now its price fluctuates between 150-200 cents in any country.

Bruno states:

"The direct economic damage inflicted on the Cuban people by the implementation of the blockade over the last 50 years amounts to more than $751 billion dollars, according to the present value of that currency."

In other words, he does not fall into the error of utilizing the sum of losses signified by the blockade year by year as if the value of the dollar was exactly the same every year. As a consequence of the world fraud signified by Nixon’s unilateral suspension of that currency’s backing in gold at the rate of 36 dollars per Troy ounce, compounded by the issuing of dollars without any limit whatsoever, the purchasing power of that money has been extraordinarily reduced. MINREX took on the task of asking a group of experts from the Ministry of the Economy to make an assessment, and this threw up the economic damage of the blockade of Cuba over the past 50 years as expressed in the current value of that currency.

"On September 2," he said in his speech, "President Obama himself ratified the sanctions against Cuba, alluding to the supposed U.S. ‘national interest.’ However, everybody knows that the White House continues to pay more attention to the well-funded ‘special interests’ of a meager minority which has converted the anti-Cuba policy into a highly lucrative business."

"Very recently, on October 19, President Obama described all the processes that, in his view, are occurring today in Cuba as insufficient and conditioned any new step by his government to internal changes that it would like to see in our country.

"The president is mistaken in assuming that he has the right to interfere and evaluate the processes currently taking place in Cuba. It is regrettable that he is so misinformed and ill-advised.

"The transformations that we are currently undertaking respond to Cubans’ aspirations and sovereign decisions adopted by our people. […] They are not intended to please or satisfy the interests of the U.S. government, to date always opposed to those of the Cuban people.

"For the superpower, any process that is not conducive to the establishment of a regime subordinated to its interest will be insufficient. But that is not going to happen, because many generations of Cubans have dedicated and are dedicating their lives to defending the sovereignty and independence of Cuba."

"On the contrary, the U.S. government has continued with its arbitrary practice of adding Cuba’s name to spurious lists, including that of states allegedly sponsoring international terrorism, produced by the State Department to evaluate the conduct of other nations. That country has no moral authority to draw up such lists – as a rule it is its name that should appear at the top of them – nor is there any reason whatsoever to include Cuba on any of those lists."

"The U.S. government is likewise upholding the unjust conviction imposed on the five Cuban anti-terrorist fighters who have been incarcerated for more than 12 years in U.S. prisons and whose cause has prompted the broadest solidarity within the international community.

"Cuba, which has been and still is a victim of state terrorism, demands that that government ends its double standards and the impunity enjoyed in its territory by the confessed authors of acts of terrorism organized under the auspices of that country’s anti-Cuban policy…"

Having reached that point, Bruno delivered to the United States delegation the coup de grâce of the famous memorandum drafted by Lester Mallory, former deputy assistant secretary of state, declassified many years later, which demonstrates the repugnant cynicism of the policy of the United States.

"’The majority of Cubans support Castro […] There is no effective political opposition […] The only foreseeable means of alienating internal support [from the government] is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship. Every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken economic life […] denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.’"

"Although this economic persecution has been the main obstacle to our country’s development and an improvement in the living standards of our people, Cuba can show undeniable results in the eradication of poverty and hunger, in the fields of health and education, which have become a world referent…"

"A few weeks ago Cuba was able to declare here that it had largely and exceptionally complied with the Millennium Development Goals. These results achieved by Cuba remain a utopia for a large part of the population of the planet."

"Cuba will never cease to denounce the blockade; it will never cease to demand its people’s legitimate right to live and work for their socioeconomic development under conditions of equality, in cooperation with other nations, without any economic siege or external pressure.

"Cuba thanks the international community for its firm solidarity with our people, convinced that, some day, justice will be served and this resolution will no longer be necessary."

"Thank you very much."

He said, to conclude his first speech.

I shall continue tomorrow.



Fidel Castro Ruz
October 31, 2010
5:13 p.m.

Translated by Granma International

UPRISING AT THE UN (Part Two)

granma.cu