Fidel's Comments on Canada's ex-PM Chretien, Haiti, De-Mining Efforts in Africa and more

[In addition to his columns, Fidel Castro has recently sent comments to
"The Roundtable" nightly TV program. Earlier this week, he sent a
commentary concerned mostly with the Climate Change Conference at Bali.
(See: "Fidel Castro's Letter on Bali Mtg, Roundtable, Dec 17" 
http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/Week-of-Mon-20071217/073099.html
and the two preceding related re****ts.)

Last week, on December 13, 2007 the program concerned Cuba's commitments
regarding human rights at the UN. Fidel commented on the situation of
"human rights" over the years, both in Cuba and elsewhere, especially as
regards US pressures on Cuba.   The first article below gives some
background; the second is a the transcript of an earlier Round Table
discussion on Canada's PM, Jean Chr(c)tien, and how he was used by the US
to attempt to pressure Cuba in previous years.

The re****t is especially interesting because it discusses Cuba's
attempt to engage France and Canada in helping Haiti -- long before
Clinton's intervention. After months of waiting for a response, Cuba
went ahead and developed its own medical aid and other
development assistance programs to Haiti. 

Also profoundly revealing are Castro's comments on Chr(c)tien's incredibly
undiplomatic effort to persuade Cuba to remove landmines from around
the US Base at Guantanamo illegally occupied by the US.  As  Castro
explains, the landmines are used solely as defensive weapons by Cuba
against the US military occupiers. Hence, Cuba has refused to sign the
landmine treaty.  However, the Canadian PM had an even more offensive
proposal:  He suggested that Canada and other international donors
would pay for a project to help de-mine Angola, if Cuba agreed to send
its soldiers to actually perform the dangerous work. This is a lengthy
transcript, but full of fascinating insights into Canada's often
delicate attempts to deflect US hegemony, Cuba's humanitarian work in
the Caribbean, and Fidel Castro's own diplomatic skill (and
forbearance) in the face of the USA's repeated use of foreign
governments to pressure Cuba to leave itself open to US aggression).
- -NY Transfer]

Cuban Headlines - Dec 15, 2001
http://www.cubaheadlines.com/2007/12/15/7706/fidel_castro_sends_letter_to_informative_round_table_of_cuban_television_and_radio.html

Fidel Castro Sends Letter to Round Table TV Program

The president of Cuba, Fidel Castro, sent a letter to the Informative
Round Table of the Cuban Television and Radio, concerning the new
commitments contracted in the United Nations (UN) by the Caribbean
island.

Fidel Castro Sends Letter to Informative Round Table of Cuban
Television and Radio The president of Cuba, Fidel Castro, sent a letter
to the Informative Round Table of the Cuban Television and Radio,
concerning the new commitments contracted in the United Nations (UN) by
the Caribbean island.

Randy Alonso, moderator of the informative space, read Fidel's missive,
in which the Leader of the Cuban Revolution makes reference to the
emotion he felt when he watched the extraordinary documentary by the
Argentinean film director, Carolina Silvestre, in which she dismounts,
one by one, the lies on the democracy and on the human rights in the
developed capitalism.

Fidel Casto points out that during several days, starting from the
constitutional referendum in Venezuela last December 2nd, he tried to
remember, among the hundreds of statements of his revolutionary task,
one in which he concretely defined the position and international
commitments of Cuba.

The statesman narrates that he requested copy of several videos in
which he approached the topic. He selected at random and realized that
one of the most precise was transmitted in the Informative Round Table,
in April 2001. He remembered that the Cubans are absorbed in an
electoral process and considered the ideas and the starting point of
his political life.

Fidel emphasized  that he would title that video with his final line:
The history will say who possesses the reason, and requested Randy
Alonso to transmit it in the Round Table this Thursday, which focused
the new international commitments of Cuba in the UN.

The Cuban President also remembered that his statements, in the Round
Table on April 25, 2001, were encouraged by some words of the prime
minister of Canada, Jean Chr(c)tien, in the Third Summit of the Americas.

(Tiempo21)

Here is Fidel's letter to the Roundtable's Randy Alonso, followed by
excerpts from an extraordinary discussion on that program in 2001:
NYTr

http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/2007/ing/f141207i.html

Havana, December 12th, 2007

Dear Randy,

I was very moved by the extraordinary documentary of  Argentinean
filmmaker Carolina Silvestre, which dissects the lies about democracy
and human rights advanced by developed and globalized capitalism. 

For days, following the Venezuelan referendum of December 2, going
over the hundreds of pronouncements that I have made as part of my
revolutionary efforts, I had been trying to bring to mind a statement
that concretely defines our position on Cuba's international
commitments. 

I asked for copies of several materials in which I tackled 
the issue. Fortunately, one of the most precise statements I made on a 
Round Table program. It was relatively recent, slightly less than seven 
years ago [2001, referring to previous events in 1998.]

We are involved in an electoral process. I consider ideas 
to be the basis of my political life. I would use the closing remarks
of this material, whose text I am sending you, as the title: "History
will decide who is right".

I ask that you broadcast it, if possible, on Thursday, tomorrow.

My remarks were inspired by the statement made by then-Prime Minister
of Canada Jean Chretien at the 3rd Summit of the Americas.At the time,
they may have seemed of little significance.

Fraternal greetings to all Round Table participants.

Fidel Castro Ruz

                                ***

Juventude Rebelde - Dec 15, 2007
http://www.juventudrebelde.co.cu/cuba/2007-12-15/fidel-castro-talks-about-the-statement-made-by-canadian-prime-minister-jean-chretien-during-the-iii-summit-of-the-americas/

Fidel Castro talks about the Statement Made by Canadian Prime Minister
Jean Chr(c)tien During the III Summit of the Americas

Response by President Fidel Castro Ruz, to a Question Posed by the
Moderator of a Round Table Discussion on a Statement Made by Canadian
Prime Minister Jean Chr(c)tien During the III Summit of the Americas.

Fidel Castro.- Very well, and now, I will ask for your patience. This
document might be of interest, if you will give me the floor.

I felt it would be worth devoting a few minutes to this matter.

Were you going to talk about the host country?

Randy Alonso.- About the host country of the 3rd Summit and about the
statements made by its prime minister. There were various statements
made by the prime minister, and by the foreign minister as well.

Fidel Castro.- Yes, I chose one of the statements made by the prime
minister, because he is the one I know better, and the one I have more
of a friend****p with.

Well, so that the people understand what this is all about.

"Quebec city (Canada), April 19 (EFE).- Canadian Prime Minister
Jean Chr(c)tien justified the exclusion of Cuba from the III Summit of the
Americas citing the Cuban regimes failure to take any action in
regards to human rights, despite the fact that he had ~spent hours
trying to convince Fidel Castro to change his policies.

"Upon arriving at the convention center in Quebec City where the summit
will take place this weekend, Chr(c)tien was asked whether he had changed
his position on the inclusion of Cuba in the Summit of the Americas
process, given that at previous meetings in Miami and Santiago he had
advocated the presence of the Castro regime.

"~I have not changed my opinion, Chr(c)tien answered.

"The Canadian Prime Minister was curt when asked if Cuba was not
present in Quebec City because of Wa****ngtons refusal.

"Likewise, when pressed to indicate what other country on the continent
had opposed Castros participation in the third Americas Summit,
Chr(c)tien told the journalist, ~ask them.

"The Canadian prime minister added that he had spent ~hours and hours
trying to persuade Castro to sign some conventions on human rights,
but that there had been no action on the part of the Cuban regime.

"~I spent hours with him (Fidel Castro) trying to get him to sign some
United Nations resolutions, Chr(c)tien insisted."

I have reflected a great deal on this pronouncement of Mr. Chr(c)tien. I
felt no need to issue a hasty and improvised public statement on that
meeting.

Instead, I have spent time collecting information and reconstructing as
objectively as possible what we discussed and the atmosphere in which
our exchanges took place.

I have brought with me a written reflection, given the need for
precision when approaching such delicate subjects.

The meeting had barely begun when he rather abruptly placed a short
list of names on the table, a list that he had obviously received
shortly before. I could almost guess what it was. This was what usually
happened whenever we were visited by a political figure from a U.S.
ally or an American politician: the State Department would hand them a
list of people tried in a court of law or sentenced for
counterrevolutionary activities.

Those who were of greatest im****tance or interest to the U.S.
intelligence services or government always headed up the lists. They
would ask for the individuals on the list to be pardoned or released.
It was a tactic consistently used by the U.S. government to apply
pressure in favor of its friends, taking advantage of any friendly
visit to Cuba. Because our country normally exercises the greatest
tolerance possible, it is only in exceptional cases that the
authorities proceed to arrest and prosecute those involved, when their
acts of provocation are grave or totally unacceptable.

The Canadian prime minister reminded me that, as a result of the Popes
visit, a number of individuals sentenced for their counterrevolutionary
activities had been pardoned, and he said he had pledged to request the
same for those on the list.

In fact, the Pope never raised this subject with me; he did it through
his Secretary of State, in another meeting with our Minister of Foreign
Affairs.

Without waiting for a response, he immediately proposed that Cuba sign
the United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
since Cuba had done just as much or more than any other country in the
world in this regard. This was undoubtedly a complimentary phrase, and
a more clever and op****tune approach.

I recall that he then went on to mention the North American Free Trade
Agreement among Canada, Mexico and the United States, and the plans to
extend it to the rest of Latin America, expressing his view that Cuba
could make an im****tant contribution.

Lastly, he referred to the treaty against anti-personal landmines,
lamenting that Cuba had not yet signed it, and requesting that it do
so. These were the four points with which he opened the talks. They all
seemed very simple. All four, however, were extremely complex.

I asked him if it was common for Canadian politicians to begin by the
most difficult questions, and jokingly added that we might be spoiling
the visit if we did not do well on this initial test.

I seem to remember that the meeting lasted around two hours and that it
unfolded in an atmosphere that was cordial and respectful but franc,
too. I must confess that I used most of the time since I needed to
present in considerable depth the rational behind our positions,
especially with regard to three of the points.

It would be impossible to repeat here each one of these arguments. I
will limit myself to a very brief summary, with the essential points.

I said that I could not decide anything personally and immediately, or
commit myself on any of the issues, or raise false expectations
concerning the decisions we would adopt. I said that the highly
publicized matter of alleged prisoners of conscience was an old story
after almost 40 years of all kinds of misdeeds and crimes committed
against Cuba by the United States. I listed them in depth and in
detail, contrasting them with the irreproachable conduct and ethics of
our Revolution despite the deluge of slander and lies heaped on Cuba. I
spoke of the hypocrisy and double standards reflected in the United
States policy towards Cuba, and the circumstances that had obliged us
to have people in prison; at the Bay of Pigs alone, we had taken 1200
invaders prisoner. I explained that the Revolution itself, from the
very first years, had been releasing those who had tried to destroy it
serving the interests of a foreign power over the course of four
decades. I noted that the issue of those who were currently in prison
for this reason was constantly used to pressure Cuba, a country
suffering hostility and aggression from abroad. I described the serious
threats we still faced, such as the acts of terrorism organized and
financed by the United States.

At one point he told me that his desire was for this situation to be
overcome, in order for us to return to the big family. I told him that
we were Latin Americans, and I asked him if it was a matter of us
returning to the big family, or of the big family returning to us. I
concluded on this point by telling him that he had brought a list of
individuals who were mercenaries in the service of the United States
and paid by the United States, who were trying to destroy the
Revolution in complicity with the United States. I said that I had to
tell him as a friend that such a list was humiliating for Cuba. He took
pains to explain that this was not his intent, and said that perhaps he
had presented the list much too soon.

It was not all dramatic. There were moments of humor and even jokes
interspersed. This part of the exchange, recounted somewhat
extensively, reflects the intensity of our first hour of talks.

With regard to his emphasis on the hemispheric family, I told him that
it pleased me greatly, but that I also thought about the world family:
Europe, Asia and Africa.

With regard to the second point, the United Nations Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, I did not hesitate to point out
that we could sign all of the articles except two, articles 8 and 13.
The first, I said, may be well and good for capitalist countries like
Canada, the United States, and the countries of Latin American, since
some are ruled by businesses and oligarchies, and the others by the big
transnationals. In countries like those, workers are divided, fractured
and, when possible, corrupted and alienated, and can accomplish very
little in the face of the political power of their bosses. It is a
question of economic systems different from ours.

This article of the Covenant refers to the right of everyone to form
trade unions and join the trade union of his choice, subject only to
the rules of the organization concerned, for the promotion and
protection of their economic and social interests. Now, in a socialist
country like Cuba, where manual and intellectual workers are all
organized in their respective trade unions and solidly united as a
revolutionary class that shares power with the rest of the people, with
the peasants, women, students, neighborhood residents and citizens in
general, such a precept could serve as a weapon and a pretext for
imperialism to try to divide and fracture the workers, create
artificial unions, and decrease their political and social power and
influence. In the United States and many countries in Europe and other
parts of the world, the strategy used by imperialism is to divide,
weaken and corrupt the trade union movement to the point where it is
completely defenseless against the bosses. In Cuba, it would be used
fundamentally for subversive and destabilizing purposes, to undermine
the political power and diminish the extraordinary strength and
influence of our workers, and to erode the heroic resistance of the
only socialist state in the West in the face of the hegemonic
superpower.

The other article could not be signed either, because it would open the
doors to the privatization of education. In the past, that gave rise to
painful differences and intolerable privileges and injustices,
including racial discrimination, something our children will never
again have to face. A country that managed to eradicate illiteracy in
just one year, that has achieved an average educational level of ninth
grade, and that has an extraordinary and massive contingent of
professors and teachers and the most sound and successful educational
system in the world does not need to commit itself to such a precept.

I told Chr(c)tien that Latin America had been trying to eradicate
illiteracy for 200 years, and have still not succeeded.

Chr(c)tien proposed that we sign the Covenant and state our reservation
with regard to the two articles in question. We responded that
afterwards there would be talk of non-compliance with the Covenant, and
nobody would know about or remember the reservations with which it was
signed. You cannot play around with these things!

With regard to the Treaty on landmines, we did not spend much time on
the subject during that meeting. I told him that we were not going to
sign it. I explained that we had an U.S. military base right in our own
territory, and that the only landmines in our country were between the
limits of that base and the rest of our territory. For us, I said,
landmines were a defensive weapon, and we would not make the mistake of
giving them up; we do not have nuclear weapons, intelligent bombs and
missiles, and the other highly sophisticated weapons that the United
States has. A genuine threat hangs over our country, and this is why we
do not intend to sign the treaty.

He later broached the subject once again, from an angle that I never
would have suspected at the time. At the end of this first meeting he
told me, with obvious satisfaction and sincerity, that it had been an
excellent discussion. This summary of the main points addressed at our
first meeting might give the impression that it took place in a gruff
atmosphere, but nothing could be further from the truth. The atmosphere
was warm and friendly at all times.

It seemed clear to me "although he did not state it like that but I
picked it up from the whole of what Mr. Chr(c)tien said" that in the
presence of such a powerful neighbor, with which it shares an 8,644
kilometer-long border, he feared for the future of his country. Being
aware of their strong and deeply rooted --but also different-- cultures
and traditions he is concerned about the risk posed to his countrys
unity by any ambitions, errors or upheavals on the part of its
neighbor. For this enormous and rich territory, with a population of
hardly 32 million, whose natural resources include "as Chr(c)tien himself
indicated" one quarter of the worlds drinking water reserves, the
United States constitutes a major headache, perhaps even more so than
it does for Cuba.

At what was perhaps the most interesting point of the conversation,
when Chr(c)tien stated his most intelligent idea, capable of inspiring a
sense of solidarity even in a listener with a considerably different
ideology, he said that he had been opposed to the idea of a Free Trade
Agreement with the United States alone. At least a third party had to
be found, and that third party ended up being Mexico, with which Canada
often shares stances vis  vis the United States maneuvers. He also
said that in the year 2005 there would be 34, and hopefully 35 (an
obvious reference to Cuba), to balance the United States power.

At one point he told me that Canada was extremely sensitive about its
independence with regard to the United States, that it was very
im****tant for it to preserve its independence from the United States,
and that its policy was to sustain close and friendly but very
independent relations with that country. He proudly informed me that
Canada was now competing with the Silicon Valley in California, where
all the high technology is produced.

The second meeting with Chr(c)tien and his delegation took place at
night. There was a dinner, and a broader exchange. At a certain point,
when the subject arose of the plot to assassinate me on Margarita
Island, a plot organized by the infamous Cuban-American National
Foundation, he commented that this was often the cause of major
difficulties; the incident with the aircraft, he said, was aimed at
creating a problem when the U.S. government was ready to take a
positive step in relation to Cuba. I then described to him about the
Cuban Adjustment Act, and its absurd and irrational consequences.

We also discussed the Helms-Burton Act. He told me that the United
States is totally isolated with regard to this legislation. He said
that he personally was the first to issue a statement after it was
passed. He was meeting with the Prime ministers of the Caribbean at the
time, and together they issued the first declaration against the
Helms-Burton Act.

As for the incident with the aircraft in 1996, used as justification
for the signing of the Helms-Burton Act, I told him that he could find
an almost complete account of the incident in the January 26, 1998
edition of The New Yorker.

When he asked me about the FTAA, I told him that we would have to be
patient, and wait to see what happened in Latin America with this Free
Trade Agreement, what the consequences would be not only for our
countries, but also for the rest of the world, as well as the tricks
that would be used to impose a Multilateral Agreement on Investments. I
also said that these issues are a source of deep concern to us and they
should be thoroughly studied. I talked to him about concrete aspects of
our economy, and the measures adopted to cope with the special period.
I pointed out that it would be impossible for many countries in Latin
America and the Caribbean to do without tariffs, because some of them
obtain up to 80% of their budgetary revenues this way. When I asked him
if Canada was harmed in any way by European integration and the
creation of the Euro currency, he said that it was not because 82% of
Canadas trade is with the United States amounting to 1 billion per day.

For my part, I told him frankly that I believed the Latin America
countries would benefit from the success of European integration and
European competition with the United States for markets and investments
in Latin America. It is better to have two, three, four major economic
powers, so that the world economy does not depend solely on one
powerful country and one currency.

We even talked about Canadian nuclear energy technology and the
possibility of our acquiring Canadian reactors in the future, although
at this point, this is neither the best nor the most economical option
for the rapid growth in electrical power generation that we need with
certain urgency.

I also spoke to him about all of the Mexicans dying on the U.S. border,
where many more people now die every year than the total number who
died throughout the almost 30 years of existence of the Berlin Wall.

There were very few major issues not covered in our talks.

Then, in view of the propitious atmosphere, and mindful of Canadas
involvement in the political events in Haiti, currently in a process of
normalization, and Canadas presence in that country, I pointed out
that Haiti was a close neighbor and one of the poorest countries in the
world, with terrible health indicators, including the prevalence of
AIDS, which threatened to become a human catastrophe. I said that
together we could set an example of cooperation by working out a joint
health care program for Haiti where Cuba would send the medical
personnel, and Canada would provide the necessary medicines and
equipment.

He asked me if I had discussed this with the Haitian president. I said
that I could not offer him such a thing without coordinating it first
with the Canadian government, but I was certain that they would accept.

He spoke of his special interest in French speaking countries, given
the fact that an im****tant part of the Canadian population is
francophone, and he was therefore interested in projects for Haiti. He
said he would study the proposal, and I said I would talk to the
Haitian government.

It would appear that this idea immediately brought another to his mind.
He proceeded to tell me that he had a proposal to make concerning
another joint project: a joint project with Angola and Mozambique to
remove anti-personal landmines. You can contribute the workers, we will
contribute the money, he said. The other countries had already signed
the agreement, he added. We indicated that the only people who could do
this work were members of the armed forces. He responded that we Cubans
had expert personnel and that they, the Canadians, would supply the
money for the project, since the budget for it had already been
approved.

Numerous countries had committed funds for clearing landmines, he
explained, including Japan, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and others, and
since we had the experts, he thought that the Cubans could do the job.

He undoubtedly did not realize how offensive his proposal could be: a
humanitarian cooperation project in which Canada and other rich
countries provide the money, while we take on the risk of mutilation
and death of our soldiers. Perhaps he never viewed it this way, or was
not well aware of what he was proposing, but I had the strong
impression that he wanted to hire us as mercenaries.

For a moment I felt overwhelmed by a sense of outrage, recalling the
selfless spirit of sacrifice, the clean and noble history of a people
who had confronted a brutal economic war and special period ready to
die for their ideas. Could anyone pretend to take advantage of this
situation to try tempting us with such a mission?

In view of my interlocutors character, and the friendly, candid,
trusting and even good-humored atmosphere in which "I remember" our
talks took place, I still believe that what he said and the way he said
it were not a conscious act of what could be objectively interpreted
from his words.

I explained that in Angola it was still difficult to clear mines
because the armed bandits supplied by the United States and South
Africa were still around; all of these landmines had been provided to
Savimbi by the United States and apartheid-ruled South Africa.
Moreover, given the risk of mutilation and death, how could we explain
to our people Cuban participation in such a program?

With great composure, I proposed what I considered a reasonable
solution: we were willing to train all of the necessary personnel from
Angola, Mozambique and any other country affected by such problems to
carry out this task in their own territories.

This subject took up almost all of the last part of our second
exchange, although the conversation continued for several minutes more
in the same friendly and cordial atmosphere. We had addressed the
unfortunate issue calmly and reasonably, and our viewpoints were
listened to and seemingly understood and accepted by the Canadian
delegation.

The bases for two major cooperation projects with third countries had
been agreed upon in principle, and work would continue on these bases.

I carefully observed the Canadian prime ministers character and
personality. He is a pleasant conversationalist and has a good sense of
humor, and one can strike up an interesting exchange with him on
various subjects. He is concerned about certain problems in the world
today, and shows great enthusiasm for his favorite projects. He is
acquainted with many political figures, knows how to make use of his
experience, and enjoys telling stories that are generally timely and
interesting. He appeared to be sincerely patriotic. He is loyal to his
country and proud of it. He is a fanatical believer in the capitalist
mode of production, as if it were a monotheistic religion, and in the
naive idea that it is the only solution for all of the worlds
countries, on every continent, in every era, in every clime or region.
He was educated in this belief, and I am not sure if someone with this
belief can fully comprehend the realities of todays world.

I knew Pierre Trudeau, an exceptional statesman, an extremely modest
and humble individual, a profound thinker, and a man of peace. I am
certain that he understood the world very well, and that he understood
Cuba, too.

Later, there were other activities. I attended a reception hosted by
Chr(c)tien in the patio of the Canadian embassy. He was cheerful,
talkative, in a good mood. He would be meeting with Clinton soon. I
accompanied him to the air****t. As we were approaching the air****t, I
told him to give Clinton my regards, and to tell him that we harbored
no feelings of hostility towards him. I calibrated my words carefully.
More than anything, it was a courtesy to a visitor, but I paid dearly
for it.

Some time later, I received a handwritten letter from Chr(c)tien
informing me that he had passed on to Clinton my wishes for better
relations with him. That was not exactly what I had said. That is not
my style; it does not coincide with the stance I have adopted
throughout my life. It could be construed as a ridiculous plea to the
powerful President of the United States. I began writing my own letter
to Chr(c)tien, explaining that this was not my message. It was an awkward
situation. It was not easy to reconcile my annoyance with the precise
terms needed to write this letter, and in a certain way my
clarification became, at the same time, a kind of criticism of our
friend. I almost managed it, but I finally gave up the idea, and even
put away the draft of the letter, which might still be found in some
old notebook; I had forgotten all about the matter until today. I could
not even reciprocate his kind gesture of writing in his own hand.
Perhaps he thought I was being rude.

Months went by, and there was no news about the Haitian project. For
our part, we were merely waiting for a brief response. Along came
Hurricane Georges. It devastated the Dominican Republic and struck
neighboring Haiti, protected only by the 3000-meter-high Dominican
mountain range near the border, which acted as a windbreaker. It then
moved on to Cuba.

When the last gales of Hurricane Georges were still blowing, in the
north of Western Cuba, on the rainy night of September 28, during a
speech I gave at the closing ceremony of the 5th Congress of the
Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, I said:

"I am asking the international community: Do you want to help this
country which, not so long ago, experienced a military invasion and
intervention? Do you want to save lives? Do you want to give proof of a
humanitarian spirit? We are talking now of a humanitarian spirit and we
are talking about the rights of human beings.

"... we know how 15,000 lives can be saved every year, how
approximately 25,000 lives in Haiti can be saved every year. It is
known that the annual infant mortality rate is 135 per 1000 live
births. I repeat: 135 children below five years of age for every 1000
live births.

[...]

"Based on the premise that the government and people of Haiti would
welcome an im****tant and vital aid package in that field, we are
proposing that if a country like Canada, which has close links with
Haiti "or a country like France which has close historical and cultural
relations with Haiti, or the European Union countries which are
integrating and now have the Euro, or Japan" would provide the
medications, we are prepared to provide the doctors for that program;
all the doctors needed, even if we have to send an entire graduating
class or the equivalent.

[...]

"Haiti does not need soldiers, it does not need invasions of soldiers;
what Haiti needs are invasions of doctors to start with. Haiti needs,
moreover, invasions of millions of dollars for its development."

November 1998: seven months had passed, and there was still no word
from Chr(c)tien about the projects we had discussed. Canadian Health
Minister Alan Rock visited Cuba. I met with him. He had just met in
Canada with Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, the South African health
minister. He arrived here truly impressed by what she had told him
about the work of Cuban doctors in South African villages.

I explained to him in detail the joint cooperation project we were
proposing. He appeared to be a sensitive and capable man, who
understood the potential and im****tance of such projects. I asked him
to expedite the steps required for the joint cooperation project with
Haiti, as we were still waiting for Canadas response to the proposal
that had been made not only personally to its Prime Minister, but also
publicly. He promised to submit a project to the Premier and the
cabinet.

On December 4, Cuba sent the first emergency brigade to help the
victims of Hurricane Georges, on its own. Medical groups continued to
arrive in the following weeks, until they totaled 12, comprising 388
Cuban collaborators. Meanwhile, our Canadian friends did not show any
sign of life. The medical project that we had proposed to carry out
jointly with Canada was already underway, thanks to the efforts of
Cuba, the Haitian government, and the sup****t of non-governmental
organizations.

In late February, the Cuban minister of foreign affairs re****ted that
he had learned through unofficial sources that the Canadian government
would donate 300,000 dollars to the medical project in Haiti.
Naturally, we were very happy with this news.

Over 10 months had gone by without an official response from Canada,
then, on March 4, we received a genuinely surprising response. The
Canadian minister of foreign affairs, Mr. Lloyd Axworthy, sent a letter
to the Cuban foreign minister, Roberto Robaina, in which he stated,
among other things:

"... I have been informed of legislation recently introduced in the
Cuban National Assembly on February 16, 1999, entitled "Law for the
Protection of Cubas National Independence and Economy," intended to
target increased criminality and subversive acts."

[...]

"I have asked my officials to prepare an assessment of recent Cuban
measures, including the forthcoming sentencing of the members of the
Internal Dissidence Working Group, in order to determine how this will
impact on the broad series of activities that we have undertaken under
the bilateral Joint Declaration. Until this assessment is complete, I
am asking my officials to refrain from undertaking new joint
initiatives. I will be writing to my Cabinet colleagues to appraise
them of this situation in order that they reflect on their own programs
of bilateral cooperation with Cuba. As of now, I have put on hold the
joint assessment by my department, CIDA and Health Canada, of the Cuban
request to undertake third country medical cooperation in Haiti."

[...]

"The days ahead will be im****tant in reviewing whether Cuba will choose
the policy of engagement and integration into the global community or
continue in the uncertain direction of recent days. I hope that you
will be able to provide a signal that can help clarify Cubas
intentions, in particular, such a signal would be helpful in ensuring
that recent developments do not become an undue preoccupation at the
Commission on Human Rights in Geneva."

Was it a coincidence? A pretext to justify the heavy pressures from its
neighbors to the south? Total insensitivity to the tragedy in Haiti? I
do not want to pass judgment. But, how do you explain that ten months
had gone by, and that during all that time, when the events that
allegedly provoked such a drastic decision and insolent letter had not
yet occurred, there had been no official response whatsoever?

Although I do not want to offend anyone, not even the distinguished
author of this letter, it is impossible to ignore the arrogant,
overbearing, interfering and vindictive tone in which this letter was
written.

What bothered me most, personally, were not the punitive measures and
threats against Cuba "after 42 years we are used to such treatment" but
rather the fact that the 300,000 dollars would never reach the sick
people in Haiti --and I do not even know if they were U.S. dollars or
Canadian dollar, worth 64 cents of a U.S. dollar according to the
exchange rate yesterday, April 24, 2001, since I have not had time to
find out what it was worth on March 15 of that year. To me it was
inconceivable that they would punish us at the cost of the lives of
perhaps thousands of Haitian children, lives that could have been saved
because at that point there were at least 25,000 children dying in
Haiti every year, and the majority of those deaths could have been
prevented with simple vaccines that could have been bought with those
dollars, whether U.S. or Canadian. Undoubtedly, someone had made a big
mistake.

I had believed the unofficial information passed on to me from the
Foreign Ministry, because it seemed so plainly logical. At that point
in time, I could not even determine if it was true or not.

There is no longer any need for regrets. Today there are 469 Cuban
doctors and health care workers providing their services in Haiti.
During the last two years and five months, until April of this year, a
total of 861 Cuban collaborators have been through Haiti, and their
services have not cost the Haitian people a penny. They provide health
care to 5,072,000 of the countrys 7,803,230 inhabitants, or 62% of the
Haitian population. They have saved the lives of many thousands of
people, and relieved the pain or restored the health of hundreds of
thousands more.

This year marked the beginning of the first stage of a massive
vaccination campaign against eight preventable diseases. All of the
vaccines have been supplied by Japan, with the participation of UNICEF,
and Cuba will be responsible for implementing the program with the
Cuban health care personnel already working in the country, who will
reach 600 in number this year. We also know that in the future, through
the combined efforts of France, Japan, Cuba and Haiti, a new
vaccination campaign will be undertaken, and that as a result, in five
years, this extremely poor Third World country will have attained a 95%
immunization coverage.

With the victory achieved by Brazil and South Africa against the
excessive costs of AIDS drugs, I believe that the day is not far off
when the Haitians can also be protected against this terrible scourge,
with the sup****t of governments willing to contribute financial
resources, United Nations agencies, and non-governmental organizations.

Haiti is not the only country where the Cuban people are cooperating in
health care projects based on the same principle. There are now 15 of
them. These projects are being carried out with the cooperation of 61
NGOs and the participation of over 2272 Cuban health care workers, of
whom 1775 are doctors.

Today, nobody can sabotage Cubas cooperation with other countries in
the Third World. Actions, not words, rapid responses, not waiting until
kingdom come while there are human beings in poor countries dying every
day and every hour. Our small country also provides special sup****t for
the training of doctors with a spirit of sacrifice, solidarity and
selflessness. Progress is possible; overcoming calamities and
alleviating the human tragedy afflicting hundreds of millions of people
are not unattainable goals.

Today, I am thankful for the talks I had with Chr(c)tien. They have
served to prove that such initiatives are possible, as is joint
cooperation with the participation of two, three or many countries.
They also demonstrate that the hours that both he and I invested in
these talks were not useless, and I followed his advice, working even
harder for human rights, for saving lives, and trying to deactivate the
gigantic anti-personal landmines that are placing our world on the
brink of devastating explosions.

These small examples of what any small country can do carry more weight
than any major agreements that the powerful make null and void, or any
acts of demagoguery and publicity-seeking for the sake of personal
vanity and ambition.

I am sure that Trudeau would never have said that he spent four hours
giving advice to someone who had not asked for it; nor would he seek
excuses for excluding an honorable country from a meeting that it did
not ask to attend, or ask it to sign an agreement that it would never
have signed.

History will say who is right.

                                 *
=================================================================
 NY Transfer News Collective     *    A Service of Blythe Systems
           Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
            Our main website:   http://www.blythe.org
   List Archives:       http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
   Subscribe:     http://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
=================================================================

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFHbASyiz2i76ou9wQRAq6xAJ0c12aLaFlF9yNC/7JSlZ+A35YxrgCgh7NF
LcV4iEdAc3+d8dDX27kdHXA=
=mkQu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----