PART II (FINAL)
After Bruno concluded his intervention around noon on
October 26, the session, as usual, allowed some time for delegations to
make an explanation of vote, before the draft Resolution was finally
voted.
The first speaker was the US Ambassador Ronald D. Godard, Senior Area Advisor for Western Hemisphere
Affairs, who was heading his country’s delegation. His unusual speech
spares me the analysis that would show that the denunciations made by
the minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba were strictly fair. His own
assertions are sufficient to reveal the cynical essence of that
country’s policy.
“The United States […] is firmly committed to supporting the
desire of the Cuban people to freely determine their country’s future.”
“The United States of America […] has the
sovereign right to conduct its economic relationship with another
country. The U.S. economic relationship with Cuba is a bilateral issue
[…] meant to encourage a more open environment in Cuba and increased
respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.”
“We should not lose sight of that in a debate mired in
rhetorical arguments of the past and focused on tactical differences—a
debate that does nothing to help the Cuban people.”
“My delegation regrets that the delegation from Cuba continues,
year after year, to inappropriately and incorrectly label U.S. trade
restrictions on Cuba as an act of genocide […] the United States holds
no restriction on humanitarian aid to Cuba …”
“The United States in 2009 […] authorized $237
million in private humanitarian assistance in the form of gift parcels
filled with food and other basic necessities, non-agricultural
humanitarian donations, and medical donations.”
“In April 2009, President Obama stated “the United
States seeks a new beginning with Cuba,” but “there is a longer journey
that must be traveled to overcome the decades of mistrust.” […] we have
initiated talks to re-establish direct mail service between the United
States and Cuba, and we have increased artistic and cultural
exchanges…”
“President Obama has stated publicly that the release of
political prisoners and economic reforms are positive for the Cuban
people. The United States hopes to see the fulfillment of these
promises soon as well as a broader opening by the Cuban government to
signal its willingness to engage constructively with its own people.
[…] it is the view of the United States that a new era in U.S.-Cuban
relations cannot be fully realized until the Cuban people enjoy the
internationally-recognized political and economic freedoms that this
body has done so much to defend in other countries around the world.”
“My delegation will vote against this resolution. Indeed, the
United States believes that it is high time for this body to focus its
energies on supporting the Cuban people in their quest to freely decide
their own future and move beyond the rhetorical posturing that this
resolution represents.
”Thank you, Mr. President.”
Soon after that, the head of the Nicaraguan delegation,
whose people deeply suffered the dirty war imposed by Ronald Reagan
which took a toll on so many human lives, made her explanation of vote.
She made a forceful speech.
The draft resolution was put to the vote and 187 countries voted in
favor; two countries –the United States and Israel, its inseparable
ally in the commission of genocidal actions- voted against and three
countries –Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau- abstained.
Not even one of the 192 UN member States was absent from the vote.
After the voting was over, the representative of Belgium, on behalf
of the European Union, an ally of the United States, was the first to
speak among all the delegations that were willing to make an
explanation of vote.
Then, sixteen countries with an outstanding role in international
politics took the floor to explain why they had voted in favor of the
Resolution. They spoke in the following order: Uruguay, Bolivia,
Angola, Myanmar, Surinam, Belarus, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Laos,
Tanzania, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Vietnam, Nigeria, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines and the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea.
Allow me to remind you that many countries abstained
from taking the floor at the request of our own delegation, in order to
avoid the voting process from taking too long -to the detriment of the
best timing to report on the debate- and the exhausting effort meant by
the participation of a higher number of speakers. In spite of that,
37 delegations spoke in crystal-clear and accurate terms in favor of
the just draft resolution that had been adopted for the nineteenth time
by the UN General Assembly. This was the longest and most vigorous
debate on this delicate and important item.
Cuba’s reply was heard in the voice of the minister for Foreign Affairs of our country at 4:17 p.m.
The essence of what he said –although almost his entire speech was essential- was the following:
“Mr. President;
“I highly appreciate the words expressed by the
thirteen speakers and the presence of all the delegations attending
this unexpected afternoon session.
“Regarding what was said by the representatives of the United States and the European Union I have to say the following:
“This is the nineteenth time that the US
delegation repeats the same argument. The blockade is an act of
economic warfare and an act of genocide.
“Hasn’t the State Department done its homework? Hasn’t it examined this issue?
“Last year I read here the Articles of the relevant Conventions…”
“I already read here the famous Memorandum that was drafted by Mr. Mallory.
“These are not “ideological arguments” of the
past. The blockade is an old ice floe reminiscent of the Cold War. The
point is not the rhetoric but the act of aggression against Cuba.
“The purpose of the United States is not to
support or assist the Cuban people. It is known that the blockade
causes hardships and sufferings. It does not cause deaths because the
Cuban Revolution prevents that from happening. How could anybody
explain the fact that Cuban children are punished in the way that has
been described here? If there is really a will to support or assist the
Cuban people, the only thing that needs to be done is to lift the
blockade immediately.
“Why are American citizens forbidden to visit
Cuba and receive first-hand information? Why are there restrictions on
the so called “people to people” contacts?
“The pretexts used to apply the blockade have
been changing. First it was our alleged participation in the
Sino-Soviet axis; then the so-called export of the Revolution to Latin
America; then the presence of Cuban troops in Africa that were there to
contribute to defeat the Apartheid regime, preserve the independence
of Angola and attain the independence of Namibia.
“Afterwards there was a manipulation of the
human rights issue. But the blockade is a brutal violation of the
human rights of Cubans.
“We are ready to discuss about human rights
violations. We could begin speaking about the concentration camp in
Guantánamo, where inmates are submitted to tortures and there is no
habeas corpus. That is the realm of “Military Commissions” outside the
rule of law. Could the US delegation explain what happened at the Abu
Ghraib, Bagram and Nama camps?
“Were the responsible indicted? Were the members
of the European governments who authorized the creation of secret
prisons in Europe and the secret renditions by the CIA indicted? Could
the European Union representative shed more light on that issue?
“We could speak about Wikileaks. Why don’t you
tell us something about the atrocities described in the more than 75
000 documents about the crimes in Afghanistan and in the 400 000
documents about Iraq?”
“The changes in Cuba are only incumbent to
Cubans. We will change everything that needs to be changed, for the
benefit of Cubans, but we will not ask the US government’s opinion. We
freely chose our destiny. That is why we made the Revolution. Those
changes will be made in a sovereign way; they will not be “gestures”.
We know that the only thing the US would consider sufficient would be
the establishment of a pro-Yankee government in Cuba; but that is not
going to happen.”
Does the United States want to see cooperation
between their universities and ours? Let them eliminate the
restrictions on the exchange between academics, students, scientists
as well as cultural exchanges; let them allow the signing of
agreements between those institutions.
“Do they want to see cooperation against
drug-trafficking, terrorism, traffic in persons, natural disasters and
postal services? Let them respond at least to the proposals that we
presented to them over a year ago without any condition whatsoever.”
“A USAID high official confirmed yesterday to
the journalist Tracey Eaton that, during the last period, they have
conveyed 15.6 million dollars to –and I quote- “individuals on the
ground in Cuba”. This is how they call their mercenaries.
“Illegal radio and TV broadcasts remain the same.
“The Five Cuban Antiterrorists continue serving
an unjust imprisonment sentence. Recently and for no reason Gerardo
Hernández Nordelo was placed in solitary confinement and he was denied
medical assistance.
“Confessed international terrorists like Orlando
Bosh and Posada Carriles are walking freely down the streets of Miami
and even carrying out their political activities there.”
“The blockade is abusively extraterritorial and affects all countries represented here. It is not a bilateral issue.
“Mr. President;
“I have very little to add to what was said by the representative of the European Union here.
“The European Union has no moral or political authority whatsoever to make any criticism regarding human rights.
“The EU would rather take care of its brutal
anti-immigrant policy, the deportation of ethnic minority citizens, the
violent repression against demonstrators and the increasing social
exclusion of its unemployed and low-income sectors.
“The European Parliament, in a shameless and infamous way, devotes itself to reward the US government paid stooges in Cuba.”
“But the European Union is delusional when it
thinks it could normalize relations with Cuba while the Common Position
is still in place.
“Thank you, very much.”
We all expected to hear the rejoinder by the
US representative to Bruno’s reply. The best thing he and his
delegation –which did not engage in the contemptuous gesture of leaving
the room- could do was to firmly withstand that volley of irrefutable
arguments. Cuba’s reply left them paralyzed. I had the feeling that
they were gradually fading away until they completely disappeared from
the scene.
During the 50 years of blockade the superpower has not been able to
defeat the Cuban Revolution- nor will it be. I did not focus on the
exercise of counting the number of votes in favor of or against the
“Resolution”. Instead I observed the warmth and the convictions of
those who spoke against that unjust and arbitrary measure. It would be
wrong to believe that this measure could stay in place forever. That
was an uprising. Peoples are sick and tired of aggressions,
plundering, abuses and deceptions.
Never had the attending delegations expressed more vigorously their
protest against the mockery meant by the contempt against the just
denunciation by the international community against an act of genocide
that is reiterated year after year. They are aware of the fact that the
most serious thing is the systematic plundering of their natural
resources imposed on most of the peoples in this planet, the ever
increasing lack of foodstuffs, the destruction of the environment, the
increasing number of genocidal wars against other peoples, with the
support of military bases placed in more than 75 countries and the
increasing risk of a suicidal war for all peoples of the world.
The United Nations can not exist without the presence of the peoples
that have been calling for an end to the blockade. What would be the
use of that body, which was founded at a time when an overwhelming
majority of countries were not even independent, without our presence?
What rights do we have if we can not even call for an end to the
blockade imposed against a small country? One way or another they have
subordinated us to the interests of the United States and NATO, a
belligerent military organization that wastes more than one trillion
dollars every year in wars and weapons, an amount of money that would
be more than enough to satisfy the basic needs of all peoples of the
world.
Many Third World countries are forced to find solutions regardless
of what might happen to others; it is like walking on a treadmill that
is moving in reverse at a higher speed.
We need a truly democratic United Nations, not an
imperial domain where the overwhelming majority of peoples does not
count. The United Nations, founded before the end of the Second World
War, is already exhausted. Let us not allow them to impose on us the
ridiculous role of gathering once again within 12 months so that they
could laugh at us. Let us make our demand be felt. Let us save the
life of our species before it is too late.
Fidel Castro Ruz
November 1st, 2010
5:53 p.m.
