Fidel Castro: Contradictions
Between Obama´s Politics and Ethics
Havana - Cuban Revolution leader Fidel Castro reiterated his
questioning to the US political system that denies every principle
of justice and formulated some questions to President Barack Obama.
In his Thursday Cubadebate article entitled "Contradictions Between
Obama´s Politics and Ethics," Fidel Castro wrote about the
statesman's willingness to renounce his prerogative, to order the
assassination of a foreign political adversary usually coming from
an underdeveloped country.
The revolutionary leader also investigates if Obama knew about
actions against Cuba by successive US administrations, included the
mercenary Bay of Pigs invasion, the terror campaigns, the
introduction to our territory of a great amount of weapons and
ammunition, and other similar actions.
Fidel Castro asks President Obama whether he is aware that for
decades Cuba was the victim of deliberately introduced viruses and
bacteria carrying diseases and plagues which affected people,
animals and plants, and bacterium, as well as the imposition of a
disrupting Cuban Adjustment Act and the criminal blockade lasting
almost 50 years.
Following is the full text of Fidel Castro's reflection.
REFLECTIONS BY COMRADE FIDEL
CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN OBAMA’S POLITICS AND ETHICS
A few days ago I referred to some of Obama’s ideas which point to
his role in a system that denies every principle of justice.
Some throw their hands up in horror if anything is said to criticize
the important personality, even if it is done with decency and
respect. This is usually accompanied by subtle and not so subtle
darts from those with the means to throw and transform them into the
elements of media terror imposed on the peoples to sustain the
unsustainable.
Every criticism I make is always construed as an attack, an
accusation and other similar qualifiers reflecting callousness and
discourtesy towards the person involved.
This time I’d rather address some questions of many that could be
raised and that the new President of the United States should
answer.
The following for example:
Whether or not he renounces his prerogative as President of the
United States --that his predecessors with few exceptions exercised
as a right per se-- to order the assassination of a foreign
political adversary usually coming from an underdeveloped country?
By any chance, has any of his many assistants ever informed him of
the sinister actions carried out by former presidents from the days
of Eisenhower through the years 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965,
1966, and 1967 against Cuba, including the mercenary Bay of Pigs [Giron]
invasion, the terror campaigns, the introduction to our territory of
a great amount of weapons and ammunitions, and other similar
actions?
It is not my intention to blame the current President of the United
States, Barack Obama, for actions conducted by former presidents
when he had not been born or when he was just a 6-years-old boy born
in Hawaii to a black Moslem Kenyan fathers and a white Christian
American mother. On the contrary, this is an exceptional merit of
the U.S. society and I am the first to admit it.
Is President Obama aware that for decades our country was the victim
of deliberately introduced viruses and bacteria carrying diseases
and plagues which affected people, animals and plants? Does he know
that some of them like the Hemorrhagic Dengue Fever later became a
scourge that took the lives of thousands of children in Latin
America and that other plagues impinge on the economy of the peoples
of the Caribbean and the rest of the continent as collateral damages
that have yet to be removed?
Does he know that several politically submissive Latin American
countries, which are today embarrassed by all the damages they
caused, also took part in such terrorist and economically harmful
actions?
Why is our country the only one in the world enduring the imposition
of a disrupting Cuban Adjustment Act which promotes trafficking in
persons and other events that take the lives of people, mostly women
and children?
Was it fair to impose on our people an economic blockade lasting
almost 50 years?
Was it right to arbitrarily demand from the world to accept the
extraterritorial application of this economic blockade which can
only bring hunger and shortages to the people?
The United States cannot meet its vital needs without extracting
large mineral resources from a great number of countries often
limited in their exports of them by the intermediate process of
refining. In general, when it is convenient to the interests of the
empire, these products are traded by big transnational companies
operating with Yankee capital.
Will that country renounce such privileges?
Would that renunciation be compatible with the developed capitalist
system?
When Mr. Obama promises to make large investments to be self-reliant
in oil, despite the fact that his country is today the largest
market in the world, what could the future be of those countries
whose main revenues come from exporting that energy as many of them
lack any other significant source of income?
After the crisis, once the competition and the fight over the
markets and sources of employment is unleashed again, as it is
usually the case among those who are better off and more efficient
in the monopoly of that technology with sophisticated means of
production, what possibilities will be left to the not developed
countries dreaming of industrialization?
The efficiency of the new vehicles manufactured by the auto industry
notwithstanding, will they use the procedure demanded by the ecology
to protect Humanity from the increasing deterioration of the
climate?
Will the blind philosophy of the market be able to replace that
which only rationality could promote?
Obama promises to mint enormous amounts of money to foster the quest
for technologies that can multiply the production of energy whose
absence would paralyze modern societies.
He includes the nuclear power plants among the sources of energy he
promises to hastily develop. These are already opposed by a high
number of people due to the high risks of accidents with disastrous
consequences for life, the atmosphere and human food. It is
absolutely impossible to prevent the occurrence of some of these
accidents.
Modern industry has already contaminated all the seas on the planet
with the release of toxins, even without such accidental disasters.
Can the conciliation of such contradictory and antagonistic
interests be rightly promised without transgressing ethics?
The U.S. House of Representatives with a Democratic majority
launched the extremely protectionist slogan of “buy US goods”, to
please the unions that supported his campaign. This tramples on a
basic principle of the World Trade Organization, since every nation
in the world, be they big or small, dream of their development based
on trading goods and services; however, only the big and rich among
them have the privilege to survive to realize such dream.
The Republicans in the United States, discredited by the actions of
the reckless Bush administration, soon reacted against the measures
taken by Obama to please his allies in the unions. Thus is wasted
the credit given by the voters to the new President of the United
States.
As an old politician and fighter I commit no sin by modestly
exposing these ideas.
As hundreds of news from the political, scientific and technological
circles are published every day, many questions could be raised for
which there are not easy answers.
Fidel Castro Ruz February 4, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
