The EU is the biggest “regime change” ever performed by Anglo-Saxon gang of the “five eyes” led by USA/UK. Is that any surprise? Of course not for a bunch of countries that accepted to live under foreign occupation since around 1939. I guess that is why they love using word “freedom” so much – some sort of nostalgia.
This disaster did not have to happen, it was entirely man made. In a saner world, the EU, Russia and the Ukraine could have negotiated a tripartite deal which would have given the Ukraine the role which geography and history have given it: to be a bridge between Russia and the EU. But the EU categorically rejected this option, several times, simply declaring that “the Ukraine is a sovereign state and Russia has no say in Ukrainian matters”.
What had to happen did happen. The EU, being the chain of weak links it is, did eventually give in, and the Dutch people were the first one to vote against the association with the Ukraine. Of course, the Euroburocrats can now find some reason to declare the vote invalid, they can declare that some law was violated, they can even negotiate some minor change the to association agreement, or they might even decide that they can simply ignore this vote. But none of that will make any difference: the undeniable truth is that the Ukrainians are not welcome in the EU, not as associates and even less so as members. So no EU, no NATO no “European future” for the Ukraine. The entire hot air balloon which has been fueling the naïve and ugly hopes of the Euromaidan has burst and the Euro-Ukrainian project is crash and burning like the Hindenburg.
This disaster did not have to happen, it was entirely man made. In a saner world, the EU, Russia and the Ukraine could have negotiated a tripartite deal which would have given the Ukraine the role which geography and history have given it: to be a bridge between Russia and the EU. But the EU categorically rejected this option, several times, simply declaring that “the Ukraine is a sovereign state and Russia has no say in Ukrainian matters”. This zero sum game was forced on Russia against her will but now it is the EU which has lost it all, even if this is by no means a victory for Russia either. The sad reality is that everybody has lost. Now the EU has to accept the total defeat of its Ukrainian policy, Russia is now alone looking at a dying failed state right across her border, while the Ukraine is simply falling apart and dying a painful death. Will the Eurobureaucrats accept this outcome?
Probably not.
They will do what they have always done. They will lie, deny, minimize and, most importantly, pretend like nothing has happened. They will say that 60% of 30% of a small EU nation do not get to make decisions for the entire continent. Or they will declare that instead of just an old fashioned “association” the EU will offer the Ukraine something much better – a “heartfelt friendship” maybe. Or a “love eternal”. Or even a “continental brotherhood”. But that will all be in vain because the people of Europe are clearly weary of the Ukronazis, even their Polish “friends” are now considering building a wall of their own, to keep their “Ukrainian friends” out of Poland; feel the love!
Please follow the link to the original article to finish reading
Mainstream media, or any other media, to the best of my knowledge, has not published any articles relating to the high-tech development that Russia is going to build in many countries around the world.
This technology will not be using newly-mined uranium, but nuclear waste, which is recycled and made harmless. Enough nuclear waste has already been accumulated to enable these power stations to run for the next 300 years.
At the moment nuclear waste cannot be safely disposed of and has a life expectancy of some 1,000 years or more creating extremely dangerous areas where it has been buried or of more concern, thrown out to sea in full fathom five, disintegrating concrete blocks.
Due to the patent that Rosatom has on no nuclear waste and the fuel of the future, they have and are becoming world leaders and providers on a global scale. This technology can also be extended to include upgrading current and outdated nuclear plants and bring them in line with making hazardous waste harmless rather than a liability.
The Russian nuclear industry
The Russian nuclear industry is an undisputed leader in advanced nuclear technologies, providing innovative engineering and construction solutions for nuclear reactors and production of nuclear fuel. Since 1954, when the world’s first nuclear power plant was launched in Obninsk, ROSATOM has amassed a wealth of experience and acquired extensive competencies in large-scale nuclear projects. Russia possesses the most sophisticated nuclear enrichment and reactor engineering technologies – pressurized water reactors designed by Russian engineers have proved their reliability through thousands of reactor years of accident-free operation.
Today the Russian nuclear industry comprises over 400 companies with over 250,000 employees operating in the nuclear fuel cycle, power generation, and R&D sectors. With its 10 nuclear power plants (34 operating power units with 25.2 GW of installed capacity), which generate about 18% of total power output, and the world’s only nuclear icebreaker fleet, Russia is focused on development of the Northern Sea Route and further expansion of nuclear power generation. Recent achievements in these areas include construction of 9 new nuclear reactors (Novovoronezh NPP-2, Leningrad NPP-2, the world’s first floating NPP and others), an additional fourth power unit at Beloyarsk NPP, and a new nuclear icebreaker flagship laid down in 2013 at the Baltic shipyard in Saint Petersburg. Its launch will mark a new stage in exploration of the Arctic region.
International nuclear projects are another focus area of ROSATOM, which is now engaged in the construction of 29 new nuclear reactors in Kudankulam (India), Akkuyu (Turkey), Belarus, Vietnam, Bangladesh and China.
Development of the nuclear industry is seen as a top national priority. It is perceived to be a key sector of the Russian economy, essential for national energy security. The nuclear industry drives demand for other products and services and therefore stimulates engineering, steel making, geology, construction and other sectors of the national economy.
Russian expertise
State-owned Rosatom says that Russia’s nuclear industry amounts to over 400 companies and more than 255,000 employees working across the fuel cycle, power generation and R&D sectors, 34 operating power facilities with an installed capacity of 25.2GW, and the only nuclear-powered icebreaker fleet in the world.
“Rosatom has one highly significant advantage – its the only company in the world which can provide the industry’s complete range of products.”
A succession of initiatives from Vladimir Putin has helped establish the continued development of this industry as a top national priority, both as a means to ensure future domestic energy security and as a key economic sector in its own right, with international projects forming a big focus area for growth. All of the thousands of reactor-years of experience gained since Obninsk – including the safety lessons learnt in the wake of the disaster at Chernobyl – have been effectively packaged to create a unique selling point for Russian expertise on foreign markets. While many critics felt that Fukushima would finally herald the demise of nuclear power, it seems that quite the reverse has turned out to be true. With its appeal now fast growing, particularly in Asia, Russia has been wooing prospective clients with a range of tempting incentives.
BOO
A business model known as ‘BOO’ (build, own, operate) has been one of Rosatom’s most successful ploys in this respect. Offered through its export division, Atomstroyexport, BOO was first used five years ago in a deal struck with Turkey and has featured in other agreements since. In effect, the purchasing country simply has to provide a suitable site and sign up to buying the electricity produced, with Russia covering the costs of building and operating the power plant. Particularly for developing countries which cannot afford the high up-front capital investment, the attraction of the BOO model is clear, and there are significant direct benefits for Russia too, not least in terms of the employment it supports.
Brilliant strategic move?
However, there is another side to consider – the push towards exporting nuclear power represents both a move to diversify income now, and a hedge against the future.
By channelling the income stream gained from oil and gas sales into long-term assets, the goal is to cement the country’s future role as a major energy nation. With even Russia’s vast hydrocarbon reserves set to run out eventually – assuming that the world does not abandon fossil fuels altogether, as some suggest it must, long before they do – recycling O&G profits into nuclear power generation against a background of rising demand makes good business sense.
Writing in January 2014, Adams said, “Russia’s decision to invest in nuclear energy capabilities is a brilliant strategic move befitting a nation of chess players”, but back then the Russian sovereign wealth fund was big, and getting bigger. Times – and gas revenues – have changed since then
Driving new developments
Export initiatives aside, there is considerable domestic scope for Russia’s nuclear industry, with Moscow having set a target of increasing the share of electricity generated to 25% by 2030, and Rosatom focussed on developing new technologies, including types of reactors that will be able to burn some spent fuels.
The rising economic and strategic importance of the Arctic, too, provides a potential driver for atomic technology, as Russia looks to develop the Northern Sea Route and explore for energy and mineral resources in the High North. The experience gained with nuclear powered ice-breakers has already led to the production of the Academic Lomonosov – a 144m-long, non-self-propelled vessel, equipped with two reactors and able to generate up to 70MW of electricity. As the flagship of a planned whole new class of ship-based generators, it is destined to be the world’s first mass-produced floating nuclear power station when it comes into service towards the end of 2016.
Mobile and capable of powering small cities, ports or industrial infrastructure, these floating reactors could be a huge asset in remote or inhospitable regions, and Rosatom say that 15 countries, including China, Indonesia and Malaysia, have already expressed an interest in the vessels.
According to the WNA, there are 70 nuclear reactors currently under construction – the most in a quarter of a century – and some 500 more are proposed. While not all of those will ultimately go ahead, it speaks to the world’s growing appetite for nuclear power and for Russia, owning around 40% of the world’s uranium enrichment capacity and a significant share of the proven global uranium reserves. The value of Russia’s current tally of international deals already runs to over $100bn, and the new nuclear tech titan is really only just beginning to flex its muscles.
Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.
From 1992 to 1995, Bosnia was ravaged by a war pitting Muslims (known as Bosniaks), Serbs and Croats against each other.
Thousands of foreign Mujahedeen guerrillas entered the country to battle rampaging Serb forces. The 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement ended the fighting. It also partitioned Bosniaalong religious lines, creating two quasi-national entities – the Muslim-Croat Federation and the Bosnian Serb Republic.
Yet, after the war, many jihadists did not leave. The Saudi government has spent millions funding the construction of mosques and religious education centers. More ominously, Saudi-backed clerics have vigorously promoted Wahhabism, an intolerant and extreme form of Islam. In pamphlets, books and sermons, Wahhabis demand an Islamist Bosnia where Orthodox Christian Serbs and Catholic Croats are subjugated under Shariah law. The goal is also to drive out Western, especially American, influence. It’s no accident that Mr. Jasarevic is a Wahhabi. Militant Islam has regained a foothold in the Balkans.
For the past decade, anti-American sentiment has intensified among segments of Bosniaks. Following the toppling of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, U.S. troops found more than 1,000 dead jihadists on the battlefield possessing Bosnian passports. The Saudis have supported several Bosnian charities serving as front groups for al Qaeda cells. Radical organizations, such as the Young Muslims, have proliferated. During the Iraq war, some Bosnian Muslim fighters joined the insurgency against American forces. At one of Sarajevo’s main mosques, the second-highest-ranking cleric in the country, Ismet Spahic, publicly denounced the U.S.-led campaign in Iraq as “genocide.” Western intelligence reports say Bosnia has become fertile soil for recruiting “white al Qaeda” – Islamic extremists with Caucasian features, who could easily blend into American or European cities and commit heinous atrocities.
Western public officials, however, have refused even to acknowledge the Islamist problem. For example, from 2002 through 2006, the international high representative for Bosnia, Paddy Ashdown, repeatedly downplayed the rise of Wahhabism under his watch. Mr. Ashdown acted as the viceroy of Bosnia. He preferred to preside over pompous ceremonies, amass administrative power and gorge at elaborate banquets. He refused to speak out against incidents of Islamic extremism, such as vandalism against Catholic churches, the harassment of priests and nuns, and the growing persecution of Bosnian Croatians. He feared offending Muslim sensibilities.
The irony is that it was American air power that finally brought the Bosnian Serbs to heel and saved countless Bosniak lives. And still, jihadists such as Mr. Jasarevic are eager to wage holy war. This reveals the moral depravity and spiritual darkness at the heart of Islamic fundamentalism. The fundamentalists cannot be appeased. The West – including the peoples of the Balkans – must awaken to this evil force lurking in the heart of Europe.
Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.
By Zivadin Jovanovic, Chairman of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals
Beginning of March I have returned from China where I participated in the International Silk Road Think Tank conference, held in the Chinese Municipality of Shenzhen.
The Belt and Road Initiative refers to the proposal by Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2013. There were 80 think tank participants from about 50 countries of Europe, Asia, Middle East and South America. High representatives of the government agencies from a number of countries, such as high ranking diplomats were also present (from Israel, Iran, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Afghanistan, Kazakhstan). Among prominent politicians who participated were Alfred Gusenbauer, former Chancellor of Austria, Roza Otunbayeva, former President of Kyrgyzstan, and others.
Hosts and organizers were the Chinese Center for Contemporary World Studies (CCCWS), the Government of the Municipality of Shenzhen and the Fudan University of Shanghai. The International Think Tank Association of the New Silk Road was established and the Shenzhen Declaration were launched.
Foreign guests also visited Beijing, Chongqing and the district of Dazu, Sichuan Province. In Shenzhen (seat of mobile telephone production, 13 millions of inhabitants, next to Hong Kong) a welcome to the foreign participants was accorded by top local Government leaders and high politicians and scientists from Beijing.
Chongqing, with 33 million inhabitants on the Yangtze River, I learned, is the largest city in China, producing 3 million cars and 55 million laptop computers yearly. It plays one of the key roles in connecting Central China regions eastward to the Pacific and South East Asia and westward to Central Asia, the Volgograd region in Russia and Central Europe.
This particular connectivity Chongqing –Volgograd region was promoted by presidents of China and Russia – Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin.
The Silk Road is a multidimensional global project and aims at modernizing and expanding fiscal connectivity between China, Asia, Africa and the whole of Europe, economic development of the vast belt along the New Silk Road but at the same time, reinforcing cultural cooperation, understanding and mutual trust among nations and civilizations. It presupposes construction and modernisation of modern roads, railways, air connections, energy, food and industry production, modernisation of Sea transport, facilities and communication, in general. It requires investment of about 900 billion US dollars from chinese sources. EU is expected to provide additional 315 billion of US dollars in order to be able to fully benefit from the Initiative. So far, according to available information, the EU could secure only 60 billion approaching China for the rest. The US seem to be unwilling so far to join, or support the Chinese New Silk Road Initiative. The US has not joined the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) in spite of the fact that their closest European allies, including Great Britain, have joined this Bank which already attracted about 60 member countries. Instead, US seem trying to get together all Asian and Pacific Ocean countries which supposedly have any reservation, or issue in dispute, towards China, to form an alternative integration counterbalancing if not obstructing Chinese Initiative. Not
being pleased with EU joining the Chinese Initiative and the Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank. Washington apparently steps up pleasures on Brussels to approve TTIP and let it coming into force, as possible. Kind of “dead race”, for some countries economic for the others geopolitical one, is going on not only among adversaries, but among some traditional allies, too.
Apart from the EU which has primarily economic interests to join the Initiative, the Group “China plus 16” has been established three years ago to cater for the interests of Central and South East European countries within the Initiative. For various infrastructural projects of this particular Group, for the time being, China has provided 10 billion US dol-lars. Serbia has been promised 1.5 billion which makes her a rather high ranking partner. Part of that sum has already been engaged in construction of two very important bridges – one over Danube and the other over Sava river, with the rest reserved for modernization of the Belgrade-Budapest railway. It is only the beginning of modernisation of the European corridor No. 10, connecting the ports of Piraeus and Thessaloniki in Greece with Central and Northern Europe.
China is also engaged in the construction of the Belgrade-Bar Highway (Montenegro, Adriatic), the thermoelectric project Obrenovac II, while negotiations are under way about the construction of a free zone Industrial Park, the first of that kind in this part of Europe. In all Serb-Chinese joint projects special consideration is given to compliance with the highest EU standards of environmental protection. Some participants in the discussion at the Shenzhen Conference have underlined the importance of connecting “Three Seas” – Adriatic, Black and Baltic. In order to optimize connectivity the Danube River water way
should be improved and modernized. The Initiative of the New Silk Road (“Belt and Road”) is only four years old. Yet, it has already embraced 75 Free zones and Industrial parks in 35 countries along the Belt. They employed about 950,000 persons and provided the tax revenue of over 100 billion of US dollars to the participating countries. New highways, railways, ports and bridges – in addition. Isn’t that a promising start of the New Silk
Road Initiative, notwithstanding hardships in the global world economy?
Newly disclosed emails show that Libya’s plan to create a gold-backed currency to compete with the euro and dollar was a motive for NATO’s intervention.
The New Year’s Eve release of over 3,000 new Hillary Clinton emails from the State Department has CNN abuzz over gossipy text messages, the “who gets to ride with Hillary” selection process set up by her staff, and how a “cute” Hillary photo fared on Facebook.
But historians of the 2011 NATO war in Libya will be sure to notice a few of the truly explosive confirmations contained in the new emails: admissions of rebel war crimes, special ops trainers inside Libya from nearly the start of protests, Al Qaeda embedded in the U.S. backed opposition, Western nations jockeying for access to Libyan oil, the nefarious origins of the absurd Viagra mass rape claim, and concern over Qaddafi’s gold and silver reserves threatening European currency.
Hillary’s Death Squads
A March 27, 2011, intelligence brief [archived here] on Libya, sent by long time close adviser to the Clintons and Hillary’s unofficial intelligence gatherer, Sidney Blumenthal, contains clear evidence of war crimes on the part of NATO-backed rebels. Citing a rebel commander source “speaking in strict confidence” Blumenthal reports to Hillary [emphasis mine]:
Under attack from allied Air and Naval forces, the Libyan Army troops have begun to desert to the rebel side in increasing numbers. The rebels are making an effort to greet these troops as fellow Libyans, in an effort to encourage additional defections.
(Source Comment: Speaking in strict confidence, one rebel commander stated that his troopscontinue to summarily execute all foreign mercenaries captured in the fighting…).
While the illegality of extra-judicial killings is easy to recognize (groups engaged in such are conventionally termed “death squads”), the sinister reality behind the “foreign mercenaries” reference might not be as immediately evident to most.
While over the decades Gaddafi was known to make use of European and other international security and infrastructural contractors, there is no evidence to suggest that these were targeted by the Libyan rebels.
There is, however, ample documentation by journalists, academics, and human rights groups demonstrating that black Libyan civilians and sub-Saharan contract workers, a population favored by Gaddafi in his pro-African Union policies, were targets of “racial cleansing” by rebels who saw black Libyans as tied closely with the regime.[1]
Black Libyans were commonly branded as “foreign mercenaries” by the rebel opposition for their perceived general loyalty to Gaddafi as a community and subjected to torture, executions, and their towns “liberated” by ethnic cleansing. This is demonstrated in the most well-documented example of Tawergha, an entire town of 30,000 black and “dark-skinned” Libyans which vanished by August 2011 after its takeover by NATO-backed NTC Misratan brigades.
These attacks were well-known as late as 2012 and often filmed, as this report from The Telegraphconfirms:
After Muammar Gaddafi was killed, hundreds of migrant workers from neighboring states were imprisoned by fighters allied to the new interim authorities. They accuse the black Africans of having been mercenaries for the late ruler. Thousands of sub-Saharan Africans have been rounded up since Gaddafi fell in August.
t appears that Clinton was getting personally briefed on the battlefield crimes of her beloved anti-Gaddafi fighters long before some of the worst of these genocidal crimes took place.
Al-Qaeda and Western Special Forces Inside Libya
The same intelligence email from Sydney Blumenthal also confirms what has become a well-known theme of Western supported insurgencies in the Middle East: the contradiction of special forces training militias that are simultaneously suspected of links to Al Qaeda.
Blumenthal relates that “an extremely sensitive source” confirmed that British, French, and Egyptian special operations units were training Libyan militants along the Egyptian-Libyan border, as well as in Benghazi suburbs.
While analysts have long speculated as to the “when and where” of Western ground troop presence in the Libyan War, this email serves as definitive proof that special forces were on the ground only within a month of the earliest protests which broke out in the middle to end of February 2011 in Benghazi.
By March 27 of what was commonly assumed a simple “popular uprising” external special operatives were already “overseeing the transfer of weapons and supplies to the rebels” including “a seemingly endless supply of AK47 assault rifles and ammunition.”
Yet only a few paragraphs after this admission, caution is voiced about the very militias these Western special forces were training because of concern that, “radical/terrorist groups such as the Libyan Fighting Groups and Al Qa’ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) are infiltrating the NLC and its military command.”
The Threat of Libya’s Oil and Gold to French Interests
Though the French-proposed U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 claimed the no-fly zone implemented over Libya was to protect civilians, an April 2011 email [archived here] sent to Hillary with the subject line “France’s client and Qaddafi’s gold” tells of less noble ambitions.
The email identifies French President Nicholas Sarkozy as leading the attack on Libya with five specific purposes in mind: to obtain Libyan oil, ensure French influence in the region, increase Sarkozy’s reputation domestically, assert French military power, and to prevent Gaddafi’s influence in what is considered “Francophone Africa.”
Most astounding is the lengthy section delineating the huge threat that Gaddafi’s gold and silver reserves, estimated at “143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver,” posed to the French franc (CFA) circulating as a prime African currency. In place of the noble sounding “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) doctrine fed to the public, there is this “confidential” explanation of what was really driving the war [emphasis mine]:
This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA).
(Source Comment: According to knowledgeable individuals this quantity of gold and silver is valued at more than $7 billion. French intelligence officers discovered this plan shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the factors that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya.)
Though this internal email aims to summarize the motivating factors driving France’s (and by implication NATO’s) intervention in Libya, it is interesting to note that saving civilian lives is conspicuously absent from the briefing.
Instead, the great fear reported is that Libya might lead North Africa into a high degree of economic independence with a new pan-African currency.
French intelligence “discovered” a Libyan initiative to freely compete with European currency through a local alternative, and this had to be subverted through military aggression.
Please follow the LINK to finish reading of the original article
We don’t need the empire to give us anything. Our efforts will be legal and peaceful, because our commitment is to peace and fraternity among all human beings who live on this planet.
The kings of Spain brought us the conquistadores and masters, whose footprints remained in the circular land grants assigned to those searching for gold in the sands of rivers, an abusive and shameful form of exploitation, traces of which can be noted from the air in many places around the country.
Tourism today, in large part, consists of viewing the delights of our landscapes and tasting exquisite delicacies from our seas, and is always shared with the private capital of large foreign corporations, whose earnings, if they don’t reach billions of dollars, are not worthy of any attention whatsoever.
Since I find myself obliged to mention the issue, I must add – principally for the youth – that few people are aware of the importance of such a condition, in this singular moment of human history. I would not say that time has been lost, but I do not hesitate to affirm that we are not adequately informed, not you, nor us, of the knowledge and conscience that we must have to confront the realities which challenge us. The first to be taken into consideration is that our lives are but a fraction of a historical second, which must also be devoted in part to the vital necessities of every human being. One of the characteristics of this condition is the tendency to overvalue its role, in contrast, on the other hand, with the extraordinary number of persons who embody the loftiest dreams.
Nevertheless, no one is good or bad entirely on their own. None of us is designed for the role we must assume in a revolutionary society, although Cubans had the privilege of José Martí’s example. I even ask myself if he needed to die or not in Dos Ríos, when he said, “For me, it’s time,” and charged the Spanish forces entrenched in a solid line of firepower. He did not want to return to the United States, and there was no one who could make him. Someone ripped some pages from his diary. Who bears this treacherous responsibility, undoubtedly the work of an unscrupulous conspirator? Differences between the leaders were well known, but never indiscipline. “Whoever attempts to appropriate Cuba will reap only the dust of its soil drenched in blood, if he does not perish in the struggle,” stated the glorious Black leader Antonio Maceo. Máximo Gómez is likewise recognized as the most disciplined and discreet military chief in our history.
Looking at it from another angle, how can we not admire the indignation of Bonifacio Byrne when, from a distant boat returning him to Cuba, he saw another flag alongside that of the single star and declared, “My flag is that which has never been mercenary…” immediately adding one of the most beautiful phrases I have ever heard, “If it is torn to shreds, it will be my flag one day… our dead raising their arms will still be able to defend it!” Nor will I forget the blistering words of Camilo Cienfuegos that night, when, just some tens of meters away, bazookas and machine guns of U.S. origin in the hands of counterrevolutionaries were pointed toward that terrace on which we stood.
Obama was born in August of 1961, as he himself explained. More than half a century has transpired since that time.
Let us see, however, how our illustrious guest thinks today:
“I have come here to bury the last remnant of the Cold War in the Americas. I have come here to extend the hand of friendship to the Cuban people,” followed by a deluge of concepts entirely novel for the majority of us:
“We both live in a new world, colonized by Europeans,” the U.S. President continued, “Cuba, like the United States, was built in part by slaves brought here from Africa. Like the United States, the Cuban people can trace their heritage to both slaves and slave-owners.”
The native populations don’t exist at all in Obama’s mind. Nor does he say that the Revolution swept away racial discrimination, or that pensions and salaries for all Cubans were decreed by it before Mr. Barrack Obama was 10 years old. The hateful, racist bourgeois custom of hiring strongmen to expel Black citizens from recreational centers was swept away by the Cuban Revolution – that which would go down in history for the battle against apartheid that liberated Angola, putting an end to the presence of nuclear weapons on a continent of more than a billion inhabitants. This was not the objective of our solidarity, but rather to help the peoples of Angola, Mozambique, Guinea Bissau and others under the fascist colonial domination of Portugal.
In 1961, just one year and three months after the triumph of the Revolution, a mercenary force with armored artillery and infantry, backed by aircraft, trained and accompanied by U.S. warships and aircraft carriers, attacked our country by surprise. Nothing can justify that perfidious attack which cost our country hundreds of losses, including deaths and injuries
As for the pro-yankee assault brigade, no evidence exists anywhere that it was possible to evacuate a single mercenary. Yankee combat planes were presented before the United Nations as the equipment of a Cuban uprising.
The military experience and power of this country is very well known. In Africa, they likewise believed that revolutionary Cuba would be easily taken out of the fight. The invasion via southern Angola by racist South African motorized brigades got close to Luanda, the capital in the eastern part of the country. There a struggle began which went on for no less than 15 years. I wouldn’t even talk about this, if I didn’t have the elemental duty to respond to Obama’s speech in Havana’s Alicia Alonso Grand Theater.
Nor will I attempt to give details, only emphasize that an honorable chapter in the struggle for human liberation was written there. In a certain way, I hoped Obama’s behavior would be correct. His humble origin and natural intelligence were evident. Mandela was imprisoned for life and had become a giant in the struggle for human dignity. One day, a copy of a book narrating part of Mandela’s life reached my hands, and – surprise! – the prologue was by Barack Obama. I rapidly skimmed the pages. The miniscule size of Mandela’s handwriting noting facts was incredible. Knowing men such as him was worthwhile.
Regarding the episode in South Africa I must point out another experience. I was really interested in learning more about how the South Africans had acquired nuclear weapons. I only had very precise information that there were no more than 10 or 12 bombs. A reliable source was the professor and researcher Piero Gleijeses, who had written the text Conflicting Missions: Havana, Washington, and Africa, 1959-1976, an excellent piece. I knew he was the most reliable source on what had happened and I told him so; he responded that he had not spoken more about the matter as in the text he had responded to questions from compañero Jorge Risquet, who had been Cuban ambassador and collaborator in Angola, a very good friend of his. I located Risquet; already undertaking other important tasks he was finishing a course which would last several weeks longer. That task coincided with a fairly recent visit by Piero to our country; I had warned him that Risquet was getting on and his health was not great. A few days later what I had feared occurred. Risquet deteriorated and died. When Piero arrived there was nothing to do except make promises, but I had already received information related to the weapons and the assistance that racist South Africa had received from Reagan and Israel.
I do not know what Obama would have to say about this story now. I am unaware as to what he did or did not know, although it is very unlikely that he knew absolutely nothing. My modest suggestion is that he gives it thought and does not attempt now to elaborate theories on Cuban policy.
There is an important issue:
Obama made a speech in which he uses the most sweetened words to express: “It is time, now, to forget the past, leave the past behind, let us look to the future together, a future of hope. And it won’t be easy, there will be challenges and we must give it time; but my stay here gives me more hope in what we can do together as friends, as family, as neighbors, together.”
I suppose all of us were at risk of a heart attack upon hearing these words from the President of the United States. After a ruthless blockade that has lasted almost 60 years, and what about those who have died in the mercenary attacks on Cuban ships and ports, an airliner full of passengers blown up in midair, mercenary invasions, multiple acts of violence and coercion?
Nobody should be under the illusion that the people of this dignified and selfless country will renounce the glory, the rights, or the spiritual wealth they have gained with the development of education, science and culture.
I also warn that we are capable of producing the food and material riches we need with the efforts and intelligence of our people. We do not need the empire to give us anything. Our efforts will be legal and peaceful, as this is our commitment to peace and fraternity among all human beings who live on this planet.
“More than 40 years ago, the Nixon-Kissinger bombing of Cambodia unleashed a torrent of suffering from which that country has never recovered. The same is true of the Blair-Bush crime in Iraq, and the Nato and “coalition” crimes in Libya and Syria. With impeccable timing, Henry Kissinger’s latest self-serving tome has been released with its satirical title, “World Order”. In one fawning review, Kissinger is described as a “key shaper of a world order that remained stable for a quarter of a century”. Tell that to the people of Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Chile, East Timor and all the other victims of his “statecraft”. Only when “we” recognise the war criminals in our midst and stop denying ourselves the truth will the blood begin to dry.”
