-DATE- 19910629 -YEAR- 1991 -DOCUMENT_TYPE- -AUTHOR- -HEADLINE- Further on Castro Interview With SIEMPRE -PLACE- ANNEX / Cuba -SOURCE- Havana PRENSA LATINA -REPORT_NBR- FBIS-LAT-91-129-A -REPORT_DATE- 19910705 -HEADER- BRS Assigned Document Number: 000010110 Report Type: Daily Report AFS Number: PA0207204891 Report Number: FBIS-LAT-91-129-A Report Date: 05 Jul 91 Report Series: Latin America Start Page: 7 Report Division: ANNEX End Page: 11 Report Subdivision: Cuba AG File Flag: Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Language: Spanish Document Date: 29 Jun 91 Report Volume: Friday Vol VI No 129-A Dissemination: FOUO City/Source of Document: Havana PRENSA LATINA Report Name: ANNEX Headline: Further on Castro Interview With SIEMPRE Author(s): Beatriz Pages Rebollar, director of the Mexican weekly SIEMPRE, published in the 30 May issue of SIEMPRE and carried as a PRENSA LATINA ``exclusive'' ; place and date not given] Source Line: PA0207204891 Havana PRENSA LATINA in Spanish 0405 GMT 29 Jun 91-FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Subslug: [``Sixth and final'' part of ``Fidel Castro, Present and Future of Cuba,'' a report on an interview with President Fidel Casto by Beatriz Pages Rebollar, director of the Mexican weekly SIEMPRE, published in the 30 May issue of SIEMPRE and carried as a PRENSA LATINA ``exclusive''; place and date not given] -TEXT- FULL TEXT OF ARTICLE: 1. [``Sixth and final'' part of ``Fidel Castro, Present and Future of Cuba,'' a report on an interview with President Fidel Casto by Beatriz Pages Rebollar, director of the Mexican weekly SIEMPRE, published in the 30 May issue of SIEMPRE and carried as a PRENSA LATINA ``exclusive''; place and date not given] 2. [Text] [no dateline as received] [Pages] What does a man like you dream and wish for at this stage of life? 3. [Castro] I imagine that when you said, at this stage of life, you meant after 60 years on this earth, or, better yet, after continuing the revolutionary struggle for so long. 4. In short, I can tell you that my dreams and desires are the same ones I had when I was a revolutionary for the first time; this was a long time ago. I keep on dreaming, believing, and wanting exactly the same things. 5. [Pages] What told you that you were a revolutionary? 6. [Castro] I believe every man has something of a revolutionary within himself; there is always something in him that is nonconformist and rebellious. However, I believe circumstances-such as the times in which he lives, the historic conditions, the social situation, and his experiences-are determining factors in whether he becomes a revolutionary. 7. Naturally, I was not born a revolutionary but I was rebellious. Why did I get the opportunity to express my rebelliousness? Because I went through some very personal experiences that made me a rebel very soon in life. 8. There is a book called ``The Making of a Rebel''-I have started reading it but have not finished-and it again brings to mind the fact that a rebel is formed by life and by his own experiences. To be a rebel you also need a certain personality. I think this factor has a great influence in the making of a revolutionary. Character and temperament are important factors. Some people are very active and others less active; some move about more than others. Although you are born with these characteristics, these in themselves will not determine if you will be a rebel. You can be born with a rebellious character, and, depending on the circumstances and your experiences, you can turn out to be a very compliant person. 9. I was born in a home with good economic standing. I did not lack anything. Some of my experiences are associated with the fact that there were people who wanted to profit from my family and persuaded my parents to send us off to the city to study or do something. Due to these circumstances, I was also able to notice the interest some people felt for money. All this was part of my upbringing and part of my experiences. My parents were semi-literate farmers and they lived in the rural area. They were farmers with land, and they also dealt in trade. They were not poor farmers. We could say that they were rich farmers. 10. Nevertheless, I was also able to see how other people lived. This does not mean that I started becoming a revolutionary at that time. However, I saw how my friends and companions lived. These were the friends with whom I passed my vacations and who were with me all the time. Being the son of rich parents I was able to see more, and I saw how the rest of the people in the area lived, especially the big U.S. sugar firm workers whose lots were much worse. 11. The managers of these big firms were in New York, and my father was there, too. People came to see my father every day. He had a generous and kind character. Any person who came up to him with a problem-and the problems were usually that he had five or six children, did not have a job, and did not have food-he would give him something, try to find him a job, or try to solve his problem. I saw how people lived. I have an unforgettable picture in my mind of how capitalism operated in the fields and how it worked until the revolution triumphed. 12. Later on, I came into contact with revolutionary and socialist ideas. I started out by being a Martiano [follower of Cuban independence leader Jose Marti], and I am still one. I started by getting in touch with our country's history, its struggles, its wars of independence, its historic values. These are the things that make a first big impact on you: nationalism, patriotism, the heroes in our country's history, the sense of honor and justice, injustice, good and evil. Starting from these basic values, you have to start judging everything, determining your preferences and political and revolutionary passions. These sentiments increased in me when I was introduced to socialist ideas; truthfully, it was when I read Marx and Engels. Marxist literature opened my eyes to the nature of society and history because I had never found a coherent explanation to all this. 13. Everything seemed to be the result of chance, luck, chaos, anarchy. In Marxism, I found a coherent explanation of man's history. As I have said at other times, at the beginning I was a Utopian socialist. Studying capitalist political economy, I began to think-and I still do-that everything was absurd, chaotic, anarchic, and unreasonable, that this type of society was not worthy of man. When I came across socialist ideas, I was already a Utopian socialist. It was like touching a flame to an explosive. The coherence and clarity of Marx's ideas had a profound effect on me. 14. Perhaps the most important thing that happened was that I not only thought in abstract terms, but also thought about putting ideas into practice. Yes, as soon as I conceived revolutionary ideas, I thought about putting those ideas into practice, and about how to do it. I had to put those ideas into practice, not by myself, but with a group of revolutionary men. You will understand that, for the time being at least, I was alone. Later and gradually, I persuaded a group of people to join me after I had shaped up the fundamental ideas. 15. [Pages] It can somehow be explained that a man in need, a poor man, can become a revolutionary. But this was not your case. Why turn your back on money when many people think that money provides everything, comfort, among other things? 16. [Castro] If you study the background of nearly all revolutionary leaders, you will find this to be the case. Generally speaking, the poor peasants I met and the sons of poor field workers did not have a chance to go to school or attend preuniversity courses or the university. I have thought about it. If I had been the son of one of those poor peasants or workers, I would never have become a revolutionary. Rather, I would never have played the role I played, the one that fell on me. I might have been a soldier in some guerrilla unit that someone else would have organized. I might have been killed or I might have survived. Most likely, I would have joined the revolutionary fighting as the poor peasants and field workers did, but in such a case I could not have played a leader's role. 17. I have come to be known because of the role I played. If I had not been able to study, if I had not reached the university, if I had not put myself in contact with these ideas, I would not have been able to elaborate on revolutionary concepts and I would not have played any important role. For a revolution-let alone a war- military leaders, or brilliant fighters, sometimes do appear. I might mention Jose Antonio Paez, the Venezuelan leader of the plains, who was not Bolivar or Sucre or like many of those brilliant leaders with a good education. He was a virtually illiterate peasant, but with great military talent. To lead a revolution with all its ideas, concepts, and purposes, you must have people with a certain education and political culture. This is why it is not strange to see many great thinkers come from universities. Nearly all socialist writers and theoreticians and the most remarkable revolutionaries studied at universities. Generally speaking, to be able to attend a university you must belong to the middle class at least. The poor man that you mention will never get to the university. 18. [Pages] Can you remember any specific cases of revolutionaries who came from an educated middle class? 19. [Castro] You have an example from your own Mexican revolution: Madero. Madero had been educated. The Mexican revolution had theoreticians and military leaders; you had both kinds of leaders. You had great soldiers with a lot of education, but they were not the theoreticians of the Mexican revolution. This explains the occurrence. It is possible to become a revolutionary through ideas. Ideas have led to many things, many sacrifices. There have been many selfless and unbiased men in the world, men who have given their lives for ideas. 20. In our wars of independence, there were also wealthy people and landowners. The wars of independence in Cuba were started by landowners who had large estates and many slaves. 21. Carlos Manuel de Cespedes was a big and rich landowner, who also owned a sugar mill. He proclaimed our independence on 10 October 1868 and proceeded to free the slaves. This was the first thing he did. The people who plotted against Spain and started the war of independence at the risk of their lives-and many of them died or at least went bankrupt-were patriots who were rich landowners. They came from rich families that owned lands and slaves, and they headed the revolution during that period. Later, other leaders arose; they were fighters and soldiers who were more popular and gave more character to the independence movement and even made it more democratic. 22. Cuba's history shows that dozens and dozens of patricians and rich people started the most heroic war in this country, one of the most heroic wars known in this hemisphere. They were not socialists. Rich people have turned their back on money for revolutionary reasons so many times. Sometimes the revolution was made by the bourgeoisie. Perhaps the French revolution was also made with people who turned their back on money. In our countries, many people have turned their backs on money for revolutionary causes. 23. Bolivar was a very rich man too, although in his case we are not talking about a socialist revolution. Yet, here too, many rich people joined Bolivar, entered the struggle for independence, and gave their lives and riches for it. Therefore, the fact that rich people turn out to be revolutionary is not strange. The only difference is that today our revolution is a socialist one. 24. I was not the grandson or great-grandson of a rich landowner. I was the son of a rich landowner who lived in the rural area and who had been poor and was the son of poor peasants. My father was of Spanish origin, a son of poor peasants. He stood out as a worker, managed to save some money, and bought land-in those times land was cheap-and that is how he started forging a good economic position for himself. However, he was the son of poor peasants. My heritage does not stem from rich landowners. I do not have the class or the education of a rich landowner. 25. [Pages] What determines the success of a man as a revolutionary: the validity of his ideas or the historic situation in which he is immersed? 26. [Castro] The merit is not in the man; it is in the historic moment and historic juncture in which he is living. These are the factors that determine a revolutionary role. Regardless of how great a man's revolutionary ideas are, they will remain in his head and nothing more if he is not in a revolutionary period in history. For this reason, no man can attribute to himself the merits of a revolution. A revolution is the result of a series of factors and gives you the privilege of being a revolutionary if you are born at a time when you can be a revolutionary. It depends a little on what man puts into all this. What would we have done if we had been born in the 17th century? However, we were born in the 20th century, in this historic period, at this historic juncture, and this is what determines the revolutionary role. I was not a descendent of counts, marquises, or anything of the sort. In fact, I was a descendent of very poor peasants. Although they had no influence over me in this respect, my grandparents were poor peasants. However, the fact that they were peasants made my parents also live in the rural areas. My parents intermingled with the people and I did so too. That had a great influence on me. I am convinced that it had a great influence. 27. In all revolutions, for example in the French revolution against the absolute monarchy, the oligarchy, and the nobility, there were many noblemen: counts, marquises, and the like. At the general assembly called by Louis XV, the three states were represented: the commoners, the bourgeoisie, and the clergy and nobility. Many noblemen and clergymen took revolutionary positions. Thus, it is a historic fact that the rich have many times turned their backs on their class. I would even say that this has been commonplace. 28. [Pages] A moment ago you said that you were a romantic person and always have been. Could you be the last romantic world leader left? 29. [Castro] I did not mean romantic in that sense. I said that if I had not had a revolutionary conviction, I could have been a romantic revolutionary. You talk about romanticism in another sense. I do feel romanticism is good. I mean the romantic man, the man who dreams, the man who wants justice. A revolutionary does not have to stop being a romantic, in the good sense of the word. 30. I used the word romantic in the sense that I could have dreamed about good things, but then I would not have had a revolutionary theory. I mentioned the word romantic in that sense. One can have a revolutionary theory and be romantic. One has to have a certain dose of romanticism to be a revolutionary, to be willing to change things and to seek justice. There are times, however, when the word romantic is used to describe naive people, people who have illusions and who are not realistic. 31. [Pages] Commander, have you always been aware that you are a leader and now a world leader? 32. [Castro] Let me tell you something: I almost never think about that, although I sometimes do, unfortunately, because one feels the weight of all the responsibility. I do think about the responsibility, but not about the satisfaction that could be felt when you consider yourself a leader, or the glory or honor of being a leader. We certainly do not fight for the glory. I always have one of Marti's thoughts present, one of the first I read and never forgot because it embodies a great truth and a great philosophy. He said: ``All the glory in the world fits in a grain of corn.'' It was admirable of Marti to say that; he fought for specific political objectives, not for the glory. During the times of the fighters for independence, during the early part of the last century, Latin American fighters talked about glory very often. Simon Bolivar spoke about glory very often. He was constantly doing so. Glory for them was one of man's objectives. A modern revolutionary cannot be thinking about glory; even Marti did not think about glory. Therefore, we cannot go around feeling satisfied, thinking about honors and things of that nature. Our satisfactions may come from the things we are able to accomplish, from the successes we are able to attain, but I can tell you that very frequently our responsibilities and the problems that need to be solved come to mind and one feels a heavy burden. 33. As for being a world leader, I have never thought about that. I swear by my honor that it does not even cross my mind. You must understand that this is a very small country and men have influence to the extent their countries have an influence on events. You put an idiot in as U.S. President-it has happened more than once- and he is a world leader because the country is a world leader. You put an idiot in any great country-and there have been great idiots in many great countries-and they are world leaders, but you pick a person you think is an ideal leader and put him in a small country and he is not a world leader. A small country can have a certain world influence, at a given moment, because it can become an example, because it can do things that are worthy of admiration, because it is a heroic country, and because it is capable of great accomplishments. A country can do it and have a world influence; it can have a world influence without being a world leader. Ideas do have unquestionable influence. As far as I am concerned, ideas are the most important things. World leaders are those who lead others. An international leader, a leader recognized in the world, could also have a certain international influence. Influence can play a role. There are no doubts about influence, but ideas and not men are the ones that can play a tremendous role in the world. We cannot disregard that. 34. It would not be entirely correct to speak about the leader of a small country like Cuba being a world leader. The Americans have made me famous. If many people admire Cuba, we owe it to the Americans. They are the ones who have made us stand out. By making us their enemies, by making us their opponents, they have given us greater importance, and have made us more famous, not only with their slanders, but also with their hostile actions toward us. 35. We do know that we are internationally known. We see it, we notice it in meetings, conferences, in many things, but I have never thought along those lines, or been conceited with the idea of being a world leader. It is not in keeping with our possibilities. 36. [Pages] What values should distinguish a chief of state? 37. [Castro] It depends on the state: If it is Switzerland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Belgium, or many of the countries that have a developed economy and a stable situation and are surrounded by all kinds of security, a head of state in those countries perhaps needs to be a great specialist on the economy, on EEC trade, on matters of integration, and a statesman, not a politician. It seems, however, that to be a statesman, one needs to be a politician. A head of state should supposedly have certain abilities of persuasion and communication, characteristics that are advisable under those conditions. 38. How should a Haitian statesman be? The conditions that are required in Haiti are undoubtedly not the same ones as those required in Belgium or in the Netherlands, or even in Uruguay. Haiti is a terribly poor country. He must be a person who has tremendous confidence in the people, a great charisma, and he should enjoy the trust and support of the people, the talent and capacity for doing much with very little. He should be able to assign priorities and resources, and be able to multiply fish and bread. In other words, he should have the ability to work miracles. I believe that more conditions are needed for being a statesman in Haiti than for being a statesman in any developed capitalist nation. This person really has a very difficult task. In Latin America, the conditions for being a statesman include, first, being a great patriot, and not only a patriot of his small, medium, or large country, but a patriot of the Americas. In the second place, he must be very honest, have a profound sense of his responsibilities, a great capacity for suffering what others are enduring, and a spirit of dignity and independence. In my opinion, I also feel that he must be knowledgeable, have the capacity for seeking advice and choosing the men who can give him advice, and for assimilating that advice. He must have all this in order not to run the risk of falling into the hands of the technocrats, because a stateman who only depends on advisers and does not know well the topics on which he is being advised may fall prisoner to these adviseors. Third, I think that in Latin America today it is very important to have an awareness of the need for integration and a very high sense of historic responsibility. If I were to choose someone to be a statesman in Latin America, I would want that person to have at least these requirements, with the differences corresponding to the different countries where they live. 39. Today a man is nothing, because he would only be a caudillo, and the times of the caudillos are long gone. There is no room for a caudillo in socialism; there is no room for a caudillo in a modern revolution, where men do things only because they trust their leader, because their leader asks for it. We do things because we are convinced of something; we work because we are convinced of an idea, a solution, a formula. In other words, to analyze a process such as ours, we would have to reduce the role of individual acts, independent from their historic merit, and understand that all work forms part of a whole in which many participate. 40. Finally and most important, there must be the participation of all the people. We would be nothing without the people. We could not even be talking here if it were not for the people at the electricity plant, if it were not for the many comrades who are looking after everything, if it were not for the others preparing the paperwork. Even your own work, you know that you cannot do it by yourself. You need many people to cooperate with you in the magazine, in the print shop, in all of those things. It is the same with us. 41. [Pages] If the unfortunate moment were to ever arise when you had to make the following decision, what would you prefer: To die, or to ask for political asylum in a friendly country? 42. [Castro] That would have to be a very unfortunate moment because I have not even thought about that. It has not even occurred to me to think about that. 43. Thirty-five years ago, when we were in Mexico in 1956, we made a promise. At a time when many believed that the revolution would not take place, when those who wanted to sow skepticism thought we would not fight anymore, in the face of such forecasts, we said: ``In 1956 we will be free or we will be martyrs.'' A very short phrase. In 1956 we were free, and we were fighting in the Sierra Maestra. We could have also been martyrs, but we returned to Cuba with our strength and we began the struggle. We were in a small part of a free territory. Later, for the last 30 years, we have been saying: ``Fatherland or death.'' Lately, we have added another slogan: ``Socialism or death.' ' Therefore, the most sacred of our duties is to fight to the death to defend the fatherland and the revolution, without any possible alternative. However, do not forget that we have not only said ``Fatherland or death,'' but we have also said ``We will win.'' In other words, we have faith in victory, not in personal victory, but in the victory of the cause, the revolution, the people. We hope we will not be in the unfortunate situation you mention, but I have no doubts about what we should do or would do. 44. [Pages] One last question, Commander. As a result of your revolutionary activities, you were imprisoned by the previous regime, and as a lawyer you prepared your own defense that concluded with the famous phrase: ``History will absolve me.'' Do you think that history has already absolved you, or do you still have to wait? 45. [Castro] Well, these are two different phases in history. We have to refer to two phases. The first phase was our revolutionary struggle against Batista's tyranny. We won this struggle, and it ended in a revolution that brought big social changes in our country, a true revolution. This is what I meant with my statement: Today you condemn me, but history will absolve me; it will prove me to be right. 46. Of course, history would have proven me to be right even if the revolution had not triumphed. I knew that the coming generations would absolve us. I was fully aware of it. Life itself, history itself, has given unequivocal evidence that the victorious revolution was right. History has shown us to be right. 47. Then came the second phase of this history. It is the phase of our 30-year struggle against the strongest imperialist power on earth, of Cuba's heroic resistance to it during all this time, and of the socialist revolution's development at the doors of the United States. This is the second phase of history, and I expect that history will also absolve us here. It will absolve us. We are still struggling, but the verdict of history will be in our favor. I have no doubt about this. 48. [Pages] Thank you. -END-