-DATE- 19910723 -YEAR- 1991 -DOCUMENT TYPE- -AUTHOR- -HEADLINE- Imevision Interviews Castro on Guadalajara Summit -PLACE- CARIBBEAN / Cuba -SOURCE- Havana Radio Havana Cuba -REPORT NO.- FBIS-LAT-91-143 -REPORT DATE- 19910725 -HEADER- ********************* Report Type: Daily Report AFS Number: PA2407225491 Report Number: FBIS-LAT-91-143 Report Date: 25 Jul 91 Report Series: Daily Report Start Page: 2 Report Division: CARIBBEAN End Page: 9 Report Subdivision: Cuba AG File Flag: Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Language: Spanish Document Date: 23 Jul 91 Report Volume: Thursday Vol VI No 143 Dissemination: City/Source of Document: Havana Radio Havana Cuba Report Name: Latin America Headline: Imevision Interviews Castro on Guadalajara Summit Author(s): unidentified reporter; in Guadalajara, Mexico on 20 July-recorded] Source Line: PA2407225491 Havana Radio Havana Cuba in Spanish 0300 GMT 23 Jul 91 Subslug: [Interview with President Fidel Castro granted to Mexican Imevision television by unidentified reporter; in Guadalajara, Mexico on 20 July-recorded] -TEXT- FULL TEXT OF ARTICLE: 1. [Interview with President Fidel Castro granted to Mexican Imevision television by unidentified reporter; in Guadalajara, Mexico on 20 July-recorded] 2. [Text] [Unidentified reporter] Mr. Cuban President, we are here in Guadalajara. An unprecedented event has taken place. Cuba was seated at the big Latin American table but it was also seated in a very different position, with a discourse that sounded strong, at the Cabanas Center. How do you explain this? How important is it for life in your country and in Latin America? 3. [Castro] Well, I believe that we first need to talk a little about the background of our interview. We met in Havana. You explained to me that you were interviewing all Latin American presidents, and that I was the only one left. I was committed to granting you this interview. I would like to express my satisfaction for being able to fulfill this commitment, even after the summit, so you can complete your record. 4. Well, I sat at a round table. It was not very big. It was a table for some 20 people. I understand the meaning of the phrase, big table, that you used. As far as the opportunity of meeting for the first time with all Latin American presidents, I believe that the table was big, not only for Cuba but for all, in that for the first time in history since independence took place in this hemisphere, since the struggles for independence at the end of last century, we had never had such a meeting except when Washington called it. When Washington said: Come, everyone traveled to the United States, or wherever, at the same time. Of course, Cuba was never invited. This is why I see this meeting as a truly historic and far-reaching event, because it was called by Latin Americans and not the United States. This is the first time in history that we have done it, and I truly think it is unusual and uncommon. This is my view. 5. You were referring to the speeches. I truly expressed what I felt, and the views I had. It would have been hypocritical on my part if I had arrived at this meeting, spoke in a princely language, and did not say what I thought. I was respectful in the way I expressed myself. I was respectful to all. I was careful and did not get excited at any time, although I do have a relatively passionate personality. There were differences in some ideas and a little bit in the style because I like to use direct language and not beat around the bush. I would not dare to characterize my speech as contrasting or absolutely contrasting because many interesting, strong, and serious statements were made. I listened to each and every one of the speeches with a lot of interest. The way in which many talented leaders expressed themselves attracted my attention. They expressed themselves strongly on serious and deep matters. Therefore, it cannot be said that I was the exception. 6. I spoke on each one of the subjects. I do not know if the speeches will be published. I believe they were recorded on tape and by television. From a historical point of view, it would be interesting if all the speeches were published. I imagine that that will be in the hands of the organizers of the event. I spoke about each one of the subjects. At times I thought about not doing it because I did not think it was mandatory to refer to each and every one of the subjects, but I generally expected to make a reference to them. I spoke whenever I noted an important omission, or an omission on an important subject was made. I maintained the same respectful tone at all times. There was a dialogue. There were some hasty responses in exchanges. There was a good sense of humor. Jokes were made. There was a little bit of everything. It would be misleading if everything that was said was analyzed and the public, national and international opinion did not have the opportunity of having direct access to everything that was said. This is why I am endorsing that everything available on the summit be published. 7. [Reporter] I ask you this precisely because during the tour in which we spoke to many presidents, we noticed an almost unique direction in Latin America, a trend toward pragmatism, the deideologization of government matters, and market economy. In this sense, Cuba seems to be an island more than ever. 8. [Castro] Yes. My conclusion is that there may have been two moments-before and after the summit. Many of us did not know each other before the summit, and we did not know how the other thought. Of course, I have my views, I have my ideology. One cannot talk about deideologization because I believe there is more ideology than ever in the international sphere at this time. It is the ideology of capitalism and neoconservatism. This is an ideology. There is also a triumphalistic sense by the defenders of capitalism and the old and unjust international economic order that has existed in the world. There is talk about a new political international order, and what needs to be talked about is a new economic international order, of the new order that the United Nations approved many years ago to alleviate some of the poverty of three-fourths of humankind, to improve the development possibilities of the Third World people. I believe that there is more ideology than ever, and that it is the ideology of imperialism and capitalism. This is why one cannot talk about the end of ideology. In any case, one would have to talk about the end of the ideologies that oppose the dominant economic system. 9. [Reporter] What can Cuba do within this domination framework since Cuba is so small and alone? 10. [Castro] Well, almost all great ideas began with small and solitary things. If we go back to the origins of religions, all religions began in a corner of the world. A prophet-I do not intend to characterize myself as a prophet-took the ideas of some, of a group of men, and the ideas later spread throughout the world. The important thing is not the size of the country that defends an idea, what matters is the size of the idea and the importance and objective value of the ideas you defend. In this case, we are defenders of ideas of social justice and international justice. We are very proud of defending those ideas. Of course, we must defend them wisely. We cannot be dogmatic. It is one thing to defend ideas with deep conviction, and another to be dogmatic. 11. We are not dogmatic, and we too need a dose of pragmatism in this world in which we are living. The problem is not only to defend an idea, but in attempting to make the ideas move forward. I do not believe that we are defending the ideas alone. If you speak about ideas of justice in this world, of ideas of development, if you protest against the looting our peoples are victim of, if you oppose the monstrosity of the foreign debt, if you do not understand how social problems and development of the countries can be solved while we are being plundered [we are not alone]. It is not a single country, but many countries. It is not a single man, or a group of men, or a party, but many men and people who are suffering the same problems and they are defending the same ideas. If you defend Latin American unity, you are defending a vital need for the survival of many people. There are more and more people who understand the need for that unity, at least in the economic order, and they will understand it better and better in the political order. If not, what could the Third World do? For example, what could Latin America do with its Balkanized life in order to negotiate and discuss with the economic superpowers, with the United States, Japan, Europe? What could each one of our countries do isolated? How could we, who are fragments of something that should be united and constitute a whole, discuss with those enormous superpowers alone, separately? Anyone can understand that as a tactic, this would be absurd. It would be madness. 12. This is why we talked about the need for unity to have a place in the world. There is already talk about the year 2000, of the third millenium. What role are our peoples going to play in that millenium? This is why I used a phrase, thinking of the almost 200 years that have gone by since the independence movement of our peoples began, since the times of Bolivar who with such a clear vision analyzed the problems of our countries, the destiny of our countries, the need for unity of our countries. I remembered Marti, who predicted all these problems almost 100 ago. I thought of what we could have been had we united. We could be a great economic power, a great economic community similar to the large economic powers existing in the world today. 13. This is why I painfully said at one point that we could have been everything and we are nothing. I said it with pain because I think about the weaknesses of our forces to face this battle that is vital for the present and, above all, the future generations. These are the kinds of ideas that we have been defending everywhere, and we have defended them in this summit. I believe it is the only way in which we can think of having a future. I believe that I am not the only one that thinks in this way. This idea is sound and has strength. I believe that there will be more and more awareness of this phenomena. I think that this summit is evidence of this. 14. [Reporter] I was asking you about this also because some have already begun the countdown for Cuba. 15. [Castro] Yes. 16. [Reporter] They say that the Berlin wall went down; the socialist world collapsed; the Soviet Union is falling apart; Marxism has been defeated; and Cuba is approaching a period of transition, a change, an end of the project it has been working on up to now. 17. [Castro] Well, I believe that the revolutionary movement, the progressive movement in general, is going through a difficult stage. The fact that all of that is being said is evidence of what I mentioned before, that ideology at this time is stronger and is more current than ever, only that it is a reactionary ideology. Socialism is still very new, very new. It just emerged in the world. Not in the modern sense, but the foundations of capitalism are thousands of years old. Indeed, adverse events have taken place in East Europe and the Soviet Union is going through great difficulties. But, have the causes that engendered revolutions and socialism disappeared from the world? On the contrary, I believe that those causes are more present now than ever. If you consider statistical figures, there are more hungry people in the world than ever, there are more sick and unemployed people and more poverty. 18. In our own Latin America, which is not one of the most backward regions, the figures on the levels of poverty are impressive, they are substantial. There are 4 billion people living in poverty and underdevelopment in the world. Where did underdevelopment come from? It came from colonialism, capitalism, from the exploitation and looting of our countries. Those causes are more present now than ever. Who can say that these problems have been solved? One has to have a triumphalistic attitude and be too optimistic to think that everything has been solved regarding progressive and socialist ideas. 19. Just like the phoenix, they will rise stronger than ever from the ashes we are covered with today. What has capitalism solved? It has not solved any problem. It has ravaged the world. It has left all this poverty. It has created life styles and consumption models that are incompatible with the realities. They have poisoned the water, the oceans; I mean the rivers, lakes, oceans, the earth. They have created the most incredible waste. I always cite an example: Imagine if each Chinese had a car or wanted to have a car, if each one of the 1.1 billion Chinese people or if each one of the some 800 million Indians wanted to have a car and this life style and that Africa did the same and that almost 450 million Latin Americans did the same. How long would oil last? How long would gas last? How long would natural resources last? What would be left of the ozone layer? What would be left of the oxygen on the Earth? What would happen with the carbon dioxide? 20. What about all these phenomena that are changing the ecology of the world and are changing the Earth? They are making life more and more difficult on our planet. Is it that capitalism has given the world a life model, a society model? Should we not be thinking about more rational things such as education of the entire population, nutrition, health, decent housing, and a high cultural level? Has capitalism, with its blind laws, its selfishness as a principle, given us a model? Has it taught us a way out? Will the road of humankind be drawn by capitalism up to now? 21. One can talk about the crisis of socialism, but capitalism is in a worse crisis. It has no way out. It does not have solutions to the great problems of humankind, in every area, from human problems to social and ecological problems. Life cannot continue based on blind laws. Man should have the possibility of planning his own development, of planning his life, of using natural and human resources rationally and not going through this crazy rat race that has led us to nothing and will lead to nowhere. 22. Thus, I do not see why there is so much talk about predictions regarding socialism. I relate socialism to new ideas, advancement, progress, the ability of man to organize his life, design his society, and plan his future. Capitalism does not promise any of these things. I would come to the opposite conclusion, in spite of these setbacks the revolutionary movement has suffered, I would come to the conclusion that capitalism is going through an irreversible crisis and that it does not have a solution to the problems of humankind. 23. [Reporter] We noticed that the feeling now is that there is a need for open markets. We are told that we are going to make a society of opportunities, of freedom, of democracy. On the other hand, we see the masses in Czchekoslovakia, Yugoslavia, in these countries, in a euphoria of freedom. 24. [Castro] Well, that took place at a certain point because there was a lot of influence from the West. Do not forget that socialism developed in the most backward European countries. They were agricultural countries. Do not forget that it was circumstantial. This was not the case in Cuba. In Cuba, just as with the Mexican Revolution, the revolution was autochthonous. In Cuba, the revolution was a product of our own decisions, it was not circumstantial, nobody imposed it on us. It is a very different situation to that of all of those countries where, in addition, many different mistakes were made. There was also an ideological battle. The presence of a consumption society had a lot of influence. Many thought that they were going to live the next day like they live in Paris or London, even without working. They harbored many illusions. It is like the people who walk in the desert and from a distance believe they see lakes, rivers, and palm trees, and it turns out that they are only mirages. 25. From those societies they did not see the terrible part, the inequalities, the injustices, the lack of security, the alienating and alienated life, the crazy competition of some men against others, the jungle capitalism where the stronger one should prevail, and the stronger one does prevail, the injustice there is in capitalism, the inequality there is in capitalism, the existence of millionaires and beggars, the existence of people who have palaces, and of those who have to sleep under a bridge. Millions of people have to sleep under bridges in the United States. I can tell you that not a single person sleeps under a bridge in Cuba. 26. When winter arrives, millions of street people commit crimes in the United States so they will be taken to prison where they can keep warm and have something to eat. There are millions of vices of all kinds in the United States. All the problems with drugs, prostitution, and gambling are a result of capitalism. That does not exist in a truly socialist country. That does not exist in our country. 27. Why do we have to change a more just and organized society, a society that has the privilege of planning its future, for a chaotic and unequal society? What kind of freedom can one talk about when you think of the illiterate, the beggars, the unemployed, in the people who do not have health services, who do not have any kind of opportunities in life? What kind of democracy can one speak of when hundreds of millions and billions inherit these things as relatives pass to their heirs do, or as a throne is inherited? What kind of equality of opportunity can be spoken of when a person has nothing? Isolated cases of those who having been very poor at a certain time were able to become rich do not matter. These are isolated examples of Cinderellas that marry a prince. 28. I think of the story of my own father who was a son of very poor peasant Spaniards. At a certain time-he was hard working-he was able to employ other men and they were able to have.... [changes thought] There are so many more stories such as this one, of people who were very poor and were able to build some wealth. Those stories happen less and less. The opportunities are given to the important executives who studied in select schools and come from families who own shares of the large international companies or the large corporations. What are the opportunities that the son of the poor man, of the peasant, of the laborer has? They cannot be deceived with the song of the siren that he is going to have the opportunity to become a Rockefeller. The time of Rockefellers is over. The time when the banks and railroads began and turned men into great millionaires, that time is over. 29. There is no equality of opportunity. It is a lie. It is a total falsehood. In my own case, I remember the children of my age. I was the son of the landowner. I was the only one who could go to school and reach sixth grade, the only one to get a high school diploma, the only one who was able to attend the university and acquire the minimum level of culture needed to play a certain role in the life of his country. None of those hundreds of children had the remote opportunity. They did not even reach the fifth grade. I have also lived the experience of someone who was able to study and play a role. If instead of being the son of the landowner, I had been the son of one of those peasants, and had not died of hunger or some of the frequent diseases that did not receive medical attention, I would have not been able to play any role in my country. 30. Therefore, I cannot believe in those fairy tales because my own life experience taught me what the realities of this world are. I believe that our society is much more just and much more democratic, not only in its contents, but also in its structure. Are they going to tell me that the great model of democracy is the United States, where less than half of the people vote, where many people have so little respect for voting that they prefer to go out to a restaurant or to the movies on the day of the elections? They elect the president with 25 percent of the votes. Nobody else has anything to do with what happens for a number of years. They elect a president who has more power than an emperor, who can even begin nuclear war without consulting with anyone. This reminds me of Rome, and a more powerful Rome than the historic one, and some emperors who have more power than those of the Roman emperors. 31. How can I deep down come to the conclusion that this is ideal for humankind? This is a model of a government system. Therefore, I cannot agree under any circumstances with that sense of triumph on those ideas because I am saying that the problems of the world need to be solved. The key question is, how are they going to be solved? We will see if capitalism and neoliberalism are the ones that are going to solve these problems. They are the cause of the disasters the world is suffering from. 32. [Reporter] Commander, I ask about all this because this kind of talk about capitalism and imperialism is hardly heard anymore. It seems that it is outdated because something else prevails in the world. 33. [Castro] The old system. This is what is in style at this time. It can only be in style for the moment, considering everything I explained before. 34. [Reporter] Is there not a countdown on Cuba? 35. [Castro] In any case, I think there is a countdown of the type that takes place before takeoffs because there is also countdown for spacecraft. Countdowns are not always bad. Many times they are good. 36. [Reporter] There is a lot of talk about.... [changes thought] Even in Cuba we have had the opportunity of talking with people.... [changes thought] You were talking about access to education. There are people in Cuba who now say: I already went to school. I am an engineer and now I want to see the United States. They want more opportunities. 37. [Castro] We do not ban them from seeing the United States. The United States is the one that bans them from seeing it. We have opened wide the possibilities. First, everyone who wants to emigrate can do so. Secondly, we have been making it easier and easier for all of those who want to visit the United States and spend some time with relatives to visit there and return to Cuba. They can go and come back. Tens and tens of thousands of people travel to the United States and return every year. We make it easier and easier. So, we do not prevent anyone from making those trips to acquire that knowledge and experience. 38. Of course, a revolution is a revolution and demands sacrifices. We are not Belgium, the Netherlands, or Switzerland. They are developed and super-developed countries. We are a Third World country. We need to work hard for our development. Cuba is not the only one with this situation. Millions of Mexicans, in this country that has oil, that has a certain level of industrial development, cross the border every year in spite of the wall. There is talk about the Berlin Wall and that it had to be torn down. Why is there no talk about tearing down that huge wall the United States has on the Mexican border? It has electric fences, patrols, and millions of things. It is said that a million Mexicans are arrested at the border and returned every year. 39. I ask myself, if there is talk about walls, why is this wall not eliminated? Why are all the Mexicans who want to visit their relatives or look for jobs in the United States not allowed to travel to the United States if they want to? Why are the U.S. borders not opened to Dominicans? Hundreds of thousands cross the Mona Passage and go to Puerto Rico and then to New York. A million Dominicans live in New York. We have a phenomenon of many people from Third World countries who emigrate. This happens in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. This is not a situation that is exclusive to Cuba. 40. Cuba has been economically blocked by the United States for over 30 years. The United States has done everything possible to prevent our development. Now we are also enduring the economic consequences of the collapse of the East European socialist countries with which we had some trade and because of the objective difficulties of the Soviet Union. We are going through a special period. It is logical.... [changes thought] There were always people who wanted to travel to the United States because there always was and always will be people whose motivations are not patriotic, political, or revolutionary. They think about attaining better life styles and higher incomes. If income in a developed capitalist country is 15 or 20 times more than the income of a Third World country, those migration movements are logical. Many people travel. 41. Now, you tell my that there are some engineers who say: I am already an engineer. I know thousands of engineers who became engineers and devote their lives to the country, to work in the country, the development of the country. Dozens of thousands of scientists are placing us at the forefront in various fields of scientific research and technology. I also speak with thousands and dozens of thousands of people who are proud of their fatherland, their revolution, and are totally devoted to their work to take the country forward in the middle of these big challenges and difficulties. Over half a million Cubans have fulfilled internationalist missions-of one kind or another-in Third World countries. There is no country that is more generous, and benevolent and that expresses more solidarity than our people. I do not believe that there is another such example in the world. 42. I am truly proud and admire the virtues of our people. I see that this situation takes place at an incomparable higher rate in other countries. In reality, this is not exclusive of Cuba. Cuba is the country in which there is less brain theft. The best talents of Latin America have emigrated to Europe and the United States looking for research possibilities, better income, and better life styles. There has been a constant theft of talent. On the other hand, the best technical and scientific talents are in our country and are working for the country with great patriotism and revolutionary spirit. 43. [Reporter] But how much more sacrifice can Cuba make? Has the time not come to open some roads? 44. [Castro] Well, I think that all Third World countries need to make many sacrifices. We have been sacrificing for centuries. Africans were subjected to plundering for four centuries. Its population was subjected to kidnapping and was brought to this hemisphere as slaves. The Indian population of this hemisphere has been suffering marginalization and sacrifice for five centuries. Humankind has been suffering great sacrifices and always dreaming of a better world either in this life or the other one. Billions of people have had to be resigned and are resigned with the idea that there might be a better life than this one. 45. Now, for the first time, humankind has fostered hopes of truly just societies, of a true spirit of equality, fraternity, and freedom. These famous goals and slogans that spread around the world from the French Revolution have not been fulfilled anywhere. I ask myself, what is the freedom of the beggar compared to that of the millionaire? What is the equality between the beggar and the millionaire? What is the fraternity existing between the beggar and the millionaire? When I speak of a beggar I can also be referring to the unemployed, he who does not have a job, who does not have housing, who does not have schooling for himself and his children, who does not have land, who has nothing. There are hundreds of millions of such people in this hemisphere. 46. The Economic Commission for Latin America says that there are 183 million poor people. The congress held in Quito recently, at the end of last year, says there are 270 million poor people and 84 million of them are destitute. There is not a single destitute person in our country. We are not a country of rich people but there is not a single destitute, beggar, or barefoot child asking for charity in the streets. There is talk here about 270 million poor people, in this hemisphere, 62 percent of the population is poor. This does not mean that the rest are rich. There are middle stratas and 10 percent may have 50 percent of the gross income. Where is justice? How can those figures set as models? 47. I saw at the conference that many talked of the needs to redistribute wealth and the need of social justice. I was glad to hear it. But I thought I was hallucinating when I heard all that. Perhaps they were influenced by the Orozco paintings. 48. I hear that language is somewhat related to the events. What is the program and what is the way in which we are going to eliminate that category of poverty and destitution. They are realities that we are seeing everyday. You cannot see this in our country in spite of the fact that we are a Third World country. You will not find an illiterate and you will not find a man without a job. The person who does not have a job is given a subsidy in line with the austerity measures we have had to implement, because of the lack of raw material. We do not send anyone to the streets. We redistributed what we have. Even students who graduate from university get their jobs even if the factories do not need them. This is done so that they work next to a more experienced engineer so that he works. They form a reserve work force for the future. 49. So, these are our objectives, our ideals. I think they are much more just. I think there is more equality, more solidarity, more fraternity, more freedom. I ask myself if a capitalist society can speak on those terms. 50. [Reporter] Why, for example, within this framework, can those who have different views not be allowed to get organized? Why can political freedom not be allowed? Why are spaces not opened? 51. [Castro] Well, the problem is that forces have been polarized in our country; the ones who have favored Cuba and those who have favored the United States. We have endured the hostility for over 30 years. The war has gone on for over 30 years. There have been all kinds of war. Among them has been the brutal economic blockade that prevents us from even buying an aspirin in the United States. It is incredible. When there is talk about human rights, not a single word is said about the brutal violation of human rights of an entire country, that constitutes the U.S. economic blockade, to prevent its development. The revolution polarized the forces, the ones that were with it and the ones against it and together with the United States. 52. I say it frankly-I believe it is in line with the reality- that as long as the reality persists, we cannot give the enemy any kind of opportunity for it to carry out its historic task of destroying the revolution. 53. [Reporter] Does that mean that dissidents will not have a space in Cuba? 54. [Castro] They will not have space if they are pro-Yankee dissidents. There are many people in Cuba who think differently and they are respected. There are a number of people. Now, the creation of all the conditions for the party of imperialism does not exist. We are not going to offer them either. I am characterized by the fact that I speak frankly and say what I think. We look for pluralism within our party. A good example is the nomination of candidates as area delegates. They constitute the foundation of the election of all the powers. The party is not the one to nominate. The area residents gathered in a meeting are the ones who make the nominations. This has been done since the times of Greece which, by the way, was not a democratic society because it was a society of owners and slaves. [sentence as heard] Slaves and other social classes had no rights. The dominating class met at the public square. 55. In our country, all citizens meet in their electoral area. They are the ones who nominate the candidates. They can nominate up to eight. It is not the party. They cannot nominate more than eight. We are not going to have 80, or less than two candidates in one voting area. In order to be elected they need to get the majority of votes plus one. Over 95 percent of the voters participate in our elections. Naturally, the United States is not going to talk about this and are not going to publicize how our society is. You know that there is a great media monopoly in the world. All this is ignored and wants to be ignored. The people and not the party are the ones who nominate in our country. 56. [Reporter] But is not a single party a very narrow framework for democracy? 57. [Castro] Well, it depends on what democracy. For revolutionary, socialist democracy, it has been a broad framework. The most self-sacrificing, most selfless people are in this party, those who have to be the first in everything, in voluntary work and internationalist missions. To be a party member is really to be deserving of the people's respect but also to make the greatest efforts, the greatest sacrifices. The most advanced, most self- sacrificing, most revolutionary people in the country are in the party. We believe that our party has promoted much greater participation by the people than there is anywhere else in the world. That is our view, our idea. Or is there only one form of democracy? I have already spoken to you about some of the characteristics of a capitalist democracy, which in my view can in no way be a model for democracy. 58. [Reporter] There are those .... [rephrases] [Chilean President] Patricio Aylwin said to us that the Latin American presidents have achieved legitimacy and now must attain effectiveness. In general the presidents talk very insistently that they have received their backing through elections, that it comes from the ballot box. You have seen how the press and the people constantly ask why there are no elections in Cuba. 59. [Castro] Well, why do they not know that there are elections in Cuba? Every two and a half years we hold elections. Every five years we elect the National Assembly and the Council of State. This is through an electoral method in which those who make the nominations are the citizens. So there is a broad base in this regard that no other country has. It is not the parties that make the nominations, or the party that makes the nominations, but rather the citizens make the nominations and elect those representatives who are the ones who make up the branches of government at the various levels. 60. [Reporter] In the case of the presidency, for example? 61. [Castro] They elect the National Assembly, which elects the Council of State. The Council of State elects its president. There is a collective government. What do I say? As president, I have much less power than any other president in Latin America. I cannot appoint ministers. I cannot appoint ambassadors; I never appoint ambassadors. The Council of State appoints them, and I participate as just one more in the Council of State in selecting a minister, selecting an ambassador, selecting the top government officials. If you analyze my constitutional powers, they are much less than those of any other president in Latin America. Power is much more shared. 62. If you ask me if I have authority, I can say that yes, I do have authority, moral authority, an authority that derives from history. If you ask if I have influence, yes, I have influence, but I cannot appoint a minister. In general, I often do not even propose anyone as a minister. The proposals come from various channels. They come from the Council of State, when a minister must be changed. Rather, I intervene when I am of the opinion that it would be good to change a minister for certain reasons, whatever, because more efficiency is needed, because a minister is tired. I may make a proposal, but I do not seek out a replacement for the minister. I can assure you of this. The powers that other Latin American presidents have are much greater than the ones I have. The type of authority or influence I have is different. It is of a moral nature. 63. A president like that of the United States has, shall I say, much greater personal power than I have, and many more powers. He has many more powers than a Roman emperor. He can declare a nuclear war, imagine! Is there anything more far-reaching than a nuclear war? The U.S. President has the power to begin one and to use nuclear weapons without consulting with Congress and without consulting with anyone. So if we get to the bottom of things, if we analyze things, we find a lot of false premises in the arguments that are used to judge Cuba. 64. [Reporter] Nevertheless, these are very widespread arguments. 65. [Castro] Well, what explanation would you give for that? We do not have the media assets that the empire has. The new Rome creates public opinion, not only ....[rephrases] Well, it creates public opinion throughout the world. Often the influence of these media is so great that the citizens of our countries do not even know who the founders of their independence were. In contrast, they know a lot about the people on the television programs that come from the United States, or the characters that come from the United States. You find that many children know little about the history of their country, but they know a lot about all that information, even entertainment, that comes canned from the United States to Latin America. Why do we not think about these phenomena which harm our culture and national identity so much? Why do we not think about these truths, that there is a monopoly of the media through the satellites, through tens of billions? [number reference not identified] Do you have the broadcasting power the U.S. media have? Could you guarantee through your network that your interview would be seen throughout Latin America and at the same time in Africa, Asia, and Europe? 66. I can talk for hours with you, but when you analyze the number of people who have had the opportunity to see this, it is one out of every thousand of those who have the opportunity to see and hear what the major U.S. television networks broadcast. Why do we forget about these facts? 67. [Reporter] But in this world, which is so open, is it possible to maintain a closed process? 68. [Castro] What is meant by a closed process? 69. [Reporter] That is.... 70. [Castro, interrupting] Do we have to go over to capitalism in any case? You can ask me whether in this world, which is so capitalist, one can maintain the ideals of socialism in one country, in several countries. I say that it is our most basic duty, since we are men of principles, men of convictions. We must fight to our last breath to defend these ideas. I do not think history will condemn us for this, since the world today is so unjust that it will not be able to prevail forever, since it is so unequal and so inhuman. Some day, even if we are crushed-because many of the greatest ideas began with martyrdom-even if we have to be martyrs to these ideas, we would not lose anything. To the contrary; we would be nourishing with our sacrifice and our blood the victory of these ideas and principles in the future. 71. [Reporter] I have also asked you this because there are many people who think that the obstacle to Cuba's integration into Latin America is the continuation of the socialist system. 72. [Castro] I do not think so, because Cuba is precisely the one that is in the best position to integrate itself, economically as well as politically. Of course, one must seek a means of adapting, of joining together. As [Mexican President] Salinas de Gortari said, unity does not mean uniformity. We cannot conceive of a integrated and unified Latin America that is uniform. We can use our imagination, our creative spirit, to insert our economy into the Latin American economy. We are very open in this regard, and as we proposed at the conference, we are willing to give preferential treatment to Latin American capital that is invested in Cuba. We have to find practical ways to bring about this integration. What is basically needed for this is the will. We are an absolutely independent country. We can do whatever is thought necessary to achieve economic integration and then the political integration. Latin America has begun to take the first steps in that direction. 73. We are willing to integrate ourselves into it. We are willing to get along. But, well, has anyone put it as a condition that Mexico renounce its state ownership of oil in order to be integrated? Or that Venezuela renounce its state ownership of oil? No one has demanded this. Many Latin American governments have control over their fundamental riches. They have opened up, privatized, with other kinds of enterprises. Some have gone so far as to privatize streets and parks. We would say that that is going too far, but there are mixed economies within the Latin American countries themselves. Why can there not be policies of mixed economies between the Latin American countries, some with a greater share for state ownership and others with a lesser share for state ownership? 74. So these are subjects that should be studied, gone into in depth, but my private conviction is that we are in a better position for economic integration, and even for political integration, than any other country. I have said that we are not very jingoist. If one day we have to renounce our flag, which we love so much, we will renounce it if we must in the service of the political integration and unity of Latin America. For us this is a very important value. The same is true if one day they want to organize a just world state, not a world under the baton and the domination of a superpower that wants to establish order. If the world progressed so much that it began universal economic and political integration, we would also renounce our flag because we are internationalists. We are not jingoists. We are not narrow nationalists. We are patriots; we love our nation. We respect and uphold our national values, but our philosophy is basically that of internationalism. I think we are much better prepared than anyone for integration. 75. [Reporter] Lastly, Mr. President, there have been two days of intensive work in Guadalajara. You have talked with many presidents. You have seen the people in the streets. We would like to know what impression Fidel Castro is taking away from this meeting. Yesterday, President Salinas said that the bonfire of integration had been lit. 76. [Castro] He said that. It was a very good metaphor. Well, really it was not two days, it was three days of work-two there and the previous ones. There were many meetings. I am taking away a very good impression from the meeting. I would say that the meeting was historic by the very fact that it was held. Even if we had sat down together only to have coffee, it would have been historic. But at the meeting we had dialogue, we talked, we discussed interesting subjects. There were many capable people at that meeting, and many very interesting things were said. 77. We should not expect miracles from the meeting, but we have taken a gigantic step. We had the opportunity of exchanging contacts with many people. I think a process of getting to know each other occurred, of exchanging information, and of rapprochement among the Latin American countries. With respect to organization, it was excellent. Mexico has shown that it has great organizational ability to hold a difficult event like this one. 78. We were treated excellently. The hospitality could not have been greater. I will never forget the care and affection we received from everyone, from the workers, and very especially from all the people in Guadalajara. So I feel once more in debt to Mexico. I feel one more reason to be eternally grateful to this great nation and these great people. 79. [Reporter] Thank you very much, Mr. President. -END-