Castro Speaks at Closing of European Solidarity Meeting FL1512183393 Havana Cuba Vision Network in Spanish 0137 GMT 14 Dec 93 FL1512183393 Havana Cuba Vision Network Spanish BFN [Speech by President Fidel Castro at closing ceremony of European Solidarity With Cuba meeting in Havana on 11 December -- recorded] [Text] I guess this is being translated -- although I have been left with doubts here as to the languages you speak. [passage indistinct] They improvised in this theater belonging to the school a real international lecture hall, right? All right: It is certainly not that I am arguing about participating or refusing to participate in this event. I must tell you what is really happening. The month of December is always a terrible month because of the great number of activities that end up taking place, activities of all kinds. Many of these activities are, of course, domestic activities, a great number of events that are held [words indistinct] of meetings of the National Assembly [words indistinct] meetings of the Science and Technology Forums, commemorations, construction works that are completed; and, to sum it up: We have had quite a lot of work -- to the point where we find ourselves obliged to participate in something daily, sometimes without even knowing how we are going to do so because some of the activities take place simultaneously. And, of course, one cannot take up all the space in our newspaper, given the scarce amount of paper we have available. Indeed, I used to make longer speeches [laughter], and have now gotten in the habit of making them brief. [laughter] A number of different factors have contributed to this. Take, for example, the conference on ecology in Rio de Janeiro. One is given seven, six minutes, at all those meetings. And I have had to become an expert at making brief speeches [chuckles]. Forced to, right? But I broke a record: In Rio de Janeiro I spoke for just five minutes! [laughter] I think I was lucky enough to have been able to say a number of things in those five minutes, as far as I was able to tell there, from the opinion of (?the gathering). I observed everyone else. Some spoke for 8 minutes; others for 12; others for 16; and one person spoke for 23 minutes. [chuckling] So they did not respect the rules. I myself did my job properly there. Now, given the scarcity of paper and knowing that many of the things I say...[pauses] not these things. No, here I am speaking [words indistinct]. I also have had to reduce the length of the speeches, and it is much better that way -- for me, for the newspapers, and for the audience. We all come out ahead that way! People were talking to me about your event. There was an event, a meeting, of European Parliament deputies going on. [words indistinct] I was to have met with them. There also was the movie event, the New Latin American Film event there. Last night I had to meet with them, too. That makes for a lot of hours. A reception was organized for them and there were about 800 people there. So, really, there has not been enough time. Corrieri would send me emissaries, as would Balaguer. Everyone would tell me you were waiting for me to at least drop by here, and [words indistinct] (?really) on the one hand, other occupations; and on the other hand, your programs [passage indistinct] And I do not have any [words indistinct] participating in the historic date being commemorated, ranging from Doctors and Science Day, on the third; to the day Granma landed, on the second; to Maceo's death on the seventh; to the Central American and Caribbean Games, [passage indistinct] the slightest participation in that. But every time there is an event, everyone pressures me tremendously to participate in the activities. Many of my comrades want me to do part of their work for them. It is their job! But here this is really not the case. I did not even need to be reminded that you were here. I think I have enough elements with which to judge and be able to appreciate how valuable and how meaningful [words indistinct] have crossed the Atlantic, have mobilized and have come to Cuba to organize this event of solidarity with our country at a moment when the country so greatly needs it. It was my most elemental duty to meet with you, even if only for a few minutes. I have had news of how the event has been unfolding and I know that many comrades have participated, and that they have provided information on very varied and diverse subjects. I did not have the privilege or opportunity to listen to these comrades, but I think they spared me from having to discuss many issues on this occasion. We still have Robertico's [Foreign Minister Roberto Robaina] closing speech which will surely add other things. On the way here, I was thinking: What to tell the delegates to this solidarity meeting? What problem should I discuss that has not been discussed? Of course, not the problems of Cuba; I believe you have heard enough of Cuba's problems in the last few days. The meeting with the European parliamentarians was red hot because not even in the European Parliament can they discuss things with the freedom they discussed them here, including the questions raised, of all kinds, and issues. They even put us on the bench, put us through a Nuremberg trial [laughter] and who knows what else happened there. [applause] [Words indistinct] with a few friends there. The international foreign press was there. It was an opportunity to show the fervent respect they feel and the concern for rights and liberties. You can imagine what it means to have the entire Western propaganda machinery aimed at one country. You can imagine what is entailed following the collapse of the socialist bloc; there is only one enemy left for the empire -- us, alone. Who could have told us that we would have had this privilege. How could our predecessors, the generations that began the struggle for our country's independence, Marti, Maceo, and so many others, imagine that someday the honor would fall on Cuba, the difficult honor -- it has to be said -- of having to withstand alone such an immense burden of pressure and hostility, such an immense burden of blockade -- alone -- without the least ethical justification. I was asked....[pauses] In the meeting with the parliamentarians there was a reporter who had just interviewed the pope. Just by chance I was next in line. I got the honor of being next, following the pope. The pope had never granted an interviewed in 15 years. [applause] The reporter asked me: Could we meet tomorrow, perhaps? I was already caught and could not get away. The European parliamentarians told me that he was a very famous reporter. You can imagine: Following an interview with the pope he became even more famous. He is an Italian of Polish descent, like the pope. I told him: You got lucky, your background helped to get that interview. [laughs] He must be a truly pleasant individual. He told me: Tomorrow? I told him: No, tonight, following this meeting I will meet with you. He asked: For half an hour? For half an hour. He asked when I thought the hostility, the blockade might end? In Kennedy's first or the second term? [sentence as heard] I had told him the old history of how every president thinks about the second term the moment he is elected for the first. [Words indistinct] a second term when he will not have the commitments and worries, after creating a very hostile public opinion which is beginning to change of course. This is what is so absurd about the entire policy of that country against us. Now they are afraid of that public opinion and above all [words indistinct] the important influence from immigration, the counterrevolutionary immigration. Although a great part of the immigration was economic. Often times, the excuse of being against the Revolution was used to get free entry. Cuba is the only country in the world whose citizens can go to the United States without asking for a visa. The consulate denies them visas but gives it to them with great ceremony once they arrive in the United States, no matter who they are, even individuals who might have done despicable things here. These individuals are entitled to residency status that no other country in the world gets. At the Mexican border, however, the United States -- inside Mexican territory, because all that was Mexican territory before it was taken away from them -- has created a Maginot Line, or a new Berlin Wall. Despite this, I believe 1 million Mexicans cross the border illegally. It is dark story. Mexicans, Haitians, everyone else is deported. Cubans serve as propaganda material and are not [words indistinct]. They do not even respect their own laws in their policy of hostility against Cuba. I was telling this reporter that Cuba is a small Caribbean country. It is not a large country with a gigantic population like China. [passage indistinct] does not have large resources. [Words indistinct] Therefore, if it is seen from the economic point of view, it would never be of great interest. We would have to analyze things from the point of view of principles. I was stressing that they do not have an ethical view of the issue toward Cuba because there is no way that what is done against us can be justified, especially right now when the socialist bloc has collapsed. They no longer have the excuse of the threat of communism, no longer have any kind of argument to try to justify it. They have none. They do it simply because they want to do it, regardless. They want to rule us, want to impose on us a system of their choosing. In other words, under this situation, the struggle and life are truly hard for us. We cannot harbor any expectations. The only expectation we can have is the struggle of our people and the peoples of the world, the pressures of the peoples of the world, the increased awareness that what that powerful nation does against us is not only criminal and unjustified but ridiculous. They criticize us for not having this or that. It is like strangling someone, hanging someone from a tree, and then criticizing him for not breathing. [laughter, applause] This is what they do to us. This is why I am not going to speak long to you. As I mentioned to the European parliamentarians, when I met with them, I knew they had discussed every issue, and I told them: I am not going to speak about Cuba. I told them: Tell me about Europe. How are things going? What plans exist? How is integration going to be achieved? What does each thing being done entail? I also was interested in the measures that are going to be taken now to reach an agreement on the Uruguay Round on tariffs. What accords had been reached with the Japanese and the United States? In other words, I was interested in global issues. It was like saying: We have discussed Cuba enough. Let us discuss the world, strategic, vital issues. I truly say this because I am greatly concerned about the world's future at the rate things are going. I did not want to talk about Cuba's interests. I asked them what were they going to do in agriculture. What solutions? What measures? I told them: I am not going to ask about sugar because it would be a little selfish, at a time when the world faces so many problems, for us to worry and discuss what is going to happen with our sugar. How is sugar -- a very important element in our economy -- going to fare in [words indistinct] projections, developments of the international situation. I told them I was not interested in that. I was interested in food production. What was Europe's view on food production in the world. I told then that I am greatly concerned with all this. It seems to me that we are experiencing one of the most truly difficult times in mankind's history. So much has been said about the disappearance of the nuclear holocaust or war, but unfortunately this danger has not disappeared. The number of countries with nuclear weapons has increased. [Words indistinct] how is all this going to end? The risks for the integration of Russia are real. Everything that has unfortunately happened in that area of the world represents danger of internal conflict and even nuclear conflicts. Who knows? Form this point of view, what has been gained in terms of security is not much. Although there have been gains in the reduction of strategic weapons, and we could say that great progress has been made because before they could eliminate mankind 20 times over, but now they can only kill it 10 times over. The nuclear danger has decreased, but they can still kill mankind 10 times over without nuclear weapons. They can kill mankind 10 times over with what is happening to the environment and the phenomena that are taking place in the world. According to what the parliamentarians told me, one of them explained that --he was better versed on this -- [words indistinct] has tried to reduce the [words indistinct] arable land, kill I do not know how many million cows. In a hungry world, a world which a few days ago had 5.541 billion inhabitants and which in six years will have 6 billion, in a hungry world where the population increases by 1 billion people every 10 years -- something never before seen ...[pauses] In 1900 there were 1.6 billion people and now there are the number I just mentioned. It will have 6 billion. In one century alone, the population will expand approximately three times more than in tens of millions of years. This is unbelievable. The population is not growing where the wealth is concentrated, where there is a certain relative abundance. It grows where poverty is concentrated and where the worst cases of erosion of the land, expansion of the deserts, etc., is taking place. To that world, the solution that globalization of the economy, neoliberalism, and the imposition of blind market laws are advocating is to kill cows, dairy cows where million of children are starving to death from lack of milk. Is the solution to reduce the agrarian land area when we have all these famines [words indistinct]? Is it rational to do this? Is this the world they are offering mankind for the future? I told them that since they want to globalize everything, the world economy, the unimagined kingdom of the corporations [words indistinct] engaged in a fierce competition like never before in history. New phenomena are taking place in a world moving toward blocs, powerful, very wealthy economic blocs, where transnationals have more power daily. In the same measure that the economic power of governments weakens, the power of transnationals increase, as well as their decision and political power. They have globalized politics and have taken upon themselves the right of intervening in any country under any pretext, and have a UN Security Council at the service of the most powerful nation, a Security Council that follows the interventionist policies drafted for it. They even do things such as bringing food with tanks, like they did in Somalia. This cannot be the solution because someday the entire African continent might end up like Somalia, the entire continent at the rate it is going. It can almost be predicted when these phenomena are going to take place. Are we going to solve world hunger by killing the people with guns? Hunger has killed many people in Somalia but since the U.S. troop and foreign troop intervention, beginning with the U.S. troops, 10,000 Somali men, women, and children have been killed -- we can add -- in a few weeks, rather than in a few months. In other words, they have globalized politics and want to establish a global police state. I say: Why not globalize solutions to the economic problems [words indistinct] instead what is globalized is interventions, the empire of the transnationals but not the solutions to the problems because the world they seek to establish has no place for the Third World. In other words, there is no place for three-fourths of mankind. They are designing a world for 1 billion people and the most appalling tragedy for 5 or 6 billion people. Within 25 or 39 years the number of people in the world might be eight or nine billion, and it continues to grow. The population is not growing in those countries with relative abundance. I call it relative abundance because there is great abundance for many and there are always many who do not enjoy any abundance. It is an unethical world, unencumbered by feelings toward mankind. The people who advocate this philosophy do not care at all for ethical issues. All the arguments are technical and based on the economy [words indistinct] especially regarding facts such as those of reducing under such circumstances the arable land and killing cows. In other words, they cannot defend this. This is undefensible. It is irrational. It is absurd for a mankind which they want to globalize. Of course, there are very serious problems that make this picture more complex than ever before in history -- real, objective environmental problems. One goes to sleep and awakes hoping scientists are wrong. According to every projection, the prospects are dire and there is great inability to change it. They ought to also globalize the solution of environmental problems or the fight for [words indistinct] if today [words indistinct] of all the accords of that meeting, of an incredible selfishness. [applause] There was a great concern there. We saw many countries there that fear disappearing soon. Many state islands with small land surfaces will disappear if the sea rises four or five meters. These problems are truly dramatic when the data is analyzed on how carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing year after year. How many parts per million where there 100 years ago? How many are there now? How many will be there in another 20 or 30 years? We are beginning to witness physical phenomena such as global warming and climate changes. In this short period of history -- since the beginning of the Revolution -- we have already observed in Cuba consequences of climatic changes that are truly disconcerting. There are droughts during the rainy season, heavy rain during the dry season, stronger hurricanes, and sea penetrations. In 1992 we experienced a massive sea penetration. In 1993, a year had not gone by when we had an even greater sea penetration -- two years in a row. The second one was the highest ever recorded. Devastating climatic changes are already beginning to take place. You can imagine when the sea penetrates a significant portion of the city's coastal area as result of these new phenomena. Nine out of the last 10 years have been the hottest in history. This verifies the global warming projections. The results of global warming have been studied mathematically. What will happen when the atmosphere reaches certain temperatures, what happens to the polar caps? And not only to the polar caps [words indistinct] but also the volume of water increases at higher temperatures. [Words indistinct] is it being said that the increase will possibly be five or six meters in the next 50 years. They are not talking centuries. They are talking a generation's lifetime. What problems are we going to encounter in such a short period of time? This is related to an incredible demographic explosion. [passage indistinct] The Chinese have been conducting a great effort in the last few years and have managed to lower the growth rate, but their population continues to increase by 16 million people a year. They have almost 1.2 billion people. In 25 years, well, in less than 25 years, China will have 1.5 billion people. India, a neighboring country, will soon have a similar amount of people. By the year 2025, these two countries alone will have 3 billion people. Of course, their growth also generates more pollution, but how can this be avoided if the solution of the economic, social, and environmental problems is not globalized. They have to live, have to develop. [Words indistinct] is imposed by the growth in population. They need increasing amounts of fertilizers, energy, need to consume more fuel in order to reach an extremely modest standard of living. The per capita income of India's population is $300 or $400. Compare this with Europe's, which is between $20,000 and $30,000. You cannot tell these countries not to develop. What might be the solution to these problems? [Words indistinct] and India, but there are countries such as Bangladesh that have today over 100 million people and soon will have over 200 million, and it is surrounded by China, India, and the Himalayas. If the water level rises as result of global warming, where are those tens of millions of people going to go? A good portion of their land surface would be lost. I am not even mentioning Africa. What problems await tomorrow's world? The problems do not end with carbon dioxide, there is the problem with the ozone layer. It is not only a matter of climate changes but also of the disappearance of the protection the atmosphere for mankind caused by the amounts of CFC, chlorofluorocarbon -- products with CFC. The CFC released today will reach the ozone layer in 17 or 18 years with disastrous effects. On this, the industrialized countries have reached an agreement to take certain measures. By the year 2000 they expect to have changed those products, but after the year 2000 all the CFC released for decades will continue to reach the ozone layer. There are the problems with methane. There is the problem with acid rain. These are serious problems, not things invented by scientists to scare people. Where will the people from Bangladesh go to live? To China? To India? To Mount Everest? These are real problems and no one is talking about them. Well, there is talk but in a different sense. The say: These are the problems. However, they do not speak of solutions. Is it perhaps that neoliberalism is going to solve all these problems? Is the globalization of the economy, as selfish as it is, going to solve these problems? The difference between a Bangladesh citizen with a gross per capita income of $170 and a Swiss citizen with a gross per capita income of almost $34,000 is more than 200-fold. Many years ago the United Nations stressed the need to begin to reduce this abyss between wealthy developed countries, the so- called countries of the north and the rest of the world. This difference does not end, stall, or drop. This difference, unfortunately, [words indistinct] per year. Comrades, with this I want to say....[pauses] Friends, I believe that in this time and world we are not only friends but also comrades because we have to confront all these issues together. These are truly serious, serious problems next to which our problems are even insignificant. The problems of Cuba are a very small part of the problems of mankind. Under these conditions: Is what is being done against us fair? Is it logical? Does it make sense? For many years, Cuba has been fighting for the Third World at the United Nations, independent of our interests; defending issues that many times went against our national interests. I can cite an example: Cuba immediately supported the campaign against smoking. However, tobacco is one of Cuba's most important sources of hard currency. We did not hesitate to support the global health campaign because it was in the interest of mankind's health. And like this, there are many other things for which Cuba has waged a consistent battle all through the Revolution. We have been preventing problems. We have been foreseeing them; unfortunately, they are becoming ever greater realities. Cuba has made a great international participation in the struggles of other peoples against colonialism and oppression. Today, there is joy in the world because apartheid is about to end. [Words indistinct] in that great victory of the African peoples, the Cuban effort was a factor. In attaining this victory, Cuban lives were lost and blood was shed in Angola fighting against South Africa. [applause] The defeat of South Africa's racists was needed to accelerate the liberation process. It would have arrived one day, sooner or later, but our effort and blood helped speed it up. This is well known by our friends and comrades in the African National Congress: the significance of Cuba's efforts toward that goal. No other country fought. What did they do with South Africa? They armed it to its teeth. What did they do with South Africa? They allowed it to have nuclear weapons. I was recalling that several years ago there was talk of an explosion, a blast recorded by U.S. satellites. It was a nuclear test, but nothing else was said about it. Are we to believe that the United States was removed from what was happening in South Africa? The Angolan war was already going on. Twice we had to fight against South Africans in Angola: first in 1975 and later during the final period. We risked everything there. We made a supreme effort possible only through the generosity of our people's will to fight. More than 50,000 men were involved in the final phase, when we could not afford to risk being weak because we might experience defeat. This happened so many thousands of miles away and when our troops were advancing toward Namibia's border in the fight against the South Africans; we were aware they might have nuclear weapons. Today, it is known that they had eight nuclear bombs. Yet even that would not have stopped us. This is to show you how much hypocrisy there is in global politics. Recently, they almost declared war on the DPRK, not because it has nuclear weapons but because it disagreed with that nonproliferation accord, because it rejected it. They have been threatened with war, but the South Africans were helped and tolerated and silence was maintained. Other evidence of that hypocrisy was recently published. The United States conducted more than 200 secret nuclear tests, more than 200 tests in past years. What cynicism. Such revelations are made every so often. A few years ago the Senate was discussing the assassination attempts made on my life by the Central Intelligence Agency, a U.S. government institution [words indistinct] the CIA itself -- or I do not know what other institution -- spoke of these attempts as if they were something great and they declassified some of these documents. They talked about how they planned the attempts, how they carried them out, and how they elaborated the plans. Well, all this was done without paying me any compensation. [crowd laughs, applauds] They have organized dozens and dozens of plans. Many times millions of dollars were [words indistinct] supposedly, it would be so much money that I would have some left over. [chuckles] They were not supposed to pay me anything because I did not do anything on my own; but to the country, they were. Back then, we did not know so much about international laws or we could have protested this when they came up with all the evidence during the Senate hearings. I believe that under U.S. law the leaders and those that do this go unpunished and can commit all types of crimes. In other words, there is a great deal of hypocrisy in all this. I mention this to contrast Cuba's foreign policy over the years. They have been years of struggle in support of other peoples. I can assure you that very few countries have been so giving, selfless, and altruistic in international solidarity with other peoples. Today we can say this and we continue to practice it. To this day in many countries there are Cuban doctors working for free, despite the special period. Despite the special period, we have not suspended our cooperation with the children of Chernobyl. [applause] Just look at how this small Caribbean country, blockaded by the United States and in the special period, continues to extend aid. This country has given more help to the victims of the Chernobyl disaster, 10 times more than the help of the rest of the countries of the world combined. Because in some countries they gave a one-week vacation to some of the children. How did the United States help the victims of the Chernobyl disaster? They invited some of these children to Disney World. They took them on an outing, a vacation. It was nothing serious. That tragedy moved us and it was regrettable that the USSR did not do more for them. They were not given any treatment. If we have a disaster, such as the one that recently happened on the eastern side of the country where thousands of homes were destroyed, everyone immediately goes there, despite the difficulties, to help those who suffered the consequences of the disaster. We are used to this. We have developed an awareness. We provided aid when there were similar disasters in Central America, even in governments with which we did not have relations. I give you another example. Several years ago, an earthquake killed approximately 70,000 people in Peru. We had no diplomatic relations with Peru. Our people made 100,000 blood donations, 100,000 blood donations in just eight or 10 days to help the Peruvian people. So all these ideas and worries over the situation of the world, the Third World specifically, are very close to us. Today we have said that Cuba's main internationalist role is to preserve its independence and Revolution, and the achievements of the Revolution. [applause] We consider this an internationalist duty because we have the deep conviction that we have acted properly and justly. Our actions are based on principles. This policy has been applied internally and externally. We have not changed our rules since we were at war, where not one prisoner was mistreated. That attitude has been maintained to this day and will continue [words indistinct] [applause] because we have been educated in the fight against injustice, abuse, crime, and tyranny. The awareness we have achieved we maintain as no other revolutionary process has been maintained. This is well known to all and it has happened in each of the revolutions, except in this one. That is the objective truth that stands above the mountains of calumny that have been written against our country. This is the only country in which, even during a special period, you will not see pictures of misery like those of children and people in many Latin American and Third World countries. There have never been death squads in this country. There have never been people missing in this country. There has never been a assassination [words indistinct] and anything contrary to this could never be proven. [applause] Nevertheless, our enemies claim they are concerned over human rights to [words indistinct]. What did they do in Argentina, where according to estimates anywhere from 10,000 to 30,000 people disappeared? They just vanished. No one even knows where the bodies are. Often, bodies were thrown into the ocean with weights. Children were taken from their mothers. They were just taken from them. The children of these victims were distributed. That is why, later on, associations of grandparents such as the Plaza de Mayo reclaimed their grandchildren. [applause] These mothers lost their children and grandchildren. This had never happened in history. Relations were never broken, even in occupied Europe under Hitler, where so many atrocities were committed. To the contrary, some of the most loving ties that you could ever imagine existed between the United States and the Argentine military government. They used them. We have spoken much about Nicaragua and the dirty war. It was the 401st Battalion of Argentine Intelligence that sent the first instructors and organizers of the dirty war to Nicaragua. The dirty war was in Nicaragua and El Salvador. That is why they felt so spoiled and pampered that they decided to invade the Falkland Islands, to claim them by force because they thought the empire would take their side in view of their brilliant service in Central America and other places. What the United States did was to side with Great Britain, as everyone knows. It had excellent and loving relations with that government. What were the relations with Pinochet after Allende's death? The murder [applause] and disappearance of thousands of people. What were the relations with South Africa, even to this date when it is impossible for that government to continue existing? As I said before: They tolerated the development of nuclear weapons. Then you have Cuba, blockaded. They want to blockade it, step on it, and strangle it. Unquestionably, they want to kill our ideas. They want to kill the example of our people. They do not want to leave a trace of dignity, independence, and progressive spirit in the world because this is not the ideology of global control of the economy under neoliberal principles. This is not the ideology of the transnationals -- to tell the truth. This explains the hate against us and the cruelty against us. This is the reason for the importance for Cuba and the world....[pauses] We all are defending a common cause, ours and yours, that of the Third World and the entire world when we speak of these problems, when we sress these ideas, and when we fight for them. I believe that this pressure alone, sooner or later, will eliminate the conditions under which our people has to struggle today, has to try to develop. They do not care about the vote obtained at the United Nations. They despise it [words indistinct] the last resolution, when more than 80 countries voted against the blockade. Four, including the United States, voted in favor. I know that one of those countries later regretted it. They regretted it because sometimes ambassadors can be bought. Only four of them do not care. They cannot continue indefinitely to underestimate international public opinion. They cannot continue to underestimate their own opinions. I heard that the Reverend Lucius Walker spoke here. He is a U.S. citizen who is waging a heroic battle, along with a group of Pastors for Peace, to create an awareness in that country. The seed they planted continues to grow. The U.S. public opinion is very important. The U.S. Government cares more about the U.S. public opinion, basically for political and electoral reasons, than they do about world opinion. But the battle they are waging is a very important one [words indistinct] to help us in these circumstances [words indistinct] Since I said that recently my speeches have been brief, I must keep my word and end this speech before I bore you too much. [crowd says: No!] What I basically wanted to express to you was our appreciation and recognition of the support you have given us. It represents a great deal to our people, especially in a moral and spiritual sense, because it is like an injection of energy in the midst of our battle, a battle that, together, we will fight and win. Thank you very much. [applause] [crowd chants: Fidel, Fidel.]