60 years of the criminal US imperialist blockade against the Cuban Revolution

Source: marxism.com

by Jorge Martin 09 February 2022

On 3 February 1962, US president Kennedy signed proclamation 3447, decreeing an embargo on all trade with Cuba, which was to enter into effect on 7 February. This marked the official beginning of a 60-year blockade (though the imperialist assault had started earlier), which has progressively been strengthened and tightened.

The aims of this campaign of imperialist bullying were openly declared in an April 1960 secret memorandum by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs Lestor Mallory. The memorandum, optimistically entitled “The Decline and Fall of Castro”, starts by establishing the following fact: “the majority of Cubans support Castro”. What’s the problem, one would think? There is a government in Cuba that has the overwhelming support of the population. Why should this worry the US? Ah, but, as Mallory points out: “Fidel Castro and other members of the Cuban Government espouse or condone communist influence.”


Image: National Archives

That is the problem. “We cannot allow a country go Communist just because the population supports it!”, is what he seems to be saying. This line of reasoning sums up the total worth of Washington’s references to the US defending “democracy” in its dealings with Cuba. The Cuban people can give itself any government it wants… as long as that is the government US corporations want.

Punishing Cuba with hunger

Incidentally, at the time of writing this secret memorandum, 6 April 1960, the Cuban Revolution had not yet made any statement nor taken any measure which could be described as socialist or communist. It had implemented agrarian reform and had taken steps to reassert its national sovereignty (both national democratic measures). It was only later that same year and in response to US provocations (the refusal to purchase an agreed sugar quota, and the refusal to refine oil at US-owned refineries) that the Cuban Revolution proceeded to expropriate US property on the island, moving very quickly towards the abolition of capitalism. And it was not until a year later, on the eve of the US-sponsored Playa Girón (Bay of Pigs) invasion, that Fidel Castro talked of the socialist character of the revolution.

But let’s return to Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Mallory and his memorandum. Not only is Castro’s government extremely popular and has communist leanings, he says, furthermore “there is no effective opposition”. He then considers the question of foreign intervention, which he seems to discard: “militant opposition to Castro from without Cuba would only serve his and the communist cause.” This is, of course, a sharp insight, but also a piece of cynicism. By this time, the US was already working closely with reactionary forces in Cuba and in Miami, sponsoring a campaign of terrorism, sabotage, aerial bombardment and counter-revolutionary insurgency in Cuba. Perhaps what Mallory was trying to say was that these methods were proving counter-productive, which is true.

Not that this appraisal would prevent the US imperialism from organising the counter-revolutionary disembarkment at Playa Girón in April 1961, which was swiftly defeated by the armed workers and peasants of Cuba.

What conclusion does Mallory draw from his observations? He writes: “The only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship.” To achieve that, he then proposes “a line of action which… makes the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation, and overthrow of government” (my emphasis).

So, there you have it in black and white, from the horse’s mouth. If the Cuban people have the temerity to overwhelmingly support a government that “condones Communist influence”, then they should be punished, by bringing hunger and desperation until they change their minds and overthrow the government. This is the reasoning behind the policy of aggression US imperialism has followed for 60 years towards the Cuban Revolution. It is a criminal policy based on punishing a whole people for having dared to free themselves from imperialist domination and abolished capitalism.

The refusal of US-owned refineries to process oil bought from the Soviet Union led to their state intervention of Texaco, Shell and Standard Oil refineries between 28 June and 1 July 1960. To this, the US replied with a cut in the sugar quota they had agreed to purchase from Cuba, in what was known in Cuba as the “Ley Puñal” (“Dagger Law”, as it was stabbing the revolution in the back). But the Cuban Revolution did not retreat in the face of economic blackmail. On the contrary, it responded by nationalising (between July and October 1960) all US owned corporations On the island. US president Eisenhower then imposed a ban on all US exports to Cuba, except food and medicine.

The 1962 presidential proclamation by Kennedy, imposing “an embargo on all trade with Cuba,” was therefore not the first measure of economic aggression against Cuba, but it represented a qualitative turning point in the campaign of US imperialism against the Cuban Revolution. It imposed a blanket ban on all US imports from and exports to Cuba, which Washington had earlier calculated would deprive Cuba of hard currency earnings of 60 to 70 million US dollars (about US$650 million in today’s currency).

The decision was also informed by the complete disaster of the attempted Playa Girón invasion the previous year and was part of a broader programme of sabotage and paramilitary attacks launched from the United States, organised and coordinated by the CIA, aimed at regime change. These activities, under the name of Operation Mongoose, included the infiltration of armed counter-revolutionaries in the island, saw funding of several million dollars, were coordinated at the highest level, by presidential authority, and were supposed to culminate in the overthrow and assassination of Fidel Castro by October 1962.

Kennedy had wanted economic action against Cuba to be taken jointly by the Organisation of American States (OAS). At the January 1962 OAS summit in Punta del Este, Uruguay, Washington put pressure on all countries to expel Cuba from the body and subject it to an economic blockade, but did not get unanimity. When it realised it would not get unanimity, it then settled for a two-thirds majority of 14 votes and a watered-down resolution. In order to achieve the necessary 14 votes, Washington agreed to resume aid to Haiti, then ruled by the brutal dictator François Duvalier in exchange for a favourable vote at the OAS. The whole operation, clearly, had nothing to do with “democracy” nor “human rights”, but rather with containing “communism” and revolution throughout the continent. There was not even a pretence that it was about anything else.

Under instructions from their masters in Washington, the OAS countries expelled Cuba, and 14 of them also agreed to different measures of economic sanctions. It was not until 1964 that the OAS as a whole, under pressure from the US and with the excuse of Cuba’s support for guerrilla struggle in Venezuela, agreed to a trade blockade against Cuba, with only Mexico voting against. The resolution talks of Cuba having put itself outside the “Christian and democratic traditions of the American peoples” (!!) But of course, no such action was ever taken by the OAS against ruthless dictatorships in Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Nicaragua (which was ruled by Somoza at the time of agreeing the Cuba blockade), etc. Perhaps these dictatorships did not violate the “Christian principles of the American peoples” …

While European countries did not formally join the US blockade, they also sharply curtailed trade with Cuba.

It is significant to note that the blockade was originally put into law under the Democratic administration of Kennedy. The failed military invasion of Playa Girón was also carried out under his watch. This should be enough to dispel any illusions that the Democrats in power have a somehow more “humane” foreign policy. The foreign imperialist policy of the US is bipartisan, as both parties defend the interests of the ruling class.

The Cuban revolution responded to Kennedy’s blockade on 4 April 1962, with a mass rally at which Fidel Castro proclaimed the Second Declaration of Havana, expressing continued defiance against US imperialism and calling for revolution across Latin America.

Resilience of the revolution as embargo tightens

It is a testament to the resilience of the Cuban Revolution that the blockade has failed to destroy it. There was a short period of time in the 1970s when there was an attempt at normalising relations between Cuba and the US, and there was a partial easing of economic measures, but that came to nothing, and under the Reagan administration in the 1980s the blockade was tightened again.

For a whole period of time, the close alliance with the USSR propped up the Cuban economy, though that came with strings attached. But after the collapse of Stalinism in the Soviet Union, the Cuban Revolution was left on its own, suffering a massive economic collapse.

It was precisely at this time that new pieces of legislation were introduced by US imperialism, widening the scope of the blockade. The 1992 Torricelli Act, sponsored by a Democrat, backed by Bill Clinton and signed by George W Bush, reintroduced the blockade for subsidiaries of US-based companies and prevented ships that had docked in Cuban harbours from docking in US ports for 180 days.

Donald Trump Signs The Pledge 18 Image Michael VadonTrump introduced 243 separate measures to tighten the blockade on Cuba, and Biden has continued this policy / Image: Michael Vadon

Then came the even-worse Helms-Burton Act of 1996, initiated by Republican representatives and signed by Bill Clinton, which made the US blockade extraterritorial by threatening non-US companies with legal action in the US if they traded or invested in Cuban assets confiscated by the revolution.

Later on, particularly between 2002 and 2014, the Venezuelan Revolution provided both a political and an economic lifeline to Cuba, proving the point that, ultimately, the fate of the Cuban Revolution will be resolved in the arena of world class struggle. But the economic crisis in Venezuela has also had a negative knock-on effect on Cuba.

60 years later, a section of the US ruling class has admitted that this policy has not worked and has not achieved its aims. The Obama thaw represented an attempt to pursue the same objectives (to smash the revolution) by different means (through the battering ram of world capitalism).

Trump put an end to that policy and introduced 243 separate measures to tighten the blockade, in the middle of the Covid-19 pandemic, including the activation of Title III of the Helms-Burton Act, which had been left in suspension. These had a catastrophic impact on Cuba. It is calculated that, in 2020 alone, the blockade has caused US$9bn worth of damages. It should be noted that not a single one of these measures has been repealed by Biden.

The US blockade is a criminal policy, which is designed, as clearly explained in the 1960 Memorandum, to punish the Cuban people with hunger for having dared to defy imperialism and having abolished capitalism.

The blockade has been consistently condemned by the United Nations General Assembly for the last 30 years. In 2020, only two countries voted against a motion condemning the blockade, the US and Israel. In its report to the United Nations, Cuba estimated the cumulative cost of the embargo over six decades at $148 billion dollars.

However, 30 years of UN votes have not changed the position of the US one single inch. This is a demonstration of how toothless of a talking shop this body is. The UN can pass any resolutions it wants. If US imperialism doesn’t agree, nothing will be done. On the other hand, if US imperialism thinks it can use the UN as a fig leaf for imperialist intervention, then it will; as in the case of the Congo in the 1960s, the first Gulf War in 1991, or more recently the UN intervention in Haiti.

Not all the problems the Cuban Revolution faces stem from the blockade. The isolation of the revolution on a small island with limited economic resources and the existence of a bureaucracy in the state are serious obstacles to building socialism. But certainly, the blockade is a factor of the first order of importance.

It is the duty of all revolutionaries, but also all consistent democrats, to wage a consistent struggle against this criminal imperialist blockade and unconditionally defend the Cuban Revolution.

Inflection EP26: US Torches Solomon Islands for Choosing China

December 14 2021

The US wants Solomon Islands to go against the obvious economic and social benefits that comes from having relations with China,

“Solomon Islands depends on just straight up foreign aid … certain times … anywhere between 50% and 60% of the Solomon Islands government budget comes from foreign aid.  This is not a sovereign country if more than half of all the money you spend is coming  from someone else; there’s always strings attached.  

What is China offering the Solomon Islands?  … number one, tourism;  it’s a no-brainer.  There’s so many  people in China, a lot of them are improving in terms of  economics, they have money to travel, they  want to travel and they will come to the  Solomon Islands in huge numbers, and they will lift that  country up. People will make money selling them things, accommodating them, bringing them around – transportation.  There will be infrastructure that you  can invest in and justify the investment  .. then education, training and building up industrial infrastructure so that the  Solomon Islands has more things that  they can trade.”

The Theft of Bolivia’s Lithium

Source: Youtube.com

July 27 2020



We covered the military coup that took place in Bolivia back in November 2019 when Evo Morales was ousted, was removed by the military and through support of the United States with their uh cold war organization known as the OAS, the Organization of American States. So essentially, just to give you a very quick brief background of what happened, Morales had been running the country for about 13 years if I’m not mistaken, and there was a referendum on whether presidents should have term limits or not.  Okay, the the people voted that yes you should have term limits.  However, Morales appealed this at the supreme court and the Bolivian supreme court said that, nope, there are no term limits, you can run, so he did and he won.

Related:  Two Million Bolivians out of extreme povety thanks to policies of Evo Morales

And you had people in this um right-wing opposition in Bolivia and the OAS, the organization of American States which is a cold war era institution based in Washington DC, receives most of its funding from Washington DC, they made these false allegations that the election results were rigged.   Okay, because Morales needed a 10% overhead to avoid a runoff and they essentially accused him of fraud and then all of a sudden you had government buildings being burnt down, you had even his sister’s house being burnt down.  He refused to,, to resign because he had won the election legitimately.  In the end, he was forced to flee.

He fled to Mexico and I think now he’s in Argentina and what’s really interesting.  is in December, so this is after the coup, he sat down with Glenn Gruenwald and even back then at the time, he told him straight up, he told him straight up, that the real reason behind this coup was about Bolivia’s resources.  Okay, so Bolivia has extraordinary amounts and reserves of lithium, now let me just show you this this clip very quickly from that interview.

We know we know that there was no election fraud this this report that was issued by the OAS saying that there were inconsistencies with the results and that Morales had rigged the election.  It’s all complete bs, yet at the time as as expected all of the mainstream media news outlets, in the wes,t framed it as oh look the Bolivian people are standing up for their liberation against the corrupt Morales regime and he falsified the results of the election, they’re illegitimate the OAS verified this.  And, oopsie, a few months later, the New York times admits that oh they got it wrong, it turns out that the election wasn’t rigged and you know they made some miscalculations when they crunched the numbers, something I also covered a few months ago, right.

A bitter election accusations of fraud and now second thoughts.  See, same thing, same thing that they did with Iraq ,they kept pushing this propaganda that Iraq had WMDs over and over and over again you know, even Condoleezza Rice writing a piece in there making the case for war, and then, uh, after they’ve already invaded Iraq and destroyed it, the New York times are like, oh oops, yeah you know maybe we should have been a bit more vigilant or something you know and done our jobs.

So it’s very important for you to understand what’s at play here.  These lithium reserves are no joke.  One week, just one week before this coup, turns out Evo Morales had cancelled an agreement that Bolivia had made with a German company.  All right now, this German company is called ACI Systems Alemanya.   Morales, on November 4th, cancelled the December 2018 agreement with Germany’s ACISA after weeks of protests from residents of the Potosi area.  The region has fifty percent to seventy percent of the world’s lithium reserves in the SALADI salt flats and surprise surprise among other clients ACI provides batteries to, Tesla.


Bolivia sets high hopes on its lithium industry - MINING.COM

Tesla’s stock rose Monday after the weekend and it didn’t just rise in the immediate aftermath of the coup, oh no, it’s been rising ever since. It’s actually risen 600 percent.  Tesla stock was valued somewhere around 250 dollars a share just before the coup, now it’s around 1 500. and that’s no coincidence, that’s the global markets reacting to the wonderful imperial news that Elan Musk can now plunder Bolivia’s resources.   Now this is a promotional video from Bolivia’s state lithium company one year before the coup.   [Music]  [Music]

I mean this thing is enormous. Okay, you can you can see it from space these, these salt flats are absolutely enormous we’re talking about tremendous wealth and Morales’ plan, which has been his policy throughout his tenure, is to redistribute the wealth to the people. So this is from Common Dreams, “the nationalization policy of the Morales government and the geographical complexity of salarioni chased away several transnational mining firms from France and FMC from the US and Pasco from south Korea could not make deals with Bolivia so now they operate in Argentina.  Morales made it clear that any development of the lithium had to be done with Bolivia’s Comibol, its national mining company, and YLB its national lithium company as equal partners”, meaning you’re not just going to come in here with your multinational transnational companies and screw over Bolivia and the Bolivian people.  Morales’ plan from the beginning has been very clear, transnational multinational companies are not allowed to come into Bolivia rip off Bolivia’s resources, screw over the Bolivian people, and then keep plundering unconditionally.

When corporations realize that they were not going to be able to screw over the country they went to Argentina, they went to Chile; not only did these right-wing oligarchs work with the OAS and the United States to get rid of Morales, but on top of it, the interim president Janine Anies openly has invited Elon Musk to come to Bolivia and essentially help plunder their resources.  The de facto administration of Janine Anies has already announced its plan to invite numerous multinationals into the vast salt flats in Potosi which holds the precious soft metal.  Meanwhile a letter from the coup regime’s foreign minister to Elon Musk dated March 31st says quote, “any cooporation that you or your company can provide to our country will be gratefully welcomed” unquote.

So, this new interim government, this right-wing regime which organized a military coup against Morales, is openly, brazenly inviting these disgusting imperialist multinationals to come into Bolivia and plunder their resources.  You call that liberation, you call that democracy, wow. This entire coup, this fascist right-wing coup, has absolutely zero, nothing to do with quote-unquote democracy, or doing anything positive for the Bolivian people. And one of the people standing to profit from this is none other than Elon Musk who owns Tesla who make electric cars and need a large supply of lithium for their batteries.

I want to show you just something that he posted on twitter.  So he says another government stimulus package is not in the best interests of the people in my opinion.   Which is funny coming from him after he received tons of money from the government in the form of corporate handouts, but okay, and then Armani tells him, you know what wasn’t in the best interest of the people, the US government organizing a coup against Evo Morales in Bolivia so you could obtain the lithium there, and look what it says.  We will coup whoever we want, deal with it.

I mean, if you needed any more proof that this guy is an imperialist, capitalist son of a bitch look no further.  Not only, not only does his family’s wealth come from apartheid, come from these emerald mines in South Africa, but on top of it, he refused to shut down his Tesla factory during the pandemic risking his workers lives, and then he’s openly admitting now that the coup in Bolivia was so that he could get his hands on the lithium needed for batteries and Tesla cars, zero shame, zero shame.

Are we surprised, are we surprised?  This has become part of the norm now, they don’t even bother hiding it, you know Trump also brazenly openly says, look we’re in Syria for the oil, yeah we’re in Syria for the oil.  He just openly admits it and this clown over here, this imperialist pig openly admitting that Morales was removed so they could get their hands on the lithium, not even trying to hide it.  Man absolutely disgusting and it’s not, it’s not the only thing, what do you think is going on in the Congo as well?  You ever heard of koltan?  They use children to mine that stuff.  He has no shame, this guy has absolutely no shame.

What is absolutely staggering is the willful ignorance, the denial by a large swath of people that this is real, like to them this is some kind of joke, like as if the United States has never intervened and illegally bombed other countries and occupied them with their military in order to steal and plunder their resources.  Like the United Fruit Company of Guatemala or going into Iraq for the oil which is now controlled by US multinationals.  I mean this is nothing new, what a shameless piece of shit!

So I want to, I want to show you the response from Evo Morales himself.  Okay, so what he says and this is, this is a loosely translated, so you’ll forgive me, but he says that Elon Musk, the owner of the largest electric car factory says, regarding the coup in Bolivia, that we will coup whoever we want, which is even more proof that the coup was for Bolivia’s lithium and two massacres for payment, we will always defend our resources

I mean, the treatment, what they did to this dude is absolutely unbelievable.  US imperialism knows no bounds, it is absolutely completely shameless and once again it’s not new, right, not just the United Fruit Company or the the oil in Iraq, I mean even uh a Patrice in Congo was assassinated.  Eisenhower ordered him assassinated because he wanted to bring in Soviet troops and, at the time during the arms race during the cold war, getting your hands on uranium getting your hands on the necessary ingredients to make nuclear bombs, you would have had Russia and Congo monopolizing that essentially.

So it’s always about resources, make no mistake, and the same thing when the Egyptian president Abdel Nasser tried to nationalize the Suez Canal.  He was attacked by the UK, by Israel, by France like how dare you control your own resources and distribute the wealth among your own people!  No no no no, we the western powers we gotta come in and take over everything.  Make no mistake, when Israel occupies the Golan heights illegally it’s not just a military strategic point, it’s also to get their hands on the oil, it’s to get their hands on the water even has snow up there, yeah they go skiing they have nice little ski resorts on Syrian land.

It’s always about the resources, but then they want to come and tell you that it’s about democracy and then they want to come and tell you it’s about human rights and then they want to come and tell you it’s about election integrity; it’s got zero to do with that and they’re just not even hiding it anymore it’s right there in plain sight, right there in plain sight man.  That is totally okay for the United States to back right wing armed opposition groups to conduct military coups, overthrow democratically elected presidents and plunder the resources of other countries in the global south because white man said so.  Absolutely shameless, this is why you always got to pay attention. This is why you can’t trust these opposition groups that spring out of nowhere whether we’re talking about Guido or we’re talking about Anies or we’re talking about in Syria.   The end result is US military bases and US corporations coming in, being given cache blanche a blank check to do whatever they like exert a military sphere of influence over the region, plunder the country’s resources and maintain a military occupation.   Sounds a lot like colonization doesn’t it?  And what’s his crime?  Morales’ crime is being the first indigenous president and trying to redistribute the wealth among the people, their wealth; disgusting absolutely disgusting.

Almagro, your lies will fall by the wayside!

December 20, 2019

Cuba responds to OAS attack on medical collaboration

The actions of the current Secretary General of the Organization of American States or OAS, Mr. Almagro is consistent with the pro-US and pro-imperialist tradition of the organization that he leads.

However, perhaps unlike the previous Secretary Generals of the OAS, who largely gave or tried to give a semblance of fair-play in conducting OAS affairs on behalf of its member countries, Almagro has made it clear from the start that he will proudly and unabashedly prostitute his organization in the interest of the deep state and the regional oligarchy.

Apparently willing to do anything to advance the reactionary agenda of his Washington bosses, Almagro has now set his eyes on the vain objective of discrediting the international reputation and respect of the Cuban Medical International Cooperation Program.

Related:  A shameful attack on those whose work benefits millions of humanity’s neediest

This internationalist program of the Cuban Revolution has sent thousands of doctors, nurses and other medical personnel to provide assistance to millions of peasants, workers and poor people on every continent on Earth – many of whom have never seen a doctor, dentist or nurse in their lives. In so doing, Cuban medical brigades have saved lives, cured diseases, trained local medical personnel, often in some of the most remote areas on the planet.

Why would the SG (secretary General) of the OAS take time out of his busy schedule to attack and discredit a medical program that has almost single handedly brought Ebola in West Africa under control, saving hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of lives in Africa? Why would Mr. Almagro want to discredit a medical program that is usually one of the first to send doctors and other medical personnel to save lives in countries that are ravaged by natural disasters such as the earthquakes in Haiti, Ecuador and Nepal a few years ago? Why would he want to discredit the prestige and respect of Cuba’s medical program that has helped millions of poor and working people over the decades in countries like Brazil, Jamaica, Grenada, Barbados, Venezuela, Guinea Bissau, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and so many more where imperialism and the local oligarchs have done everything to decimate health care services by underfunding and underinvesting in the training of doctors and other medical personnel and health facilities?

Related:  Cuba: We will continue to save lives within the limits of our possibilities

The answer is resoundingly simple, US imperialism are worried that everywhere Cuba’s doctors, nurses, dentists and other medical personnel go to save the lives of the victims of poor health, another nail is driven in the heart of capitalism and imperialism and another star ⭐️ on the banner of Cuba’s revolution.

The US empire is no doubt equally concerned that through Cuba’s internationalist medical program, their long-standing strategy to isolate the Cuban people and their Revolution has lost traction and appeal amongst the world’s poor who have tangibly benefitted from the Cuban Revolution.  Hence, SG Almagro, acting in the role of an undignified servant of the US empire, is deployed to lie, misrepresent and distort Cuba’s internationalist program under the guise of the OAS.

It also appears that the US empire and its local allies are concerned that the more encounters the ordinary folks of the region have with Cuba’s life savers and curers of their diseases, the more they might realize the truth of the words of Fidel Castro that “a better world is possible”; a world in which they will be free to use their resources without being told by the IMF, the World Bank or the US ambassadors in their capitals how much they can or cannot allocate to their health care budgets and other budgets like the Cuban government does freely each year!

Related:  Strong defeat of the United States and Almagro in the OAS at the adoption of a Caribbean resolution on Bolivia

So SG Almagro, you may serve imperialism for your own personal benefits.  If that is what you want your legacy to be that’s your right, but you should NEVER forget that Cuba’s internationalist medical program will live forever in the hearts and minds of millions of poor all over the planet.  Those who have been served by the Cuban medical brigades will forever be grateful to a free and sovereign country called Cuba, working under the nose of a brutal warmongering empire living out its final days!  A new day is dawning,  your lies will fall by the wayside!

Viva el programa medico internacional!

Comments from a reader.

Strong defeat of the United States and Almagro in the OAS at the adoption of a Caribbean resolution on Bolivia

Source; Cubadebate; La Santa Mambisa

December 19 2019


Taken from Cubadebate

The US and Secretary General Luis Almagro suffered a resounding defeat in the OAS, when CARICOM managed to adopt a resolution on Bolivia in the Permanent Council.

Before the meeting of the Permanent Council, the Representation of Bolivia had proposed amendments to the CARICOM Project. Granada began the meeting by pointing out that the Bolivian Project did not constitute amendments to the CARICOM Project, but a new draft Resolution.

The representative of the coup government of Bolivia responded that he did not think alike and that it was not a new document. I thought that the draft CARICOM Resolution could have been more constructive and instead of supporting the intention of burning the country as Evo Morales wishes, contribute to pacify it. He added that many are not interested in what happened in Bolivia, which were not actions against the indigenous people, but actions of armed groups that supported Evo Morales, as well as his call to fence the cities.

Belize presented a motion of order proposing that the draft amendment proposed by Bolivia be put to the vote.

The result of the vote on the Bolivia project was as follows:

In favor 8 Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, USA, Ecuador, Panama, Paraguay and Venezuela(the representative of the self-proclaimed Guaidó).
Against 17 Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Guyana, Grenada, Jamaica, Mexico, Trinidad and Tobago, Nicaragua, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Uruguay, Bahamas, Saint Kitts and Nevis.
Abstention 8 Canada, Costa Rica, Chile, Guatemala, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Peru and Honduras.
To use 1 Haiti

So the Bolivian project was rejected.

Then the ambassador of the United States proposed to vote on the draft Resolution of CARICOM, which resulted in the following:

In favor 18 Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Guyana, Grenada, Jamaica, Mexico, Trinidad and Tobago, Nicaragua, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Suriname, Uruguay and Panama .
Against 4 Bolivia, Colombia, USA, Venezuela (the representative of the self-proclaimed Guaidó),
Abstention 11 Canada, Costa Rica, Guatemala, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Peru, Honduras, Brazil, Chile and Paraguay
Absent 1 Haiti

As a result, the Resolution “Rejection of violence and call for full respect for the rights of indigenous peoples in the Plurinational State of Bolivia” was approved .

Below was an explanation of the vote of several delegations, among which the Colombian ambassador drew attention with an aggressive and even offensive speech against the sponsors of the Resolution and those who supported it. Both the representative of Colombia and that of the USA. they attacked Venezuela, while the Guaidó representative also did it against Nicaragua.




TAKING INTO ACCOUNT the objectives and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and those of the Charter of the Organization of American States (OAS);

BEARING IN MIND that international and hemispheric conventions on human rights contain the values ​​and principles of freedom, equality and social justice that are intrinsic to democracy;

HIGHLIGHTING the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, whose article 1 states that “[l] indigenous people have the right, as peoples or as individuals, to the full enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights standards ”; the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, of the United Nations, and the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [AG / RES. 2888 (XLVI-O / 16)], whose article XII states that “[l] indigenous peoples have the right not to be subject to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia or other related intolerance.

NOTING the deep concerns about the situation of human rights, including racist and discriminatory violence, expressed by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) in its preliminary observations of December 10, 2019, after its visit to Bolivia;

NOTING ALSO the conclusions of the IACHR that there was a wave of violence following the electoral process and that serious allegations were made regarding human rights violations, including arbitrary detentions and arrests, killings and murders, injuries to the civilian population , criminalization and persecution of political opponents, and violations of freedom of expression;

RECALLING the “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the Americas” [AG / DEC. 79 (XLIV-O / 14], which reaffirms that advancing in the promotion and effective protection of the rights of indigenous peoples of the Americas is a priority for the OAS;

RECALLING ALSO article 9 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter that states that: “[l] the elimination of all forms of discrimination, especially discrimination of gender, ethnic and racial, and of the various forms of intolerance, as well as the promotion and protection of the human rights of indigenous peoples and migrants and respect for ethnic, cultural and religious diversity in the Americas, contribute to the strengthening of democracy and citizen participation ”;

RECOGNIZING that, despite the improvements produced during the last decade, the indigenous peoples of Bolivia have suffered historical injustices as a result of colonization and dispossession of their lands, territories and resources, among others, which has prevented them from fully exercising, in particular, their right to development in line with their own needs and interests;

HIGHLIGHTING that the inherent rights of the indigenous peoples of Bolivia, which derive from their political, economic and social structures, as well as their cultures, spiritual traditions, stories and philosophies, especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources, must be respected and promoted;

REAFFIRMING that indigenous peoples, in the exercise of their rights, must be free from all types of discrimination;

CONSIDERING the importance of eliminating all forms of racial discrimination or violence derived from them that affect the citizens of the Americas, especially indigenous peoples, and taking into account the responsibility of States to combat them;

AFFIRMING that any doctrine, policy and practice that is based on the promotion of the superiority of peoples or persons based on national, racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences in Bolivia, is racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and socially unfair; and

WELCOMING the agreement signed between the Bolivian authorities and the IACHR to install an independent group of international experts to investigate the acts of violence that occurred between September and December 2019,


1. Condemn the violations of human rights and the use of violence against any citizen of Bolivia, especially all forms of violence and intimidation against Bolivians of indigenous origin.

2. Also condemn the intolerance towards symbols, traditional vestiges and religious practices, as well as any aspect of indigenous civilization that may be subject to unequal treatment or mention.

3. Underline the need for the authorities of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to fulfill its inherent responsibility, as part of the community of nations, to protect the human rights of all in Bolivia.

4. To urge the authorities of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to respect, fulfill and effectively implement all their obligations arising from international law relating to indigenous peoples, especially those related to human rights.

5. Reiterate the appeal made by the Permanent Council of the OAS on November 20, 2019, in resolution CP / RES. 1140 (2259/19) rev. 1, to all political and civil actors in Bolivia, including all authorities, civil society, military and security forces and the general public, to stop the violence immediately, preserve peace and seek a frank dialogue that promotes national democratic reconciliation.

6. Appeal to the Bolivian authorities to guarantee, in a full and unrestricted manner, the observance and protection of human rights and guarantee responsibility for any violation thereof, in accordance with international human rights law, as reflected in resolution CP / RES. 1140 (2259/19) rev. 1, of the Permanent Council of the OAS.

December 18, 2019

A shameful attack on those whose work benefits millions of humanity’s neediest

Source:  Cuban News Agency
December 19 2019

Cuba responds to OAS attack on medical collaborationCuba denounced the new attack by the Organization of American States (OAS) against international medical collaboration.

The call for a forum in Washington on Wednesday sponsored by the OAS seeks to discredit the participation of Cuban health specialists in social programs in Third World countries, Cubaminrex stated.

The conference is part of the defamatory campaign launched by the White House to attack the Cuban Revolution in those fields where it is most admired, Johana Tablada, deputy director general of the U.S. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, affirmed.

Johana described as shameful the intention to attack an activity that benefits millions of human beings in the world, being part of the South-South cooperation plans, protected by International Law, the United Nations programs and the World Health Organization.

Cuba condemns new OAS aggression against its international medical collaboration

With this approach, Almagro once again goes against the people and serves the most reactionary interests of the Donald Trump government and the oligarchies that support it, she added.

These aid workers offer their services voluntarily, driven by a humanist conviction, in a disinterested way, and respond to this task as a genuine internationalist duty.

50 Years in the Making, We Must Again Confront and Reject U.S. Warmongering

Source:  Black Alliance for Peace (BAP)

ajama baraka.jpg

The need to break the silence

50 years ago, on April 4, 1967, Dr. Martin Luther King reconnected with the radical black tradition by adding his voice of opposition to the murderous U.S. war machine unleashed on the people of Vietnam. For Dr. King, his silence on the war in Vietnam had become an irreconcilable moral contradiction. He declared that it was hypocritical for him to proclaim the superior value of non-violence as a life principle in the U.S. and remain silent as the U.S. government engaged in genocidal violence against a people whose only crime was to believe that they could escape the clutches of French and then U.S. colonialism.

“As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems,” Dr. King said. “I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked, and rightly so, ‘What about Vietnam?’ They asked if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government.”

In his speech at Riverside Church, King not only criticized U.S. actions in Vietnam but identified the cultural pathologies at the center of U.S. society. “I am convinced that if we are to get on to the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values,” he said. “We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”

50 years later, what rational person can honestly argue against the position that the U.S. is still the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet?

A militant anti-war and anti-imperialist movement

 But what existed in 1967 that helped put moral and political pressure on King was a militant anti-war and anti-imperialist movement; a movement that in many respects was born out of the black-led pro-democracy and social justice struggles and organizing in the South. Many of the young white activists who took up opposition to the war and built such organizations as Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) cut their activist teeth while working with black activists in the South. From the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee and the Revolutionary Action Movement (RAM) to the Northern-based Black Panther party, the cutting edge of the Black liberation movement took an early and resolute oppositional stance against the war on Vietnam.

After almost three decades of pro-war conditioning by both corporate parties and the corporate media coupled with cultural desensitization from almost two decades of unrelenting war, opposition to militarism and war is negligible among the general population. The black public has not been immune to these cultural and political changes. And with the ascendancy of the corporatist President Barack Obama, during whose tenure the U.S. continued its militaristic bent unabated and in fact ratcheted up its aggressive posturing in some parts of the globe, particularly in the Middle East, there was a decidedly rightward shift in the consciousness of the black public and a significantly dampened anti-war sentiment among black people.

Politically the result has been disastrous for the society and for the U.S. anti-war movement. The bi-partisan warmongering over the last two decades has met very little opposition, and the traditional anti-war stance of the black population has almost disappeared.

Opposition growing among young people

But once again we are seeing opposition to militarism, violence and war developing among young people. And once again we are seeing young black voices making the connections between opposition to domestic state violence and the moral necessity to be in opposition to the U.S. war machine reflected in the policy statements from the Movement for Black Lives, BYP 100 and the Black Lives Matter network. Those positions are supported by the Black Left Unity Network, the Black is Back Coalition and other black formations. What is needed at this historical moment is for those forces to be galvanized and given more strategic focus.

What is needed is a Black Alliance for Peace (BAP).

The BAP must be a people(s)-centered human rights project against War, Repression, and imperialism that seeks to recapture and redevelop the historic anti-war, anti-imperialist, and pro-peace positions of the radical black movement. So, on April 4, we are calling for a new alliance to help revive the black anti-war and peace movement in the black community as an essential component of a revived broader anti-war and pro-peace movement. Moreover, this new movement is even clearer on the connection between state violence and repression and the global war-mongering of the U.S. The pivot to Asia, the rotating of NATO troops on the borders of Russia, the destabilization of the U.S. African Command (AFRICOM), continued support for apartheid Israel, police executions and impunity in the U.S. and mass incarceration are all understood to be part of one oppressive, desperate structure of global white supremacy.

Dr. King also called upon the nation to understand the link between the unfulfilled economic needs of the majority of the population ground down by the ravages of an unforgiving racialized capitalism and the ruling class commitment to direct public funds toward militarism. His call for a poor people’s campaign was the human rights foundation of his anti-war position.

Militarism has a direct impact on working people and the poor. Even Republican president Dwight Eisenhower understood this when he issued what in today’s right-wing U.S. culture would read as a radical statement:

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.”

There must be an alternative to the neoliberalism of the Democrats and the nationalist-populism of Trump. We need an independent movement to address both the economic needs of poor and working people and the escalating attacks on the Black community, immigrants, women, unions, the LGBTQ community, refugees, Muslims, the physically and mentally challenged, youth, students, the elderly, Mother Earth – all of us. We need a new movement to end the wars on black people and people around the world. The BAP is a significant step toward helping to revive the anti-war, anti-imperialist and anti-state-repression movement in the U.S. Let us on this 50th anniversary re-dedicate ourselves to building a movement for social justice that rejects the de-humanizing effects of war on everyone.

Ajamu Baraka, National Organizer, Black Alliance for Peace

Cuba, Ecuador and Bolivia Urge the World to Protect Venezuela against US Imperialism


If US policy toward Caracas does not change, “Venezuela and Latin America will turn into another Vietnam” . . . Evo Morales, President of Bolivia

raul 1The leaders of Bolivia, Cuba and Ecuador have urged the international community to defend Venezuela against imperialism “seeking to destroy Hugo Chavez’s Bolivarian revolution,” according to the ABI news agency. “They think it’s time to destroy the Bolivarian revolution and depose the president of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, and they use unconventional warfare to achieve this goal,” said Cuban leader Raul Castro, speaking at a meeting of social organizations ahead of the G77 + China summit.  “By defending Venezuela, we will protect Bolivia and all of America,” he carried on.

Rafael CorreaThe leader of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, called on all Latin American countries” to defend Venezuela.

In turn, the Bolivian leader, Evo Morales, said that if US policy toward Caracas does not change, “Venezuela and Latin America will turn into another Vietnam”.

Evo Morales 6Venezuela’s President, Nicolas Maduro, thanked the leaders of Cuba, Bolivia and Ecuador and urged the US to revise its foreign policy aimed at undermining the government in Caracas.

“We are facing a conspiracy aimed at dividing our country, fill it with violence and reiterate the need for international intervention with the sole purpose of obtaining the world’s largest oil field,” he said.

nicolas maduro 7Leaders of developing nations plus China met on Saturday to draft a global anti-poverty agenda at a summit in Bolivia.



Source:  Cuba, Ecuador and Bolivia urge world to protect Venezuela against US imperialism

Read also: Bolivian leader Evo Morales urges to dissolve UN Security Council – media