|
February 8, 2014 - No. 6 161st Anniversary of the Birth of Cuba's National Hero Celebrations of the Life and
|
 At the Museum of Martí's Forge. |
The Prime Ministers of Jamaica, Antigua and Barbuda and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, also participated in the march.
As it does every year, the march began at the steps of the University of Havana and made its way to the Fragua Martiana (Museum of Marti's Forge), where the participants paid tribute to the Cuban leader, the genuine advocate of unity and Latin American integration.
During the act which preceded the traditional march, the
president of the Federation of University Students, Yosvani Montano,
spoke about the importance of Marti's ideas today, revitalized by the
so-called Centennial Generation, led by the historic leader of the
Cuban Revolution, Fidel Castro.
The Torchlight March begins at the University of Havana.
(With files from Prensa Latina; Photos:
CubaDebate)
Integration of Latin America and
Caribbean
in Defence of Sovereignty and Peace
Second Summit of Community of Latin American and Caribbean States Held in Havana
Havana, January 29, 2014
From January 28-29, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) held its second summit in Havana, Cuba, with several days of meetings which preceded it, including discussions to sum up the work and aspirations of CELAC member countries in the Havana Declaration ratified at the conclusion of the summit. The summit coincided with celebrations in Cuba of the 161st anniversary of the birth of Jose Marti, a hero to the peoples of Latin America for his contributions to their national liberation struggles. The summit was attended by 29 presidents, the president-elect of Chile and other national representatives. Also in attendance were UN Secretary-General Ban-Ki Moon and Secretary-General of the Organization of American States (OAS) José Miguel Insulza. During two days, the sessions addressed a large array of issues relevant to the problems facing the region, particularly the fight against hunger, poverty and inequalities. Going into the summit, Cuba occupied the pro tempore presidency of CELAC. This role was handed over to Costa Rica at the conclusion of the summit.
CELAC comprises 33 countries -- all the countries in the Americas with the exception of Canada and the U.S. The first summit was held December 2-3, 2011 in Caracas Venezuela. The founding of CELAC in 2010 was a historic advance by the peoples of Latin America and the Caribbean to throw off the yoke of U.S. imperialism and its regional instrument the OAS. Thus, it is no accident that the U.S. and Canada, which advance an agenda of imperialism and private monopoly right against the people's interests throughout the Americas, have been decisively excluded from CELAC.
Cuban President Raúl Castro gave the opening speech for the summit. He began by noting the absence of the late President of Venezuela Hugo Chávez, who played an important role in the founding of CELAC and whose presence is sorely missed. He affirmed the importance of CELAC's work, saying, "Step by step, we are creating a Community of Latin American and Caribbean States that is currently recognized in the world as the legitimate representative of the interests of Latin America and the Caribbean.
"Likewise, we have been reconciling our views and, despite the inevitable differences, a spirit of greater unity within diversity is being developed, and that should be our ultimate goal.
"As I said in Santiago de Chile, 'We know that, among us, distinct ideas and even differences exist, but CELAC has been built upon a legacy of two hundred years of struggle for independence and is based on a profound commonality of goals. Therefore, CELAC is not a succession of mere meetings or pragmatic agreements, but a common vision of a Greater Latin American and Caribbean Homeland which solely has a duty to its peoples.'
"One of our priorities should be the creation of a common political space in which we can move forward toward the achievement of peace and respect among our nations; in which we are able to overcome the objective obstacles and those deliberately imposed upon us; in which we can utilize our resources in a sovereign way and for our common well-being and place our scientific and technical knowledge in the service of progress for our peoples; in which we can assert undeniable principles such as self-determination, sovereignty and the sovereign equality of States.
"Only in this way can we ensure that the assertion describing Latin America and the Caribbean as the most unequal region in the planet no longer be a reality.
"Cuba's pro tempore presidency of CELAC has focused precisely on the achievement of this goal. That is why the central theme of this summit is the struggle against poverty, hunger and inequality."
President Castro provided
the facts and figures compiled by the United Nations' Economic
Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) showing the
challenges that face the region in this regard, saying that "the
poverty rate in Latin America and the Caribbean in 2012 reached, as a
minimum, 28.2 per cent of the population; that is to say, 164 million
people. And the abject or extreme poverty rate was 11.3 per cent,
equivalent to 66 million inhabitants in the region. The most
distressing concern, however, is child poverty, which affects 70.5
million boys, girls and adolescents; 23.3 million of whom live below
the poverty line.
"The richest 10 per cent in Latin American receive 32 per cent of the total income, while the poorest 40 per cent receive only 15 per cent."
He stated that proper use of the natural resources of the region are key to eradicating poverty, improving health, living conditions and the standard of living in the region:
"[I]t is precisely all this wealth which should become the driving force in eradicating inequalities. The imperative and challenge we face is being capable of transforming this natural capital into human capital, into economic infrastructure and diversification of production and exports, in a way that decisively contributes to a true development process.
"One of the problems we face in Latin America and the Caribbean is the inability to translate the periods of high prices of the natural resources we export into long-term economic development processes, in such a way that they could truly contribute to the reduction of poverty and increase the per capita income of our populations. To do so we should fully exercise sovereignty over our natural resources and design appropriate policies to guide our relations with foreign investors and transnational companies operating in CELAC member countries."
Addressing the issue of education, Castro explained that, "While access to primary education has improved in the region, information gathered by ECLAC and UNESCO establishes very clearly that access to education, and the quality of training which students receive, are very much linked to income levels.
"The situation is far more serious in secondary education, not only because 50 per cent of youth between the ages of 20 and 24 dropped out, but because only 21.7 per cent of youth from the poorest sector in that age group were able to finish school. In contrast, 78.3 per cent of their peers in the richest sector managed to complete this level of education. That is to say, a 56.6 percentage point gap separated the two groups in 2010.
"In the case of university education, the situation is even more complex. According to some estimates issued by ECLAC, in the year 2010 enrollment at this level accounted for one third of youth between the ages of 18 and 24."
Castro emphasized that the problems facing the region in terms of education are not only fully solvable but must be resolved if the aspirations of CELAC member countries are to be realized. He urged all countries to collectively take responsibility for the well-being of the region, paying attention to the particular needs and capabilities of each country.
The issue of threats to peace in the region from outside forces was also addressed by Castro, who said, "We can not forget the long history of interference in the internal affairs of states, military invasions and bloody coups d'état. The so called 'centres of power' have not resigned themselves to losing control of this rich region, nor will they ever renounce the attempts to change the course of history in our countries, to recover the influence they have lost and benefit from our resources.
"In 1999, when the socialist block ceased to exist, NATO modified its strategy for offensive actions against alleged global threats outside the territory of the member States of the Alliance in an area it called the 'Euro-Atlantic periphery.' At the European Union-Latin American and Caribbean Summit that was held in Rio de Janeiro later on in June, the historic leader of the Cuban Revolution, Fidel Castro Ruz, asked if our region had been included in that 'periphery' and if it was subject to that ever-more aggressive and dangerous doctrine. Such questions remain unanswered until today, fifteen years later."
As concerns threats from cyber warfare, President Castro pointed out the need for cooperation on this front as well, to prevent cyber warfare from being used for military purposes or developing into open military conflict.
Elaborating on issues of war and peace, President Castro stated, "As an expression of its firm commitment to nuclear disarmament and peace, Latin America was the first region in the world to establish, through the Treaty of Tlatelolco, a Nuclear Free Zone. But we should go further. Peace and development are interdependent and inextricably linked. There can be no peace without development.
"Nor will there be
development without peace. That is why we are determined to declare our
region a Zone of Peace to eradicate -- once and for all -- war, the use
or threat of force; a Zone in which any dispute between our countries
can be resolved amongst ourselves, through peaceful means and
negotiation, in accordance with the principles of international law."
He concluded his speech expressing support for some of the important issues facing the region, such as Argentina's fight to exercise sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands and adjacent seas. He also highlighted the fight for Puerto Rican independence, saying, "I reiterate that our Community will be incomplete as long as the seat of Puerto Rico, a genuinely Latin American and Caribbean sister nation faced with colonial status, remains vacant." Regarding the threats of the monopolies to the region, he added, "We express our solidarity with the people and the government of Ecuador, threatened by the lawsuits filed by transnationals before courts which are prejudiced by greed and a neo-colonial political vision."
(Radio Havana Cuba, Granma International; Photos: CubaDebate)
Declaration of Havana
Foreign Ministers of CELAC members countries and others meet on January 27, 2014 to prepare for the summit,
including work on the Havana Declaration.
The Declaration of Havana, adopted by the Havana Summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) on January 29, reaffirms the role of the bloc as a regional space for dialogue and political coordination.
The document stresses the determination to jointly work for the well-being of the people of the region and expresses the need to advance regional integration.
The 83-paragraph document also includes the main tasks being undertaken by CELAC and the problems facing the region in all areas.
The declaration reiterates the CELAC member states' position that unity and integration must progressively be achieved, with flexibility and in respect of diversity and the right of each state to choose its own political and economic system.
Comprehensive and inclusive development is a priority expressed in the document, in order to guarantee sustainable and productive progress, in harmony with the environment.
The heads of state also expressed in the declaration their determination to jointly work in order to face the challenges posed by the current world situation and to boost economic growth that favour social inclusion and equality.
Emphasis is put on the need to work for food security, literacy, education the development of agriculture and the achievement of universal public health services.
The Latin American and Caribbean character of Puerto Rico (a de facto U.S. colony) was reiterated in the document as well as the commitment to realize Latin America and the Caribbean as a territory free of colonialism.
The document rejects the practice of unilaterally designating certain states as being involved with terrorism, drug trafficking and other unfounded accusations, including the U.S. blacklisting of Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism.
The text also backs the Argentinean claim over the Malvinas Islands and rejects the more than 50-year U.S. economic, commercial and financial blockade of Cuba.
(Radio Havana Cuba; Photo: CubaDebate)
Proclamation of Latin America and Caribbean
as a Zone of Peace
The following proclamation was issued by the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) at the Havana summit.
***
The Heads of State and Government of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) gathered in Havana, Cuba on January 28 and 29, 2014 at the Second Summit, on behalf of their peoples and faithfully interpreting their hopes and aspirations,
Reaffirming the commitment of member countries with the Purposes and Principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter and International Law, and aware of the fact that prosperity and stability in the region contribute to international peace and security,
Mindful that peace is a supreme asset and a legitimate aspiration of all peoples and that preserving peace is a substantial element of Latin America and Caribbean integration and a principle and common value of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC),
Reaffirming that integration consolidates the vision of a fair International order based on the right to peace and a culture of peace, which excludes the use of force and non-legitimate means of defense, such as weapons of mass destruction and nuclear weapons in particular,
Highlighting the relevance
of the Tlatelolco Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in
Latin America and the Caribbean establishing the first nuclear weapon
free zone in a densely populated area, this being a contribution to
peace and to regional and international security,
Reiterating the urgent need of General and Complete Nuclear Disarmament, as well as the commitment with the Strategic Agenda of the Organization for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (OPANAL), adopted by the 33 Member States of the Organization in the General Conference held in Buenos Aires in August, 2013.
Recalling the principles of peace, democracy, development and freedom underlying the actions of countries members of SICA [Central American Integration System],
Recalling the decision of UNASUR [Union of South American Nations] Heads of State of consolidating South America as a Zone of Peace and Cooperation,
Recalling the establishment, in 1986, of the Zone of Peace and Cooperation of the South Atlantic,
Recalling also our commitment, agreed in the Declaration of the Summit of Unity of Latin America and the Caribbean, on 23 February 2010, to promote the implementation of our own mechanisms for peaceful conflict resolution,
Reiterating our commitment to consolidate Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace, in which differences between nations are peacefully settled through dialogue and negotiations or other means, fully consistent with International Law,
Cognizant also of the catastrophic global and long-term humanitarian impact of the use of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, and the ongoing discussions on this issue,
Declare:
1. Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace based on respect for the principles and rules of International Law, including the international instruments to which Member States are a party to, the Principles and Purposes of the United Nations Charter;
2. Our permanent commitment to solve disputes through peaceful means with the aim of uprooting forever [the] threat or use of force in our region;
3. The commitment of the States of the region with their strict obligation not to intervene, directly or indirectly, in the internal affairs of any other State and observe the principles of national sovereignty, equal rights and self-determination of peoples;
4. The commitment of the peoples of Latin American and Caribbean to foster cooperation and friendly relations among themselves and with other nations irrespective of differences in their political, economic, and social systems or development levels; to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors;
5. The commitment of the Latin American and Caribbean States to fully respect for the inalienable right of every State to choose its political, economic, social, and cultural system, as an essential condition to ensure peaceful coexistence among nations;
6. The promotion in the region of a culture of peace based, inter alia, on the principles of the United Nations Declaration on a Culture of Peace;
7. The commitment of the States in the region to guide themselves by this Declaration in their International behavior;
8. The commitment of the States of the region to continue promoting nuclear disarmament as a priority objective and to contribute with general and complete disarmament, to foster the strengthening of confidence among nations;
We urge all Member States of the International Community to fully respect this Declaration in their relations with CELAC Member States.
In witness of the undersigned having duly signed this Proclamation in Havana, on the 29th day of the month of January of 2014, in a copy written in the Spanish, English, French and Portuguese languages.
New Container Port Opens in Mariel, Cuba
Cuban President Raúl Castro greets Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff at the inauguration of the container terminal at the port of Mariel, Cuba, January 27, 2014. At right, leaders of several Latin American countries and those involved in the project express their enthusiasm for the project.
On January 27, Cuban President Raúl Castro Ruz and Dilma Rousseff, President of Brazil inaugurated the first section of a container terminal at the port of Mariel, 45 kilometres west of Havana. The port is part of the Mariel Special Development Zone.
Also in attendance were the presidents of Bolivia, Evo Morales; Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro; Guyana, Donald Rabindranauth Ramotar; Haiti, Michel Martelly and Jamaica's Prime Minister, Portia Simpson-Miller, in addition to executives of companies involved in the work.
The port facilities are located within a special development zone recently established as part of the country's efforts to update its economic model, and is designed to encourage foreign investment in this deep-water port.
The Brazilian construction company Odebrecht is
responsible for the project, which has benefited from $682 million in
financing from Brazil's National Economic Development Bank and the
Brazilian government's Development Bank. This assistance began under
the administration of former Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da
Silva. On behalf of all Cubans, President Castro thanked President
Rousseff for her country's solidarity and aid for such a significant
project for economies of Cuba and the region. The Cuban President also
thanked the designers, builders, investors, national and international
operators who completed the arduous work to finish the terminal, which
is now part of the regional port system. The president stressed the
importance of opening the container terminal on national hero José
Martí's anniversary and in the context of the Second Summit of the
Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC).
Aerial views of the Mariel container port.
Castro also highlighted that the Mariel container terminal will be operated by one of the largest port operators worldwide to ensure the efficiency, security and quality of services. President Castro said the port and the robust infrastructure accompanying it, are a concrete example of the optimism and confidence with which Cubans see a socialist and prosperous future.
He affirmed that the Mariel Special Development Zone will become the main gateway for Cuba's foreign trade and a chance to drive the nation's economy and replace imports, increase exports, create jobs and access cutting-edge technology.
It should also be noted that the establishment of such a
port is yet another act of defiance by the Cuban people and the peoples
of the region against the U.S. criminal blockade and extraterritorial
laws imposed on Cuba and countries that trade with Cuba. Under the U.S.
Torricelli Act, which came into force during the
Clinton administration, American companies, including subsidiaries
abroad, are forbidden from engaging in any trade with Cuba. Foreign
ships using American ports are barred from travel to Cuban ports for a
period of 180 days. Foreign ships returning from Cuba are also to be
impounded.
(Photos: CubaDebate, Opciones)
Ecuador Withdraws from Inter-American Reciprocal Assistance Treaty
On February 7, Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa signed a decree taking his country out of the Inter-American Reciprocal Assistance Treaty (TIAR). Correa's signing of the decree follows the approval of the National Assembly to denounce the treaty. The TIAR was created in 1947 by the United States to uphold their geopolitical interests in the region during the Cold War.
The TIAR has been increasingly seen as essentially political in nature since the clauses that relate to the protection of the region against external threats are tied to events such as the military interventions in Guatemala in 1954, in Panama in 1964, in the Dominican Republic in 1965, and the isolation of Cuba from regional forums since 1962.
It has been pointed out that the United States did not invoke the TIAR when there was true external aggression against a Latin American country, as in the aggression against Argentina in 1982 by the United Kingdom, thus proving that the TIAR was never intended as a defence agreement.
According to the Ecuadorean Foreign Ministry, the country's withdrawal from the TIAR is a further step towards the construction of a continental doctrine of security and defence, in tune with the reality of the contemporary world, towards the construction of a fair and equal world order and towards the development of relationships among States.
The withdrawal will be effective two years after Ecuador formally notifies the Secretary-General of the Organization of American States of its denunciation of the TIAR.
(ACN)
Haitians in Dominican Republic
Montreal Meeting Denounces Ruling 168-13 Denationalizing Dominicans of Haitian Descent
On January 19, the 168-13 Action Committee held an important meeting in Montreal to mobilize against the Dominican Republic's Ruling 168-13 of September 23, 2013 to deprive nearly a quarter of a million Dominicans of Haitian origin of their citizenship. More than 150 people responded to the invitation and gathered in the Haitian Cultural Centre, La Perle Retrouvée.
Journalist Dorothy Alexander, who was in the Dominican
Republic last December, reported on what she saw on the ground. She
presented, among others things, the results of the first national study
on the immigrant population produced by the Dominican Republic's
statistical office.
The Dominican Republic has a population of 10 million. Some 524,000 are immigrants and another 244,000 are of immigrant descent or about eight per cent of the total population. Of these, five per cent are Haitian or of Haitian descent. Sixty-eight per cent of immigrants live in urban areas. Sixty-four per cent are men. They are young: 54 per cent are between the age of 20 and 34 years. Conditions are untenable. Sixty-six per cent of Haitian workers have an average salary of 10,262 pesos. By comparison, 47 per cent of those who are not Haitian earn 39,000 pesos per year or three times the average annual income of workers of Haitian origin. Alexander explained that only 12 per cent of Haitian immigrants have an employment contract. Ninety-two per cent of Haitian immigrants have no insurance of any form (50 per cent of other immigrants also have no insurance). Many of them, undocumented, are illiterate.
While in the Dominican
Republic, Alexander visited the Haitian Embassy where the department
that handles immigrants to that country receives 400 people per day
for, among others things, a shower. Why? The facts reveal that only 17
per cent of people of Haitian origin have access to water. Homes are
also in poor condition, many have only dirt floors. Workers live in the
bateyes, the barracks in the sugar plantation camps. She visited a
community kitchen where there is no access to water and no electricity.
She concluded, "I wanted to be the voice of the voiceless. You too can
make a difference."
Jean Saint-Vil, activist, and Jean-Claude Martineau, historian and poet, gave a historical overview of Haiti, from the declaration of independence in 1804, to the division of the country thereafter until 1915 when the country's president was assassinated at the same time the U.S. Army arrived in the country. Many Haitians were sent to the sugar plantations in the Dominican Republic and Cuba. In 1959, the Cuban revolution led by Fidel Castro released Haitians from their fate. In Dominican Republic the situation has not changed. Haitians are considered second class citizens. In the 1937 Parsley Massacre led by Dominican dictator Trujillo, more than 30,000 Haitians were slain under the pretext that Haitians would compromise the integrity of the white Hispanic population. Today, the approach of the Martelly government is to manage appearances, which the Dominican Republic is taking advantage of, said Saint-Vil.
The 168-13 Committee read its statement, which will be submitted to the Harper government by the NDP. It demands that Canada take a clear stand on this situation, said Alexander. Everyone is invited to sign the petition and circulate it widely. Other committee members also took the floor to express gratitude for the support received in the effort to overthrow Ruling 168-13. Melissa Gresseau sang with warmth and conviction a song dedicated to Dominicans of Haitian descent.
Political representatives spoke in support of the committee's work, including Alexandre Boulerice of the NDP, Christine Dandenault of the Marxist-Leninist Party of Quebec, Emmanuel Dubourg of the Liberal Party of Canada and Frantz Benjamin of the City of Montreal. Boulerice said we have a battle to wage on fundamental rights. Everyone is insulted by the Dominican Republic's ruling, a blatantly racist ruling creating a stateless people, a ruling that is unacceptable and must be reversed, he said. He noted that as the official opposition, the NDP has put pressure on the Canadian government.
Dandenault welcomed the Haitian community's immediate response after Ruling 168-13. "The Canadian government says that the two countries share a commitment to democracy, rule of law, human rights and the free market. If the Government of Canada was consistent in its claims that it stands for rights, it should oppose what the Dominican Republic is doing. The fact that there has been no progress since the Parsley Massacre of 1937 shows that these countries need fundamental changes, major changes to develop a governance that protects the rights of all people, regardless of race, national origin, religion, gender, lifestyle, and governance worthy of all human beings. Never forget the 1937 Massacre!"
After the meeting, the petition was circulated throughout the room and people continued to discuss the situation in the Dominican Republic and the next actions to defend the rights of Dominicans of Haitian descent.
(Translated from original French)
Joint Declaration Against Ruling 168-13 (Excerpts)
We, the signatories of this statement, wish to state
that the right to a nationality recognized by the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights is essential to the effective establishment and
maintenance of social justice in our Americas and elsewhere in the
world. Nationality is a prerequisite for citizenship, that is to say,
the exercise of political rights and public participation in decisions,
and we believe that the withdrawal or denial of citizenship that has
the effect of making persons stateless is an anti-democratic measure
which must be denounced. The denial of the right to a nationality is
particularly unacceptable when it widely discriminates against a
specific group of people for reasons such as ethnic origin or skin
colour.
We have learned with dismay that more than a quarter of a million Dominicans of Haitian descent are being deprived of their citizenship in the Dominican Republic as a result of ruling 168-13 passed on September 23, 2013 by the Dominican Constitutional Court. This racist ruling is all the more shocking in that it has been applied retroactively against people based in this country since 1929, in total violation of the Dominican Constitution that recognizes the principle of non-retroactivity of the law. In doing so, the Dominican government seems to want to betray the history of the Dominican people, their culture and social fabric, which are the result of cultural intermingling and intermarriage. We, the citizens of Canada, the United States and other countries of America, raise our voices to condemn this ruling because we have a responsibility to defend the right to nationality for all the natives of our continent.
Having derived from the old continents to form what we call today the New World, from the Bering Strait to Cape Horn, through the Caribbean Sea, our Americas have become countries of immigration, carriers of all dreams of freedom. We recognize that this freedom achieved at the cost of great struggles for civil rights, can only be preserved by our constant vigilance. We cannot ignore that this New World which, in reality, was for centuries the home of the Iroquois, Algonquin, Taino, Incas and many other indigenous peoples has a history that is combined with the bitter experience of genocide, slavery, segregation and the difficulties of modern immigration.
 "Born in the Dominican Republic equals Dominican citizenship"; "Everyone has the right to a nationality" |
1. Despite this painful past and present..., we are optimistic because the ideal of justice and freedom has been [achieved at] several moments in the history of our continent. This was the case when, to correct an unjust decision of the Supreme Court that refused to recognize the citizenship of former slaves and their descendants, Amendment 14 of the Constitution of the United States was ratified in 1866. Thus in that country the principle of jus soli was endorsed, that is to say the recognition that every person born on U.S. soil is a citizen of the United States, regardless of the skin colour or immigration status of their parents.
Amendment 14 of the Constitution of the United States was not the only case of victory against social exclusion. Indeed, [from] the nineteenth century to today, similar victories were won almost everywhere in the Americas.
In particular, the principle of jus soli was adopted by 30 countries out of 35. We consider it one of the greatest strengths of our continent that this principle guaranteeing equal opportunities at birth is the norm rather than the exception. This is linked to the fact that it is immigration that creates the wealth of the Americas. While recognizing that immigration requires methods of selection, reception and integration to promote social cohesion, we cannot deny that most of the population of America is the result of immigration.
It must also be recognized that no method for granting or withdrawal of nationality should be based on racial discrimination or lead to the creation of groups of people without legal [status]. This is unfortunately the situation in the Dominican Republic in the first decade of the XXIst century. We see a decline and a very dangerous precedent in our Americas. Must we point out that it was after a blanket withdrawal of citizenship to Jews that the Holocaust was initiated during the Second World War? Those who remember the 30,000 Haitians massacred by the Dominican dictator Trujillo in 1937 know that the current crisis has all the hints of a past that must never be repeated.
2. Having learned the lessons of history and with [an] analysis of current issues, we must declare our total opposition to Ruling 168-13. In demanding that this ruling be repealed we are adding our voice to the many Dominicans who also protested against its application in their country. Our statement is in the same spirit as that of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights which, already in 2005, had ruled against the Dominican Republic because of its refusal to issue birth certificates to children born ... in its territory. Our statement also echoes the positions of CARICOM, the [Organization of American States], the Commission on Human Rights in the Dominican Republic and members of the Dominican and Haitian diaspora, who have all condemned the ruling as discriminatory, racist and xenophobic.
Given the fact that the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness 1961 was signed or ratified by several countries on the continent, including the Dominican Republic and Canada, we ask that the Government of Canada in particular urge the Dominican government to meet its international commitments. Haiti, in the wake of the events after the ruling of the Dominican Constitutional Court, has engaged in bilateral discussions with its neighbour. We take note [of this], hoping that these talks will lead to promoting good relations between the peoples of these two countries that share the island of Kiskeya.
However, it is imperative to note that the situation of stateless persons in the Dominican Republic is primarily a matter of human rights internationally. We who feel directly concerned by such issues continue to say loud and clear that respect for the right to nationality is a non-negotiable principle for all human beings who, without exception, are born free and equal with respect to rights and all undoubtedly aspire to preserve their rights and freedoms. [...]
(Montreal, January 2014 Action Committee Against Ruling 168-13 of the Dominican Republic)
Colombian Peace Process
Communiques of the Peace
Delegation of the
Revolutionary Armed
Forces of Columbia-People's Army (FARC-EP)
Extermination of Political Activists Denounced
On January 20, at a press conference, former Senator Piedad Córdoba denounced to the world the murder of 29 political activists of the political and social movement Marcha Patriótica, during the two years of its existence.
At the same event, one of the 256 jailed activists, Francisco Tolosa, in charge of the international relations of the organization, without ever having carried a weapon, said by telephone from prison, that "we are in jail because of doing politics without weapons" and added "that there is no real democracy in Colombia without Marcha Patriótica."
We are feeling a little frustrated here in Havana, where we signed a partial agreement with the government of Juan Manuel Santos, to expand democracy and political participation in Colombia, because the facts alleged by the leader of Marcha are in contradiction with what we agreed. It's a lack of awareness of the State's duties, and a bad signal that continues to undermine our trust in the government's word.
What Piedad Córdoba denounces, reaffirms that under President Santos the right to political choice is not being respected. The extermination of political activists and social and popular organizations continues.
In order for this peace process not to end in a farce or a comedy, in empty words about expansion of democracy, it is urgent that the government stop the ordeal of Marcha Patriótica.
All Colombians, who have always dreamed of a political
solution to the longest conflict in the hemisphere, in order to achieve
national reconciliation, must defend the peace process and demand real
political and security guarantees for the social and political
movements of the country.
Mass action called by Marcha Patriótica, December 13, 2013, in Bolivar Square in Bogota, Colombia.
We cannot tolerate that in the midst of a peace process, Marcha Patriótica is annihilated systematically, day by day, as happened with the [political party] Union Patriótica (UP). The government wasn't only watching it; they were even covertly involved in it, keeping silence about the killings, plotting the legal persecution of leaders to place them behind bars, because they "represent dangerous ideas," as one of the prosecutors says. The murders of social and popular leaders in Colombia always started with the so-called prosecution, but afterwards they ended up dead.
We are permanently encouraged by the government to change bullets for votes, but farmers, claiming justice, are murdered and mutilated when they protest on the roads against state policies that only serve the interests of transnationals and condemn the majority to live as outcasts with the flags of sovereignty tumbled to the ground.
The justifications made by some state officials to explain the terrible genocide of the UP deeply hurt us. We will never accept the brutal and uncivilized explanation that those deaths occurred because the combination of the methods of struggle could not go unpunished. But we affirm that neither Jaime Pardo, nor Bernardo Jaramillo, nor Leonardo Posada nor José Antequera, nor Manuel Cépeda, nor the congressmen; none of the thousands of martyrs of the UP were carrying rifles before or at the moment they were killed.
The Attorney General of the Republic, Dr. Eduardo Montealegre, is right when he states that "the great challenge of post-conflict will be the dirty war."
In Colombia there is a vital need to disassemble the National Security Doctrine, the concept of the internal enemy and paramilitarism, as factors that have spurred state terrorism. The government should not only swear "never again" but also deploy compelling action to curb murderous operations like the infamous "Red Ball" ("Baile Rojo") that exterminated a movement and now intends to apply it to Marcha Patriótica.
Where is the much-vaunted tolerance we talk about in the
partial agreement for Political Participation? We must put aside the
sweet and honeyed words on democracy, when the outbreak of bullets
against opponents of the regime is tolerated, to destroy, in a
calculated way, any attempt to build a political alternative. We have
to start the implementation of the agreements right now, so that the
process won't be just a vacuous verbiage. It is a State's duty to
protect the lives of citizens and guarantee the right to political
choice in Colombia.
Myths of the Peace Process
About the Peace Process: Myths and Mythomania
* This document is a reply to an article written by Humberto de la Calle, chief negotiator of the Colombian government team in Havana, named "Myths of the Peace Process" (in Spanish).
Recent statements made by [Colombian President] Juan Manuel Santos in Europe seem more a delirium, full of unnecessary boasts, than the expression of a coherent policy that provides guarantees to make progress in the peace process.
You cannot distort the reality and believe that it is OK to escalate war as if there weren't any peace conversations, or that you can forward a dialogue, pretending that the country is not suffering the ravages of confrontation.
It doesn't make sense to bask in death, as Santos is doing in Spain, while he is sabotaging joint speeches of reconciliation in Havana, just because the counterpart is striking a military blow. You cannot keep the country on fire and change hundreds of humble soldiers into cannon fodder, while threatening the counterpart by saying that if it attacks a major figure, the process will explode into a thousand pieces. This discrimination between lives that have value and others that don't, because they simply do not belong to the class of the wealthy, is the most disgusting thing a president can say. A president, who proclaims to be committed to national reconciliation.
The counterpart has talked about the myths of the peace process, using the term pejoratively, in the sense of a false, widespread belief. In the same way, we can clarify that we are not at the Peace Talks as a result of military pressure or on the way to surrender. This is the first myth to disassemble because it confuses causes and courses.
Peace is a strategic aim of the FARC and that's why we are in Havana. All previous dialogues have been in consideration of that principle. Therefore, Juan Manuel Santos and [Spanish Prime Minister] Felipe Gonzales are wrong if they believe that with a militaristic conception, or the glorification of the criminal Zionist strategy against Palestine, they will convince the world that State terrorism, backed by the military power of the empire, is the key to achieving peace.
Santos should be ashamed to
allow, without any hesitation, subordination to the CIA and
intervention of foreign powers in the internal conflict in Colombia.
Besides the U.S., also British intelligence, the Spain of Felipe
Gonzales, and Israel are attacking the FARC and the popular movement.
It is unacceptable that the Colombian government recognizes with silly
pride that the [U.S.] Southern Command is leading the counterinsurgency
war, because this is what he's saying when he talks about the presence
of the NSA (National Security Agency) technology, and the spending of
$9 billion, which is the amount they have invested in cowardly bombings
of FARC camps, apart from the total budget spent on Plan Colombia.
The second government myth is the belief that the peace agenda can be interpreted without taking the preamble into account, which is the spirit of the General Agreement of Havana. The preamble is so important because from it derives the necessary commitment to discuss essential issues such as economic policy and the serious problems of urban poverty and political exclusion.
There is unity and coherence between what the FARC-EP say publicly and what they do in each scenario, including the negotiation table, so the third myth is to think that our discourse in the media is just rhetoric and deception. The proposals for social change, claimed by the people on the streets, are our flags and we will not lower them here at the Peace Talks.
The fourth myth is the belief that there is a democracy in Colombia and that representatives of the establishment are its defenders. What really exists is state terrorism, and therefore our approach to strengthen popular political participation and establish true democracy are not ravings or distractions. Our arguments in defense of the majority are serious, and so we will not cease to insist on solving the essential problems that have caused misery and inequality. Therefore, we agree with Juan Manuel Santos when he says that the partial agreements achieved so far, are almost nothing. It is obvious that the key issues still have to be discussed.
The government has never agreed with the FARC to leave out of discussion the issue of the Armed Forces, their giant apparatus and their doctrine. Thus, the fifth myth is to believe that you can achieve peace without demilitarization of society and State, maintaining inhuman factors as the National Security Doctrine, the conception of the internal enemy and paramilitarism.
On the other hand, it is unthinkable that in a process like the one we're carrying out, you can overlook the need to restore the social function of property. Hence the sixth myth is the illusion that a stable and lasting peace can be possible without ending big landownership and without curbing foreign ownership of land.
It is important to note that the country doesn't agree with the fragmented and partial information given on the results of the process. As the agenda states, the parties only agreed to keep internal debates confidential, but not the conclusions. So the seventh myth is to confuse confidentiality with secrecy, to think that the solutions to the war can be reached behind citizens' backs, and that a countersignature mechanism, that requires the full participation of the sovereign, can be imposed unilaterally restricting it to a cropped and uninformed consultation.
The eighth myth is to think that in a scenario of decades of institutional dirty war, the State can be judge and jury at the same time, and that it can create its own regulations and transitional mechanisms. Moreover, it's an illusion to think that in a process that should favor the victims, you can avoid the creation of a Commission of Clarification of the truth of the history of Colombia's internal conflict.
We have never claimed to be angelic figures, but neither can the regime pretend that we are Beelzebub himself and the ruling elites constitute a court of heavenly cherubs. It is a myth to think that the insurgency is to assume primary blame for the results of the confrontation and that the State is not involved in international crimes. We recall that the FARC have not come to Havana to agree to impunity. It should be clear that, by act or omission, the State is ultimately responsible. It won't achieve anything if it maintains this morbid tendency to distort reality.
Finally, it's a fact that without comprehensive rural reform and without political participation, ie, without founding essential elements for democracy, you cannot achieve and build peace. But this search in Havana is not so simple, because here it is not a matter of distributing "gratuities." In the FARC, there are no delegates who can be bought or sold and therefore arguments, political wisdom, and genuine willingness to bring about change and achieve reconciliation are required.
We don't resign ourselves to see persecution, criminalization and death of many popular and opposition leaders while the peace talks are being held, and to see, in particular, the fragility of the guarantees for Political Participation they have offered us. Witnessing how public resources are being distributed like corruptible "gratuities" to align parliamentarians, judges, officials and heads of political authorities, in such a blatant way, moves us to say that this is not the "democracy" we want and we are looking for.
From Havana we call for a debate on these fundamental issues for the country. And we also call to assert the immense desire for peace that beats in the heart of Colombia. Peace doesn't belong to parties, presidents or dignitaries; peace is a supreme good that belongs to everybody.
Peace Delegation of the FARC-EP
Havana, Cuba, site of the peace talks, January 23, 2014
(farc-epeace.org)
Terrorism or Legitimate Rebellion?
This document intends to be a short brainstorm on the War on Terror, the list of terrorist organizations and our inclusion in it.
Since the 9/11 attacks, the War on Terror has been reinforced, responding to a necessity of replacing the anti-communist struggle of the Cold War. Although for many people the so-called War on Terror is something abstract, there are a lot of people in this world who have felt, in their flesh and blood, the consequences of this declaration of war. It has been a clear pretext to invade Irak, Libia, Afghanistan and Syria, with a disastrous humanitarian impact on those countries, as everybody knows.
The list of terrorist organizations, as part of the world-wide war on terror, is based on a completely subjective criterion, as underlined by many scholars, politicians and other individuals. That's to say, there is no clear, overall definition of Terrorism, and the inclusion of an organization into the list corresponds to State interests, political alliances and economic needs.
This becomes clear when we take a look at the Taliban. In the 1980s, when they were called Mujahideen, they were armed by the U.S. and were considered freedom fighters for a long time. Palestinians are engaged in a legitimate resistance, according to the UN, while they are considered terrorists by Israel. The ANC was a terrorist organizations until 2008 and they are now considered legitimate fighters against apartheid. Why is it that Hezbollah is on the list, being a legal party in Lebanon, with senators and deputies, and the Greek fascist party isn't, while the latter has killed activists and threatened unionists?
Therefore, not only the FARC, as insurgent organization, should be removed from the infamous list. The list shouldn't exist in the first place, because of the reasons mentioned above. It's clear that the War on Terror and the list of terrorist organizations have been used to demonize different organizations who are simply fighting against oppressive and anti-democratic regimes. I would like to recall the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
"Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law."
Or the United States Declaration of Independence, 1776:
"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
It's a fact that we are fighting against such tyranny and oppression; that was not the only reason for the FARC's uprising, but keeps on being the reason for continuing our armed struggle up to today, in spite of what many people may believe or proclaim. We have stated in various occasions, that we are not married to weapons, that's to say, weapons are a necessary evil to protect ourselves against a regime that has never allowed the lower class to participate in politics.
The murder of Jorge Eliécer Gaitán in 1948 was an example of it; then, the political genocide of the Union Patriotica in the 1980s; and nowadays, union leaders, human rights defenders, leaders of grassroots organizations and so on, keep on being killed. In the news you only read the top of the iceberg about such human rights violations.
There are a lot of misunderstandings about who we are, what we want and why we are doing it using weapons, not in the least caused by the big media corporations, who generate public opinion.
Who in the world today knows or has read anything about the FARC's pilot project, presented to the Colombian government in the year 2000, to start substitution of coca crops in Cartagena del Chairá, one of the most affected areas by coca crops? Naturally, the idea was to provide infrastructure, housing, education and all the necessary things to make such substitution feasible for the peasants of the area.
The government never responded to our proposal. On the contrary, they reinforced the tactic of fumigation of the coca crops, using glyphosate, consequently generating a huge humanitarian crisis in peasant and indigenous areas, affecting legal crops and displacing entire communities.
During the Caguán period, the FARC led many projects on housing, infrastructure and education, projects which were immediately bombed by the Colombian air force after 2002, to present the area as a disaster caused by the FARC.
It's clear that the inclusion of Colombian guerrilla movements in the list of terrorist organizations of the European Union has been suggested by the United States. There are no valid grounds why the FARC would be included in such a list.
If the FARC-EP really were a terrorist organization without any political grounds, then what would the Colombian government and the FARC-EP be talking about at the peace talks? The mere issues of the Agenda show our political essence; would there be any need to talk about agrarian reforms with a terrorist organization? About political participation? About mechanisms to countersign the agreements? Would there be anything to talk about with an essentially terrorist organization?
On one hand, the Colombian government and its media want the world to believe that FARC has no support at all among the civil population. On the other hand, they are constantly arresting, attacking and murdering people who are suspected to be FARC supporters.
On one hand, they call us "narco-guerrillas" whenever they can and want people to believe that the real problem behind drug-trafficking is the FARC, stubbornly denying the drug problem as a social problem, both for the poor peasants who grow coca leaves, as for the -- equally poor -- small drug-dealers who live in the streets of Chicago or Amsterdam. While they treat coca- and poppy growers and their consumers as criminals, State institutions are accomplices of the activities of big drug cartels, whose existence depends on the connivance of the authorities.
My goal is not to convince people of our role as "the good guys" of the movie. I just think the social problems in Colombia should be measured in their right proportions; that's why the FARC has proposed a Commission of Review and Clarification of the Truth about the History of the Internal Conflict in Colombia. It's obvious that such a long conflict has caused victims from both sides and we believe that only through serious, impartial investigations, we will be able to start a process of national reconciliation and reach a long-lasting peace with social justice.
This moment is appropriate to undertake action regarding our inclusion in the list. Times have changed; the peace talks are a step in the right direction. Our elimination from the list of terrorist organizations would be a significant move towards an inclusive society, in which -- I'm sure -- the FARC-EP will play a positive role as a political movement.
(farce-epeace.org)
About Eavesdropping
Members of the FARC-EP Peace delegation in Havana, Cuba, January 14, 2014: Ricardo Téllez (left),
Pablo Catatumbo (centre) and Iván Márquez (R).
We cannot share the opinion that the facades of intelligence are totally lawful, that their operations are adjusted to the (intelligence) law and that they don't have anything irregular.
We definitely agree with the first statements of the President, when he referred to the wiretapping or eavesdropping and directly blamed "dark forces who are trying to sabotage processes, such as the peace process." And this is not everything. We also agree with his consistent announcement to order a "thorough investigation," and his determination to relieve, as he did, the head of army intelligence, General Ricardo Mauricio Zúñiga and the director of the Technical Intelligence Agency of the Army (CITEC), General Oscar Zuluaga.
We also consider the words of army Commander General Juan Pablo Rodríguez very honest, when he admitted that the spy operation "Andrómeda" was intended to illegally intercept the [communications of the] peace negotiators.
In this context no one understands the changing opinion of the government, which overnight changes its approach about such serious events. The height of absurdity! Peace is not "subversive" or "terrorist" [so] as to be subjected to espionage and persecution with the justification of the government.
If the director of the magazine Semana, Alejandro Santos, says and reiterates from Bogotá, that "under the facade of legality, illegal work was done" and that "we have all the evidence, the sources, the testimonial evidence about what happened, the Prosecutor's research should continue to the end.
It is inconsistent that the government will now ask the Attorney General, Eduardo Montealegre, to ignore everything with the bizarre story that they were acting within legal norms.
You cannot disrespect public opinion, or the thinking people of the country this way.
You need to be blind not to see that the purpose of the illegal actions of the enemies of peace, is to explode the process of Havana into a thousand pieces. A peace process, which is a superior and human attempt and all Colombians want it to succeed from the bottom of their hearts.
It's serious what is happening in Colombia. Spying was not carried out only against the government peace delegations and the FARC, but also against the most prominent leaders of the left, who are also being threatened with death by paramilitary groups.
The establishment has a perverse wrath with leaders like Piedad Córdoba and it seems that it was not enough to kill her politically with a disability for 18 years, but now it wants to exterminate her physically to "delete her from the map." The same applies to Iván Cepeda, who has been targeted by the Attorney's arbitrariness. And many others, including Petro, Lozano, Abella, and against Marcha Patriótica, of whom more than 30 activists have been killed, against the Union Patriotica, and against the land claimants, who now total one hundred killed.
They try to exterminate all ideas, linked to a national project of true democracy, peace with social justice and sovereignty.
A peace process that has mobilized the hope of millions of Colombians and which urgently demands an end to the dirty war, because with [the] dirty war there won't be peace.
The snipers who are shooting against the political solution to the most prolonged conflict on the continent in a senseless and crazy way, should be immediately disarmed. If they could not win the war, then let us make peace.
From the possible agreements of Havana, with the support of the national will, must flourish in a new country, a peace that has to last for centuries. It should be built on the solid foundation of a National Constituent Assembly, with which we must rebuild ourselves as a civilized nation.
Peace Delegation of the FARC-EP
Addendum: It is time that these illegal facades of computer experts at the service of militarism allow the restoration of the website MUJERFARIANA from the FARC, hacked and taken out of circulation for several days now.
(farc-epeace.org)
Read The Marxist-Leninist Daily
Website: www.cpcml.ca Email: editor@cpcml.ca