A PROPOS DE LA CONFERENCE TRICONTINENTALE
Comaguer a consacré le 13 mai une émission radio (www.radiogalere.org) à cette conférence internationale tenue à la Havane en Janvier 1966 et qui avait réuni plus de 500 délégués représentant des mouvements d’opposition ou des mouvements de libération nationale tous en lutte contre l’impérialisme étasunien et venant des trois continents : Afrique, Asie, Amérique Latine.
Il était inévitable qu’un tel rassemblement, sous la présidence de Fidel Castro, suscite des réactions de la puissance accusée.
Mais il ne s’est pas agi de simples communiqués ou d’articles de journaux. La puissance impériale a organisé une riposte massive et durable à la mesure de la menace.
Les promoteurs de la Conférence furent visés : Ben Barka fut assassiné en France en Octobre 1965, Che Guevara qui se trouvait au Congo au moment de la conférence fut assassiné l’année suivante en Bolivie.
Mais ces meurtres faisaient partie d’un plan de bataille général qui va se dérouler pendant plusieurs années , d’une part en continuant les assassinats : Amilcar Cabral, un des plus remarquables participants africains, sera assassiné en Janvier 1973, d’autre part en mettant en œuvre dans leur arrière cour latino-américaine une politique de renversement des régimes progressistes pour mettre en place des dictatures militaires. Ainsi Salvador Allende, présent à la conférence dans la délégation chilienne, sera lui liquidé le 11 septembre de la même année 1973 à Santiago à l’occasion du coup d’état orchestré par Kissinger. N’échapperont à la contre offensive impérialiste, qui ne pourra cependant pas venir à bout des communistes vietnamiens, que Fidel Castro et le régime cubain et Manuel Marulanda le dirigeant historique des FARC colombiennes, présent à la Conférence, qui lance la guérilla en 1964 et mourra, guerillero invaincu, de mort naturelle, en 2008.
En témoigne un document peu connu que nous reproduisons ci-aprés.
Il s’agit du rapport d’une commission du Sénat étasunien établi en Juin 1966 qui montre l’extrême attention apportée à la Conférence et à ses participants par les services de renseignement étasuniens, le travail d’analyse des travaux et des différents courants politiques représentés en particulier des positions respectives de l’URSS et de la République populaire de Chine.
Un autre document a échappé à nos recherches. Il s’agit du livre « LA LUTTE TRICONTINENTALE » d’Albert-Paul Lentin publié dés la fin de 1966 par François Maspero qui fut interdit en France jusqu’en 1982, n’est pas mentionné dans les bibliographies de son auteur et est aujourd’hui encore introuvable.
L’implication du gouvernement français au plus haut niveau celui de Georges Pompidou, premier ministre et Roger Frey, ministre de l’intérieur dans la disparition de Mehdi ben Barka explique probablement cette longue censure.
THE TRICONTINENTAL CONFERENCE OF AFRICAN, ASIAN, AND LATIN AMERICAN PEOPLES
(A Staff Report)
An event of outstanding importance to the Free World took place in Havana on January 3 of this year. The Cuban capital was the site of what was probably the most powerful gathering of pro-Communist, anti-American forces in the history of the Western Hemisphere.
The first Tricontinental Conference of African, Asian, and Latin American Peoples, as it was called, was convened in the Hall of the Ambassadors at the once-swank Habana Libre Hotel (formerly the Havana Hilton Hotel) in Havana, Cuba. In all, there were 83 groups from countries on three continents-reportedly represented by approximately 513 delegates, 64 observers and 77 invited guests. These groups included 27 Latin American delegations.
The Soviet delegation was the largest at the Conference, consisting, of 40 delegates..
Asian countries were represented by 197 delegates, while Africancountries had 150, and the 27 Latin American groups comprised 165 delegates.
Also participating in the conference were 129 foreign journalists from 35 countries, including several from the United States, and more than 100 Cuban journalists.
Salient aspects of the Conference are evidenced as follows:
*The public posture of international communism since the fictitious burial of the Communist International has been that it does not engage in subversion or violence. At the Havana Conference, all pretense of nonintervention in the affairs of other nations was dropped, and the delegates, under Moscow leadership, openly committed themselves to the overthrow by violence of all those governments which do not meet with their approval.
*The Conference established a Communist-dominated general headquarters to support, direct, intensify, and coordinate guerrilla operations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
*Gave communism a subversive leverage surpassing anything it has heretofore possessed. Bringing into the Conference fold militant leftist and nationalist movements from many countries (which, while themselves not Communist, share the antipathy of the Communists towards the West and towards the United States, and support the Communist-backed "wars of national liberation".
*Havana was selected as the headquarters for international subversion and guerrilla operations, thus making a de facto situation de jure in international Communist circles.
*Immediately following the Conference, the Latin American delegations met and, after reviewing the problems of "revolutionary tactics and strategy," unanimously voted to establish a parallel regional organization, to be known as the Latin American Solidarity Organization (OLAS), with its permanent headquarters in Havana.
*Moscow elbowed the Chinese Communists out of the No. 1 position to emerge as the undisputed controlling force in the new international apparatus of subversion.
*On the ideological plane, however, Maoism emerged triumphant, as the speeches of the delegates and the resolutions of the Conference attest.
*Castro, who has heretofore sought to straddle the fence between Moscow and Peiping, has now openly alined himself with Moscow.
*The actions taken by the Conference point to the immediate and massive intensification of terrorism and guerrilla activity throughout the Americas, as well as in Asia and Africa.
*The Communists were able to get the varied leftwing and radical-nationalist participants in the conference to designate United States "imperialism" as enemy number one in every continent.
The gravity of the threat posed by the Tricontinental Conference was the subject of a recent study prepared by the Special Consultative Committee on Security of the Organization of American States at its sixth regular meeting. Its study concluded: « That the so-called first Afro-Asian-Latin American Peoples' Solidarity Conference constitutes a positive threat to the free peoples of the world, and, on the hemisphere level, represents the most dangerous and serious threat that international communism has yet made against the inter-American system. »
It is necessary and urgent, for the purpose of adequately defending democracy: a. That the [proven] intervention of communism in the internal affairs of the American Republics be considered as aggression, since it constitutes a threat to the security of the hemisphere.
b. That the American governments define their position regarding the present treatment of every kind to be given to communism, and that they consequently adopt coordinated measures that will lead to the common goals.
2. POLITICAL BACKGROUND OF THE CONFERENCE
Events leading up to the Havana Conference of 1966 bear the mark of years of planning and experimentation. In reviewing- these events, it is important to understand that the Tricontinental Conference was not called to start subversive operations. The meeting, was held, rather, to coordinate subversion and guerrilla activity on a worldwide basis, to exchange experiences, and to build further on what has already been constructed-meaning- especially Cuba and Vietnam.
The Dominican delegate, Guido Gil, made this crystal clear in his address to the conference. He said: "The Dominican delegation believes it is very important-one might say almost vital-to the development of the revolutionary process of liberation of the peoples of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, to be able always to count on a consultative body such as the Tricontinental Conference through which experiences and ideas acquired in the process of the struggle of the various peoples of Asia, Africa, and Latin America could be shared."
Similar statements were made by other delegates, like the delegate from the United Arab Republic, whose Havana Embassy, incidentally, gave a reception to members of the delegations. The Arab delegate said that '" solidarity means to step across continents. * * * We support the struggle of the peoples of Vietnam." He linked that support to the success of the "struggle in the Dominican Republic,Venezuela, Colombia, and other countries."
From time to time, Communists disclose their interpretation of Marxism and relate their objectives in remarkably frank language. Such was the case in a speech made by Premier Nikita Khrushchev on January 6, 1961. Conventional war, he said, is not a precondition for the Communist takeover of the Free World. He pointed out that there are four categories of wars-world wars, local wars, liberation wars, and popular uprisings. He said that world war is ruled out, since it would mean destruction of all of society-Communist and non-Communist. "National Liberation Fronts" were endorsed as the safest and most efficacious means of extending Communist domination. This decision was ratified at the twenty-second Communist Party Congress in -.Moscow in October of that year.
The Havana conference of 1966 represents an extension of this Kremlin philosophy enunciated 5 years earlier. "Liberation wars," said Khrushchev, "will continue to exist as long as imperialism exists * * * such wars not only are permissible, but inevitable. Therefore, the peoples can attain their freedom and independence only by struggle, including armed struggle." He said, however, that the Soviets would not hesitate to use the threat of world war, particularly thermonuclear war, to immobilize Western military power and the will to use it.
Krushchev proceeded to employ nuclear blackmail by installing missiles in Cuba in 1962, and pouring troops and technicians into the island in virtual occupation of the country. There they constructed the most extensive underground fortifications in the history of the hemisphere.
Many political writers viewed the Cuban missile crisis, in retrospect, as a sort of continental divide in relations between the Soviet Union and the United States. That this is not so needs no elaboration, for the basic elements of Communist strategies articulated by Khrushchev in 1961 have, except for temporary reverses, remained very much the same. The popular name for it is "peaceful coexistence." But, as the Havana document makes clear, "peaceful coexistence" is not designed to hold back the onward march of "wars of liberation." Quite the contrary.
Prof. Robert Strausz-Hupé understood the situation when, back in 1963, he predicted "ubiquitous disturbances throughout the Free World such as uprisings throughout Latin America, Africa, and Asia."
Writing on the subject of local wars, Prof. Gerhard Niemeyer arrived at much the same conclusion as Dr. Strausz-Hupé. He said: "The cold war will take on the form of a number of concrete conflicts, each of which seems capable of settlement, so that the potential settlement of such conflicts will tend to be confused with an over-all settlement of the Cold War." Considered within the context of the statements made at the Havana conference, Dr. Niemeyer's comments assume a new significance.
Dr. Niemeyer also correctly estimated back in 1963 that political operations of the Communists would, aim at control of strategic areas in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. As the Russians well knew, there could be no better key than Cuba, and they resorted to the pickpocket method of stealing it. They intend not only to maintain control, but, as the Havana conferences clearly demonstrate, to expand Cuba as the base from which to pilfer the countries of Asia, 'Africa, and Latin America.
The strategy was articulated in Castro-official newspaper, Revolucion, in December of 1964 in the following statement: "Colombia and Venezuela form the nucleus of a vast Vietnam of Latin America."
It was no Soviet expeditionary force that put Cuba into Mr. Khrushchev's pocket in 1959 and 1960. It was done by unconventional warfare --blackmail, subversion of the Cuban Confederation of Labor, deliberate destruction of the police and armed forces, and cancellation of Cuba's democratic constitution. No overt expeditionary force created I-e upheaval in the Dominican Republic in April of 1965. The guerrilla wars being waged in Venezuela, Colombia, Peru, and other countries, which the Russian delegate to the Havana conference specifically named as targets for Communist conquest, are wars of the same nature, directed from Cuba with material support from the Soviet Union. Nothing could be plainer on this score than the words of Soviet Delegate Sharaf Rashidov.1
The value of Cuba to world communism is not primarily as a launching pad for atomic missiles, aircraft, and submarines against the United States and its neighbors. The very existance of a Communist Cuba just off our shores under Soviet occupation carries with it the shattering implications of U.S. weakness and vulnerability. The psychological value alone of a Communist Cuba is enormous, an it is being exploited every day in every way. For example, Vilma Espin de Castro, wife of Cuban Armed Forces Minister Raul Castro, journeyed to Moscow last November. Thumping the drums for the upcoming conference, she broadcast from Moscow to the world: "If little Cuba located only 90 miles from North American imperialism, is able to carry out its revolution, then all peoples every-where can do so. Her comments were echoed by virtually every delegation to the Havana conference
The tangible value of Cuba, however, is something else. Avowedly pro-Communist, it has served as a hemispheric operations center which has conducted unconventional warfare against its neighbors for the last 6 years.
The governments of Panama, Colombia, Guatemala, Venezuela, Peru, Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Argentina have protested against proved Cuban complicity in student riots, guerrilla operations, and political assassinations. A plot to assassinate, simultaneously, the presidents of Colombia and Venezuela was uncovered, and the trail led to Havana.
Cuba's role in subversion extends back to July of 1960 when Raul Castro and his wife hosted a "Preparatory Conference of Latin American Youth." Groups of teenagers from 17 Latin American countries, Canada, the United States and Europe descended on Havana. This was perhaps the first mass effort to recruit youngsters for guerrilla training.
Raul Castro addressed the assembly thus: "We must remove ourselves from the influence of the American eagle whose claws have been worn down from plundering its sister republics." Alongside the younger Castro were official delegates from Russia, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Red China, North Korea, and East Germany.
Fidel Castro himself rose from a sickbed to address the meeting. He told the youths to look upon Cuba's expropriation of United States properties as "an example for Latin America."
Just prior to the youth conference, the former Spanish Communist General Enrique Lister, appeared in Cuba. A graduate of the Frunze Military Academy in Russia, Lister set a out organizing guerrilla training camps, along with another Spanish Communist, Colonel Alberto Bayo. Bayo, it should be noted, trained Fidel Castro and his band of revolutionaries in Mexico and prepared them for their invasion of Oriente Province of Cuba on December 2, 1956.
These two Spanish Communists were the prime movers in establishing, guerrilla training camps in Cuba. Among the first was Boca Ciega school east of Havana in the resort town of Tarara.. It was placed under the control of Colonel Bayo. General Lister helped establish and later commanded the largest complex of guerrilla training schools in Minas del Frio, Oriente Province.
The training of guerrilla fighters and subversives in Cuba got underway in the middle of 1960 when Colonel Bayo received an initial batch of 19 young Latin American "becados"--so-called scholarship students. They were put through a rigorous program of drilling, marching, swimming, and mountain climbing; demolition work, infiltration tactics, and propaganda techniques. From these modest beginnings, Cuba's guerilla camps swelled in number to 10 in early 1963, following the missile crisis of the previous October. Painstaking interviews over the past several years with Castro officers, camp technicians, and other refugees who escaped following defection from the Government, indicate that by early 1966 Cuba had developed 43 such camps in which Latin Americans are trained in Viet Cong,-type terroristic wars.
Colombian officials estimated that 1,500 of its youth, including young women, were in training in Cuba the end of 1965. Virtually all of the countries of this hemisphere have presented evidence that their citizens are being trained in guerrilla operations in Cuba.
Nor are mainland United States and Puerto Rico immune from the guerrilla virus, and subversion. Previous studies of Cuba have concentrated mainly on the Cuban threat to our Latin American neighbors. However, U.S. territory is being, progressively threatened, as well, and that threat is summarized below.
Actual assaults on the United States and its institutions began as early as November 17, 1962. On that date several Cubans were arrested and charged with attempted sabotage of oil refineries in New-Jersey and retail stores in New York City. Roberto Santiesteban Casanova, the head conspirator, was found to be head of the Castro Communist spy and terrorist ring, operating in the United States. However, he and his accomplice, Jose Gomez Abad and his wife, were cloaked with diplomatic immunity by virtue of their assignment to the Cuban mission to the United Nations. Under this cloak, they recruited three others, including a pro-Castro American woman, and attempted the sabotage described by the Attorney General as "aimed at the heart of the internal security of the United States of America."
Upon the intervention of U.N. Secretary General U Thant, who argued diplomatic immunity, Robert Santiesteban Casanova was released on $250,000 bond and allowed to leave the country, without being brought to justice. This incident contrasts unpleasantly with treatment accorded U.S. nationals in Iron-Curtain countries, particularly Cuba and Russia. The case of Newcomb Mott comes instantly to mind. This young American strayed across the Soviet border, was accused of spying, sentenced to 6 months in a Soviet labor camp, and then allegedly committed suicide by the improbable method of cutting his own throat with a knife. Adding to the improbability is the apparent contradiction that the Soviet guards who were accompanying him to the labor camp would permit the American to have a sharp knife in his possession at all.
Following the revolt in Santo Domingo in April of 1965, it became known that Santiesteban Casanova had turned up there on the rebel side. It also became known that he is a meniber of the Cuban DGI-General Directorate of Intelligence-Cuba's overseas spy and sabotage system.
Then there is the startling case of February 16, 1965, in which three American Negroes and a Canadian women were seized in a plot to blow up cherished symbols American heritage-the Statue of Liberty, the Washington Monument, and the Liberty Bell. All were Castroites. All had traveled to Cuba.
Interrogation turned up the fact that ringleader, Robert S. Collier, not only had traveled to Cuba illegally with 84 so-called "students" in August of 1964, but while there had received instructions in terroristic tactics from a major in the North Vietnamese army. Walter A. Bowe, another plotter, was revealed to have been a member of the Castro-financed "Fair Play for Cuba Committee." Both had been in contact with Robert Williams, an American renegade Negro.
According to a Havana broadcast of January 5, 1966, Robert F. Williams attended the Tricontinental Conference. He is presently a fugitive from North Carolina justice as the result of a riot which occurred in Monroe, N.C., on August 27, 1961. He faced prosecution there on a kidnaping charge. During the past few years he has been conducting a series of broadcasts in English beamed to the United States from Havana. These broadcasts openly call upon American Negroes to engage in force and violence against the American Government. He is the publisher of a monthly newsletter called the Crusader. In its May-June 1964, issue, Mr. Williams describes in detail how to manufacture Molotov cocktails, organize riots, terrorize the population, and ruin cities. The Crusader of October 1964, shows a photograph of Robert F. Williams with Mao Tse-tung, Chinese Communist leader. Mr. Williams is also the author of a pamphlet entitled "Negroes With Guns," published by a Communist publishing house, Marzani and Munsell.
Williams' berserk anti-Americanism should not be lightly dismissed as something uncharacteristic and irrelevant. For the fact is this: that Williams insane hatred of America and his categorical commitment to violence were reflected, with minor changes in wording and nuance, in the speeches of the most "responsible" Conference spokesmen and in the official resolutions of the Conference.
New York Police Commissioner Michael J. Murphy revealed that the terrorists had contacts in other cities with a view toward spreading terrorism throughout the country. Collier apparently received his instructions from Major Ernesto Guevara when the latter came to the United Nations to address the General Assembly in December of 1964.
Raymond Wood, the detective who penetrated Collier's "Black Liberation Front" and turned up the information which led to the arrest of Collier and his accomplices, testified that Collier told him he had met with Major Guevara and had received instructions from him. Said detective Wood: "Three-man demolition teams were to spearhead an uprising. The Capitol and the White House were scheduled to be destroyed by air."
Detective Wood also stated that the plot called for inducing military pilots to sabotage planes, the creation of chaos within the armed forces by means of false communications, and the use of mortar and machine-gun fire on police and street crowds, and, finally, the boobytrapping of the homes of Government officials.
The same February 16 that the plotters in New York were seized by police, another event took place in Miami which suggests, at the very least, some coordination. The Roney Plaza Hotel on Miami Beach canceled a meeting of a Cuban exile group. The management told the president of the group that it had received an anonymous telephone call threatening a bombing of the premises if the meeting were held. The previous October 7, a hall in the Everglades Hotel in Miami was bombed when the same exile group met there.
Two days following that, on February 18, it was discovered that Southern Florida might be the center for the printing and distribution of Communist pro-Castro propaganda. For, on that date, a Venezuelan stevedore in the port of Caracas came upon a mailpouch filled with pro-Castro literature as the U.S. ship, Santa Rosa was being unloaded. Investigation turned up another 1,000 mailpouches containing the literature. Upon tracing its origins (amounting to 100,000 pieces), they were found to have been consigned to Caracas from Miami. A Caracas cable from Agence France-Presse remarked that "* * * the material presumably was sent bv agents of the Castro regime who have be-en infiltrated into the United States."
These are a few of the many items in the history of mounting hemispheric violence which preceded the Conference.
3. CONFERENCE PREPARATIONS
El Madhi Ben Barka, President of the International Preparatory Committee (who was subsequently kidnaped in France and is now presumed murdered), sounded the Conference theme in sessions of the Preparatory Committee.
Ben Barka pointed out at the September 1964 meeting held in .Moshi, Tanganyika, that the proposed Tricontinental Conference would blend the two great currents of world revolution: That which was born in 1917 with the Russian Revolution, and that which represents the anti-imperialist and national liberation movements of today. He thought it significant that the forthcoming Conference would be held in Cuba, because, he declared, the Cuban Revolution is the realization of these two currents.
He indicated that the anti-imperialist and national liberation movements must adopt a global strategy on a tricontinental scale. "We must achieve greater coordination in the struggle of all the peoples, as the problems in Vietnam, the Congo and the Dominican Republic stem from the same source: U.S. imperialism," he pointed out.
Ben Barka declared that each one of the anti-imperialist organizations of Africa, Asia, and Latin America were selected by the groups represented in the International Preparatory Committee, and that in those nations where there are several organizations, a National Front was formed. Said Ben Barka: "This will lead to a greater unity among the anti-imperialist forces of each country, initiating a positive process among organizations in which at times there are secondary differences, in the face of an enemy that wants to be an international gendarme. This is the spirit in Ahich the Conference will meet in Havana."
The Cuban section of the International Preparatory Committee included Armando Hart, Organizing Secretary and Foreign Relations Secretary of the Cuban Communist Party, and Osmani Cienfuegos, Cuban Minister of Construction and Communist Party leader.
"We must prepare well for this international event," said Fidel Castro, "and greet it with our best efforts in all fields."
"There is an intense mobilization of the people regarding the Tricontinental Conference, the holding, of which coincides with the VII Anniversary of the Cuban Revolution," added Armando Hart.
The Castro regime outdid itself in preparation for the occasion. No expense was spared. -Nor has any accounting of the sources of funds or their disposal been made public.
The Cuban Institute for Friendship Among the Peoples mustered up 100 luxurious automobiles, expropriated from industrialists, property owners, and government officials, for the expected guests.
One hundred and fifty guides, who were specially prepared by teachers from the Schools for Revolutionary Instruction, the Ministry of Education, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, were recruited.
The Ministry of Education arranged a program in cooperation with the Young Co-mmunist Union, the High School Students Union, the University Students Federation, and the Pioneers Union.
The Federation of Cuban Women, in a meeting attended by 3,500 delegates from all parts of the nation, initiated plans for parties, study circles, sports events, children's parties, parades, and simultaneous chess matches .
All such activities were conducted during the months of November and December in salute to the Tricontinental Conference and the VII Anniversary of the Cuba Revolution.
The Federation of Cuban Women organized many other activities heralding these two important events. There was the Women Workers' Conference; the opening of an experimental workshop for women's fashions; a productive work period dedicated to planting fruit and timber trees, and the harvesting of vegetables; the studying at regional and sectional levels of all material published by the Tricontinental Conference Preparatory Committee; and collective contribution of thousands of hours of volunteer work by women.
The Committees for the Defense of the Revolution organized 60,000 study circles, held conferences and seminars, and had lectures on the situations existing in Asian, African, and Latin American countries, With the reported participation of 2,150,000 members. They also organized mural exhibitions, decorated streets with flags of the participants in the Tricontinental Conference, and held seminars on the Conference in the 3,100 section headquarters throughout the Nation.
In honor of the occasion, 50,000 -people were served a supper beneath Marti's statue in the Plaza de la Revolucion. A giant "History of Cuba" exhibition was set up on La Rampa. Delegates were bailed at provincial fiestas. Nightclub stars furnished entertainment. Greeting came from the following Communist leaders: China's Chou En-lai, North Korea's Kim II Sung, North Vietnam's President Ho Chi Minh, Mongolia's Yu Tsedenbal , USSR Council of Ministers Chairman Aleksei Kosygin, and Leonid Brezhnev, First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Central Committee. It all added up to an enormous lift for the prestige of the Castro regime.
A strenuous campaign was mounted to beautify Havana--an important point in the preparations to salute the historic event. A commission composed of representatives from various organizations decided to turn the empty city lots into "Friendship Gardens," to plant "Solidaritv Trees" in the City and provinces, collect rubbish, scrap iron, and old signs.
The Cuba Trade Union Center presented, throughout the capital, groups of entertainers from each of the 25 National Trade Unions. These groups performed songs and dances from each of the countries participating in the Tricontinental Conference. Programs for the Conference were printed in each of the languages represented therein. All work centers were decorated, and a special effort was made to increase production during this period.
To popularize the occasion both at home and abroad, masses of documents relating to the Tricontinental Conference, interviews, special reports, radio and TV coverage, were printed and distributed. In addition, a special call issued by the Cuban national Committee, said in part:It will be the first time in history that revolutionaries from three continents will meet, in a conference such as this. The representatives of anti-imperialist organizations from the most distant parts of Africa, Asia, and Latin America who struggle for liberation or national consolidation, will meet to firmly confront the threat created by U.S. imperialism that is manifest in aggressions in Vietnam, the Congo, and the Dominican Republic."
"Let us make the preparations work for a giant mobilization of all sectors of the country to fulfill the ambitious goals established by the Communist Party of Cuba and its First Secretary, Fidel Castro," continued the statement of the National Committee.
"This Conference," declared Dr. Raul Roa, Cuban Minister of Foreign Aff airs, and mem'@,er of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, speaking before the United Nations Organization, "has been called in order to strengthen even more the bonds of solidarity among the peoples of the three continents, and at the same time will be a point of departure for broadening and deepening the development of their struggle against colonialism, neocolonialism and imperialism, for social progress, economic development and world peace."
As a final production, the Conference more than jusfified the massive and elaborate preparations that went into its organization.
4. THE AGENDA OF THE CONFERENCE
On January 8, the four committees of the Conference discussed the provisional agenda drafted in Cairo by the Committee on Preparations at its meeting during the previous September. The agenda finally adopted was the following:
1. The struggle against imperialism, colonialism, and neocolonialism.
A. Support to the Vietnamese people in its heroic struggle against the imperialist aggression of the United States and for the liberation of South Vietnam and unification of the entire country.
B. Struggle for complete national liberation , for the right of peoples to selfdetermination, and consolidation of independence and national sovereignty in the three continents, struggle against imperialist aggression, subversive conspiracies, and foreign intervention in independent states; and against the imperialist policy of isolating peoples struggling for their national independence.
C. Intensification of all forms of struggle, including armed struggle, by the peoples of the three continents. against imperialism colonialism, and neocolonialism, headed by U.S. imperialism.
D. Support to the Cuban people in its just struggle against U.S. imperialism and in defense of national sovereignty. Support to the patriotic struggle of the Latin American peoples against the imperialism of the United States and its instruments, such as the OAS.
E. Elimination of foreign military bases in the three continents and action against the policy of military pacts.
F. Struggle to prohibit the use, production, testing, and storage of nuclear weapons, and for complete destruction of all present nuclear weapons and all instruments for producing them; and struggle for disarmament and world peace.
G. Action against apartheid and racial segregation; support to the peoples of Africa and of the United States in defending their rights to equality and freedom; struggle against discrimination and racism in all other forms.
H. Ways and means of aiding the liberation movements in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, in general, and armed struggle for independence, in particular.
2. Burning issues of the struggle against imperialism in the countries of the three continents, particularly in Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, the Congo, the Portuguese colonies, Rhodesia, southern Arabia add Palestine, Laos, Cambodia@,- South Africa, Korea, Venezuela, Guatemala, Peru, Colombia, Cyprus, Panama, Southwest Africa, and North Kalimantan.
3. Anti-imperialist solidarity among the African, Asian, and Latin American peoples in economic, social, and cultural fields.
A. For the economic emancipation and social and cultural liberation of the peoples of the three continents.
1. Principles on joint struggle to obtain and consolidate the economic emancipation of the peoples of the three continents and the struggle against the economic exploitation and aggression of imperialism, colonialism, and neocolonialism.
2. Measures to eliminate the consequences of colonial domination in the economic, social, and cultural fields.
3. Action against the policy of blockade and boycott imposed by imperialism in the case of countries that are fighting for freedom and that have already achieved independence.
4. Economic planning and mobilization of natural and manpower resources for economic development and to obtain true economic independence, based chiefly on the country's own natural resources.
5. Agrarian reform in the continents.
6. Problems of national training of personnel.
B. For the development of economic, social, and cultural relations.
1. Aid and cooperation among the peoples of Africa, Asia, America in the economic, social, and cultural fields. 2. Fundamental principles of economic and technical cooperation among the countries of the three continents, based on principles of equality and mutual interest.
3. Establishment of a new economic policy between countries of the three continents and the rest of the world. Establishment of trade, economic, and financial relations with the developed countries on a basis that makes possible the development of the others.
4. Formulation of a joint definition for the countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America of the concept of a peaceful coexistence.
C. For coordinating the action of workers', students', and women's organizations in the three continents.
4. Political and institutional unification of the efforts of the peoples of Asia, Africa, and Latin America in their joint struggle for national liberation, reconstruction, prosperity, and peace.
Summarizing the agenda and purpose of the Tricontinental Conference, the official Cuban newspaper Granma, in its issue of January 6, 1966, said:
The strategy of the revolutionary movements in their struggle against imperialism, colonialism, and neocolonialism and, especially against Yankees imperialism - principal enemy of peoples- calls for closer military ties and solidarity between the peoples of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, the working class, the progressive forces of the capitalistic countries of Europe and the United States and the Socialist camp.
5. RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY CONFERENCE
The general resolution adopted by the Tricontinental Conference represented a major victory for the philosophy of Maoism, in the sense that it rejected all Possibility of peaceful reform and declared revolutionary violence to be the only road to the future. These were the words of the resolution:
One cannot accept the, first small step as an alternative to those that follow.
We cannot permit ourselves to be deceived or frightened. * * * The struggle is to the death. * * * The peoples of the three continents must reply to imperialist violence with revolutionary violence to safeguard hard-won national independence, as well as to achieve the liberation of the peoples who are fighting to shake off the colonialist noose.
The general declaration of the Tricontinental Conference covered the following significant points:
1. Condemned Yankee imperialism for allegedly "carrying out a policy of systematic intervention and military aggression against the nations of the three continents."
2. Referred to Yankee imperialism as the "implacable enemy of all peoples of the world."
3. Referred again to Yankee imperialism as constituting "the basis for oppression; it directs, provides, and upholds the worldwide system of exploitation."
4. Proclaimed "the right of the peoples to meet imperialist violence with revolutionary violence."
5. Vigorously condemned "the Yankee imperialists' aggressive war in South Vietnam."
6. Proclaimed "its solidarity with the armed struggle of the peoples of Venezuela, Guatemala, Peru, Colombia."
7. Condemned "the aggressive policy of the U.S. Government and its Asian agents against peaceful and neutral Cambodia and calls for the rejection of all political, economic, diplomatic, and cooperation with the Yankee imperialists and with all puppet governments which help the U.S. overnment in their aggressive policy against the Indochinese peoples."
8. Condemned "the North American imperialists' blockade on Cuba."
Another resolution read in part:
North American imperialism is at the fore of the imperialists' aggressive policy. The most desperate actions against peoples, as in Vietnam and the Dominicin Republic, lie at the door of the Yankee imperialists. North American states girdle the globe. Aggressive pacts in which the United States is the leading power cover ever continent and sea. The United States is found behind everv aggressive action committed by the other imperialists.
Another resolution read in part:
« North American imperialism is at the fore of the imperialists' aggressive policy. The most desperate actions against peoples, as in Vietnam and the Dominican Republic, lie at the door of the Yankee imperialists. North American states girdle the globe. Aggressive pacts in which the United States is the leading power cover every continent and sea. The United States is found behind every aggressive action committed by the other imperialists. »
Another resolution read:
« This conference is convinced that, in view of the imperialists' violence, the peoples of the three continents must reply with revolutionary violence. The latter (people's) must make use of all the most vigorous forms of struggle, among which armed battle is one of the higher forms to obtain final victory. »
The resolution dealing with Vietnam said:
« The conference sets forth clearly that to the imperialist tactic of limited wars the effective reply is the development of liberation wars in every region where conditions are ripe. The best example is Vietnam, where the United States by stepping up its intervention is creating the conditions for a more complete defeat later. »
Again Vietnam was dealt with in these terms:
« It is necessary to multiply solidarity with the Vietnamese people throughout the world and support their heroic battle in every mariner, even by sending armed volunteers if that be necessary. The Conference supports the four points laid down by the Government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the five points stated by the South Vietnam National Liberation Front, and calls on all peoples to struggle to see this applied as the sole settlement for the Vietnam case. Defense of the Vietnamese people's just cause has become a central task for the revolutionary strategy of the peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America. »
A resolution on Puerto Rico said in part:
« Puerto Rico remains occupied by U.S. imperialism, which not only denies her the right to independence, but has converted her into an enormous military base that includes atomic weapons. »
Another resolution stressed the importance of Cuba:
« Special mention is due solidarity with Cuba, whose people are defending and carrying forward a revolution only ninety miles from the United States. Her choice as the site of the first solidarity conference of the peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin American is the highest recognition of the importance of her revolution and the significance it has for the peoples of the three continents. Cuba, because of her relatively small size, her geographical position near the United States and in a zone surrounded by Governments which are puppets of the Yankee imperialists * * * proves with her revolution, triumphing over all aggressions perpetrated or fomented by the United States, that revolution is possible and invincible. »
A resolution on the Panama Canal Zone said:
« The Panama Canal Zone is being used as a base for attack on peoples fighting for their liberation, it forms the Caribbean triangle with the military bases at Guantanamo and on Puerto Rico. This is done against the will of the Panamanian people. »
The resolution on the United Nations denounced it as being manipulated by the United States. The Conference's "Declaration on the OAS" said:
« That the Organization of American States has no legal or moral authority to represent the Latin American nations. That the only organization that will be able to represent Latin America will be the one composed of the democratic and anti-imperialist governments that are the genuine product of the sovereign will of the Latin American peoples. »
The Conference proposed:
« That the revolutionary movements of Colombia, Venezuela, Peru, Panama, Ecuador, and others in the Caribbean area and southern part of the hemisphere take prompt steps to make a joint study of this military situation, wlth a view to finding means to counteract the effects of this aggressive attitude of imperialism. »
The Conference resolved:
« To give the most determined support to the revolutionary movements of Colombia, Venezuela, Peru, Panama, Ecuador, and other countries of the Caribbean area and the southern part of the hemisphere in order to respond to the overall aggressive policy of U.S. imperialism with the most effective measures to counteract its effects.
To denounce before all the countries of the three continents the Yankee intervention in the armed struggles of Colombia, Venezuela, and Peru, and to promote the militant solidarity of the combatants of those countries with each other and with the peoples of the continents in the great battle for national liberation.
To give decisive support, in all forms, to the armed struggle undertaken in Peru, the path valiantly chosen by the Peruvian people to achieve its definitive and total economic and political independence. »
Such was the atmosphere and the general political character of the Tricontinental Conference in Havana.
6. U.S.A.-THE MAIN TARGET
Cuban President Osvaldo Dorticos set the tone for the extreme anti-Americanism that characterized the Conference in his speech of January 4, 1966. Dorticos said:
It is certain, however, that imperialism, especially North American imperialism, which has assumed the sad role of international gendarme, is sharpening the violence and is intensifying the taking advantage of all vile instruments of aggressions against peoples, from bribery and blackmail up to the most barefaced forms of violence and armed intervention. * * * There is no better place than this conference to proclaim without vacillations the right of peoples to oppose imperialist violence with revolutionary violence.
Dr. Guido Gil, head of the Dominican Republic's delegation to the Tricontinental Conference, joined the chorus in these terms, in a speech delivered on January 9, 1966:
It is in Asia, Africa, and Latin America where the hardest blows are being dealt imperialism, and principally its leading ai-id prime force, Yankee imperialism.
In accordance with this viewpoint, the conference adopted a resolution which said-
That the imperialist government of the United States is condemned as an aggressor and violator of the sovereignty of the Dominican people
That the OAS (Organization of American States) be condemned as the main political instrument of U.S. imperialism in the neocolonial dominating of Latin America.
On January 14, 1966, Virgilio Shuverer, a Panamanian diplomat, was interviewed in the Panamanian Legislative Palace as to his estimate of the Conference. He said:
The Tricontinental Conference, in my opinion, will have an important effect on the lives of people who are today subjected to imperialism * * * I believe that it will be a stimulus, a joint effort among the revolutionaries of the world, for carrying forward the methods and tactics being employed at present against imperialism, particularly U.S. imperialism.
On January 4, 1966, Norman Pietri Castellon, chairman of the Puerto Rican delegation to the Tricontinental Conference broadcast his views. He called Puerto Rico "the most important military fortress of U.S. imperialism," and added that "The independence movement is continuously organizing the Puerto Rican people so that we may resolutely confront U.S. imperialism." He further declared that "The Puerto Rican Independence Movement expects effective solidarity from the Tricontinental Conference of the peoples of Asia, Africa, and Latin America."
Renato Bitossi, chairman of the Communist-controlled World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) and a member of the Italian Communist Party's Central Committee, was interviewed on January 8, 1966, at the Hotel Havana Libre, headquarters of the Tricontinental Conference, as to the significance of the conference. Before the conference had closed its session, he assured the interviewer that the WFTU accept the resolutions adopted by this conference."
Asked how the WFTU is likely to show its solidarity, he pointed out that-
The WFTU carried out mass demonstrations during the Suez Canal crisis against the Korean war, * * * It intervened mainly with supporting demonstrations all over the world in order to assist the Cuban revolution against U.S. imperialism.
* * * The WFTLU is an observer at the Tricontinental Conference.
7. THE BASIC GOAL--MORE VIETNAMS ON A TRICONTINENTAL SCALE
Dominant motif of the Havana Conference from the outset was Communist unity displayed against a backdrop of "successes" in the terroristic war being waged in Asia by the Viet Cong, alla rejection of peace offers. it was no coincidence that the first speaker at the January 4 plenary session was Nguyen Van Tien, delegate from the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam (Viet Cong), His opening speech had the quality of that of a political cheerleader, and it set a triumphant tone for the secret deliberations which followed. He asked the delegates for unanimous "solidarity" with the Viet Cong cause. ("Solidarity" can be interpreted in the Communist lexicon as do likewise. )
Van Tien said in Havana that the Viet Cong are strong enough to win any type of war "imposed upon them" by the "Yankee imperialists and their lackeys." He boasted that, "Even if the Yankees, instead of abandoning their military venture, send 300,000, 400,000, or even more troops to South Vietnam, they cannot win. * * *" He claimed that the Viet Cong control 80 percent of the territory of South Vietnam "thereby ensuring the smooth development of our struggle until final Victory." He also laid claim to "victories of strategic significance,'' and encouraged the delegates to engage in similar types of wars in their own countries. "We are," he said 'determined to defeat them (the United States) * * * determined to fight on for 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, or even longer until the Yankees abandon their policy of aggression and get Out of our territory-."
Tran Danh Tuyen, the North Vietnamese delegate.who presented the official view of Hanoi, insisted that the final resolution of the conference must include recognition "of the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam as the only hemline representative of South Vietnam." What is significant to this otherwise routine demand was his warning that victory in the Viet Cong fight was prerequisite to the success of projected wars of liberation on other continents.
It is important to note that none of the delegates who spoke at the Tricontinental Conference seriously advocated a negotiated peace in South Vietnam. Peace on the terms suggested by Tran Danh Tuyen would mean nothing less than unconditional surrender on the part of the United States.
Again linking Communist military victory in Vietnam to the ultimate success of the "Havana Conference on World-Wide Subversion," Tuyen said:
"In view of the vital bearing of the Vietnam question on our three continents and on the present situation of the entire world, please allow us to propose that the Conference adopt a special resolution on Vietnam." (Italics supplied.)
The resolution proposed by North Vietnam was: "Demand that the United States put an end to its aggressive war in South Vietnam and unconditionally and at once end their bombing of North Vietnam; withdraw their troops and arms from South Vietnam, and dismantle all military bases there; call on the United States to respect and strictly implement the 1954 Geneva agreement on Vietnam, which recognizes the right of the Vietnamese people to solve their own problems; call for the prevention of the introduction of U.S. arms, ammunition, and troops into Vietnam; forbid the United States to turn the territory of other countries into military and supply bases for aggression against Vietnam; urge all-out support for and fraternal assistance with the Vietnamese people to make sure that the Vietnamese people can resist the aggression of U.S. imperialism * * *"
Preconference guidance in this direction had already been supplied through a Pravda; editorial of December 25, 1965, which viewed the war in Vietnam as the prototype of other Communist-directed terroristic wars. Said Pravda:
"The American 'dirty war' in Vietnam is a challenge to the national liberation movement throughout the world, and a direct attack against it aimed at strangling the peoples' liberation struggle.'' (Italics supplied.) "American imperialists and their apologists are trying to prove the 'lawfulness' of waging wears against the peoples defending their national independence. But national wars are just wars. They are lawful weapons of the oppressed peoples, and express their will to live in freedom without any foreign enslavement by their puppets."
The North Korean delegate put the test of wills and the ability of the United States to cope with terroristic wars bluntly: "If the struggle against U.S. imperialism is given up," said Kim Wal Yong, "victory in revolution, independence, peace, and progress are out of the question."
The military character of the Conference was brought out in the address by Cuban President Osvaldo Dorticos, who welcomed the delegates to Havana. He welcomed them as "liberation fighters." One purpose of the meeting, he said, was the "duty to give unrestricted support to the movements of Asia, Africa, and Latin America," linking success in those areas to "the fundamental obligation to express solidarity with, and pledge the most resolute support for, the valiant people of Vietnam." He concluded his address in a call to arms with "renewed faith in the peoples' future, in their invincible fighting potential, and in the assurance of imperialism's final defeat. * * *"
Beaming to Latin America, Castro's Radio Havana described the address of Nguyen Van Tien in lyrical terms, quoting his claim that "guerrillas of his country have won great victories in the struggle against U.S. aggression." Apparently designed to pump up the courage of Cuban-exported guerrillas operating in Latin America, Radio Havana said: "The South Vietnamese revolutionary leader declared that 'in the Plei Me area, where we fought for 10 days, more than 1,700 U.S. soldiers were killed or wounded.' " Van Tien was described in the broadcast as a "South Vietnamese guerrilla."
Guido Gil of the Dominican Republic said "the popular struggle" in his country is still continuing. He said that "armed combat will be the path of liberation, and that is why the people are preparing and organizing themselves to defeat the imperialists, and we certainly will." His colleague, Cayetano Rodriguez del Prado, vowed that Dominican Communists "will convert the Dominican Republic into the Vietnam of Latin America."
It is significant to note here that one delegate, Euclides Gutiérrez Feliz, was a Vice Minister in Colonel Francisco Caamaño's so-called constitutional government, during the revolt in Santo Domingo in April 1965.
José de la Tunón, delegate from Panama, said in a Cuban broadcast to Latin America: "The peoples of Latin America and the Panamanian working class are bound to be encouraged by this event, since from it will come the plans which must be carried out against the common enemy of all peoples, Yankee imperialism."
In English-language broadcasts, Radio Hanoi recounted the cordial, informal talks Fidel Castro conducted with delegates from North and South Vietnam. It said: "Dan Thi Thanh, a militia-woman fighter who had downed a U.S. aircraft, member of the North Vietnam delegation, presented to Premier Fidel Castro a ring made of the metal from the wreckage of the U.S. plane downed in North Vietnam. The Premier clasped and raised her hand and, amid stormy applause, warmly praised the valiant fighting spirit of the Vietnamese women."
This incident is recounted here simply to underscore the terroristic and warlike nature of the conference, and the extent to which propaganda high-jinks were employed to whip up the fires of belligerency and fanaticism.
Another, and certainly more grisly, incident involves the helmet of a U.S. pilot shot down over North Vietnam. Pedro Medina Silva, the chief Communist delegate from Venezuela, talked about using the helmet for purposes of morale building.
The Venezuelan said that the National Liberation Front of Vietnam had presented the Venezuelan National Liberation Front with the helmet of a dead American pilot, shot down over North Vietnam. "The Venezuelan National Liberation Front gave it to the Tricontinental Committee for Support of Vietnam. We then deposited the helmet with the Cuban Committee for Solidarity. We shall wage a campaign of emulation, both on the island of Cuba and in Latin America with it, and we shall carry it to every continent to give more impact and more brilliance to the week of solidarity with Vietnam which is scheduled in March on a Tricontinental scale."
Commenting on the makeup of the bloodthirsty delegations to the Havana conference, Budapest's Communist newspaper Nepszabadsag implied that it was the success of Castro's guerrilla campaign in Cuba and the Viet Cong war in Asia, that influenced the Soviets to emulate those tactics on a worldwide basis. The paper noted that the conference was not in the hands of "catastrophic politicians" but in the firm glip of revolutionaries.
Judging from the Latin American representatives, in particular, it was clear that the delegates represented a breed which is prepared to fulfill the assembly's call for "immediate and concrete action." Absent, for example, were Fabricio Ojeda of Venezuela, Luis Corvalán, Secretary General of Chile's Communist Party, Luis Carlos Prestes of Brazil, and Norge Botello Fernández of the Dominican Republic. The composition of the Conference strongly suggests that a decision was made to rely less on the "national" Communist Parties and turn to the "man with the gun."
Particularly in Latin America, the prime target for subversion from the new headquarters in Havana, the Communist parties are split along national lines and tradition, and weakened by intra-party fights, and ruled by leaders who belonged to tile previous generation of revolutionaries. It would be almost impossible to weld these politically oriented Communist party bosses into a one-leader operation.
The respectable Paris newspaper, Le blonde, observed that the Soviet Union has thrown its weight behind tile guerrilla fighters rather than Communist parties because. Le Monde warns, Russia now believes that "the destiny of the revolutionary movements in Latin America lies * * * in direct action, more precisely in armed action."
Le Monde also points out that, "with the exception of Venezuela and Colombia, the orthodox Communist parties have show n no great enthusiasm for guerrilla wars."
Essentially, then, the tactics which are most likely to be followed in intensified subversion from Havana are those employed by Fidel Castro from 1957 to January 1 1959, wiled those tactics catapulted him into power and by the Viet Cons, in Vietnam today. These tactics include political subversion, penetration of student groups, bomb throwing in the cities, kidnaping, robbery, blackmail--all culminating m and supporting open guerrilla operations.
In his speech closing the Tricontinental Conference. Castro called for "a common strategy, a joint, simultaneous struggle" throughout Latin America against the United States. In fact he enumerated the projected targets including Venezuela, Peru, Colombia, and Guatemala.
Cuba's Foreign Minister Raul Roa echoed the views of his chief at the Tricontinental Conference and called upon the assembled delegates to "redouble our efforts to make this historic conference an endless source of encouragement, inspiration, and support for the liberation movements in Asia. Africa, and Latin America." He added that the effort should be dedicated especially to "those peoples who are fighting weapons in hand for their self-determination, independence and sovereignty, a perfect example of what can be found in the ** * battle being waged today by the people of Vietnam against Yankee imperialism and its allies." In keeping with this outlook it migrant n`,t be farfetched to expect in the near future an extensive diversionary move on the part of forces in various countries of Latin America in an effort to force the withdrawal of some of our forces from Vietnam.
Conference resolutions demanded "the immediate withdrawal of all foreign troops, the dismantling of foreign military bases" with special reference to American installations calculated to defend these countries from Communist aggression.
Major Luis A. Turcios, representing the Rebel Armed Forces of Guatemala (FAR) struck a similar chord at the Conference, from which we quote:
In Guatemala the only channel for revolution is armed struggle. It is a revolutionary war.
He quoted from a declaration of FAR to the effect that "The revolutionary forces have taken the only road which remains to occur people; to answer counterrevolutionary violence with revolutionary violence; to open the way for the Guatemalan revolutionary violence by force of arms * * *."
He looked to the Tricontinental Conference to "channel, coordinate, and apply effectively anti-imperialist solidarity measures." He emphasized particularly the training of the rebel armed forces which he called "the political and military instrument which Guatemalan people needed in order to wage war."
He added: "That most advanced expression of out struggle lies in the establishment of the first guerrilla zones, particularly the Edgar Iberia zone * * *. This guerrilla front was formed more than 2 years ago and now we can say that it has been definitely consolidated."
An article appearing in the New York Times of March 18, 1966, page 17, reported on a secret interview with Luis Augusto Turcios Lima by Henry Giniger. The article described Turcios as a graduate of the Polytechnical School, Guatemala's military academy, and the Ranger School at Fort Benning, Ga. While Turcios denied being a Communist, the article stated, his associate, Gabriel Salazar, head of the Political Commission of the Rebel Armed Forces, admitted Communist Party membership. Turcios admitted that his group did not number more than a few hundred, the Times reported.
Among the participants in the Conference was General Enrique Lister, referred to as "the hero of the Fifth Regiment of the Spanish Civil war," an expert in the field of guerrilla warfare. He appeared as an observer and representative of the World Peace Congress, a well-known Communist front.
Spokesman for the Venezuelan National Armed Forces of Liberation (FALN) was Pedro Medina Silva, its commander. Speaking at the Conference session on January 6, Medina Silva pointed out that the Havana Conference offers "The most opportune occasion to drag up a global strategy in the struggle * * * The revolutionary parties of Venezuela have formed the National Liberation Front. The Front has outlined as objectives to be achieved in this struggle the establishment of a nationalist, democratic government which will lav the foundations of socialism in our country. * * * Now we know that this objective can be achieved only through armed struggle." The FALN has been authoritatively described as a Communist-controlled paramilitary organization.
Roberto Garcia Urrutia, head of the delegation from Peru, addressed the Conference on January 7 as follows. He explained that since the start of the armed struggle in Peru on July 9, 1964, a number of fronts have opened and that now five guerrilla warfare centers exist. He noted that wide sectors of the intellectuals and the middle classes have already come out for the guerrillas and against the government's allegedly repressive measures. He declared that 80 percent of the students have come out firmly in support of armed struggle. In his remarks he also stated that Peruvian revolutionaries support all armed struggles of national liberation of the peoples of the three continents. "In particular," he mentioned "the struggles of Venezuela, Colombia, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, and we especially feel solidarity with the glorious peoples of South Vietnam and the Democratic Republic of Vietnam."
Concluding, he emphasized that "This Tricontinental Conference is the most positive effort that has been made in the past few years to orientate the fight, harmonize efforts, define objectives, and basically develop on a worldwide scale the battle against the fundamental enemy of peoples, peace, progress, and mankind: Yankee
8. THE CASE OF PUERTO RICO
The situation in the U.S. island of Puerto Rico presents considerable cause for alarm and calls for immediate attention. Latin Americans in culture and outlook, the Puerto Ricans are, as Soviet delegate Sharaf Rashidov himself declared, prey for Communist penetration and terrorism.
The history of Communist subversion to the present is considerably more alarming than is generally recognized. Some of that history was revealed by Norman Pietri, Puerto Rican delegate to the Havana Conference. He said: "Armed struggle has taken place in Puerto Rico. The struggle for independence has continued 'In the streets, and is becoming stronger daily."
Another Puerto Rican delegate, Narciso Rabell Martinez said: "The independence movement is continuously being organized among the Puerto Rican people so that we may unflinchingly confront U.S. imperialism. It is a fight waged from within the very heart of the monster. But as Jose' Marti said, 'although we are living in the heart of the monster, we also possess David's sling.' The possibility of obtaining Puerto Rico's independence is clear and present, and we believe that, with the burgeoning of the mass movement now surfacing, Puerto Rico will also soon become a 'free territory of America.' "
Cuban intrigue has converged on Puerto Rico through roughly three different means-drug trafficking, terrorism, and diplomacy and propaganda.
Puerto Rican police and the FBI nipped one plot by Cuban trained Puerto Ricans to assassinate John Bishop, FBI chief in San Juan, and to kidnap high-ranking Puerto Rican officials. One of those captured testified that contact with Cuba was carried out through agents in the Dominican Republic. Interception of the terrorist group, the so-called Armed Movement of Puerto Rico, was made outside Ramey Air Force Base, one of the largest military installations on the island. Propaganda "which declares war against the United States" was found along with rifles, pistols, field telephones, and large amounts of ammunition.
Chronic riots at the University of Puerto Rico are attributed to student agitators following instructions from Cuba's government controlled subversive student organization, the University Student Federation (FEU).
Cuba has also become an important way-station for the transfer of drugs from Red China to Puerto Rico and thence to the mainland United States. A break in one drug ring came in December 1964 with the arrest of Castroite Cubans Carabeo Nerev and two accomplices. Eugene Marshall of the Federal Narcotics Bureau in Miami revealed that the three had been back to Cuba several times since they entered this country under the cover of "exiles." The conclusion drawn is that Castro agents have entered Puerto Rico and Miami in the guise of "political exiles."
On September 24, 1964, the New York Times reported: "There are strong suspicions that Communist Cuba is making an attempt to flood Puerto Rico with drugs via Havana in an effort to undermine the economy of the island." On January 6, United Press International reported that marihuana was arriving in the United States from Cuba "in great quantities."
In an interview with New York police inspector Ira Bluth, UPI reported that "marihuana used to come to New York almost entirely from Mexico, but recently a large amount of drugs from Cuba have been discovered * * * they have .. been introduced into this country from Cuba through Florida. * * * in the past few months of 1964, 697 pounds of drugs from Cuba had been found, compared with 241 pounds in 1963. * * *"
It is believed that the sale of drugs, particularly heroin, in the United States and other Free-World countries provides a considerable amount of foreign exchange by which Cuba finances guerrilla activities. Connection between Cuban terrorism and drug traffic was brought out in other evidence. When Carabeo Nerey was arrested in Miami, he was accompanied by two Puerto Rican females, sisters Nellie and Doris Antuna. Doris, said the report, had been living with a Wilfredo Jesus Risco, who earlier had been uncovered as an intermediary in supplying Puerto Rican terrorists with money.
Sabotage, little reported and less understood in mainland United States, has taken and is taking its toll in Puerto Rico. In December1964, San Juan's newspaper, "El Madro" reported "a wave of incendiaries which swept the area. The targets were mainland U.S. companies-Levittown Construction Co., Barker's Department Store, Woolworth's, the Bata Shoe Factory, and Bargain Town.
Eight attempts were made to burn Woolworth's, but vigilance cut down the damage considerably. However, Barker's loss was placed at $4 million; Bata Shoe Factory was completely destroyed at a loss of $3 million. Newspaper accounts drew the obvious of parallel between what happened in Puerto Rico and the tactics being carried out by National-Liberation Front terrorists in Venezuela and Colombia.
Incendiarism and other acts of terrorism have been accompanied, in the past, by bloody, Communist-led student riots. Puerto Rican Congressman Carlos Westerbrand has moved to establish laws to outlaw such Communist infiltration in student organizations citing incidences of such infiltration even among the high school student bodies.
Venezuelan Pedro Medina Silva is leader of the Latin American committee to carry on terroristic wars in Latin America. He is also chief of the Venezuelan Armed Forces of National Liberation. Speaking in Havana on February 8, of this year, he announced that Venezuela, Puerto Rico, Chile, and the Dominican Republic were on the Tri-continental General Secretariat charged with carrying out terroristic wars. He said of Puerto Rican participation: " This is very important. For the first time, Latin America achieves integration (in the world war of subversion). This is the first time that Puerto Rico -Participates in an organization as important as the General Secretariat." He added: "We feel that this is a debt we owed Puerto Rico, one we have now paid by incorporating that country on a tricontinental scale in an organization which will enable it to see and observe, and above all, to contribute to its own final liberation so that it can stop being a Latin American colony.
The remarks of Soviet delegate Sharaf Rashidov, when he included Puerto Rico as a target of tricontinental subversion, recall the fact that Russian interest in that island goes back a few years. It records Soviet manipulation of Cuba for political, military, and propaganda purposes.
Back in 1954 ' the Soviets sponsored a "World Peace Conference" in Prague. This led, in 1957, to the establishment of the Afro-Asian Conference held in Cairo. Rashidov, it should be noted, headed the Soviet delegations to the Prague and Cairo Conferences. He was responsible for the behind-the-scenes maneuvering at the Cairo Conference of "non aligned" nations in late summer 1964 which, with very little persuasion it, n-tai, be deduced, led Cuba to introduce a resolution demanding that the United Nations call for a debate on the "colonial status of Puerto Rico."
The Cairo delegates accepted the resolution and, on November 20, 1964, the U.N. Committee agreed to the debate. The U.N. Committee debate is outrageous on the face of it. It completely ignored the fact that in November of 1964 the Puerto Rican people went to the polls, and cast 778,000 votes out of a total cast of about 860,000 affirming their status as U.S. citizens in a "Free State Associated with the United States"-an association that has brought Puerto Rico out of grinding poverty.
However Soviet-Cuban maneuvers lurks the kernel of Communist policy toward Puerto Rico. That policy is to force the retirement strength from the Caribbean and eventually from Latin America. It is also to be noted that U.N. acceptance of the debate came just prior to the visit to the United Nations by Major Guevara. What he said regarding Puerto Rico exposes some of that kernel. He said that the "use of Puerto Rico as a military base by the United States threatens the peace." It may be considered no co-incidence that Guevara's views were echoed by Norman Pietri, Puerto Rican delegate to the Tricontinental Conference. He said on January 10 in Havana that "14 percent of the national territory of Puerto -Rico is occupied by nine immense U.S. military bases designed to strengthen Yankee domination in Puerto Rico ***exposing the rest of the Latin American peoples to the constant threat of direct imperalist military aggression. ***" There is little difference, except in the wording, between what Guevara hinted at, and what Puerto Rican Communist Norman Peitri actually said 1 year later.
Pietri went on to spell it out: "Imperialism has everything in those gigantic bases--long-range guided missiles, super bombers loaded with atomic bombs, nuclear submarines at Roosevelt Roads, and special anti-guerrilla troops. From this stems the imperative need to win national independence in order to promote conditions conducive to total eradication of Yankee military installations in Puerto Rico and the threat they pose to the rest of Latin America."
The climax of several years intervention in Puerto Rico by the Russian-Cuban combine came on February 10, following the Tri-continental Conference. On that day, Puerto Rican terrorists actually established a "Free Puerto Rico Embassy" in Havana. At the same time, the Puerto Ricans signed a so-called "pact of solidarity" with the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam in the latter's Havana headquarters. Aping the tactics of the Viet Cong, the Puerto Ricans claimed that they (the equivalent of a National Liberation Front) were "recognized as the only legitimate representative of the Puerto Rican people."
Following that announcement, and the establishment of the Communist Puerto Rican "Embassy," 26 Latin American Communist delegations said they would establish in their countries, "national committees of solidarity with Free Puerto Rico." Viet Cong military representatives immediately added their voices to the throng, saying that "the enemy of both our peoples, and of humanity, is North American imperialism."
Norman Pietri invited Puerto Rican newspapers to send their journalists to Havana, offering to pay then- fare of $1,400 round trip, San Juan-New Orleans-Mexico-Havana, and from Havana back to San Juan via Spain. He used the precedent, or alleged precedent, of the travel of U.S. "students" to Cuba in 1963 and 1964 and their defiance of State Department regulations as justification. Eschewing United States citizenship, which the Puerto Rican group is dedicated to sever, Pietri screamed that freedoms granted under that citizenship were being violated by not permitting travel between the United States and Cuba.
Geographically, Cuba, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico extend in that order in a straight line across the Caribbean from the tip of Florida to the Leeward Islands. Under Communist control, and appropriately equipped militarily, the letter three could effectively block sea and air approaches to northern South America and the Panama Canal. Cuba alone virtually commands the access routes to the Gulf of Mexico and Central America.
This is the political and strategic significance of Puerto Rico in the communist master plan for the Western Hemisphere.
Why was Havana chosen as headquarters for worldwide subversion? Why not Cairo, the site of the Afro-Asian organization, or Peking?
First, Cuba under Castro has a proved record of success in penetrating Latin America, and Latin America is a major target of Communist expansion. And a headquarters for worldwide Communist subversion located in Havana, right on the doorstep of the United States, is a tremendous psychological achievement, with vast potential repercussions throughout Latin America.
Second, iron-clad control of the populace must be assured if there is to be a tranquil political climate for a worldwide base of subversion. There must also be reasonable assurance against external attack, in effect, a "sanctuary."
There is overwhelming evidence that the machinery of the Cuban Government has been progressively organized over the years, to carry out its number one task-the export of Communist subversion. To a large extent, the choice of Havana in January as headquarters for world subversion is but the culmination of years of such organization. In fact, Cuba moved rapidly along the road to the fulfillment of its role in the international Communist conspiracy from the moment Fidel Castro's hatred of the United States became manifest upon his taking power in 1959. The tempo and direction of that movement increased in direct proportion to Soviet Russia's increasing intervention in that country in 1960.
In 1959, Castro launched five invasions of his Central American and Caribbean neighbors, and preparations for these invasions began little more than a month after he took power.
In February 1959, Havana commenced a propaganda campaign of radio broadcasts calling on "all revolutionary sectors and citizens to unite in the of the Government of Haiti." This drum-fire of propaganda culminated on August 13 in an invasion of Haiti from Cuban territory.
On August 26, 1959, Haitian Foreign Minister Louis Mars sent a fully documented report to the Organization of American States (OAS) on Castro's invasion. Several of the landing force were identified as members of Castro's Rebel Army and were on active duty at the time of the invasion.
On April 24, 1959, just a few days following an address by Fidel Castro at the United Nations, Panama was invaded by Cuba. Panama appealed to the OAS, which promptly sent an investigating team and determined that members of the invading force were Cubans, and that the origin of their mission was, indeed, Cuba. On May 1, the remnants of the landing force surrendered to Panamanian troops and overthrow the OAS team.
On May 31, 1959, however, another group of Cuban soldiers landed by plane in the mountainous area of Nicaragua. On June 28, still another group of Havana-trained Nicaraguans was captured trying to cross the border from Honduras into Nicaragua. On July 27, the OAS issued a finding that the group had been trained at La Cabana fortress in Cuba by Major Ernesto Guevara.
Perhaps the bloodiest battle and the greatest defeat for Castro in his 1959 invasions took place on the shores of the Dominican Republic. Castro's invasion force was exterminated, almost to a man. The date was June 14. From that date comes the name of the present Communist group in the Dominican Republic, the June 14th Movement, which was heavily involved in the revolt of April 24, 1965.
While these adventures were being launched abroad, the internal police apparatus was being organized. Castro broke up the constitutional army and replaced it with militia-originally, for propaganda purposes-called the "popular forces."
Castro tried to deal with resistance through oratory, threats, and mass arrests. He sent his militia in repeated sweeps across the mountains to dislodge and eradicate the gallant bands of guerrillas. But he has not to this day succeeded in doing so, even though he has enchained the hardy farmer who has been the most steadfast enemy of communism. As resistance continued, Soviet and Soviet-bloc "technicians" arrived in Cuba, refined its crude apparatus of invasion into smooth machinery of subversion, revamped its government, organized a system of censorship, and remade Cuba after its own image.
It is humilating enough to have the international Communist conspiracy seize control of a country only 60 miles from American shores, and maintain itself in power despite all the pressures we have thus far brought to bear. It becomes a thousand times as humiliating when that country is transformed into a headquarters for international revolutionary subversion while the OAS and the mighty United States of America look on, helpless and apparently incapable of any decisive action.
THE SOVIET UNION AND THE HAVANA CONFERENCE
The U.S.S.R. had much to gain by giving moral and material support to the Tricontinental Conference.
The Conference established an instrument through which the Soviet Union could effectively conduct subversive operations in every country of North and South America, Asia, and Africa.
Speakers at the Tricontinental Conference referred repeatedly to efforts being made to attract students, particularly those front Latin America, to attend the schools for subversion which have been established in the Soviet Union and its satellites.
In its clash with Communist China, the Tricontinental Conference furnished an opportunity for a major Soviet propaganda victory over its Chinese rival.
As early as December 9, 1965, a month before the Tricontinental Congress, Soviet Foreign Minister Andre Gromyko spoke before the Supreme Soviet of the U.S.S.R. and expressed his deep interest and support for the Congress. He felt that the Conference would provide an ample forum of representatives of anti-colonialist countries and anti-imperialist forces." He declared that "the Soviet Union as a participating factor, will do everything it can to support the struggle for peace and for national liberation and for the conference's success."
Sharaf Rashidovich Rashidov arrived at the Conference as head of a strong Soviet delegation. He will be remembered as a holder of important posts in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Soviet Government, notably: Presidium chairman Uzbek Supreme Soviet; deputy chairman, Presidium, U.S.S.R. Supreme Soviet; Bureau member, Central Committee, Uzbek Communist Party; candidate member, Central Committee, Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
In his address before the Plenary session of the Tricontinental Conference on January 7, 1966, he began with some sugary plunges calculated to enhance the prestige of Fidel Castro and his regime. "We can see with our own eyes," he said, the great successes achieved by the Cuban people in creating a Dew social system...... Free Cuba," he declared, "the first socialist state on the American continent-symbolizes the invincibility of a people fighting for liberation from the oppression of imperialism and for socialism."
Then he assured the Conference of all-out Soviet aid. He stressed "that the Soviet delegation has arrived at this conference with the aim of giving all-round assistance to the unification of the anti-imperialist forces of the three continents in order to provide greater impetus to our common struggle against imperialism, colonialism and neocolonialism-led by the U.S. capitalists." Mr. Rashidov seems to have conveniently forgotten the Soviet phrases widely circulated in the United States about peaceful coexistence, disarmament, and cultural exchange.
With regard to the American effort to free the people of Vietnam from the threat of Communist enslavement, Rashidov minced no words. He charged that:
In Asia, the piratical policies of imperialism have been especially vividly expressed in the criminal aggressive war waged by the U.S.A. against the heroic people of Vietnam. The United States is subjecting the cities and villages of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam to barbaric air raids, destroying the civilian population, burning the crops, destroying industrial enterprises and communications.
The Soviet people resolutely condemn the aggression of the U.S.A. against the Vietnamese people, and express their solidarity with the heroic struggle against the modern barbarians.
All over the Soviet Union crowded meetings and demonstrations of working people are being held, at which millions of workers, collective farmers, office workers, and intellectuals are expressing their indignation and are protesting against the shameful and dirty war waged by U.S. imperialists in Vietnam. * *
Rashidov did not, of course, indicate that these meetings were organized by the Soviet Government itself. Rashidov spoke boastfully in describing the military aid of the Soviet Union to Vietnam. He said: « The Soviet Union is supplying the fraternal people of Vietnam with the most modern weapons for meeting U.S. aggression.
We are doing everything in order that the deliveries of Soviet military equipment--aircraft, rockets, artillery, ammunition, and so on-will get into the hands of the Vietnamese freedom fighters as rapidly as possible.
We Soviet people are happy that the military equipment which the workers of the land of Soviets are producing at their enterprises with such great enthusiasm also helps the cause of the victory of our Vietnamese brothers over the aggressor. »
Then Rashidov made certain definite proposals which were subserviently approved by the Conference delegates. He proposed that an international fund be set up to aid the Communist forces in Vietnam. He proposed the "development all over the world of a mighty mass protest against the dirty war waged by the U.S. imperialists in Vietnam, the demand that it be immediately stopped and the armed forces of the U.S.A. and its allies be recalled from Vietnam."
Saluting the Communist-dominated guerrilla forces in South America, he declared that, "We express our fraternal solidarity with the armed struggle being waged by the Venezuelan, Peruvian, Colombian, and Guatemalan patriots for freedom against the stooges of imperialism."
After making a powerful appeal for revolutionary unity which clearly put the delegates of Communist China on the spot, Mr. Rashidov declared that "the Soviet delegation supports the proposal to set up at this conference an Organization of Tricontinent Solidarity," adding the proposal that "from January 3 to 10, an international week of solidarity of the three continents in the struggle against colonialism, neocolonialism and imperialism" be held.
Hardly had these words been uttered when Rashidov and his fellow Soviet diplomats were compelled to voice hypocritical apologies to the dupes throughout the world who had taken seriously the Soviet assurances regarding peaceful coexistence. On February 17, 1966 the New York Times called attention to the fact that "Soviet officials are making quiet disclaimers of the aggressive calls for revolution in Latin America, Africa, and Asia issued at last month's Tricontinental conference in Havana." The author pointed out that the Soviet Union "seems to have been led by its desire to outflank the Chinese" effort to appear more revolutionary than Moscow.
The Uruguayan Government acted promptly and vigorously by summoning the Soviet Ambassador in Montevideo to the Foreign Ministry to explain the statements of Rashidov. With tongue in cheek, the Soviet Ambassador assured the Uruguayan Minister that Rashidov was speaking "privately" and not for the Soviet Government. TASS reports of the Tricontinental Conference proceedings were toned down considerably from those issued by Prensa Latina, the Communist Cuban -press agency.
Argentine officials also expressed serious displeasure with Rashidov's speech.
The fact that the Soviet Union has emerged as the principal architect of revolutionary violence in the hemisphere was recognized by the Special Consul Committee on Security of the OAS. Speaking about the Havana Conference, the report of the committee said:
The Committee recognized that the tremendous significance of the event, of major seriousness inasmuch as it means a declaration of war against the democracies, lies in the fact that it is no longer Cuba on its own initiative that proposes to export its "revolution" to the other countries of the hemisphere, but Russia that makes common cause with the "revolutionary movements" and promises determined support to the "popular liberation movements" that follow the example of Cuba.
The Soviet delegation, headed by Rashidov, left Havana on January 16, 1966. Members of the delegation were bid farewell at the Jose Marti International Airport by Blas Roca, member of the Cuban Communist Party (PCC), by the members of the PCC's central committee, and by other Cuban dignitaries.
THE CHINESE COMMUNISTS AND THE HAVANA CONFERENCE
The Tricontinental Conference furnished the Chinese Communists with an international forum for their campaign to challenge the hegemony of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union over the world Communist movement. The Chinese leaders hoped to demonstrate that they were foremost in their denunciation of "American imperialism." Their principal anti-American diatribe was delivered on January 5, 1966 by Wu Hsueh-chien, chairman of the Chinese delegation, from which we quote:
The United States is doing all it can to place Asia, Africa, and Latin America under the total domination of "the dollar empire." In Africa, Asia, and Latin America the United States has installed thousands of military bases where it is stationing some I million soldiers. * * * Today U.S. imperialism is embarking upon the same path tread by Hitler.
Wu Hsueh-chien hailed the demonstrations in the United States against American policy in Vietnam as "A broad campaign of the masses of unprecedented proportions." [EDITORIAL NOTE.--A study published by the Educational Testing Service of Princeton University shows that Vietnam demonstrations were reported at 21 percent of the colleges-but less than 5 percent of the students participated.] The speaker advised that "We must sponsor even more powerful mass movements and develop even more extensive -people's wars so as to tighten the noose around Yankee imperialism's neck and defeat it."
The Chinese leader called for rebellion against Latin American anti-Communist governments, in these terms:
We resolutely support the peoples of the Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Peru, Colombia, Guatemala and of other countries in their armed struggle against North American imperialism and its lackeys, the people of Puerto Rico, the Guianas, Martinique, and Guadelupe in their struggle for national independence.
In an obvious reference to the Soviet Union, Wu Hsueh-chien assailed its alleged "anti-evolutionary" policy by posing the following questions:
With whom do they want to act jointly and against whom is their joint action directed? Why do they consider Yankee imperialism, the sworn enemy of the peoples of the three continents, as their principal ally for joint action, proclaiming to the four winds their unchangeable policy oriented toward the establishment of cooperation in all fields with the United States?
According, to a January 16, 1966, broadcast from Peking, the Chinese
Communists listed the following two salient points of the Conference:
1. Adoption of a resolution pledging firm support to the Vietcong forces in Vietnam.
2. Adoption of a general political resolution denouncing "the criminal acts of aggression of the United States."
At the same time, the Peking broadcasts referred to certain "failures" of the Soviet delegation, in these terms:
1."The Conference fought out a long, repeated struggle which resulted in the dismal failure of the Soviet delegations attempt to push through its erroneous line of lot fighting imperialism but splitting the Afro-Asian and Latin-American people's solidarity movement."
2. "It (the Conference) frustrated the Soviet revisionists' scheme to do away with the Afro-Asian People's Solidarity Organization--AAPSO."
3. "Throughout the Conference he (Rashidov) did not dare to make a reply to the 10 questions concerning united action raised in a speech by Wu Hsueh-chien, head of the Chinese delegation."
4. "At the political committee meetings the Soviet delegate insisted on imposing on the Conference a resolution on so-called peaceful coexistence. His attempt was strongly opposed by the delegates of China, Japan Indonesia, Korea, Malaya, Thailand, Uganda, Basutoland, Southwest Africa, Nepal, and Pakistan.
5. "In the course of the Conference, the Soviet delectation took a stand against condemning the United Nations, an instrument of U.S. imperialism."
6. The Peking broadcast of January 19, 1966, summarized the Chinese position with the statement that "The Khrushchev revisionists' slogan of 'united action' also finds its expression organizationally in the demand for establishment of a new Afro-Asian-Latin American organization to be controlled by these revisionists themselves and affiliated with such organizations -under their thumbs such as the World Peace Council."
Because Communist semantics are so alien to the Western mind, and because certain of the developments at the Havana Conference were obscured by its ostensible unanimity on key issues, this Chinese summary of what transpired at Havana sheds very little light on the actual power balance between the two major tendencies in international communism, as reflected in the Conference.
From this latter standpoint, the two most important developments were that, on the organizational plane, Peiping was elbowed out of the No. 1 position by Moscow (this is apparent from a careful reading of point 6 above); while, on the ideological plane, the Maoist philosophy scored a series of smashing triumphs.
While the Conference again underscored the very real competition for power and influence between Moscow and Peiping, the fact that both Red China and the U.S.S.R. were elected to the committee encharged with continuing the work of the Tricontinental Conference, indicates that, however serious their differences may be within the international Communist "family," Moscow and Peiping, stand united in their opposition to the United States and to the free world in general.
THE CONFERENCE AND THE CUBAN ECONOMIC CRISIS
The Havana Conference served Fidel Castro as a life-preserver for his insecure regime. It served in the first place as a device to divert the attention of his downtrodden Cubans from the rigors of a bankrupt economy.
First-hand testimony regarding,, Cuban conditions was presented to the House Committee on Un-American Activities on June 11, 1965, by Juanita Castro Ruz, the sister of Fidel Castro, who found conditions unbearable and defected on June 20, 1964, deciding to acquaint the world regarding the true state of affairs Under the Castro dictatorship.
She described economic conditions as follows:
Miss CASTRO. When Fidel came into power, he devoted himself to the task of destroying the main Cuban industry, which was the sugar industry. I remember he said many times that we had to get away from a one-crop economy, that we had to diversify, not only on the farms but in industry also.
Not knowing what he was doing, he ordered the destruction of many canefields, to the amazement of those that knew that was the worst mistake possible. Ile talked about trying to build tip industry in Cuba and that Russia would send him whatever equipment and machinery he might require.
Besides all of this, also the Cuban peasants to whom Fidel had promised more land than just agrarian reform, well, Fidel was very far from fulfilling his promises to these peasants. The Cuban peasants, all of whom believed in Fidel, like all the rest of the Cubans, saw day by day how the wealth of the country, how their own livelihood, disappeared.
The Cuban peasants are one of the groups in Cuba who have completely ref used to cooperate with Fidel. They have absolutely refused, in spite of all threats, to work on the fields.
Miss CASTRO. All of the sugar mills in Cuba, all the sugar cane plantations, were confiscated by Fidel. There were even sugar mills that were dismantled and the machinery sent to Russia as pavement for Cuba's debts with Soviet Union for arms.
He did not distribute the land among the peasants, as he had promised, through the agrarian reform. He has forced them to work these so-called cooperatives or people's farms. The peasants have totally refused to do this and they do not cooperate with Fidel; they do not work in the fields.
Besides, during this last sugar crop, due to the fact that the peasants have refused to work, Fidel has been forced to take to the fields all the people of Cuba, including, students, public employees, even school children, so that they would do the work because the peasants refused to work in the fields. (Page 834.)
Miss CASTRO. Sugar production at present, in spite of the totals announced by the government, is lower than it was 10 years ago. For example, there is the fact that in 1952 Cuba produced 7 million tons of sugar. It was necessary, due to so large a production during the following years, to restrict the Cuban industry. But in spite of that it still continued to flourish.
The destruction of the sugar industry was so large that during 1959-1960, production decreased to only 3 ½ million tons.
Miss CASTRO. Standard of living in Cuba has decreased 100 percent. Although there may be some money, although some people may have some money, they can do nothing with it because there is no food to buy, no clothing, no shoes, no medical supplies. (Page 835.)
Miss CASTRO. For example, a family of five in Cuba-and I will try to be as accurate as possible, because' after I left Cuba, quite a few more items were rationed-for example, a family of five did not have the right to even one quart of milk a day, because in order to obtain this the family had to number six members. For example, a family of five had no right to fresh milk; instead, they received six cans of condensed milk per week. One quarter of a pound of meat a week was all thev received, and there were many weeks when they did not receive even this. (Page 836.)
Miss CASTRO. I said that Fidel's heart is in Peking, because on different occasions he has stated his feelings, his sympathy for the hard line of the Peking government, and that his stomach is in Moscow, because China cannot supply him with certain items that he requires, such as oil. (Page 840.)
("Testimony of Juanita Castro Ruz," House Committee on UnAmerican Activities, June 11, 1965, pages 834, 835, 836, and 840.) One of the biggest British banks (Barclays) recently summarized Cuba's 1966 position as follows:
Present situation-ecoiiomy weakening, despite excellent sugar harvest. Development dependent on aid from the Soviet bloc. Continued trade deficit. Reserves very low. No difficulties with payments for exports to Cuba, but position should be kept under review. Outlook: bleak.*
In its study of Foreign Agriculture, dated February 28, 1966, and published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, we find the following estimate:
During the 7 years of the Castro regime, Cuba has failed to improve its sugarbased economv and has suffered a sharp deterioration in its food situation. * * * The cut in rice imports, coupled with reduced domestic output, means that the 1966 availability of rice in Cuba will probably be only half as high as even the low low 1965 level. On January 7, the monthly rice ration was cut from 6 to 3 pounds per person.'
The New York Times estimated the state of the Cuban economy in January 1966, in these words:
The present diffi