REALLY SAID IN THAT INTERVIEW WITH THE NEW YORK TIMES
When the New York Times reported July 6 that Fidel Castro had allegedly offered, during an interview with Richard Eder, “to withhold material support from Latin-American revolutionary movements if the United States and its hemispheric allies would cease their material support of subversive activity against Cuba," friends of the Cuban Revolution throughout the world reacted with considerable _ skepticism concerning the accuracy of the account. World Outlook, for instance, said [July 17 issuel, "Such an offer is quite contrary to the line Castro and his government have followed,"
The Algerian publication El Moudjahid [July 11] branded the report as a "falsification." It shocked with the Cuban Embassy and Prensa Latina to ascertain whether such an interview had been held and if so what had actually been said by Castro. When El Moudjahid received the official text it then offered its readers a translation of the pertinent points in the Spanish text so that they could judge for themselves as to the accuracy of the version offered by the New York Times,
Since it is of some interest, we offer the following English translation of the same passages:
"ttf desire to establish a dialogue exists, it is necessary to seek its form,' Prime Minister Fidel Castro told a correspondent _ of the daily New York Times in. conneotion with the possibility of Cuba and the United States undertaking negotiations to normalize
#li-
their relations. ‘The formal initiative, whether public or private, must come from the United States because this government is the main one responsible for the situation existing between our two countries, While there is no objection to reestablishing diplomatic relations between Washington and Havana, it must be preceded by the solution of questions that are still pending,!
"The most delicate and serious problem concerns the spy flights of the 'U-2! planes. These flights began in October 1962, at the time of the air-naval blockade of the island by the United States, They have continued uninterruptedly., The North American authorities pretend that these flights are carried out for reasons of security but Cuba, for its part has never utilized such means to defend itself against the attacks of counterrevolutionaries coming from the United States.
were diplomatic 1 means existed: dt would be possible to reaehan arrangement,! Fidel Castro added, ‘In order to avoid repeating incidents provoked by the North American troops at the Guantd4namo base, occupied illegally by the United States, we will make a ocontribution: we will withdraw the Cuban sentries several hundred meters. from where they are now stationed,!
"Commenting on the rupture of diplomatic relations between Cuba and Washington, Fidel Castro said: ‘If the government of the United States had not adopted an aggressive attitude toward the _ revolution, it would not have been necessary for Cuba to reply in such a rigorous manner.
'tBut it is well understood that the road it would have taken would still have been that of socialism, The Soviet Union has always shown its interest in a peaceful solution of the Cuban-North American dispute, in accordance with the desire for peace which animates the socialist camp. — Nevertheless, it is equally well known that the Soviet Union has given multiple evidence of its decision to grant support to Cuba in case of aggression.
"tif relations between Cuba and the United States are not reestablished within a short time,! Fidel Castro added, 'Cuba will establish commercial relations with other parts of the world -including western Europe, It will be too late to renew trade with the United States,
“tIn my opinion, ‘the people of the United States are remote from world reality and-its problems, You live tranquil lives there, With the exception of the Civil War, you have never confronted the problems experienced by the rest of the world,” You center attention on work and technical progress, but you never accord sufficient attention to social and historical problems and to political ideas, That's why it is so difficult for the United States to understand that the Cuban Revolution feels no hate for the North American people,
~1l2-
Hate acoumulates when people feel frustrated and hopeless. The Cuban people feel indignant when they are attacked but indignation . is something quite different from hate.
"ttf the United States were disposed to live with us in accordance with international norms, then we would feel the same obligation, If Cuba financed a revolution against a government that respected it, that would violate international norms, But if we finance a revolution against a government that does not respeot us, then there is no violation because there are no norms.
'tThe Cuban revolution is an example for thé peoples who are not yet free, This is the moral aid we give to movements struggling for national sovereignty in other countries, It is the United States that furnishes material aid in trying to overthrow the revolutionary government, Cuba cannot agree to withdraw its s athy and its aid to other revolutionary movements,! [our oighaste cl YIn brier,! Fidel Castro concluded, !the realization of an agreement between the two governments depends fundamentally on the confidence which each side has in the good faith of the other,'"
On July 28 the New York Times published a special dispatoh from Santiago de Cuba, dated July oY, reporting a statement by Castro on this point in Eder's interview, The full dispatch is as follows:
premier Fidel Castro said last night that the published version of his interview with a New York Times reporter earlier this month was truthful but that he had beon misunderstood,
"He denied he had offered to negotiate a suspension of aid to revolutionary movements because 'aid to such movements is not negotiable,!
"He said he and the reporter discussed international norms and he added that he understood 'the need of countries to live in conformity with international norms,!
"Cuba would feel free, he said, to help ony revolutionary movement in any country that did not respect Cuba,"
ste
“"
The misunderstanding -- if such it was -- of Castro's remarks seems to have led astray only certain ultralefts who place almost religious faith in the accuracy of the New York Times. In London, for instance, the Newsletter, which voices the opinions of Gerry Healy and his Socialist Labour League, interpreted it as nothing less than an offer of "an tAlliance for Progress! to the United States," claimed it revealed the "absolute bankruptcy" of Castro's tnetty~. bourgeois ideology" and "also lays bare _the complete betrayal of the Cuban people by the Soviet bureaucracy."
The Newsletter utilized the misinterpretation -- or falsification ~- of what Castro said to offer its readers a full page article describing how this "fact" fits in with the ultraleft thesis that "in no sense has a workers! state been established" in Cuba and that. the Castro government rules a "capitalist state -~ at present represented by the bonapartist. dictatorship of Castro" which must be - "successfully overthrown." The author, Ed Stilwell, apparently a newcomer to the columns of the Newsletter, asserts: “The recent events in Cuba have confirmed trrefutably that no petty-bourgeois leadership and party can establish a workers! state. The working class in Guba have neither power -- nor the semblance of it -- the militia, the agrarian reform and the nationalizations notwithstanding."
And why didn't the U.S. imperialists snap up the "deal" allegedly offered by Castro to "betray" the "capitalist state" he. heads? Stilwell says that "this would obviously be in the best interests of US imperialism," His explanation is that Wall Street's poor judgment is due to the "thickheadedness of the US rulers," They refuse to accept a betrayal of the capitalist state in Cuba; they reject normalization of relations; they insist on the costly business of blockading it as part of their ultimate, still more costly objective of smashing it, even at the risk of nuclear war,
Another explanation is that they are just more cautious about ascertaining the facts than is the Newsletter, They want to preserve the capitalist system in face of the socialist revolution which opened in Cuba and which promises to touch off a chain reaction throughout the Western Hemisphere, In this they display none of the thickheadedness observable in quarters where the primary concern is simply to preserve certain ultraleft dogmas,