YouSaid · the spoken record

CASTRO

lines on the record: 272
first: 1960-09-24
most recent: 1979-09-24
sittings or episodes: 2
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“Mexico had on more than one occasion, been the victim of aggression, including military aggression. The United States seized a large part of Mexican territory after a war during which heroic sons of Mexico wrapped themselves in the Mexican flag and jumped from the ramparts at Chapultepec rather than surrender. Such are the heroic sons of Mexico. And that was not the only act of aggression; that was not the only occasion on which United States forces marched into Mexican territory. 127. There was also intervention in Nicaragua, and for seven years César Augusto Sandino put up a heroic resistance. There was intervention more than once in Cuba, and in Haiti and Santo Domingo. There was intervention in Guatemala.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The United Nations is empowered to deal with questions of this kind. It is the supreme international organization. It has authority over and above that of the Organization of American States. Moreover, we wanted to bring the question before the United Nations because we known that economically the Latin American nations are dependent on the United States. 126. The United Nations was seized of the question and asked OAS to look into the matter. OAS met. What action was to be expected? That OAS would protect the country that had been attacked; that it would condemn the political aggression, and in particular the economic aggression, against Cuba. That was what we expected. After all, we were a small country in the Latin American community. We were yet another victim of aggression. We were not the first or the last.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“That action is specifically prohibited by regional international law. As all the representatives of Latin America in this Assembly know, economic aggression is expressly condemned by regional international law. Yet, the United States Government violated that law; it made use of the economic weapon and simply slashed our sugar quota by almost a million tons. There was nothing to stop them. What could Cuba do to protect itself in such a situation? It could go before the United Nations to complain of political aggression, economic aggression and the aerial incursions by pirate aircraft, to say nothing of the United States Government's continual interference in Cuba's political affairs and the subversive campaigns it is carrying on against the Revolutionary Government. 125. We had recourse to the United Nations.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“At the request of the Executive, the United States Congress enacted legislation authorizing the President or Executive to reduce sugar imports from Cuba by whatever amount might be deemed appropriate. The economic weapon was being used against our revolution. The newspapers had already taken it upon themselves to prepare the ground for this policy. They had been carrying on the campaign for some time for it is common knowledge that here the monopolies and the Press are synonymous. The economic weapon was used. At one fell swoop our sugar quota was cut by nearly 1 million tons — although the sugar had been produced for the United States market — in order to deprive our country of the resources it needed for development, in order to reduce it to impotence, and to attain political ends. 124.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“We wanted to sell our products and we were looking for new markets. We signed a trade agreement with the Soviet Union under which we were to sell 1 million tons and bought certain quantities of Soviet goods. Surely no one will say that that is wrong. There may be some who would not sign such a treaty because it would be unpalatable to certain interests. But we did not feel under any obligation to ask the State Department's permission to sign a trade treaty with the Soviet Union because we believed, as we still do and always shall, that Cuba is a truly free country. 123. When sugar stocks began to fall and our economic position was beginning to improve, the blow fell.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“But that is not the way things turned out. There is now evidence that revolutions do not ruin countries and that evidence has just been provided by the United States Government. It has proved many things, including the fact that revolutions do not ruin countries and that imperialist governments are indeed capable of trying to do so. Cuba had not ruined itself and so Cuba had to be ruined. 121. Cuba needed new markets for its products, and we might frankly ask any delegation here which of them does not want its country to sell what it produces, which of them does not want its exports to increase? We wanted our exports to increase. That is what all countries want, that must be a universal law, for only self-interest can oppose the universal interest of trade, which is one of the oldest aspirations and needs of mankind. 122.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Did they believe what they were saying when they stated that the land reform was going to cause a drop in production? Perhaps they did. It is understandable that everyone should think in the way his mind has been trained to think. It is possible they imagined that without the all-powerful monopolies we Cubans could not produce sugar. It is possible, perhaps they were even sure that we should ruin the country. But it is obvious that, if the Revolution had ruined the country, there would have been no need for the United States to attack us, they would have left us alone and the United States Government would have berm a very noble, a very good Government, and we a group of people who were ruining the nation, providing a living example of the fact that you cannot have revolutions because revolutions ruin countries.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“They said that the land reform would bring chaos to agricultural production, that production would decline considerably, that the United States Government was concerned lest Cuba might not be able to fulfil its commitments regarding supplies to the United States market. 119. The first argument, and it is a good thing at least for the new delegations here to become familiar with some of the arguments, because the day may come when they may have to answer similar arguments — that the land, reform meant the ruin of the country. That did not happen. Had the land reform meant the ruin of the country, had agricultural production dropped, there would have been no need for the United States Government to intensify its economic aggression. 120.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“If that is the case, how does it happen that aircraft — not supersonic aircraft by any means but ordinary light aircraft with a maximum speed of 150 miles an hour can enter and leave the national territory of the United States as they pleas, pass close to two bases on both the outward and return flights, without the United States Government's knowing that these aircraft are entering and leaving? This means one of two things: either the United States Government is lying to the people of the United States and the United States is defenceless against air raids, or the United States Government was an accomplice in these raids. 118. The air raids finally ended, and then came economic aggression. What was one of the arguments used by the enemies of the land reform?”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“We invite representatives to give a little thought to this matter, and we invite the people of the United States — if perchance the people of the United States have an opportunity to learn what is said in this hall — to think about the fact that, according to the United States Government's own statements, the territory of the United States is completely guarded and protected against any air raid and that the defences of United States territory are infallible, that the defences of the world they call "free" — although for us, at least, it was not free before 1 January 1959 — are perfect.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“We were the only country in the world in which this happened, although I do recall that, at the time of his visit to Cuba, President Sukarno told us that we must not think that we were the only ones, that they too had had some problems, that some United States aircraft had also been flying over their territory. I do not know whether I have committed an indiscretion in mentioning this; I hope not. The fact of the matter is that we were the only country in the world, or at least in this peaceful hemisphere, which, without being at war with anyone, had to endure constant harassment by pirate aircraft. And were those aircraft able to enter and leave United States territory with impunity? 117.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“When it was proved that the aircraft were taking off from the United States, the United States Government did not proclaim its right to burn our sugarcane fields. On this occasion it apologized, it said it was sorry. After all, we were lucky, for the United States Government did not apologize after the U-2 incident; instead, it proclaimed its right to fly over Soviet territory. That is bad luck for the Soviets! But our anti-aircraft defences are not very strong and the aircraft continued their raids until the cane was harvested. When there was no cane left in the fields, the bombing stopped. 116.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Finally, one day, while flying over one of our sugar mills, an aircraft was destroyed by the explosion of one of its own bombs and the Revolutionary Government succeeded in collecting the 'remains of the pilot and in seizing his papers, which showed that he was indeed a United States pilot and the aircraft a United States aircraft, and provided complete evidence as to the place of take-off. The aircraft had passed between two bases in the United States. It could no longer be denied that those aircraft were taking off from the United States. 115. This time the United States Government, confronted with irrefutable proof, did give an explanation to the Government of Cuba. Its behaviour in this case was not the same as in the case of the U-2.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“There was no evidence; all right, no one knows what evidence means. There it was — the aircraft that had been photographed and captured; but we were told that that particular aircraft had not dropped any bombs. We do not know how it was that the United States authorities were so well informed. Pirate aircraft continued to fly over our territory, dropping incendiary bombs. Millions and millions of pesos were lost in the burring sugarcane fields. Many ordinary people, the little people of our country, who saw this property that was now truly theirs being destroyed, suffered burns and injuries while fighting the persistent and relentless bombing attacks by pirate aircraft. 114.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“What is more, they said the aircraft was standing quietly in a hangar. But when one of our periodicals published a photograph of the aircraft, it was only then that the United States authorities seized it, and immediately issued a statement to the effect that the matter was of no importance and that the casualties had been caused not by bombs but by anti-aircraft fire; and meanwhile those who had committed this foul deed, this crime, were going about the United States undisturbed, and not hindered in any way from continuing to commit such acts of aggression. 112. I take this opportunity of telling the representative of the United States that there are many mothers in Cuba still waiting for a telegram of condolences from him for their children murdered by United States bombs. 113. The aircraft went back and forth.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“There were children and old people width their entrails ripped out. Was this the first time for us? No, children and old people, men and women had often been wiped out in our Cuban villages by bombs of United States manufacture supplied to the tyrant Batista, and on one occasion eighty workers were killed by the all-too-mysterious explosion of a ship loaded with Belgian weapons which had finally reached our country after a major effort by the United States Government to prevent the Belgian Government from selling us arms. 111. Dozens of war victims; eighty families destroyed by an explosion; forty casualties caused by an aircraft that leisurely flew over our territory. The authorities of the united States Government denied that those aircraft; had come from United States territory.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Another afternoon another aircraft flew over our sugarcane fields and dropped some small incendiary bombs. And what started in a haphazard fashion was then continued systematically. 110. One afternoon — when a large number of United States tourist agents were visiting Cuba in connexion with a campaign by the Revolutionary Government to encourage tourism as a source of national income — an aircraft of United States manufacture, of a type used in the Second World War, flew over our capital, dropping leaflets and some hand-grenades. Naturally, some anti-aircraft guns went into action. What with the grenades dropped by the aircraft and the anti-aircraft fire, because, as you know, some of the projectiles explode on contact with any hard object, the result was more than forty casualties.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Naturally, the colony depended on the metropolitan country; the economy of the colony had been organized by the metropolitan country; the colony had to be subject to the metropolitan country and if the colony took steps to free itself, the metropolitan Country would take steps to crush it. 107. Aware of our economy's dependence on the United States market, the United States Government began its series of warnings that it would deprive us of our sugar quota. Concurrently, other activities were taking place in the United States of America, the activities of the counterrevolutionaries. 108. One afternoon an aircraft coming from the north flew over one of our sugar mills and dropped a bomb. That was a strange, an unusual event, but of course we knew where that aircraft came from. 109.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“In the search for a formula which would reconcile its interests in ensuring a source of supply with those of its domestic producers, the United States Government set up a quota system. One would have thought that the quotas would be based on the historic contributions of the various sources of supply to the market, and our country's historic contribution to the United States market had been almost 50 per cent. Nevertheless, when the quotas were established, our share was reduced to 28 per cent and the few advantages granted us by that law were successively withdrawn in subsequent legislation.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Obviously, Cuba being the nearest source of supply for sugar, that source of supply had to be assured; tariffs were lowered, production was encouraged, and during the war years, when the price of sugar was astronomical throughout the world, we were selling our sugar cheap to the United States, in spite of the fact that we were its only source of supply. 106. The war ended and our economy collapsed. The mistakes made in this country in the distribution of sugar were paid for by us; prices that had risen enormously by the end of the First World War; tremendous boost to production; a sudden drop in prices, ruining the Cuban sugar mills, which quietly fell into the hands of — guess whom — the United States banks, of course, because when Cuban nationals went bankrupt, United States banks became rich; and so it went on until the 1930's.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The United States, by virtue of one of those laws, or rather one of those agreements between the shark and the sardine which it called a reciprocity agreement, obtained a number of concessions for its products in order that they might be able to compete freely with the products of its friends, the British and the French, and squeeze them out of the Cuban market, as often happens among friends. In exchange, certain tariff concessions were granted for our sugar but the Congress or Government of the United States could modify them unilaterally at will, ' And that is what happened. When they considered it more in their interests to raise the tariffs, they did so and our sugar could not enter the United States market, or it entered at a disadvantage. When the clouds of war gathered, the tariffs were reduced. 105.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The cheap philosophy of imperialism began to demonstrate its nobility, the nobility of the self-seeker and the exploiter, to demonstrate its kindness towards Cuba, saying that we were being paid a preferential price for sugar, which amounted to a subsidy for Cuban sugar, the sugar that was not so sweet for us Cubans since we were not the owners of the best sugar fields or of the biggest sugar mills. What is more, in that assertion lay hidden the true history of Cuban sugar, of the sacrifices my country had had to bear, of the occasions when it had been subjected to economic aggression. 104. Earlier on, it was not a matter of quotas, but of customs tariffs.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“In other words, at the time when, according to the United States Press and the international information agencies, Cuba was already a red Government, a red menace ninety miles from the United States, with a government dominated by Communists, the Revolutionary Government had not even had occasion to establish diplomatic or commercial relations with the Soviet Union. 102. But hysteria is capable of anything. Hysteria is capable of making the most unlikely and the most absurd assertions. However, let no one think that we are now going to recite a mea culpa. There will be no mea culpa. We do not have to ask forgiveness of any-one. What we did we did very deliberately and above all fully convinced of our right to do it. 103. Then began the threats against our sugar quota.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The problem was that those name interests were the owners of the wealth and natural resources of the majority of the peoples of the world. 101. And the Cuban revolution had to be chastised for its attitude. The audacity of the Revolutionary Government had to be castigated by punitive operations of every kind ranging as far as the destruction of the impudent men concerned. On our word of honour we swear that we had not then had occasion even to exchange a letter with the distinguished Prime Minister of the Soviet Union, Mr. Khrushchev.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“It was then that a new stage in the harassment of our revolution began. Can anyone who objectively analyses the facts — anyone who is willing to think for himself and not as the United Press or the Associated Press tells him to think, to think with his own head and draw conclusions from his own reasoning and see things as they are without preconceived notions, honestly and fairly- consider that the things which the Revolutionary Government has done were such as to call for the destruction of the Cuban revolution? No, But the interests affected by the Cuban revolution were not concerned about the ease of Cuba, they were not being ruined by the measures of the Cuban Revolutionary Government. That was not the problem.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Worked-out mines, impoverished land, not even a modest contribution to the economic development of our country. And then the Revolutionary Government enacted a law on mines requiring these monopolies to pay a 25 per cent tax on mineral exports. 99. The attitude of the Revolutionary Government had already been too daring. It had clashed with the interests of the international electric trust, clashed with the interests of the international telephone trust, clashed with the interests of the international mining trusts, clashed with the interests of the United Fruit Company, clashed, as it were, with the most powerful interests of the United States, which as you know are closely interrelated. That was more than the United States Government, that is to say, the representatives of the monopolies of the United States, could stand. 100.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“All the nickel was mined by United States concerns. And under the Batista tyranny, a United States company the Moa Bay Company, had obtained such a profitable concession that, in only five years — listen carefully — in only five years it was going to amortize an investment of 120 million dollars. A 120 million-dollar investment' to be amortized in five years! 98. Who was it that gave that concession to the Moa Bay Company, through the intervention of the United States Ambassador? None other than the tyrannical Government of Fulgencio Batista, the Government that was there to defend the interests of the monopolies, and what is more — and this is a fact beyond any doubt whatever — the concession was completely tax-free. What were such undertakings going to leave for the Cubans?”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“One can be sure that to a representative of the Netherlands, say, or any other European country, the limits we set to land holdings would be quite surprising; they would be surprisingly high. The maximum set by our land reform law was around 400 hectares. In Europe, 400 hectares would constitute a large estate. In Cuba, where there were United States monopolistic companies holding up to around 200,000 hectares (200,000 hectares, in case anyone thinks he has not heard aright), in Cuba, a land reform designed to reduce the maximum holding to 400 hectares was something which these monopolies considered inadmissible. But in our country it was hot only the land that was owned by United States monopolies; the principal mines were also the property of these monopolies. Cuba produces a large quantity of nickel, for example.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“We did not confiscate these lands we merely proposed to pay for them in twenty years, and the only way we could pay for them was in bonds, maturing after twenty years, earning interest at 4 1/2 per cent, which would be gradually redeemed year by year. How could we pay for the land in dollars? How could we pay immediately? How could we pay what they asked for it? It was absurd. Anyone can see that in these circumstances we had to choose between carrying out the land reform and not carrying it out. If we did not carry it out, the appalling economic situation of our country would last indefinitely; but if we did carry it out, we would be exposing ourselves to the enmity of the Government of our powerful northern neighbour. 97. We went ahead with the land reform.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Do you imagine, gentlemen, that a poor, under-developed country with 600,000 unemployed, with such a high level of illiteracy and sickness, whose reserves have been used up, and which has contributed 1,000 million dollars in ten years to the economy of a powerful country, could have the wherewithal to pay for the land which was going to be affected by the land reform, or at least pay for it on the terms demanded by the American State Department as compensation for the prejudice to their interests? They demanded three things: prompt, effective and fair compensation. Do you understand this language, gentlemen? Prompt, effective and fair compensation. In other words, pay immediately, in dollars, the amount we ask for our land. 96. We were still not 150 per cent Communists. We were just becoming a little more tinged with red.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“They never asked us about our problems; not even out of pity, or on account of the large share of responsibility they bore in the matter, did they ask us how many of our people were starving to death, how many were suffering from tuberculosis, how many were out of work. No; never an expression of solidarity with us in our needs. The only concern expressed by the United States Government representatives was for the telephone company, the electricity company, and the problem of the lands owned by the United States companies. How were we going to pay? Clearly, the first question to be asked was — what were we going to pay with? "What with?”, rather than “how?”.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“And I must in honesty warn the representatives of Latin America, Africa and Asia: when they plan to carry out a just land reform, they must be prepared to face situations similar to ours, especially if the best and largest estates are owned by United States monopolies, as was the case in Cuba. 94. It may well be that we shall how be accused of giving bad advice in this Assembly. It is certainly not our object to disturb anyone’s sleep. We are simply drawing attention to the facts, although the facts are sufficient to keep anyone awake. 95. The problems of compensation were at once raised. Communications from the American State Department began to pour in.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“We carried out a land reform appropriate to the needs of our development, appropriate to our capacities for agricultural development; that is to say, a land reform which would solve the problem of landless peasants, solve the problem of the supply of these essential foodstuffs, remedy the fearfully high level of unemployment in rural areas, and put an end to the appalling poverty which we found in our countryside. 93. Well, it was at that point that the first real difficulty arose. The same thing had happened in the neighbouring Republic of Guatemala. When land reform was carried out in Guatemala, difficulties arose there.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“In Cuba too, even the big landowners were in agreement with land reform, provided it was a kind of land reform which suited them, like the land reform proposed by many theorists: a land reform which would not be carried out, for just as long as it could be avoided. 92. Land reform is something recognized by the economic organs of the United Nations, something which is no longer in dispute. In our country it was indispensable; more than 200,000 families lived in the rural areas of our country without any land on which to grow essential food crops. Without land reform our country would not have been able to take the first step towards development. Well, we took this step. We instituted a land reform. Was it radical? It was a radical reform. Was it very radical? It was not particularly radical.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The third measure was the reduction of electricity charges, which were among the highest in the world. Thus arose the second conflict with the United States monopolies. By this time we were beginning to look like communists. We began to be painted red, simply because we had clashed with the interests of the United States monopolies. 91. There followed another law, an inevitable and indispensable law, inevitable for our country and inevitable, sooner or later, for all the peoples in the world, at least for all those peoples of the world who have not yet carried it out: the land reform law. Of course, in theory, everyone is in favour of land reform. No one dares to question if; no informed person dares to deny that land reform is an essential condition for economic development in the under-developed countries of the world.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“But the people rushed into the streets rejoicing, as would happen in any country, even here in New York, if rents for all families were reduced by 50 per cent. But this did not involve any difficulty with the monopolies; some United States companies owned large buildings, but they were relatively few. 89. Then came another law; a law cancelling the concessions which the tyrannical Government of Fulgencio Batista had granted to the telephone company, which was a United States monopoly. It had taken advantage of the peopled defencelessness to obtain very favourable concessions. The Revolutionary Government cancelled these concessions and restored the rates for telephone services to the previous level. This was the beginning of the first conflict with the United States monopolies. 90.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“These agreements for the defence of the hemisphere, therefore, should rather be called "agreements for the defence of United States monopolies”. 88. The Revolutionary Government began to make its first reforms. The first thing it did was to reduce rents paid by families by 50 per cent. A very just measure, since, as we said earlier, there were families paying as much as a third of their income. The people had been the victims of large-scale speculation in housing, and there had been tremendous speculation in urban land at the people’s expense. But when the Revolutionary Government reduced rents by 50 per cent, there were some who were not pleased, to be sure: those few who owned the apartment buildings.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“A novel way of explaining contradictions, when they become inexplicable! 87. According to this explanation, it was not a question of military aid. It must then have been a kind of technical assistance. Why were these circumstances displeasing to our people? Everyone knows — even the most ingenuous person knows — that in these modern days, with the revolution that has- taken place in military equipment, the weapons of the last war are absolutely obsolete for a modem war; that fifty tanks or armoured cars and a few outdated aircraft could not defend any continent or any hemisphere. On the other hand, they are useful for oppressing unarmed peoples; they are useful for intimidating peoples. They are useful for the defence of monopolies.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“And even when, a few months before the end of the war, there was an embargo in this country on arms sent to Batista, after more than six years of military aid, the rebel army had evidence, documentary evidence, that after the solemn declaration of this arms embargo the forces of tyranny had been newly supplied with 300 rockets, to be fired from aircraft. 86. When our fellow-countrymen living in the United States set these documents before the public', the United States Government could find no other explanation than to say that we were mistaken, and that they had not sent any fresh supplies to the army of the tyranny, but had merely replaced some rockets of the wrong calibre for its aircraft by some others which were of the right size — and which doubtless were fired at us while we were in the mountains.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Now it is important to notice what this Agreement says in article I, paragraph 2: "The Government of Cuba undertakes to make effective use of assistance received from the Government of the United States of America pursuant to this Agreement for the purpose of implementing defence plans, accepted by the two Governments, under which the two Governments will participate in missions important to the defence of the Western Hemisphere, and will not, without the prior agreement of the Government of the United States of America ..." — I repeat — "... without the prior agreement of the Government of the United States of America, devote such assistance to purposes other than those for which it was furnished.” 85. This assistance was devoted to combating the Cuban revolutionaries. It had therefore the approval of the United States Government.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“That was an army that had been overcome; an army that had been defeated and had surrendered. We could quite rightly have treated as prisoners-of-war these foreign officers who were there assisting and training the enemies of the people. However, that was not what we did; we merely requested the members of the mission to return to their own country, because after all we did not need their lessons, and their pupils there had been defeated. 83. I have with me a document. Let no one be surprised at its appearance, for it is a torn document. It is an old military Agreement, under which the Batista tyranny received generous assistance from the United States Government. 84.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Was this policy consistent with correct behaviour towards Cuba — a correct conduct of relations between the United States and Cuba? No, for we were the injured party, because the Batista regime stayed in power with the assistance of the United States Government, the Batista regime stayed in power with the assistance of tanks, aircraft and weapons supplied by the United States Government; the Batista regime stayed in power through the use of an army whose officers were trained by a military mission of the United States Government. And we trust that no official of the United States will try to deny this fact. At the very moment when the rebel army arrived at the city of Havana, the United States military mission was occupying the principal military camp of that city.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“No; no revolutionary government coming to power wants international problems; what it wants is to devote its energies to solving its own problems; what it wants is to carry out a programme, as does any government that is genuinely interested in the progress of its country. 81. The first occurrence that we considered an unfriendly act was the opening wide of the doors of this country to a whole gang of criminals who had drenched our land with blood. Men who had murdered hundreds of defenceless peasants, who did not tire of torturing prisoners for years who killed right and left, were welcomed here with open arms. To us this seemed strange. Why this unfriendly act by the United States authorities towards Cuba? Why this act of hostility? At that time we did not fully understand; now, we see the reasons perfectly. 82.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“None at all; that is why we are so astonished and we continue to be astonished when we hear in the General Assembly of the United States Government's great concern for the future of the countries of Latin America, Africa and Asia. We cannot overcome our astonishment because, after fifty years of such a regime, we now see the results in Cuba. 80. What has the revolutionary government done? What crime has the revolutionary government committed, that we should receive the treatment we have received here, that we should have such powerful enemies as we have been shown to have here? Did our problems with the United States Government arise immediately? No. When we came to power, were we possessed with the desire to seek international problems?”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“No; until the revolution none of us had any say in the future of our country; until then the rulers who served the interests of the monopolies controlled its destinies; until then it was the monopolies which determined the fate of our country. Did anyone try to stop them? No, no one. Did anyone place difficulties in their way? No, no one. They were allowed to go about their business and in Cuba we are now enjoying the fruits of their work. 79. What was the state of the national reserves? When the tyrant Batista came to power there were $500 million in the national reserves — a goodly sum for investing in the industrial development of the country. After the revolution there were $70 million in our reserves. Does this show any concern for the industrial development of our country?”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Of course, in the eyes of the President of the United States, what we have done for our people is treason to our people; but it would not be so, for sure, if instead of being loyal to our people we had been loyal to the great United States monopolies which were exploiting our country's economy. 77. Let note at least be taken here of the wonders which the revolution found after it succeeded, wonders which are no more and no less than the usual wonders associated with imperialism, the wonders of the free world for us colonized countries. 78. No one can blame us if Cuba had 600,000 unemployed, 37 1/2 per cent of its population illiterate, 2 per cent suffering from tuberculosis, and 95 per cent of the children in rural areas suffering from diseases caused by parasites.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The poor and under-developed country of the Caribbean, with 600,000 unemployed, contributing to the economic development of the most highly industrialized country in the world! 76. That was the situation which confronted us; a situation which is not unknown to many of the countries represented in this Assembly because, in the final analysis, what we have said about Cuba is merely a general X-ray photograph, so to speak, which is valid for the majority of countries represented here. What alternative was there for the revolutionary government? To betray the people?”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Public utilities, electricity and telephone companies were owned by United States monopolies. A large part of the banking and import business, the oil refineries, the greater part of the sugar production, the best land, and the chief industries of all types in Cuba belonged to United States companies. In the last ten years, the balance of payments between Cuba and the United States has been in the latter's favour to the extent of $1,000 million, and that does not take into account the millions and hundreds of millions of dollars removed from the public treasury by the corrupt and tyrannical rulers and deposited in United States or European banks. One thousand million dollars in ten years!”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Seventy per cent of the children in the rural areas were without teachers. Two per cent of our population were suffering from tuberculosis, that is to say, 100,000 people out of a total of a little over 6 million. Ninety-five per cent of the children in rural areas were suffering from diseases caused by parasites. Infant mortality was consequently very high. The average life span was very short. In addition, 85 per cent of small farmers were paying rent for their lands amounting to as much as 30 per cent of their gross incomes, while 1 1/2 per cent of all the landowners controlled 46 per cent of the total area of the country. The proportion of hospital beds to the number of inhabitants of the country was ludicrous when compared with countries with average medical services.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“It found, first of all, that 600,000 Cubans fit for work were permanently unemployed — a figure which is, in proportion, equal to the number of unemployed in the United States at the time of the great depression which shook this country and almost led to disaster. Three million people, out of a total population of a little over 6 million, had no electric light and enjoyed none of the benefits and comforts of electricity. Three and a half million people, out of a total population of a little over 6 million, were living in hovels and huts unfit for human habitation. In the towns rents accounted for as much as one third of family incomes. Electricity rates and rents were among the highest in the world. 75. Thirty-seven and a half per cent of our population were illiterate, unable to read or write.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)