Cuban political discourse and the island’s official media made such a huge shift from the revolt in Egypt to the disorders in Libya that I began to think: What’s behind all this? We received daily reports from the country of pyramids, and on the television news we frequently saw some youths protesting in the plazas and others being cruelly repressed.
However when Libya heated up with giant protests, they were hardly shown on the TV screen, and nor was anything else heard (except when they were carrying arms and seemed dangerous). The only thing spoken of were the ill intentions of the western powers, and in the briefly shown images the Cuban media prioritized the “leader’s followers” waving green flags and holding up photos of Gaddafi the “brother leader.”
Curious about this change of attitude, I conducted a little research. So what did I discover?
Firstly, I found that almost all of the Arab nations coming to a boil — including Libya and Syria — are currently “headed” by tyrants who have transformed republican institutions into dynasties. These are corrupt men who, as corresponds in those cases, have cut civil rights down to the roots and do their dealings employing extreme cruelty against their opponents (today’s butcher shop is overwhelming proof), although these involve only pacifist fighters.
Gaddafi, speaking in front of television cameras, ended up saying: “Those who don’t love me deserve to die.” Shouldn’t this incitement to violence be enough to deny him any support?
The two “socialist republics” (Syria and Libya) are socialist in name only (the high life expectancy rates are not indicators that socialism exists there). Gaddafi and Bashar al Assad are supported by minorities of the rich and they maintain (or they have up to now) magnificent relations with the “western empire” (to the point of supporting elections of right wing politicians in Europe), and of late they have caught the privatization fever.
And what else did I discover in my research? Good heavens… that the government of Cuba maintains magnificent relations with both.
In 2010, the ambassador of the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in Cuba described the relations between the two nations as “excellent” and expressed his government’s interest in investing in our country.
And with Syria
In 2001, Fidel Castro traveled to that “brother” country.
Later, in 2009, a Syrian delegation came to Cuba and that same year representatives from the island returned the visit (led by Deputy Minister of Foreign Relations Marcos Rodriguez Costa and the Cuban minister of Foreign Investment and Economic Collaboration, Martha Lomas Morales).
In all these exchanges, 40 years of friendship were recognized and recollections were made of the mutual support and cooperation in the face of the monopolistic control of the western mass media.
In 2010, Raul Castro received Bashar al Assad on a state visit and as a result they signed three bilateral cooperation agreements.
Conclusion: The government of Cuba has no conflicts with these capos. Since the revolts began, “our little pals” have been going around slaughtering with no holds barred. But it took an invasion by other sons of b…… for the Cuban Friendship Institute (ICAP) to vigorously condemn anyone. It seems that ICAP has confused who should be the recipient of friendship.
The statement by that institution says in one of its paragraphs: “We raise our voices calling to prevent the murder of freedom. What is at stake is the independence and sovereignty of Arab peoples and of all human beings on the planet.”
I don’t believe they’re lying. But firstly, before freedom, people are being murdered. And secondly, why didn’t they say that before?