Fidel Castro
On June 28, 1999, Commander in Chief Fidel Castro asked to speak at the Summit of Heads of State and Government of Latin America and the Caribbean-European Union, which was taking place in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to make what he called «three very brief reflections and questions» which, despite being applauded, were not answered and continue to hover over the world today:
There is a political question of utmost importance, which I cannot fail to point out about NATO’s new strategic concept. It took four paragraphs.
One: «In order to promote peace and stability in Europe and in a broader context, the European allies are raising their capacity for action, including increasing their military power.»
Two: «The security of the Alliance remains subject to a wide range of military risks. […] These risks include uncertainty and instability in and around the Euro-Atlantic region, and the possibility of regional crises on the Alliance’s periphery.»
Three: «A greater number of force elements will be available at the appropriate readiness levels to conduct prolonged operations, whether within Alliance territory or beyond.»
Four: «Potential threats to Alliance security are more likely to emanate from regional, ethnic or other crises beyond Alliance territory, as well as the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery.»
I would like to make three very brief reflections and ask three questions.
One: We would like clarification, if possible, as to whether or not the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean are included within the Euro-Atlantic periphery as defined by NATO.
Two: The European Union, after much debate, has given its support to a declaration of this Summit, which says: «This strategic partnership is based on full respect for international law and the purposes and principles contained in the Charter of the United Nations, the principles of non-intervention, respect for sovereignty, equality between States and self-determination». Does this mean that the United States is also committed to respecting the principles contained in this agreement of its allies? What will Europe’s attitude be if the United States decides on its own to start dropping bombs and missiles under any pretext against any of the Latin American and Caribbean countries gathered here?
Three: Everyone knows that, for example, Israel possesses hundreds of nuclear weapons developed with certain Western assistance, about which a strange and hermetic silence has been kept.
Would this mean that any day NATO, starting from point four above, by virtue of a clandestine proliferation not only of weapons of mass destruction but also of massive production of such weapons, could proceed to drop thousands of bombs on Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Israeli and Palestinian cities, destroying electrical systems, industries, roads and all the essential means of life of those peoples, directly killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians and threatening the existence of the rest of the population? Can this be the civilized solution to such problems? Could it be assured that it would not lead to a nuclear conflict? Where would NATO’s new and unsustainable doctrine lead us?
After having expressed just a brief idea in relation to this delicate subject, I have nothing more to say. I apologize.
Thank you very much (Applause).
SPEECH BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL OF STATE OF THE REPUBLIC OF CUBA, FIDEL CASTRO RUZ, AT THE FIRST WORKING SESSION OF THE SUMMIT OF HEADS OF STATE AND GOVERNMENT OF LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN-EUROPEAN UNION, AT THE MUSEUM OF MODERN ART, RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL, ON JUNE 28, 1999. (Shorthand Versions – Council of State)
source La Pupila Insomne
translation Red en Defensa de la Humanidad – Cuba
Fuentes:
https://cuba-networkdefenseofhumanity.blogspot.com/2022/01/questions-about-nato-by-fidel-castro.html