If Obama doesn’t pull the trigger due to world opinion and all the powers saying no to war, that is when these Israeli gentlemen will not dare to fire a rocket on their own account
• Interview given by Comandante en Jefe Fidel Castro Ruz to the eminent Venezuelan journalists Vanessa Davies, Andrés Izarra, Walter Martínez and Mario Silva, August 8, 2010, Year 52 of the Revolution

Transcript: Council of State

Vanessa Davies.— Greetings to the people of Venezuela, to the people of Cuba and to the people of Latin America who are going to accompany us from this point.

Comandante Fidel Castro, leader of the Cuban Revolution and continental leader has made some reflections and some warnings on the possibility of a nuclear holocaust. Today we will have the opportunity to share his ideas and his proposals.

This is going to be will be an expanded conversation, because we also have present with us and participating: Andrés Izarra, president of Telesur; Walter Martínez, producer, moderator, and program director of "Dossier," broadcast by Telesur and by Venezolana de Televisión; and Mario Silva, likewise producer, moderator, and program director of "La Hojilla," broadcast by Venezolana de Televisión.

Comandante, thank you very much indeed for the invitation and for this opportunity.

Comandante, you stated yesterday in the special session of the Cuban Parliament that you wanted to persuade the U.S. president, Barack Obama, not to give the order that would begin, that would give rise to a nuclear war. Why do you think that Barack Obama would listen to the voice of a Latin American leader to avert a world conflict?

Fidel Castro.—I did not speak as a Latin American leader, I spoke as a representative of our country who has been insisting on that problem, and above all, one who has been meditating very, very, very much on that problem, something which perhaps my situation as a person who has been fighting to regain his health has had an opportunity to do, because it is very difficult for a president in post, a leader in post of any country, who has to attend so many things, to be able to devote the time that I have devoted to thinking about this problem. I have thought about a lot of problems, of course, but this is the problem that has the maximum priority.

As I explained in the message to the Assembly, this came up a month and two or three days ago, this great concern; but initially I was a little more pessimistic. In spite of everything, and I thought that I should make an effort if any possibility of survival existed, and I believed that there would be, especially in Latin America and the Caribbean, which are not threatening anybody, which do not possess nuclear weapons nor, would anyone suppose, missiles pointing at Russia or at China. The region has some bases, well, there’s a base there close to Venezuela, the Dutch one, right? The one in Colombia has aircraft, it does not have nuclear weapons, there’s no aircraft carrier stationed there, when an aircraft carrier does go to Cartagena, there could be a risk; however, I believe that it would have to be a matter of chance, in the first place, and there will always be other priority targets, in the hypothetical case, which I see as very real, of course, of nuclear warfare.

I don’t believe that there is another area in the world representing as little danger as a potential aggressor than this region of the world.

Vanessa Davies.—You stated that you were less optimistic a week ago and that now you are more optimistic, given the possibility of Obama not giving the order. Why?

Fidel Castro.—Yes, that’s correct, and I am very grateful to you interrupting me whenever you want.

Vanessa Davies.—Thank you.

Fidel Castro.—Yes, I was more pessimistic. Then I continued thinking and came to a conclusion which, in my judgment, is very good, it is totally the opposite: I saw the possibility of peace being saved, nuclear war being avoided; moreover, and what is the most important, you can help to save the peace today, although within a month the danger of war will return.

I said, what are the mechanisms via which this nuclear war is being unleashed? So, it was then that I understood that it has to come to pass on the basis of the decision of one man, whose power is highly relative for many reasons.

There is an enormous military apparatus without which the empire cannot exist. That military apparatus has gradually changed, there and in Russia; at any given moment, dozens of years ago and for quite some time there, that famous "nuclear briefcase" existed. One has the right to ask oneself, well, and of what use is that briefcase now? One supposes that the man reasons well, is perfect, is brilliant, is intelligent, that he didn’t go crazy, didn’t drink, that he is an austere man, completely dedicated, who goes about with his briefcase ready to launch a little bomb, another one, a response here and there.

That was during one time, and really it wasn’t well used, there was almost a mistake in the days of the October Crisis – above all because there is, of course, an experience in the circumstances of Cuba. It is not a bunch of aficionados beginning to talk about nuclear problems; we are talking from a country that was at the point of being the target of nobody knows how many nuclear weapons, and we were resigned, not that we were trying to be more valiant than anybody else. It was simply a patriotic sentiment, a sentiment of national dignity, fortified by a revolutionary idea, by a hard struggle in which we had put all of our energies, in a situation of which we very conscious; we didn’t want those missiles here, we would never have wished for them, because we preferred to maintain our image as a country that was not the military base of anybody, and because we estimated that there was no need to be offered any guarantee, and we signed that agreement solely out of an internationalist spirit.

I wouldn’t want to have to repeat the history of how that situation was arrived at, but in those days Israel was not a nuclear power either; the nuclear powers were Britain and France, allied to the United States, and the USSR – the People’s Republic of China wasn’t even recognized in the United Nations – and among those powers there was a very great rivalry, born of the two bombs which in those sad days, corresponding to very recent dates, the 6th no less, they dropped first on Hiroshima, and there was a terrible aerial competition – an area in which the United States had total superiority – in terms of missiles it occupied second place, the Russians had superiority in that area; nuclear weapons became thermonuclear weapons, thus multiplying their destructive potential.

When the British and French, supporting Israel attacked Egypt, under the leadership of Nasser who nationalized Suez, the British and French who had been the owners of all of that territory in the colonial era, were not going to countenance that. France had only had Lebanon; the United Kingdom or Great Britain, as they wanted to call it, had all the rest, including Iraq. You know, well, history knows, how the Romans expelled the Jews, as they called them and, for 2,000 years – as a consequence of the very demands, among them of Russia, and a series of historical factors – they were looking for a home; however, in 2,000 years another population had established itself there, which was even there beforehand.

Well, the population in our country, unfortunately, is not the indigenous one, it is the Spanish, established 500 years ago.

Vanessa Davies.—Comandante, but you haven’t told us why you are optimistic now in relation to the United States, to the possibility of the order not being given for a nuclear bomb.

Fidel Castro.—Ah, very good, you’re right, Vanessa, I am very pleased at you interrupting me.

Look, I am an optimist on account of the mechanism that I was explaining to you, trying to explain to you: that finally, one man has to take the decision, and that man is not Nixon, who was a cynic; he is not a terrible ignoramus, like Reagan was; not an insane fool like Mr. Bush; he is not a consummate hypocrite like this gentlemen’s father – I could quote almost all of them. Neither was he, of course, a Roosevelt, nor a Carter, two very different kinds of men; however, in this case one better than the two, in one context, in one context! I’m not taking to you of an ethical context, but what we’re going to call an exceptional case, an African American who reaches the presidency of the United States, something never before seen or anticipated; it was always thought that a president had to be an intelligent white, the others were descendents of slaves, they were Africans, moreover, they had other religions. He had to be white and Christian, without exception; all right, Obama is Christian, but of African origin, of a Muslim father, from a Muslim people.

I’m saying: a series of characteristics have come together in this man: he is of African origin and is of Muslim parentage, and he has reached the presidency of the United States as a consequence of a colossal economic crisis, of a stupid war, in which they are doing no more than taking corpses from Iraq, many of them. It is already known what that war was, how it was decided, the lies, that man on the aircraft carrier talking of "mission accomplished." The world knows all that. By virtue of all those factors, including the tremendous economic crisis, Obama reaches the presidency. If another one had done so, the probable variant was the first that I conceived, but given the chance that it was this one, I said: the most probable variant is the second.

Because now I was thinking – in reference to the nuclear briefcase – what is the nuclear briefcase good for? The nuclear briefcase isn’t needed, the man can take the first decision, nobody can take it for him, and it’s him who will has to take it, but this is about a man who, indisputably, is not a murderer, he’s not an individual who desires evil for others; he’s a politician, he studied, he has a culture, is an excellent speaker, he had a lot of sympathy – he’s losing it now – his public approval rating went up to 44% today, he’s there and it is him who would have to pull the trigger.

Vanessa Davies.—Can that man assert himself over the interests of the military-industrial complex, Comandante, which wants there to be a war?

Fidel Castro.—Now I’m getting ahead of myself, Vanessa, he doesn’t need to assert himself, he has that prerogative in his hands... Nobody can pull the trigger for him, and he is the one who has his finger on this trigger, just once; so he is obliged to think very seriously what he is doing, because he is not a murderer, nor far less. And there are evident symptoms that his advisors are beginning to perceive that. He still hasn’t realized it, but one knows him; I read from cover to cover the book Dreams of My Father, written by him. I underlined it, looked at it again, because I wanted to know what that man was; there were none of these problems then, but he was an adversary and I wanted to know what kind of an adversary; I studied him well, as far as one can study a person, and he had none of those characteristics which would convert him into a murderer, a guy who would get pleasure from that, a kind of Nero.

Current circumstances are obliging a man like Obama to turn into a Nero, who set fire to Rome, set it to burn; he [Obama] would be setting the world on fire; in the first place he would have to decide the deaths of hundreds of millions of people – more! – but I said hundreds so as not to seem exaggerated. And moreover, the first consequence of his order is that all the crews of the aircraft carriers would die and the U.S. ships in the area would be sunk, they are going to sink the submarines but they’re not going to have anybody to rescue them, or take them away or recover them when they come up to the surface.

Mario Silva.—Comandante, turning now to Latin America.

You were saying just now that, if there is no aircraft carrier stationed in the Pacific area, I suppose, or in the Caribbean, close to Colombia, in order to fuel the bases with mechanisms for an attack; nevertheless, we have 7,000 marines stationed in Costa Rica, there is an aircraft carrier there and there are troops there, right?

Fidel Castro.—Yes.

Mario Silva.—Could that conflict turn toward here? Could it go toward Latin America, to be specific, to all those countries in Latin America, specifically Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Cuba itself?

Fidel Castro.—Could what turn what way?

Mario Silva.—In other words, could that conflict turn in this direction, not as a nuclear war but as an attack on the countries that are liberating themselves in Latin America?

Fidel Castro.—An attack with what weapons?

Mario Silva.—No, no, conventional weapons, not nuclear ones.

Fidel Castro.—Ah, no, there’s no problem.

Mario Silva.—Okay.

Fidel Castro.—The war would be over before they get here; the war would end before that, what they’re going to be counting is the nuclear warheads that they’re launching at each other. What sense would it make to start a war to occupy Brasilia? Power will disappear before, order will disappear, everything will disappear.

Mario Silva.—I wasn’t saying with nuclear weapons toward here, but that the conflict could turn toward Latin America with conventional weapons.

Fidel Castro.—But that takes time. How many days would that take, Mario? If they send troop transporters, how many hours would that take however fast they come? Disembarking, taking up position, occupying the city, and that only in the current situation, without nuclear warfare, would have some sense. You understand? In Iran the war will turn nuclear, and all the causes giving rise to the interventions that we know of to date would disappear, Mario.

Vanessa Davies.—Would Iran change its attitude? In other words, would Iran bow its head and accept sanctions?

Fidel Castro.—Everybody knows that it wouldn’t.

Vanessa Davies.—Would Israel change its attitude?

Fidel Castro.—Israel is the only one that would not try to persuade Obama to halt the war, because it is too brazen, very arrogant, and so it isn’t going to say one word to him; the most likely thing that it would do… well, if it has time, because we don’t know what’s going to happen there; is what it did when Port Said happened, when, together with the French and the British, it attacked Nasser, who had nationalized the Suez Canal; so, in spite of how arrogant they are, always were, and rash one could say… they’ve done it more than once. That was in the era of Cyrus, in the year 70 BC, I believe, they put Jerusalem under siege and ordered the expulsion of the Jews, as they called them.

But however, when the Port Said incident took place and Khrushchev threatened with rockets, they didn’t say anything, they didn’t even protest, they simply withdrew with the others, but they had destroyed the Egyptian aircraft of Soviet manufacture lined up on the runway.

We learned from that experience and never had aircraft in line. When they attacked our bases in Girón, our aircraft were dispersed. It wasn’t a question of having them in line, in Egypt, as they were a pack of cards, the aircraft were swept away.

Vanessa Davies.—Comandante, in order to give the floor to our compañero Andrés Izarra and Walter Martínez, I would like to ask you something else.

You have stated that powers like Russia and China – as you said yesterday – are doing everything possible to avert nuclear war, and you said that you knew that they were making concrete gestures. We should like you to tell us what gestures are being made from Russia and from China to avert nuclear conflict.

Fidel Castro.—If I did much, I wouldn’t have the right to say it. I know what I think and, given the concrete problems that concern them, what they are thinking. These are people who desire peace more than anyone, and they are acting.

Look, I am going to quote you an example. When it is said that Russia is currently suffering a disaster, nobody doubts it, because it is a reality that they are suffering one, and they are taking a whole heap of measures, not only because of what this Kaosenlared website is saying, but on account of things that we concretely know about the situation there, with temperatures of 50 degrees. That Moscow is in a serious situation, that the air is not breathable. The slogan is: leave Moscow anyone who can, or nobody go out into the street.

This disaster reminds me of the consequences of climate change that the author of the documentary Home, Yann Arthus-Bertrand, the most eminent specialist on the issue, demonstrated with the support of the best specialists in the world in that documentary.

And we know, because we have offered cooperation. What cooperation can we offer? Well, we have medical brigades. If they ask for 100 doctors, if they ask for 300, we can send them because, fortunately, our country can count on those people who have been trained over many years, but we know what they would like. They would like, as soon as they can, for us to go about sending airplane and helicopter pilots, so that those making the greatest efforts in the crisis, can have a break, and then set about renewing them. At the present time, with every reason, medical aid doesn’t interest them at the moment.

We know everything that is happening there, and what they are doing is logical.

We don’t need to check the files of the leaders of those countries to know what they are doing, Vanessa. That is why I am speaking in that way in response to your question.

Andrés Izarra.—Comandante, on the role of Russia in this entire issue, Russia has been, on account of its own influence on Iran, a country around which many of the tensions or the possibility of deferring them have pivoted in terms of its action; however, it has publicly stated, has held positions against Iran and the Iran’s possession of atomic weapons, even announcing sanctions. How do you see this and what do you see as Russia’s possible role in dissuading an atomic conflict, given this somewhat ambiguous position?

Fidel Castro.—Look, nothing is just or fair from the moment that a group of countries possessing nuclear weapons prohibit others from having them; these countries are invoking something important: that they don’t want nuclear warfare, that they don’t want other nations to have nuclear weapons, but while maintaining that position, they are manufacturing as many as they can, without any limits, to the extreme that, between the two major powers, they already have more than 18,000 nuclear weapons; many thousands in the United States alone; I am leaving a margin for France, for the United Kingdom, for China, for Pakistan and for India – of course assigning – as it is very well known and those in Norway who dedicate themselves to the issue know it – hundreds of nuclear weapons to Israel; the United States happy, applauding and supplying them the most modern aircraft that exist, supporting them diplomatically, providing them with billions of dollars in weapons, because it is the market that makes life sweet, makes the military-industrial that Eisenhower, the great innocent, discovered one day when he was already close to leaving the presidency of the Republic. Very innocent, but he was planning the little invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs and asked them not to say a word. "Everybody swear that you’re not going to say one word." Well, they made all those papers public later, because they can’t even control secrets.

They’re in that situation now… Yet another demonstrative element that they cannot control secrets. Imagine that a young guy in Intelligence has supplied 240,000 documents to the group, and now they want to arrest him, that they can’t publish that, and the rest are laughing about it.

There was a cable just today. What’s that group called?

Mario Silva.—WikiLeaks.

Fidel Castro.—WikiLeaks, yes, yes, they are going to publish it, they’re going to publish everything that they know, and the Pentagon yelling, "You can’t, because it’s going to do great harm." Now they can’t even control secrets.

So, that’s the situation. Everything that they’re doing is escaping out of their control.

Andrés Izarra.—Looking a little at the region, and within this geopolitical game, the situation between Cuba and the United States. You have announced the upcoming release of the Five. We would like to know a little more, that you give us some details in that direction…

Fidel Castro.—What, the day, the day that they’re going to free them?

Vanessa Davies.—Why did you say that?

Andrés Izarra.—…if you could expand on that announcement and then what it would mean…

Fidel Castro.—We could make the compañeros nervous, I’m not saying…well, maybe with an error of 72 hours, as a margin; but one doesn’t like to say it because people get worried if you declare something about what’s going to happen, because it would seem that you’re playing the role of a fortune teller or something like that, but there’s no fortune-telling involved, and that’s why I told the deputy that a week seemed too little, and December seemed much too long. We could have told him much too much time, we could have told him: well, maybe almost three times the time needed. Now you can deduce for yourselves which words of mine you prefer.

Andrés Izarra.—What would that signify for Cuba-United States relations?

Could we be entering a new phase? Could this be a first step for breaking the blockade?

Fidel Castro.—For us? Why? I’m not concerned about that, I’ve forgotten that. Why? Just, well if they’re selling something, while it’s worth something…but that isn’t my task. Mine is to state things and events so that every one can decide.

You should understand that the compañeros are not people who you’re going to take by the finger or hand to do things, and what I want is that they think, and I think that we are advancing extremely far in that; but not only what our compañeros think, but yours too, it’s very good that yours think as well, not just the Venezuelan compañeros, but all of those who meet there think. Those who are part of ALBA, of MERCOSUR and everybody should think, I’m not asking for anything, I’m not criticizing anybody, not even the new president of Colombia, who has command now.

Yesterday I listened to his talk very devoutly, every word that he spoke, more or less one hour and 10 minutes, until the last little word. All the children, his wife, I was content seeing how happy his wife was saying now, yes. It would seem that the story is just beginning; but, well, I heard it all, and I heard everybody.

Andrés Izarra.—One last question, Comandante, before giving the floor to Walter, since you mention the issue of Colombia, and a bit linked to what Mario is saying.

Fidel Castro.—Incidentally, you know?

Andrés Izarra.—Without getting to the boiling points of two geopolitical areas to which you have referred, the issue of the Koreas and the issue of the Middle East.

Recently in South America we have had significant levels of tension and the role of Colombia as the Israel of the Americas has been highlighted on various occasions. Those tensions that were experienced and which continue in some form, because the relations between Colombia and Venezuela are still broken,

what opinion do you think this situation merits? What is your analysis of this role that Colombia is playing and these tensions that are emerging in South America, because of the role of one militarist, warmongering government that we have in the region?

Fidel Castro.—I have given my opinion on all that, I wrote it in my Reflections.

Andrés Izarra.—And you have a book on that, as well.

Fidel Castro.—The book La paz en Colombia (Peace in Colombia) was very much at the beginning, it cost me a lot more work to do it all, because I was coming out of a very grave situation, I didn’t think that I was going to recover. Well, among other things, to give you an idea, I had an accident, in order to write again, I almost had to learn to write again, and when I was writing, I had to go back and fix it all up. I almost couldn’t do a dedication, it wasn’t just my arm, I was almost learning to write, but repeating it again and again, because the trauma remained – how long I was without consciousness; finally, but I had to make a great effort, and during that time, I wrote and said certain things, I worked a little on the history of Central America, of the revolutionary movement.

I thought a lot about Tarek William Saab, from there in Anzoátegui, who was coming, who was in Pakistan, who visited our [medical] brigade, and I had read with indignation how he complained that the yankis had sent him Villalobos, who studied at Oxford University no less, he was the revolutionary. All this is associated with the death of a poet, a great poet over there, and when they accused him of corruption, it seemed to one to be calumnies, more lies added to the so many that they are saying.

Well, I dedicated very many hours to that problem of El Salvador and the struggle in El Salvador, and every one of their battles; and in the transfer of technology from Vietnam, how the people were trained to penetrate in little groups of men, how it is that a handful of combatants liquidated an entire brigade in Valparáiso, an entire brigade, and at the time that they did all that. In other words, I was familiarizing myself, and I was more than a little surprised when I saw that they were sending to Venezuela, to the Venezuelan Revolution, a governor from one of the richest states of Venezuela, an advisor to tell him how he had to govern. In those days I was recuperating, I made an effort. I was never in agreement over those prisoners that they held for months and years, they must have suffered a lot, those captured men.

I was in total agreement with the aspirations of Marulanda, who was a genuine revolutionary, a man who wanted to change that situation, that’s a story which is very well known. There’s the historian Alape, a magnificent historian, I knew him very well, he knew about that, about everything; in summary, I knew the figures of that era and I knew their politics; moreover, they were supporters of peace and unity, but they killed a lot of people.

They were from the Communist Party, Marulanda’s group separated, and it separated because defending the peace led the Communist Party to make commitments that the oligarchy did not fulfill, it killed thousands of cadres. Then Marulanda reacted and said that he would never again discuss anything with that oligarchy, that it was time wasted, and I defended that; however, I couldn’t be in agreement over those prisoners and that they were asking a ransom for them because, in the book of La Victoria Estratégica – which was published a few days ago – it is demonstrated what our politics of war were and we won the war on account of our politics, not on account of our strength. Our strength was insignificant, but you don’t know what an insignificant force supported by ethics and reason can do.

How many arms did Batista have? He had 100,000. How many men? One hundred thousand, between soldiers, sailors, police, etc. Who supplied them? The United States, modern weapons. What did we have? A few rifles that we gradually collected and the rest we set about seizing from the enemy, but, in the end, in less than two years, in less than two years, in seven or eight months we defeated the regime and took total possession of the 100,000 weapons, the approximately 100,000 weapons, not only on account of our strength, but on account of our morals.

So we couldn’t be in agreement, the war is never won if prisoners… who wants to be captured? When you kill prisoners, what happens is that it costs you a lot more. A man with a machine gun, entrenched behind the double back wheel of a truck, if he falls into an ambush, he doesn’t know how many people he can kill, and he does so even knowing that if he’s captured, they won’t kill him; well imagine one who is convinced that they’ll kill him, or that he’s going to have to endure extremely harsh conditions for years; what soldier wants to be captured? I always criticized that.

I was a supporter of peace in Colombia, for that reason the book is called La Paz en Colombia, that is everything that I think about that. My thinking related to Colombia is expressed there, and the why of our positions, which are invincible, because they are fair, because they are clean.

We were right in desiring justice and we were right in promoting peace in that country, and we were supporters of the struggle, because if you cannot obtain it by other means, you have to obtain it by the way of arms, that’s how all revolutions have been made, until a moment arrives in which neither the empires nor the revolutionaries can reach their goals by way of arms. Look at the conclusion: neither the empire, nor the revolutionaries.

Somebody says: All right, now I’m going to look for a rifle. What weapons is he going to look for? A rifle. A rifle or a little nuclear bomb, which is what he’s going to look for, for…? And what are you going to do, are you going to obtain it by killing? Those are the ideas that I’m saying, the concepts. If one thinks with the concepts of before, of yesterday, one doesn’t draw those conclusions.

Andrés Izarra.—Comandante, Do you think that there is some possibility of Colombia attacking Venezuela?

Fidel Castro.—There is not even the remotest possibility of Colombia attacking Venezuela.

Vanessa Davies.—Why?

Fidel Castro.—First, because it doesn’t interest them; second, because they can’t; third, because they don’t want to; fourth, because they know that the consequences would be disastrous. I believe that’s four reasons already.

Walter Martínez.—Comandante, very important issues have been floated in this dialogue.

A few minutes ago you were talking of the Suez crisis, which brings us various lessons that we can extrapolate. But, given that you have just made such a convincing reference, I am going to go back to Senator Paul Coverdell, the fundamental proponent of Plan Colombia.

Paul Coverdell, a U.S. right-wing senator, died on July 18, 2000 and when he convinced Congress to fund the first Plan Colombia, he made a horrifying synthesis, but one that is still valid.

Having taken into account the geopolitical, economic and strategic importance represented by Venezuela from the energy point of view, Paul Coverdale presented an synthesis to the Congress of the United States and stated: "In order to control Venezuela we need to militarily occupy Colombia." Congress gave him funding for the first Plan Colombia, but on the condition that there would be military judges on the terrain that could be en situ, to immediately court martial any Colombian soldier who was in collusion with the paramilitaries, those who violated human rights and those who exceeded the ethical rules of confrontation. But the core was: "In order to control Venezuela we need to militarily occupy Colombia."

Time and circumstances have changed. Colombia now has seven-plus U.S. military bases, now nobody doubts that the greatest energy wealth is in Venezuela, now on a planetary scale. After we succeeded in controlling, kicking out the transnationals, the real riches appeared and which they had concealed from us. How does this phrase play out and this reality, given the presence, with immunity, of U.S. and Israeli troops in Colombian territory?

Fidel Castro.—Yes, and what else? What is needed to be able to carry out the plan of this…?

Walter Martínez.—Coverdell.

Fidel Castro.—I’m not trying to learn the name, you already have it…

Walter Martínez.—It is, moreover, that Coverdell was the spokesman for a policy; it’s not important that Coverdell is already dead, the policy continues in full development.

Fidel Castro.—And they’ve finally succeeded in having the bases, they already have Colombia, all the bases that they want. And what more do they need?

Walter Martínez.— In principle, political will.

Fidel Castro.—No, let’s suppose that they have the will to attack. Time, that’s one of the things that they need.

Walter Martínez.—A maneuver is space and time; the space they do have.

Fidel Castro.—Time; but they’re not going to have it, they’re not going to have time to do that, no any at all, not 5% of the time that they would need to carry it out. Unless they aspire to do so before…

Let’s say one thing: that the Bolivarian Revolution fails, that being one of the objectives that they are seeking; they are thinking of using arms as a last resort. What is the hour of the last resort? After they have made every effort, like they did to defeat the revolutionary government in 2002, and they will have completely exhausted that expedient; but when they obtain it they’ll be happy and say: "See how intelligent we are, we’ve solved everything with the media… we have used the other artillery: publicity, lies and we’ve put them out of combat." Thus, the possibilities are greatly reduced.

So that was everything, that’s how they invaded Iraq, well, in other times in which those weapons didn’t exist; that’s how they occupied Cuba and imposed the Platt Amendment on it, they imposed on it that Guantánamo naval base; that’s how they have imposed the hundreds of military bases that they have everywhere, on all the continents, linked to those of their predecessors the British and their ideological providers, the French, because this France is the result of that very just revolution, which is the bourgeois Revolution, which evolved to become what is today the empire. And thus everything is very clear, very explained, it is very logical. And I believe that the positions that we are sustaining are in no way distant from that logic, Walter.

Vanessa Davies.—Comandante, you are stating and also based on the question and commentary that Walter made, that neither the empire or the revolution are going to win power by the way of arms, the arms that we know; in other words, the armed revolution or what you were replying to Walter just now. What are the arms now for making the revolution and what are the arms of the empire?

Fidel Castro.—Divulging the reality of what is going to happen and I’m going to tell you why.

Vanessa Davies.—Communication is the weapon?

Fidel Castro.—Well, I believe that you have the nuclear weapon in your hands, the ideological one, and if you win that battle you will have defeated the regime, and there will be no need for revolutions. What do you think of that?

Vanessa Davies.—It seems incredible to me.

Fidel Castro.—Well, that’s the way it is.

Vanessa Davies.—Simply, that we are going to seize the war, using Walter’s words, in the terrain of communication.

Fidel Castro.—Yes, there you have it.

Well, in conveying an idea, because that will help our man not to be mistaken.

Walter Martínez.—If you will allow me.

Some time ago we developed a theory, which was that there are two theaters of operation: the real theater, whether military, political crisis, management crisis, and a parallel or alternative theater, which is the media version of this. And in a world interconnected via satellite, where information is part of every strategy, you can be losing in the theater of operations, but if you succeed in convincing people that you are winning, at least you will win time. And if you are winning, but you don’t know how to sell that in the theater of communication, it’s as if you aren’t winning. Is it from there that what you have just said to us comes, from the power of communication in a world interconnected by satellite and in real time?

Fidel Castro.—The power of communication was in the hands of the empire, it used and abused that power and, at the end of the day today everything that occurs in the world is a product of that; they have fabricated the power that they have and they tried to hold onto it in every possible way, but they couldn’t, so they’d better resign themselves to that now.

Vanessa Davies.—Who, the empire or us?

Fidel Castro.—Who?

Vanessa Davies.—Who should resign themselves?

Fidel Castro.—You know very well that it’s the empire. (Laughter)

Vanessa Davies.—It’s the empire that has to resign itself.

Walter Martínez.—In other words, Wikileaks is turning into something like a guerrilla of the ‘60s.

Fidel Castro.—We’ll have to build a good number of statues to it.

Vanessa Davies.—Who else should we build statues to at this point in time?

Fidel Castro.—Well, to you, you cannot underestimate… listen, listen you’ve been hammering away every day; moreover, you have been supporting the revolution and that is a revolution that has shaken the hemisphere. And for us that meant a lot in the most difficult moments of the Special Period, when aid came from there which spared our people enormous sacrifices, a people who have been fighting for almost 50 years, when those people thought they had it all, Mr. Bush was already at the point of appointing – I think he already had a governor for… and you have underpinned all that, don’t you deserve a statue, tell me? And all the media over there in the hands of who it was, of the counterrevolution? And who were the people who defended revolutionary ideas? You. So I’m not exaggerating, nor is it praise that I’m fabricating for you here.

Vanessa Davies.—You are talking of new ideas, of understanding the world in another way, not how we as revolutionary women and men have understood it up until now. In what way are we wrong when we analyze the world with the old ideas? And what are those new ideas, those new tools for the analysis of ideas?

Fidel Castro.—I believe that the ideas were correct. The ideas weren’t incorrect, but now they are left as ideas of another era.

Vanessa Davies.—And what are the ideas of this era, then?

Fidel Castro.—Well, the first is to prevent war, and the rest remain to be elaborated. But yes, the rest, how society is going to be, how goods and services are going to be administered, how renewable sources of energy are to be obtained…

Goddamn, I’ve got something here.

Mario Silva.—The HAARP project.

Fidel Castro.—You’ll see, you’ll see.

Vanessa Davies.—But, Comandante, those are issues that have to be thought about: the environment, ecology, new forms of politics.

Mario Silva.—New society.

Vanessa Davies.—These are the new ideas, what you are saying: well, the ideas of before were correct, but other elements have to be incorporated. Ecology is one element, it is a central concern that you have expressed.

Fidel Castro.—Yes, yes.

Vanessa Davies.—The forms of economic relation, for example, how would these be replanted, on planting a model…?

Fidel Castro.—They can’t be capitalist, because we are not going to reconstruct the same thing all over again with all the knowledge available to us, and I am saying that we cannot reconstruct the same and I can’t tell you how they’re going to do it, all of us have to do it among ourselves; but this is a humanity that knows how to read and write and the world has who knows how many scientists, if that isn’t all destroyed. If we succeed in getting it preserved, it is to be hoped that we succeed in ensuring that it is utilized, that intelligences work. What they have done is to have worked to provoke self-destruction, misfortune, unhappiness…

Right here I wrote: "In the documentary 50 Years after Hiroshima, one can see the charred and almost transparent corpses of babies who died in their mothers’ bellies, they are horrific images." Are we going to reproduce that? It’s impossible that human beings’ intelligence should be dedicated to that, it cannot be, it simply cannot be.

Mario Silva.—Capitalism is no longer viable, simply and flatly. In other words, not even as a weapon…

Fidel Castro.—It belongs to prehistory.

Mario Silva.—Exactly.

Fidel Castro.—It turns out that Marx was right.

Vanessa Davies.—But socialism belongs to prehistory as well, according to your adversaries.

Fidel Castro.—No, it’s the only… What is socialism? That’s a question that we have to ask ourselves.

Vanessa Davies.—What is socialism for you now, in the 21st century?

Fidel Castro.—For me? Communism, what Marx himself defined as communism: from each according to his means, for each according to his needs. Of course, what the needs are remains to be defined, not those of a plane or a boat to go about the world fishing and wasting all the fuel. Is that of intelligent humans? Imagine, from intelligent men and women? Let’s recall what Chávez says, without changing the idiom. Yes, because I am trying to save words, if I have to say male and female scientists, so-and-so and so-and-so, in everything that I have to say, I would be complicating the way of explaining things that are already complicated in themselves.

Andrés Izarra.—Comandante, I should like to turn our attention a little to Venezuela.

Fidel Castro.—Yes.

Andrés Izarra.—Venezuela is once again going into a new electoral process in September.

Fidel Castro.—Yes, maybe. (Laughter)

Andrés Izarra.—What we have described as a process of great importance.

Fidel Castro.—In a transitional period, yes.

Andrés Izarra.—It is anticipated that the opposition will return to Parliament with a certain representation and that, in itself, is going to be a political event which is going to force the Revolution to enter a new stage. You, who have been such a scholar of the Bolivarian Revolution, who have been a beacon for the Bolivarian Revolution in many decisions, and because of the example the Cuban Revolution represents for us, how do you see this phase that Venezuela is entering in the electoral period, what analysis you would make, what recommendations would you make to the leadership of the Revolution and the Venezuelan people on this process?

Fidel Castro.—I’m going to answer you.

What I said a minute ago, a second ago, could seem like a criticism of what you are doing in Venezuela, and it certainly isn’t, I believe that what you are doing is absolutely correct, the truths, the explanation Chávez is giving of what socialism is and what it means, what it has meant for millions of people in all contexts, that’s what you must do, because what you are going to do now is what you have to do and keep on doing until the end.

Well, if better things happen, there’s no need to be sad about that. I found it amusing because, as we were talking about dates and things, I said: it’s going to coincide with the date of the elections which is… the 23rd?

Andrés Izarra.—They’re on the 26th.

Mario Silva.—The 26th of September.

Fidel Castro.—The 26th, well, three days later, according to my calculation, that is in a transitional period. If something better comes along, I hope that you will feel extremely happy that you have contributed to something better.

Vanessa Davies.—Something better than what, Comandante?

Fidel Castro.—At best there won’t even be imperialism. Listen, it’s hard, but well, what are we going to do about it! (Laughter)

Vanessa Davies.—But Comandante, that’s very soon.

Fidel Castro.—Well, they’re sending me to the madhouse, you know (Laughter), finding me a little place there.

Vanessa Davies.—It’s very soon, Comandante, to say that imperialism is going to fall in less than one month.

Fidel Castro.—Well, and what must I say, that it’s going to last one century, that it’s going to last 10 years, that there isn’t going to be a war? What am I going to say? Because one assumes that the time period established in the Security Council runs out on September 7, in 19 days, I believe, which is before the elections that you have announced. In order for you to have elections, first there has to be no war, and if there is no war, and imperialism doesn’t end, so what? Vanessa, don’t blame yourself, blame me, please. It is what I am affirming, but it isn’t a caprice, it is a line of thought.

Walter Martínez.—Comandante, you have posed with great exactitude a probable scenario of this situation which seems to be in countdown in relation to a possible conflict with Iran, and with great precision, you said: "The moment they attempt to halt an Iranian vessel in order to inspect it, Iran is not going to allow that," and the causus belli could be generated right there, and hundreds of missiles are going to fall on the U.S. fleet.

You also said: "The Iranians, closer than us to the idea of death…" I can confirm that from my limited experience when I was covering the war between Iraq and Iran for a while, and that reached a stagnation point, because Saddam Hussein could kill – I am going to be crudely hypothetical – 10,000 Iranians and they sent him 20,000; they sent him 20,000 and he was killing them, and they sent 40,000, and I believe that it was you yourself who said that they were capable of clearing the minefields by walking over the mines so that others could come and fight.

In that scenario, it would seem that a confrontation in those latitudes is inevitable, what is your point of view?

Fidel Castro.—You were there, eh?

Walter Martínez.—I was there during the war between Iraq and Iran, I toured the field from Chat-el-Arab to the Turkish border, where the Kurds are.

Fidel Castro.—And you saw that?

Walter Martínez.—A stagnation point arrived, because Saddam Hussein had nothing left to launch at them and they weren’t falling back. The Abadan refinery was burning, in Chat-el-Arab; there was stagnation, things reached a certain calm on the southern front, there was already nothing more to offer to decide the balance from the strategic point of view.

Fidel Castro.—Do you remember that everybody was competing to sell Iraq weapons, everybody, the British sold steel for a long-reach cannon, the Soviets sold all those missiles whose reach was extended? In summary, the great arms trade,

I argued, not with the Iranians, I argued with the Syrians; the foreign minister was here in a meeting, and I said: "You shouldn’t cross the border," and the Syrian said that they should, because when the USSR was invaded, the Soviets didn’t stop at the border, they continued to Berlin. I said to him: "I am not discussing legal problems, I am not discussing moral problems, I am discussing political problems. And why don’t you get to Cairo once and for all. Why don’t you get to Cairo?" I reiterated it to them.

We took away from Iraq the right that we had designated to it to host the next Non-Aligned Movement Summit. Well, nobody knew where it was going to be. I wrote a letter to each one of the Movement members, because we couldn’t have the formal meeting, and proposed that they authorize me to designate India; they replied that they were in agreement, and thus it was decided that the next country for the Non-Aligned meeting would be India. Saddam was a very good friend of ours, because when he wasn’t at war with anybody, he was utilizing resources well; from before he became president, we were attending to him, lending him important services related to health, and he was a very good friend of our country, which was always in a very tight situation; but, we had to do that.

The Iranians entered Iraq and reached that city beside the mouth of the Euphrates and established their fortifications and machine-gun nests there, they were surrounded by the Iraqis and with them, the Soviet advisors, and they did who did know how defenses were demolished because they fired at every machine-gun nest with a direct cannon shot, they destroyed all the Iranian machine-gun nests and the Iranians had to withdraw to that city. Why? I said to the [Syrian] foreign minister: "Look, don’t convert a war of aggression on the part of the Iraqis into a patriotic war. That is the political calculation that I am making, do not commit that error." The Syrian foreign minister didn’t even reply. They got involved, the Iranians did not reach Cairo, they didn’t reach anywhere, they couldn’t hold the city and, in short, had to withdraw. You are a witness to all that.

And Ahmadinejad was the chief of the Guardians in the northwestern region, the overall chief was Khomeini, who had earlier written a letter to Gorbachov, and Gorbachov sent me a copy of the letter. Well, in the letter he argued, he made a strong criticism of him, and Gorbachov almost… well, he sent me a copy and he was laughing; "Look at that lack of realism," he said, "writing this letter."

Deep down, I thought that Khomeini was in the right, because he had every right in the world for his criticisms of Gorbachov. It was at that time – I believe, recalling something else, Walter – that Gorbachov wrote to me, we kept up relations, he made a visit here; I was hard, without offending him, but Gorbachov was saying in one of his letters that he had visited Felipe González; well, he was portraying Felipe as the sine qua non of socialists. And I’m very sorry, but I do not think that. And I said: "Are you coming here to advise us on what we should be doing?"

Walter Martínez.—Who said that?

Fidel Castro.—Gorbachov.

Walter Martínez.—Gorbachov about Felipe González, right?

Fidel Castro.—Yes.

"Are you coming here to advise us on what we should be doing?" I said that.

And, you want me to tell you something? Now you’re asking me, what was Gorbachov like? I am telling you that I knew Gorbachov when he was like a whiplash, making criticisms about the leadership of the Party, very strong criticisms, and he defended things correctly, he was opposed to income not derived from work. He used to say: "I am not in agreement with income not derived from work." He knew that alcohol was inflicting a lot of damage and he fought it. The sugar that we were supplying them already wasn’t enough for them, because the Russians are experts in managing stills and converting sugar into good vodka for you; Gorbachov didn’t ban it, but he put a high price on vodka, and made toys cheap, and took a series of measures that you couldn’t but agree with.

But, even more surprising! Yeltsin was the secretary of the Moscow Party, and Yeltsin was almost a model for us, because he was a ferocious critic of all the errors being committed there in the USSR, with the things that they were doing; he was formidable at making criticisms, he had prestige, everyone read him here, we published his statements.

In those days I believe he made a trip to Nicaragua, he talked with us, when I went to Moscow they asked Yeltsin, precisely, to attend to me, he showed me the entire city. I said to him: "Yeltsin, look at that, this city that they have converted into a beautiful modern city." He took me to a part of the former Moscow, but all that has disappeared, it was very beautiful and now there’s nothing there. Then Yeltsin, who agreed with that, said to me: "I think that it would be better to make the subway and the buses free." I replied: "Yeltsin, don’t do that, because if you make those means of transport free, the number of people who are going to get on those metros and buses is going to double and nothing is going to be achieved. Don’t do that." But he was very enthusiastic about all those ideas. And thus, he was a model communist, to the extreme that I had to advise him not to be so extremist; I have been accused of extremism so many times, had to be advising him. And look what all those people did, both Gorbachov and Yeltsin did, they took those decisions and their known ways. We have lived through all that history.

Walter Martínez.—Allow me to be persistent, Comandante.

Do you still think that the causus belli is going to happen when the fleet attempts to stop some Iranian merchant ship or vessel to be inspected?

Fidel Castro.—Yes, and that date cannot be delayed, it can’t be delayed because that would be beating a retreat. That is a point that is coming, or it’s met, or it’s passed. If it’s met, it’s war, if it passes, it’s defeat.

Walter Martínez.—We’re very close to that situation.

Fidel Castro.—But if he is conscious of the decision that he’s going to take it wouldn’t be war or defeat.

Mario Silva.—Of what he is going to provoke.

Fidel Castro.—That is the quid pro quo that I am posing.

Vanessa Davies.—But it would correspond to the UN to go back on its opinion.

Fidel Castro.—The UN doesn’t count for anything, anything, for anything.

Vanessa Davies.—The UN Security Council.

Fidel Castro.—It would disappear as well.

Vanessa Davies.—The UN Security Council would disappear in a nuclear war.

Fidel Castro.—And without a war, as well. None, none of that will continue to exist; if arms are not going to exist, what use are those apparatuses.

Vanessa Davies.—It will correspond to the UN Security Council to retreat? Fidel Castro.—Nobody knows who is going to say the word, it will be the people in the new world. Well, that’s how it’s going to be, a fantasy, but that’s how it’s going to be.

Vanessa Davies.—But you are moving between optimism and pessimism in relation to that scenario that Walter is proposing.

Mario Silva.—Everything depends on Obama?

Fidel Castro.—On us persuading him.

Vanessa Davies.—With these messages that you are sending out and many people.

Fidel Castro.—Well, making the maximum number of people in the world participate in this point of view and him feel fortified that he is going to do good and not a horrible thing.

Can you imagine a conscious Obama deciding the death of hundreds of millions of people, of babies appearing charred in their mothers’ bellies? Can you conceive that a man with elemental common sense could really do that?

Vanessa Davies.—But there are many sectors pushing in that direction.

Fidel Castro.—And what are all those sectors on the side of the world? And if those sectors don’t want to die either, or want their families to die, or want their children to die? That’s the reality.

Mario Silva.—Those sectors as well, in the case of the powerful economic sectors, wouldn’t want to lose their influence in the economic world.

Fidel Castro.—Yes, but between the body bag and life, they would prefer life.

Mario Silva.—They’d prefer the body bag. (Laughter)

Walter Martínez.—You spoke of the Suez campaign and there, there was a whole mob among the British, French and Israelis, and Nasser even sunk their boats knowing that that was the jugular of international trade and closed the Suez Canal; I believe it was Eisenhower who was in the White House, he told them: "Withdraw from there, stop that adventure or I’ll send the U.S. army in on you." He had balls and had the gift of command, he came to be the winner of World War II in the European theater.

Fidel Castro.—Yes, yes.

Fidel Castro.—Well, everything that you are saying is true, that the Israelis do whatever they like. Right.

Walter Martínez.—And moreover, they have the nuclear armaments facilitated by the White House, among others.

Fidel Castro.—Yes, they have it, but they are waiting for the United States to give the order. They believe that they’ve got it, that they have persuaded it. They have made all their agreements with Saudi Arabia, with the Arab Emirates, what time they are going to fly, how they are going to fly, they aren’t going to fire on the Saudis.

Walter Martínez.—The air corridor over Saudi Arabia.

Fidel Castro.—They have all the aircraft, there are going to be waves of aircraft, which they have been given by the yankis; but they are waiting for it to be the yankis, and they know that the yankis can’t say no; because they are saying no… Now they are waiting for somebody to pull the trigger, and that is Obama. And what happens if Obama doesn’t pull the trigger? You can say, well they’ll pull it. But if Obama doesn’t pull the trigger on account of world opinion and all the powers demanding that there is no war, ah, that’s when these Israeli gentlemen will not dare to fire a missile on their own account.

Walter Martínez.—It is here that the key word that you utilized in the Extraordinary Assembly comes in; in other words, we have to persuade them.

Fidel Castro.—Yes, persuade them.

Walter Martínez.—Do you believe that, in this countdown race, via the power of the media, we will be able to reach the point of creating a wave of opinion that will persuade him…?

Fidel Castro.—Yes, well, ask Izarra, because through him I heard about everything that we are talking about here is being broadcast by Telesur, and so, well, ask him, as he says he is receiving many greetings and many messages, he must know, ask that man beside you. (Laughter)

Walter Martínez.—A little historical annotation. You did not have the exclusive in the hot era, because during the 4th Republic, a figure from the then Soviet Union said: "I want to tell you that Venezuela is no longer among the targets of our nuclear potential." "What? And were we a target?" "Yes, because you were the strategic and secure suppliers of the United States, and if we were going to war against the United States, Venezuela would also be due for a little atomic bomb so that they couldn’t use that source of resources."

Fidel Castro.-Well, they have so many that they can share them out.

I didn’t know that detail, but it’s logical.

Walter Martínez.—It was leaked in the 4th Republic. They said it with a certain sigh of relief, some politician in the 4th Republic.

Fidel Castro.—When did they say it?

Walter Martínez.—I don’t know exactly who and when; but it was in the 4th Republic, during a high-level visit. We were a target…

Fidel Castro.—In the 4th Republic.

Walter Martínez.—Yes, before the Revolution.

Vanessa Davies.—Before the Bolivarian Revolution.

Fidel Castro.—That was the 4th Republic?

Vanessa Davies.—Yes.

Walter Martínez.—Yes, we’re in the 5th… (laughter) and it isn’t the French one.

Vanessa Davies.—Comandante, we are reaching the end of the conversation. Each one of us has one question left. I am going to consume mine with the following question.

In the light of the experience of Cuba, in the Cold War, of the Cuban Revolution, what lessons did Cuba learn from it, and what lessons do you think that we Latin American men and women should take now from those lessons of Cuba during the Cold War?

Fidel Castro.—Cuba’s lesson in the Cold War?

Well, in terms of the Cold War it befell us to endure the blockade and suffer all the consequences; but also it was demonstrated that it was possible to resist, and Latin Americans should think in the same way, that there is a tremendous potential in the masses, that it is possible to attain justice, real liberation, genuine.

That is what I think, after what was derived from that experience that we lived through.

Vanessa Davies.—Thank you very much, Comandante.

Mario Silva.—And in Venezuela, that is if we reach the 23rd, how do you see that?

Fidel Castro.—I see everything as very good, but don’t forget one thing, that what humanity most needs to live, among other things, is food, and that this is the area of the world that produces the most food. While the United States produces for two billion people, Latin America has the potential to produce food for eight billion at least, although, of course, the future of humanity will be more controlled by human beings themselves, because populations can be regulated.

One day, I set about adding up the number of people, how many we could come to be, and where one stops and up to where the number of people can be reduced. There should not be more inhabitants born on the planet than those that can be sustained. That has a limit.

Fidel Castro.—What? No, in no way. Malthus said that humanity was not going to be able to sustain itself. My view has nothing to do with Malthus. If I agree in some way, that’s a coincidence, and not in a world of private property, not in a nationalist world, not in a world of empire, it is a totally different world; it is a truth that the planet cannot have more inhabitants that those it can sustain without destroying it.

Walter Martínez.—It is finite.

Mario Silva.—It has to be a world of possibilities.

Walter Martínez.—Malthusian?

Fidel Castro.—That is one truth. I don’t know who could have said it or not.

Walter Martínez.—The geopolitical axis is moving toward the Far East. China, 1.3 billion inhabitants and growing; India, 1.160 billion of inhabitants and growing.

Fidel Castro.—And why does China have 1.3 billion now, and not 3 billion?

Walter Martínez.—When I was there in 1985 and they were talking of the Long March III like a dream – now they are thinking of putting a Chinese on the moon – they said just one child per couple.

Fidel Castro.—Ah well, that’s why. And what did Mao say? What did he believe in? That, in the nuclear age, the possibilities of survival were related to the number of inhabitants of the country. So, if they don’t establish that, the Chinese would now be approaching three billion, how would they feed those people?

Walter Martínez.—Impossible.

Fidel Castro.—But, nevertheless, Mao was the fundamental factor that made the Revolution possible in China, which has reached the levels of productivity that it has today.

Vanessa Davies.—But you were making the reflection on food in relation to Venezuela. Why?

Walter Martínez.—Latin America is the great reservoir.

Vanessa Davies.—But also Venezuela.

Fidel Castro.—Yes, Venezuela is an ideal place, and that is what the government is doing, it is trying to produce, for example, all vegetables. There are no cyclones there that are going to flatten the cultivation areas, unless the yankis invent them… Right here, on that webpage, it is saying that the yankis are developing a way of influencing.

Walter Martínez.—Meteorological warfare.

Fidel Castro.—And here there’s nothing more than one sentence, one single thing that must…

Walter Martínez.—The field of antennae that they have in Alaska, the HAARP project.

Fidel Castro.—They have a field of antennae and they‘re convinced that they can produce cyclones, rainfall, everything. That’s what they’re up to.

Walter Martínez.—Do you consider that a real possibility or science fiction?

Fidel Castro.—No, that isn’t science fiction, that is real science.

Vanessa Davies.—Although there are people who think that it’s science fiction, effectively.

Fidel Castro.—And they’re already using that. You know that, at this moment, the Chinese have said that they cannot export any more rice. What prices are foodstuffs going to acquire for a country importing them, like Cuba?

Walter Martínez.—Russia has just prohibited the export of grains.

Fidel Castro.—Russia has just prohibited it, but it has told us that it will maintain the commitments it has, what do you think about that?

Walter Martínez.—That is solidarity.

Fidel Castro.—That it is maintaining its supply commitments that it has signed with Cuba despite all that and despite the disaster.

Mario Silva.—What is happening is that the issue of the HAARP project was ridiculized by the U.S. media so as not to go more deeply into it, and into the information that there must be about the HAARP project.

Fidel Castro.—It says here: "RIA Novosti in its report on the findings of Dr. Areshev, also notes that:

"The United States is, definitely, exploring the possibilities of controlling the climate in various regions of the world. The corresponding technology is being developed in the framework of the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), with the objective of constructing a potential for launching droughts, hurricanes, floods and earthquakes. From the military point of view, one supposes that the HAARP will create a new type of weapons of mass destruction and an instrument of expansionist policy that could be used to selectively destabilize the environmental and agricultural systems of the target countries."

They are developing another and an even worse weapon.

Vanessa Davies.—Comandante, if there isn’t a nuclear war, the climatic war…

Fidel Castro.—Well, they are going to continue inventing that, or others; they also invented the war, non-nuclear, of those missiles that fly and fall at 25,000- kilometer speed, destroying everything.

This is not published by Granma, it’s published by Ria Novosti. I had this, I took it to the Assembly yesterday. It says: "The author ends his article by saying: ‘We are witnessing a covert climatic war, a prelude to what could be the scenario of a future world war that would end with a balance in human and environmental losses unparalleled in history.’"

So, for that, all these inventions are such that they cannot be used.

I write: "Reliable reports arriving from Russia narrate the magnitude of the climate tragedy that that sister country suffered."

"The objective situation is of an unprecedented magnitude" – this is written as well, not by Ria Novosti, but by the other—"derived from natural and vegetable peat fires, very high temperatures of approximately 39 degrees, which has alarmed the Russian government and prompted feverish activity during the last few days, to try and prevent the fires from destroying any Russian energy objectives, among them, some fuelled by nuclear energy, we are informed."

So, here it says: "This disaster" –I added this part – "is showing us the consequences of climate change that the author of the documentary Home, Yann Arthus-Bertrand, the most eminent specialist on the issue, showed us with the support of the best specialists in the world in that film.

"If nuclear war is not averted nor can others equal or worse be averted. I have also thought that, if humans can create disasters, they can also create renewable energies based on diverse sources, among them, some as important as water and wind."

Mario Silva.—Eolian seems to be the alternative.

Fidel Castro.—Well, then there’s no need to even use nuclear energy.

Vanessa Davies.—Comandante, we have abused your time and we will give Andrés Izarra an opportunity to bring the interview to an end.

Andrés Izarra.—I have here various questions arriving via Twitter, Comandante, which, to honor people who have been following the interview and sending their messages, I am just going to put to you two, so as not to abuse your time.

The first question is from Mariyán Diez. She asks if you are not afraid that the Washington hawks will try to assassinate Obama as they did in the past with Kennedy. How do you see the internal thing in the United States?

Fidel Castro.—Yes, of course, the fact that they haven’t assassinated him is almost a matter of chance, because they have done it before. Remember the attack on Reagan? They shot him with a little Caliber 22 pistol and left a bullet in his lung.

Walter Martínez.—And Obama has a vice president who is constantly raising his profile and acquiring a WASP profile.

Fidel Castro.—All that fits into the norms and habits.

Vanessa Davies.—Could they assassinate Obama, Comandante?

Fidel Castro.—Yes, but I don’t think that they’re going to do it now. In any event, he’d better look after himself, and not be trusting, because absurd, irrational things could happen.

No, he knows how to look after himself, he takes all the measures, looks after himself, and the people who they have selected to look after him are real professionals, nobody bribes them, they’re already made for that, they are programmed for that.

Vanessa Davies.—And how do you know that? (Laughter)

Fidel Castro.—Well, like you know it too.

Walter Martínez.—Vice President Biden is getting ready to bat.

Fidel Castro.—Oh! The one I remember is Johnson.

Andrés Izarra.—There is an Enriquecido on Twitter who is asking when you’re going to visit Venezuela.

Fidel Castro.—What need is there for me there?

Andrés Izarra.—And they’re asking me to tell you that, at this moment, President Chávez is on "Aló Presidente" reading from your book, from the book that you sent him.

Fidel Castro.—Yes, I sent it to him and I put "very fraternally;" that was the same day that I sent it to our ambassador.

Walter Martínez.—I’m supposing that each one of us will go from here with a copy under our arm, right? (Laughter)

Vanessa Davies.—Comandante, you haven’t replied when you’re going to Venezuela.

Fidel Castro.—Well, it’s not a task that I’ve proposed to myself nor do I believe it’s essential, it would be better for me to devote myself to hearing you from here.

Vanessa Davies.—On your book, when is the third part of the history coming? The first is out, the second is ready.

Fidel Castro.—This one? The second is almost done now, as I explained yesterday. I hardly have to touch anything; I’ve already made the links, the explanations. Imagine, a man devoted to that produces more, has no other obligations and so it is very advanced.

Well, I promised the Assembly that we would see each other again.

There’s time for all that, there’s lots of time ahead, Izarra, you can tell your readers that. And my program, look, I really have to meet with some physicist to get an explanation of the concept of time, because I don’t understand it, as I said there: what is time?

Aaah! Look, Goddamn, something I underlined about time.

Well, here’s one in which I talk of the disaster; that is another little piece from yesterday when I said: "Evolution began on Earth, with the first germs of life; that is known to everybody and the theologians, that doesn’t take space away from them to try and seek interpretations; but even the notion of time is disappearing, what is time? And I said: "Because time is an invention of man, it is the space measured between different events, that’s how time was invented; but, when did time begin? One would have to explain that. It’s all very complicated."

And I would really like to talk with a physicist who could explain to me what is time, because this is what has occurred to me and I have these great doubts, and I hope that they can help me, maybe they can help you too.

Walter Martínez.—At least we can say to you that, on television, time is really peremptory (Laughter) and this is touching its end. With the permission of the compañera.

Fidel Castro.—All right; but to my sadness.

Vanessa Davies.—Comandante, thank you very much indeed, really, for this opportunity.

As Venezuelan men and women, we add ourselves to your call for peace and to this persuasion of the president of the United States, Barack Obama.