Vol. 76/No. 14      April 9, 2012

The Spanish-language edition of Making History: Interviews with Four Generals of Cuba’s Revolutionary Armed Forces is one of Pathfinder’s Books of the Month for April.

The interview excerpted below with Gen. Néstor López Cuba was conducted in Havana in October 1997 by Jack Barnes, national secretary of the Socialist Workers Party, Mary-Alice Waters, editor of the book, and Martín Koppel.

In the interview López Cuba refers to Cuba’s internationalist missions. The most prominent of these was in Angola. From late 1975 to May 1991, 375,000 Cuban combatants volunteered to help that newly independent country defeat invasions from the white supremacist regime in South Africa. Copyright © 1999 by Pathfinder Press. Reprinted by permission.

WATERS: An interesting interview appeared in Granma International a few weeks ago with Cuban brigadier general Luis Pérez Róspide, who heads up military industries for the Revolutionary Armed Forces. The interviewer paraphrases Pérez Róspide as saying that his department of the FAR has the “basic mission of guaranteeing that each Cuban has a rifle, a land mine, and a grenade to defend the country.”

The article continues, noting that when the general was asked about the manufacture and utilization of land mines, which are opposed by some rich countries, Pérez Róspide “gave his opinion that no one discussed this issue with the poor or those who are threatened by nuclear weapons and have none of their own. ‘Land mines are the weapon of the poor,’ General Pérez Róspide declared.”

We’d like to get your opinion on this question, since a very big campaign is under way in the capitalist world, promoted by the governments of Canada and various members of the European Union, to sign an international treaty banning land mines.

LÓPEZ CUBA: Yes, and unfortunately this campaign also has broad backing among persons who are very progressive, very humanitarian, and who have enormous respect in world public opinion. To some extent this is understandable, since this is a very human question.

But one has to ask: What about the two flights by B-29s that dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? How many people were killed? How many victims are still dying from the effects? If a nuclear arsenal exists capable of annihilating the world, why not fight against this?

Because mines are the weapon of the poor. They are the weapon of those who don’t have the resources to buy a B-52 bomber or an F-16 fighter jet.

A number of years ago, when the collapse of socialism had already begun, the Soviets gave us a final squadron of MIG-29 fighters. Six were delivered.

Recently, the Russian government proposed to sell the FAR more of these MIG-29s. [Raúl Castro, then minister of Cuba’s Revolutionary Armed Forces] asked them: “How much do they cost?”

“Twenty million dollars,” he was told.

So the minister replied: “We’ll sell you back the six we already have!”

Actually, we have been making an effort to sell these MIG-29s, and to get authorization from the Russians to collect payment. Because a poor country like Cuba, whose armed forces and budget depend on our economic possibilities, cannot afford these expensive aircraft. We cannot afford other types of expensive and sophisticated weaponry, nor are they particularly necessary if we take into account the popular character and strictly defensive purpose of our weapons, including the antipersonnel mines we have, which are not for use in another country.

So what can we use to resist? Weapons that are the least expensive—rifles, mines, Molotov cocktails, antitank grenades. That is why we have to adopt this stance against banning land mines.

How many billions of dollars does the United States sell in arms to Third World governments? It’s an incredible figure—and at the cost of hunger, of dire poverty. How many millions are killed by the “bombs” of starvation, lack of electric power, health care, food? And why does this happen? Because of the dependency of these countries on big capital. Because of the exploitation of the people of those countries. That’s the truth.

Yet they single out mines to be against—because they are weapons of the poor. If we had our way, we would rather not have mines, or rifles, or any other weapons. Let them respect the sovereignty of the peoples. Let there be justice. But as long as we continue to be under constant threat, we are the ones who are accountable for the security of our people.

That is why we have been very cautious in giving our opinion on this world campaign against mines.

We know all about land mines. The majority of the combatants we lost in internationalist missions were due to mines. The majority of those crippled were due to mines. We know the effects of this weapon. But isn’t that true of all weapons? In any case, there are weapons that are much more deadly than mines.

That’s the reality. That is the reason for our position.

BARNES: It’s when the peoples give up their right to defend themselves that they will be slaughtered.

LÓPEZ CUBA: Yes, that’s the truth.

BARNES: People sometimes ask us, “Do you really believe the Americans will use their nuclear weapons someday?” We reply, “They’ve already used them! Against the peoples of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” And it is only the readiness of people around the world to fight that stops the U.S. rulers from using those weapons of mass destruction once again.

LÓPEZ CUBA: Exactly.

BARNES: So that gives us time to fight to take their arms away from them. American workers will come to understand this very well.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home