When the first cases of covid-19 were detected in Cuba in March 2020 and the pandemic began to spread throughout the national territory, 243 measures were already weighing on the Cuban economy and people, which to date hit sources of income, operations as well as exports and tourism.

At the same time, unilateral decisions by Washington fractured relations between families in Cuba and abroad.

Although they were activated during the Trump administration, Biden has kept them unchanged. A demonstration that, in the United States, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party embody the same hegemonic strategy of imperial domination.

In the case of Cuba, in line with the speech enunciated from the White House, which sought to present the country as a failed state, on digital networks the media financed by the United States government tried to conceal the criminal nature of the system of coercive measures against the island.
Through the analysis of experts, testimonies and documents, this chapter of the audiovisual series Archivo.cu reveals why this unilateral policy denies rights to Cubans.

(By: Daily Perez Guillen)

1. Take over the Democratic Party and return it to the people. They have failed us miserably.

2. Fire all pundits, predictors, pollsters and anyone else in the media who had a narrative they wouldn’t let go of and refused to listen to or acknowledge what was really going on. Those same bloviators will now tell us we must “heal the divide” and “come together.” They will pull more hooey like that out of their ass in the days to come. Turn them off.

3. Any Democratic member of Congress who didn’t wake up this morning ready to fight, resist and obstruct in the way Republicans did against President Obama every day for eight full years must step out of the way and let those of us who know the score lead the way in stopping the meanness and the madness that’s about to begin.

4. Everyone must stop saying they are “stunned” and “shocked”. What you mean to say is that you were in a bubble and weren’t paying attention to your fellow Americans and their despair. YEARS of being neglected by both parties, the anger and the need for revenge against the system only grew. Along came a TV star they liked whose plan was to destroy both parties and tell them all “You’re fired!” Trump’s victory is no surprise. He was never a joke. Treating him as one only strengthened him. He is both a creature and a creation of the media and the media will never own that.

5. You must say this sentence to everyone you meet today: “HILLARY CLINTON WON THE POPULAR VOTE!” The MAJORITY of our fellow Americans preferred Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. Period. Fact. If you woke up this morning thinking you live in an effed-up country, you don’t. The majority of your fellow Americans wanted Hillary, not Trump. The only reason he’s president is because of an arcane, insane 18th-century idea called the Electoral College. Until we change that, we’ll continue to have presidents we didn’t elect and didn’t want. You live in a country where a majority of its citizens have said they believe there’s climate change, they believe women should be paid the same as men, they want a debt-free college education, they don’t want us invading countries, they want a raise in the minimum wage and they want a single-payer true universal health care system. None of that has changed. We live in a country where the majority agree with the “liberal” position. We just lack the liberal leadership to make that happen (see: #1 above).

Let’s try to get this all done by noon today.

There are two complementary angles from which to interpret both this visit and the entire process of attempting to normalize relations: what they mean for assessing the past, and what they mean as we move towards the future.

Looking to the past, it is clear that the recently initiated process of normalizing relations between Cuba and the United States must be interpreted as a victory, writ large, of the revolutionary and socialist people of Cuba, of their convictions, their capacity for resistance and sacrifice, their culture, their ethical commitment to social justice; and as a victory for Latin American solidarity with Cuba.

There are some things so obvious to us Cubans that sometimes we forget to underscore them.

• This normalization process was started during the lifetimes of the historic leadership of the Revolution, and has been conducted by leaders of that same generation.
• It implied recognition for the institutional legitimacy of Cuba’s revolution, recognition denied to our Liberating Army in 1898, and also to the Rebel Army in 1959 (although, yes, accorded to the dictatorships of Gerardo Machado and Fulgencio Batista).
• It included explicit recognition of the Revolution’s accomplishments, at least in education and health (the two that were mentioned).
• It included explicit recognition of Cuban assistance offered in solidarity to other peoples of the world, and its contribution to such noble causes as global health and the elimination of apartheid in Africa.
• It included explicit acceptance of the fact that decisions about changes and socioeconomic models in Cuba belong exclusively to Cubans, that we have (and have earned) the right to organize our society differently from the way others do.
• It implied a declaration to abandon the military and subversive option, as well as the intent to abandon coercion, as instruments of US policy towards Cuba.
• It expressly acknowledged the failure of policies hostile to Cuba implemented by preceding administrations, which implies (although not declared as such) recognition for the conscious resistance offered by the Cuban people, since hostile policies only fail in the face of tenacious resistance.
• It recognized the suffering the blockade has caused the Cuban people.
• This process did not emerge from concessions by Cuba of a single one of our principles; or from backing off on demands to end the blockade and return the illegally occupied territory in Guantánamo.
• It included public acknowledgment that the United States was isolated in Latin America and the world because of its policy towards Cuba.
I don’t believe that any reasonable, informed person in today’s world could interpret this normalization process as anything but a victory for Cuba in its historic differendum with the United States.
Looking to the past, this is the only possible interpretation.
Now then, looking to the future, things are more complicated, and there are at least two possible and extreme interpretations, as well as their intermediate variations:
• The hypothesis of perverse conspiracy
• The hypothesis of divergent conceptions about human society

Both are being debated on Cuban street corners. Readers should be aware at this point that I don’t plan to argue for one or the other of these two hypotheses, or for any combination of the two. Future developments will put them to the test, and everyone will be able to draw their own conclusions from this “passage into the unknown.”

Those who defend the hypothesis of perverse conspiracy see President Obama’s words as false promises or subtle deception, at the service of a plan conceived for us to open our doors to US capital and the influence of its mass media; allow a privileged economic sector to expand in Cuba, one that with time would be transformed into the social base for the restoration of capitalism and renunciation of national sovereignty. That would be the first step towards returning Cuba to a country of rich and poor, dictators and gangsters— such as we had in the 1950s.

Cubans who think this way have the right to do so: many past deeds in our common history justify such enormous mistrust. These are well known and I don’t need to list them here.

Many people remember the famous phrase attributed to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, referring to Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza: “Somoza may be a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bitch.”

Of course neither President Obama, nor today’s generations of North Americans of good will (and there are many) are to blame, as individuals, for the first stages of this historical journey. But also, undeniably, the history is there and it conditions what they can do and the way we interpret what they do. History’s processes are much longer than a single human lifetime, and events occurring many decades ago influence our options now, because they influence collective attitudes that exist objectively and relatively independent of leaders’ ideas and intentions.

Even distancing President Obama from the aggressive and immoral policies of previous administrations—those that organized invasions, protected terrorists, fomented assassinations of Cuban leaders and implemented intentions to starve the Cuban people into submission—even establishing this distinction, it can’t be forgotten that Obama alone is not the policy-making class in the United States.

In all honesty, I should recognize that the impression given by President Obama here wasn’t as conveyor of a perverse conspiracy, but rather as an intelligent, educated man, who believes in what he says. What happens then is that the things he believes in (with every right) are different from those we believe in (also with every right).

This is the second hypothesis then, the one concerning different conceptions of human society, differences that were quite evident in all that was said and also what was left unsaid, throughout the visit by President Obama and his delegation.

They made it very clear that the main direction US relations with Cuba will take will be economic, and within the economic arena, the main strategy will be to engage with and support the non-state sector.

That was very clear, in the speeches and symbolic messages, taking distance from the socialist state-sector economy, as if “state” property were the property of some strange entity, not ownership by the whole people, as it is in reality.

We agree that a non-state sector should exist in the Cuban economy. In fact, expanded space for self-employment and cooperatives is part and parcel of implementing the Guidelines that emerged from the 6th [Communist] Party Congress. But we disagree on the role that this non-state sector should have in our economy:

• They see it as the main component of the economy; we see it as a complement to its main component, the socialist state enterprise. As a matter of fact, today the non-state sector, although providing nearly 30% of jobs, contributes less that 12% of the country’s GDP, an indication of its limitations in terms of value added.

• They pose [the non-state sector] as equivalent to “innovation”; we see it as a sector with relatively low value added. Innovation is found in high tech and science, and their links with the socialist state enterprise. Cubans’ innovative spirit has been expressed over these past few years in many other ways, such as the development of biotechnology, its medicines and vaccines; massive training in new information technologies at the University of Informatics Sciences; urban agriculture; the energy revolution; and many other achievements during the Special Period [of dramatic economic crisis], none of which were mentioned in our visitors’ speeches.

• They see private initiative as “empowering the people”; we see it as “empowering one part” of the people, and a relatively small part. The people’s role as protagonists is found in the state enterprises, and in our large publicly-funded sector (including health, education, sports and public safety), where the real work is done for all the people and where most of the wealth is created. We can’t accept the implicit message that the non-state sector is equivalent to “the Cuban people”. This wasn’t stated so brutally, but is quite clearly inferred from the discourse.

• They tacitly separate the concept of “initiative” from state ownership. We see in the state sector our main opportunities for productive initiatives. That’s how I explained it in the Business Forum, using the example of the Molecular Immunology Center where I work, which I described as “a company with 11 million stockholders”.

• They see the non-state sector as a source of social development; we see it as a double-edged sword, also a source of social inequalities (of which we already see evidence in such things as the recent debates on food prices), inequalities that will have to be controlled by fiscal policies that reflect our values.

• They believe in the driving force of competition (although this concept has been questioned even by serious ideologues of capitalist economies). We are familiar with its rapacious nature, eroding social cohesion, and we believe more in the dynamic, the driving force, that emerges from programs that consider the whole nation.

• They believe that the market efficiently distributes investments in response to demand; we believe the market doesn’t respond to real demand, but rather to “demand by those with money in their pockets”, and deepens social inequalities.

• They base their case on the history of corporate development in the United States, a country whose economy took off in the 19th century, under global economic conditions unrepeatable today. We know that underdeveloped nations with dependent economies face different realities, especially in the 21st century; they won’t develop their economies, or their science and technology, based on small private, competitive initiatives, or by trying to reproduce the path of today’s industrialized countries 300 years later. That would be a recipe for perpetuating underdevelopment and dependence, with an economy designed as an appendage and complement to the US economy, something which Cubans already saw in the 19th century when such dependence submerged us in a single-crop economy and closed the door to industrialization. Understanding this comes from looking at history, and thus, history is something we can’t forget.

Taking the road to civilized co-existence “with our differences” means the whole Cuban people need to arrive at a deep understanding of those differences, to keep specific and apparently rational decisions on tactical economic questions from leading to strategic errors; and worse still, allowing others to push us towards such errors, by virtue of what is said and what is left unsaid.
We knew how to avoid such errors at the beginning of the Special Period, when the European socialist camp disappeared and the world was awash in the neoliberal ideology of the nineties. We will know how to do this even better now.

Civilized co-existence certainly distances us from the risk and barbarity of war (both military and economic), but it doesn’t exonerate us from battling in the field of ideas.

We need to win this battle of ideas in order to win the economic battle.

Cuba’s 21st-century economic battle will be fought on three main fronts:
1. The socialist state enterprise’s efficiency and growth capacity, as well as its insertion in the global economy
2. The link between science and the economy, through high-tech companies, with products and services of high value added, that expand our export portfolio
3. Conscious limitation on the extension of social inequalities, through action by the socialist state
On these fronts the Cubans’ 21st century will be decided.

The battle of ideas consists of consolidating our thinking and consensus about where we want to go and in concrete terms, how to get there.

The Florida Straits’ waters shouldn’t be the scenario for war, and it’s very good for everyone that this be so. But for a long time, those waters will continue to separate two different conceptions of how human beings should live together, of the way people organize themselves to work and live in society, and of the distribution of the fruits of their labor. And it’s also very good that this be so. Our ideal for human society is rooted in our historical experience and in the collective soul of Cubans, brilliantly synthesized in José Martí’s thinking. He studied and understood US society better than anyone of his time, and said: “our life has no resemblance to it, nor should it at too many points.”

Capitalism’s essential belief, even among those who sincerely think so, is that material prosperity is constructed on the basis of private property and competition. Ours is that creativity is motivated by ideals of social equity and solidarity among people, including future generations. Our concept of society represents the future…even if the future takes some time in coming, conditioned objectively by the present. It still represents the future for which we have to struggle.

Private property and competition represent the past, and although this past still necessarily exists within the present, it continues to be the past.

You always have to see the concepts behind the words spoken, and the reasons why other words are left unspoken.

The battle for our ideal of how human beings should live together will be in the hands of today’s generations of young Cubans, who in their time will confront challenges different from the ones faced by 20th-century revolutionaries, but all the same great, transcendental and also more complex.

Analyzing the these challenges’ complexities, I have to confess I’d like to enlist once again in the Union of Communist Youth, whose membership card (No. 7784 of 1963) sits on the desk in front of me. I’m still a communist, but I’ve had to accept that I’m no longer “young.” Yet what I can do is share with young people an analysis of what is being said today and what has been left unsaid, and together with them construct the intellectual tools we need for the battles ahead.

José Martí wrote in April, 1895: “The biggest war unleashed against us will be in the realm of ideas: so we will win it with ideas.”

By Agustín Lage Dávila

The Spanish kings brought us the conquistadors and landowners; their imprints remained in the circular mounds of earth assigned to the gold prospectors in the river sand, an abusive and shameful form of exploitation whose vestiges can be seen from the air at many sites in the country.

Today to a great extent tourism consists in showing off the glories of the scenery and tasting the food delicacies from our seas; we always share this with the private capital of the large foreign corporations whose revenues, if they don’t reach the billions of dollars per capita level, don’t even deserve to be noticed.

I must add, since I am obliged to mention the subject, and mainly for the young people, that few people are aware of the importance of such a condition at this singular moment in human history. I wouldn’t say that time has been lost but I don’t hesitate in stating that neither you nor we are not sufficiently well-informed about the knowledge and awareness we should possess in order to confront the realities challenging us. The first one we should be aware of is that our lives are a historical fraction of a second, that we must also share the necessities of life of all human beings. One of these characteristics is the trend of placing too high a value on their role: and this is contrasted on the other hand with the extraordinary number of persons who embody the loftiest of dreams.

But nobody is good or bad per se. None of us are designed for the role that must be taken on in a revolutionary society. In part, we Cubans have the privilege of having the example of José Martí. I even wonder whether he had to fall or not at Dos Rios when he said “Now is my time” and he charged against the Spanish in their trenches in a solid line of fire.

He didn’t want to return to the United States and nobody would make him return. Someone ripped some pages from his diary. Whose perfidious fault was that? No doubt it was the work of some unscrupulous plotting soul. We know of differences among the leaders but there were no instances of indiscipline. Our glorious black leader Antonio Maceo declared: “Whoever should try to take over Cuba will be covered in the dust of its earth drowned in blood, unless they perish in battle.” We also acknowledge Máximo Gómez as the most disciplined and discrete military leader in our history.

Looking at it from another angle, how can we not help but admire the indignation of Bonifacio Byrne when he declared, from the distant ship that was bringing him back to Cuba and as he saw the other flag flying beside our lone star flag: “My flag is the one that has never been a mercenary one…”, immediately adding one of the loveliest phrases that I have ever heard: “If fragmented into tiny bits it should again be my flag someday…the raised arms of our dead will be ready to defend it still!…” Nor shall I forget the passionate words of Camilo Cienfuegos that night when several dozens of meters away bazookas and machine guns of US origin and in the hands of counter-revolutionaries were being aimed at the terrace where we were standing. Obama was born in August of 1961, as he himself told us. Over half a century would pass since that moment.

Nevertheless, let’s see how our illustrious visitor thinks:
“I have come here to bury the last remnant of the Cold War in the Americas. I have come here to extend the hand of friendship to the Cuban people”.

This is immediately followed by a flood of concepts, entirely new ones for most of us:
“We both live in a new world, colonized by Europeans”. The US President went on: “Cuba, like the United States, was built in part by slaves brought here from Africa. Like the United States, the Cuban people can trace their heritage to both slaves and slave-owners”.
The native populations don’t even seem to exist in Obama’s mind. Nor does he say that racial discrimination was swept away by the Revolution; that pensions and salaries for all Cubans were decreed by the Revolution before Mr. Barack Obama’s tenth birthday. The odious bourgeois and racist custom of hiring thugs to throw black citizens out of recreation centers was swept away by the Cuban Revolution. This would go down in history in the battle that was fought in Angola against apartheid, putting an end to the presence of nuclear weapons on a continent of over a billion inhabitants. That wasn’t the purpose of our solidarity; we wanted to help the peoples of Angola, Mozambique, Guinea Bissau and others to rid themselves of Portugal’s fascist colonial yoke.

In 1961, just two years and three months after the Triumph of the Revolution, a mercenary force, with cannon and armored infantry and equipped with planes, was trained and accompanied by US warships and aircraft carriers in a surprise attack on our country. Nothing can justify that premeditated attack which cost our country hundreds of casualties, both in dead and wounded. Nowhere is it recorded that the pro-Yankee assault brigade was able to evacuate one single mercenary. Yankee combat planes were presented at the United Nations as having been taken by rebel Cubans.

That country’s military experience and power is extremely well-known. They also thought that Revolutionary Cuba would be easily knocked out of combat in Africa. The attack through southern Angola of the racist South African motorized brigades brought them close to Luanda, the Angolan capital. A struggle ensued there, lasting for no less than 15 years. I wouldn’t even be speaking of this unless I had the elementary duty of responding to Obama’s speech at the Gran Teatro de La Habana Alicia Alonso.

Nor shall I attempt to provide details, I will just emphasize that over there a glorious page was written in the struggle for the liberation of human beings. In some way I was hoping that Obama’s conduct would be correct. His humble origins and natural intelligence were obvious. Mandela was imprisoned for life and became a giant in the struggle for human dignity. One day a copy of a book telling about part of Mandela’s life ended up in my hands and, what a surprise, the prologue had been written by Barack Obama. I glanced over it quickly. The size of the tiny letters used by Mandela to specify information was incredible. It is worthwhile to have met such a man.
I have to indicate yet another experience in the South African episode. I was really interested to learn more details about how the South Africans had acquired their nuclear weapons. I only had very precise information that there were not more than 10 or 12 bombs.

Researcher and Professor Piero Gleijeses would be a trustworthy source, having written the excellent “Missions in Conflict: Havana, Washington and Africa 1959-1976”.I knew that he was the most reliable source on what had happened and I communicated this to him. He answered me that he had not spoken any more on the matter because in the text he had been replying to the questions of comrade Jorge Risquet, a good friend of his who had been the Cuban ambassador or collaborator in Angola. I located Risquet; he was involved in some other important matters, in the final weeks of a course. That task coincided with a rather recent trip Piero made to Cuba. I had advised him that Risquet was getting on in years and his health was not the best. A few days later, as I had feared, Risquet got worse and died. When Piero arrived there was nothing left to do but make some promises. But I had by that time gotten hold of information about matters dealing with that weapon and the help racist South Africa had received from Reagan and Israel.

I don’t know what Obama would say about this story. I don’t know whether he knew anything or not, even though it is rather doubtful that he would know absolutely nothing. My modest suggestion is that he should reflect and not try to elaborate any theories now about Cuban policies.

There is one important matter:
Obama gave a speech where he used saccharine words to express: “It’s time, now, to leave the past behind. It is time for us to look forward to the future together…un future de esperanza. And it won’t be easy, and there will be setbacks. It will take time. But my time here in Cuba renews my hope and my confidence in what the Cuban people will do. We can make this journey as friends, and as neighbors, and as family… together”.

We presume that each one of us ran the risk of having a heart attack upon hearing those words spoken by the President of the United States. With a pitiless blockade lasting for almost 60 years, and those who have died in mercenary attacks on Cuban ships and ports, an airliner full of passengers exploded in mid-flight, mercenary invasions, multiple acts of violence and force?
Nobody could be so naive as to think that this noble and self-sacrificing people would renounce glory and their rights, and the spiritual richness they have earned with the development of education, science and culture.

Furthermore I would point out that we are capable of producing the foods and material wealth that we need, with the efforts and intelligence of our people. We do not need the Empire to give us any gifts. Our efforts shall be legal and peaceful because we are committed to peace and to the sense of brotherhood among all human beings who live on this planet.

Fidel Castro Ruz
27 March 2016
10:25 p.m.

If anything unites Cuba and the United States, like nothing else, it is precisely baseball. They created it, but here, just like over there, its roots have grown deep in our culture, a palpable detail during the March 22 celebration at Havana’s Latinoamericano stadium, the exhibition game between Cuba’s national team and Major League baseball’s (MLB) Tampa Bay Rays.

It all transpired before Presidents Raúl Castro Ruz and Barack Obama, who were the guests of honor during an afternoon of peace and friendship painted on the faces of children carried in the arms of stars, and symbolized by a flock of doves released during the opening, after the ceremonial pitch by two legends, Luis Tiant and Pedro Luis Lazo. All that was needed was a good game. The Rays and Cuba’s home team delivered.

A LOSS CAN TEACH A GREAT DEAL

Supported by their exact philosophy and precise moves, the Rays were faced with the Cubans’ energy, intent upon demonstrating that the historic quality and long tradition of baseball in the country has not been lost. The result was a close game, in which both teams learned something, and showed the world their strengths.

The Rays came out on top (4-1), supported by spotless pitching (just one walk given up), lead by left-hander Matt Moore. Their offensive production was precise, taking advantage of their rivals’ shortcomings, scoring four runs on five hits, with three runs batted in by first baseman James Loney. These were the details that derailed Cuba, obliged to face the Rays’ tough pitchers again and again.

The Cuban team’s manager, Victor Mesa, commented, “The boys earned my respect. No one should be worried; we were in a great game, and the balance sheet is positive. One more time, it was shown that a loss can teach a lot of baseball,” noting some of the team’s shortcomings and mistakes.

“We were burdened with technical-tactical problems, questions we explain all the time. Manduley’s error was a result,” Victor said, satisfied despite the problems.

“We’ll explain these things with the video and they will learn from the mistakes. In any event, we made more hits than Tampa, and battled to the end, despite the figures we were missing. We proved here that, if we prepare, we are a danger, what happened is in the game, and can be improved with thinking and concentration,” the coach said.

“No doubt, they think more than we do, they function perfectly, and get this from the daily games at a high level. It also helps that they are well compensated, the mind performs better, their discipline is impeccable, and they always know what to do. But we are going to solve these problems; we must come together to achieve it,” Victor said, emphasizing the significance of the day given the presence of Raúl and Obama, who witnessed a duel characterized by discipline on the field and in the bleachers.

AN AFTERNOON OF LEARNING

Everyone was aware of their errors, but everyone had new experiences as well, against a well-prepared opponent. Cuba’s starting pitcher, Yosvani Torres commented, “A great experience, in my mind, I’ll take away the tactical discipline with which our opponents played, and maybe one trophy – striking out Evan Longoria. I don’t know him, but everyone talks about him.”

We asked the star from Pinar del Río what most impressed him, and he responded, “The concentration, the attention paid by every one of the Rays, the pitchers and batters alike; their body language at the plate, and on the mound they were very poised, with no clues that could reveal a deficiency. It’s not that they don’t have them, but they don’t show it.”

As for the Cuban team, Torres didn’t hesitate, “Satisfaction, because we showed that we can play at this pace, sustain a duel with no difficulty, although it is true that we have lots of details to polish up, work more on control, for example, and this is something we will achieve if we play at a good level; there’s no other way to get it.”

While the scoreboard did not indicate a huge difference between the two teams, it was clear that the home team lacked effectiveness, failing to score despite making more hits, until Rudy Reyes brought the crowd to its feet with his homerun off of Tampa’s ace closer, Alex Colomé.

“Just imagine,” Rudy said, “getting the opportunity and hitting a homerun off a MLB closer. Plus we saved a little face with that run. Anyway, with or without the homerun, we didn’t do badly, we were able to give the opponents a game and people enjoy good baseball, that’s the most important.” The long-time member of Havana’s Industriales gave spectators a few seconds of tension as they watched his hit soar toward the foul line in far left field, ultimately staying within the field.

BROTHERHOOD REIGNS

When the 27th out was called, the Rays raised their fists in victory, but there was no solitary celebration on the field, and instants later the two teams exchanged shirts – a custom seen often in soccer, but rarely in baseball. The spontaneity of the moment reflecting the spectacular climate felt in the Latinoamericano stadium, a national sanctuary where the visitors witnessed the country’s love of the game.

“In the end, we’ve only been in Cuba a few hours, but we felt the warmth and friendship of our Cuban brothers. We felt the taste of baseball here, like no other place – we’re never going to forget this,” said the Ray’s Puerto Rican catcher, René Rivera.

“This will not be forgotten, it is an unquestionable step forward in sports,” insisted the great Omar Linares, and right he is, since the game not only gave the two teams a valuable competitive experience, but served to strengthen the foundation of a new bridge between Cuba and the United States.

The spark was lit.

Yankees former star shortstop Derek Jeter told Granma that he had always felt something special for Cubans, and admired their way of competing. He had the opportunity to play with some who helped him see the political difference between the two countries, “But I also understood that we have baseball in common, and we are sailing in the same direction, with the same passion.”

(By Oscar Sánchez Serra, from Granma)

The core message of both speeches was, of course, the same: Trust the people, free their energy, and they will work wonders, not just economically but also politically and morally. Both presidents used their biographies to good effect—Mr. Reagan to plug worker rights (“I led my union out on strike, and I’m proud to say we won”), Mr. Obama to make some pointed suggestions about race relations in Cuba. Mr. Reagan used his description of worldwide progress to puncture the founding myths of Soviet communism. Why, I wondered, did Mr. Obama not use some version of this sentence from his predecessor’s speech: “In Latin America in the 1970s, only a third of the population lived under democratic government; today over 90% does.”

For all their similarities, the big difference between what Ronald Reagan said in Moscow and what Barack Obama said in Havana was how they said it. Mr. Reagan clearly thought he could use humor to make his case. What better way to take on the absurdities of the Soviet system than with a joke about bureaucrats sitting on their butts? The light-hearted approach did produce one of the speech’s wrong notes. (One wonders what the president could have been thinking when he summed up Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika with Butch Cassidy’s famous line about jumping over the waterfall: “You crazy fool, the fall will probably kill you.”) All the same, humor allowed Mr. Reagan to be scornful without being angry. Mr. Obama kept referring to “differences” with the Cuban leadership, as though there were two sides to the argument. Mr. Reagan—whether out of naivete or wisdom—assumed everyone listening knew that was a joke.

(By Stephen Sestanovich, from The Wall Street Journal)

He was accompanied and bid farewell at the airport by the President of the Councils of State and Ministers Raúl Castro Ruz.

Obama will now travel to Argentina to meet with his counterpart Mauricio Macri.

During his visit to the island, the U.S. President, together with his accompanying delegation, toured sites in Old Havana including the Plaza de Armas, the Captain Generals’ Palace and the Cathedral of Havana, accompanied by City Historian Eusebio Leal Spengler.

On the morning of Monday, March 21, Barack Obama paid tribute to Cuba’s national hero, José Martí, laying a floral wreath to the monument in Havana’s Plaza de la Revolución, and held official talks with the President of the Councils of State and Ministers, Army General Raúl Castro Ruz. Following the talks, both presidents offered statements to the press, which received wide international media coverage.

Later on, Obama participated in the Cuba-U.S. Business Forum, where he exchanged with Cuban workers from both the state and non-state sectors.

On the final day of his visit, the U.S. President addressed the Cuban people from Havana’s Alicia Alonso Grand Theater.

The final activity of his agenda was the baseball game between Cuba’s national team and the Tampa Bay Rays of the U.S. Major League in Havana’s Latinoamericano Stadium, which he attended with his family and legislators and cabinet members of the accompanying delegation.

He enjoyed the beginning of the game alongside President Raúl Castro, who was also accompanied by the President of the National Assembly of People’s Power Esteban Lazo, First Vice President of the Councils of State and Ministers Miguel Díaz-Canel, and other government officials.

Obama’s visit came 15 months after the announcements regarding the decision to reestablish relations between the two countries on December 17, 2014. This is the first visit by a serving U.S. President since the triumph of the Cuban Revolution.

(Granma)

The U.S. President recognized the economic transformations underway in Cuba and stated that the island is welcoming U.S. businesses. He also noted his country’s intention to promote the use of new information and communications technologies.

Obama highlighted the U.S government’s desire to become an important trading partner for Cuba and mentioned a few companies which have traveled to the island to finalize agreements, including Cleber LLC, hotel chain Starwood and online accommodation service, AirBnB.

He likewise emphasized the spirit and talent of the Cuban youth and the population’s creative capacity, as well as the island’s commitment to education.
Obama also expressed the U.S. government and people’s desire to support small businesses and the Cuban private sector.

(Granma)

He highlighted some of the successful cooperative efforts undertaken by the two countries, including those in the areas of telecommunications, heath care, and the environment, as well as the joint work carried out combating the Ebola and Zika viruses.

In reference to steps Obama has taken to modify aspects of the blockade, Raúl described these as “positive but insufficient,” emphasizing that the policy remains in force and has intimidating and extraterritorial effects.

Obama, for his part, thanked the Cuban people for the welcome he and his family have received, and commented that seeing a U.S. President in Cuba was once unthinkable, but that, “This is a new day.”

He emphasized his recognition that the destiny of Cuba will be decided by the Cuban people and no one else.

Obama noted that relations between the two countries are not going to change overnight, but that, with mutual respect, the two countries can work to improve the lives of both peoples, while expressing difference frankly.

In response to a question, President Obama said that the two countries have different government systems and economies, in addition to a long history of profound differences, but that, “We are moving forward and not looking backward.”

As part of his official visit to Cuba, Obama laid a floral wreath at the base of the monument of Marti, at the Havana´s Revolution Square.

After the ceremony, the US President broke the protocol and had his picture taken with the images of Commanders Ernesto Che Guevara and Camilo Cienfuegos, displayed on two building across the square, on his back.

Along his delegation, Obama toured the Jose Marti Memorial, a site that tells the history of the Cuban Hero, inaugurated by Cuban Revolution leader Fidel Castro on January 27, 1996, before heading for the official welcome ceremony at the Revolution Palace, where he will meet with President Raul Castro.

(Tomado de ACN)