CUBA YEARS
"With Fidel: A Portrait of Castro and Cuba" : Interviews with Frank Mankiewick and Kirby Jones, July-October, 1974 (Chicago: Playboy Press, 1975)
(EXCERPTS)
"With Fidel: A Portrait of Castro and Cuba" : Interviews with Frank Mankiewick and Kirby Jones, July-October, 1974 (Chicago: Playboy Press, 1975)
(EXCERPTS)
Castro looked just the way he was supposed to look, but neater and more dapper. He wore the traditional olive-green fatigues, but they were tailored and pressed and appeared to be made from an extremely lightweight material. His black boots were brilliantly shined and he wore a pistol belt--complete with pistol--around his middle. On each shoulder was the diamond of red and black with a white star in the middle signifying his military rank as commandante (major). His insignia was partially encircled b a gold braid, which meant commandante en jefe (commander-in-chief). There is only one of those...............
There are some surprising things about Castro physically. He is taller than expected, and, for a forty-seven-year-old man who has been the leader of his country for fifteen years, he looks surprisingly youthful. At about six-foot-two and 190 pounds, he has the build of a cornerback, or maybe an Ivy League tackle. Considering the hours Castro keeps, his face is remarkably unlined, his eyes unpouched. The hairline is receding a trifle, and the beard is flecked with gray, but the midriff is flat, the eyes are clear, and he is remarkably unchanged from the young man whose last appearance in the United States was at the famous heads-of-state United Nations General Assembly in 1962.....................
The following entourage was a small Alfa Romeo sedan with one ministry official and one bodyguard. The jeep was Russian-made and equipped with a two-way radio placed between the front seats. On the floor was a box of six-inch cigars and a blue metal tin containing candy mints. Across the front dashboard, securely mounted, was a Russian-made AK47 automatic rifle..........
It is questionable whether Fidel Castro cold pass a high-school driver’s education course. He has the habit—admirable under normal circumstances—of wanting to look a person in the eye when he is talking. But we were in the backseat..................
There was no apparent itinerary. In spite of our wariness of his driving, Fidel stopped at red lights and obeyed traffic signals just as if we were out for a Sunday drive. People along the road waved and called out “Fidel, Fidel.” Castro waved back most times. He was very busy talking and explaining everything.....................
We stopped alongside a factory that was being built to produce radios, batteries, and minicalculators. He chatted a bit with the manager, asking him what the building was made of, about construction schedules, the number of workers to be employed, what the projected production schedule was, and if any problems existed. The manager replied that they were on schedule but would be able to move faster if they had more trucks. They talked as if they already knew each other, had talked before, and would again. We soon learned that this was the way most peopled talked to Fidel. They had seen him before, and they did expect to see him again......
Inside, the maitre d’ escorted us to a table as if we were ordinary customers. Daiquiris were served all around and for the next few hours Fidel quizzed us on Watergate and American politics with the same interest that he had demonstrated about the factory. This was July: John Ehrlichman had just gone to trial, the Supreme Court was considering the tape decision, and the Judiciary Committee was getting ready for public debate. “You Americans,” Castro said after a while, “talk a lot about stability and the need to deal with stable governments. I think my government is the most stable in the western hemisphere.” Then he paused and added with a slight smile, “Including, it would seem, your own.”....................
Comparing notes later, it seemed clear we had been with one of the most charming and entertaining men either of us had ever met. Whether one agrees with him or not, Castro is personally overpowering. U.S political writers would call it a simple case of charisma, but it is more than that. Political leaders often can be and are charismatic in a public sense, but rather normal in more private moments. Such is not the case with Fidel Castro. He remains one of the few truly electric personalities in a world in which his peers seem dull and pedestrian...............
Such personal feelings should not be confused with ideological or political agreement on our own part, for there was much on which we were to differ. But from the moment he looked you straight in the eye and spoke directly to every question, from the moment he first leaned eagerly forward to stress a point, his bear no more than six inches away, each of us knew we were in for a fascinating interview and an exciting experience.................
We were not let down. The interview was conducted totally in Spanish. No questions were submitted in advance, and Fidel answered everything put to him. Castro speaks very softly. Contrary to the public image built up over the years in the United States, he converses in a relaxed, but serious, manner. He is the head of his country, and what he says is carefully thought out and logically presented. He knows what he is doing and saying all the time.............
It was so easy to become engrossed in his style and logic that we often found ourselves starting from point A and within ten minutes agreeing with point B. Fidel is a former trial lawyer and he shows it. All his arguments follow a carefully structured presentation. By the time he has built his case, if you do not watch out, he has you convinced of things you do not believe..............
Castro is not a passive talker. His whole body seems to become involved in what he says. His fingers stroke his beard, his arms and hands punctuate his points in a fluid manner. He often raises one finger against his face or in the air as he thinks and talks. Even as he sits quietly talking in his chair there was a magnetic energy and motion to him........................
Q. You briefly mentioned the October, 1962 missile crisis as one of the topics discussed between President Kennedy and Jean Daniel. In several historical works, especially in Thirteen Days, by Robert Kennedy, we know some of what took place during the October crisis from the American point of view. We have no data on conversations which took place among yourselves and especially between you and Khrushchev during those days.............
A. To what are you referring?
Q. Well, what happened during those days, day by day, especially during the last few days?
A. I can tell you some of what happened; I am not going to tell the entire storey. What I can say is that we saw certain movements in Washington, such as the convocation, special meetings, and other certain measures, which we understood not only by instinct and smell, but by our experience with the way in which Kennedy had imposed the blockade. We declared a state of alarm and mobilized our antiaircraft weapons. When the crisis developed, therefore, we had taken all the military precautions that we could take before the two threats—aerial attack or invasion—occurred. We mobilized our antiaircraft defenses to protect the more important, strategic spots, the missile bases included. Later we saw the alternatives open to the United States: bombardment of the bases or an invasion. We then suggested to the Soviet command that the strategic missiles be dismantled, so that they would not all be in the same position which would facilitate their destruction by aerial attack. There was a critical period after that. The American planes began flying very low and we understood the danger—because if we permitted these flights we were risking a surprise attack. And at a specific moment, when tensions were at a peak, our antiaircraft artillery started shooting at low-flying aircraft. That same day coincided with the shooting down of the U-2................
Q. How many planes were shot down?
A. Only one plane. Who is responsible for the missile crisis? If the United States had not been bent on liquidating the Cuban revolution there would not have been an October crisis. This was first demonstrated with economic aggression and then with the organization of subversive forces against Cuba, the Bay of Pigs invasion. Were we right or wrong to fear direct invasion? Didn’t the United States invade the Dominican Republic? Didn’t the United States bomb North Vietnam? Didn’t they carry on an exhausting war for years in South Vietnam? How could we be sure that we would not be invaded? And this thought determined the setting up of strategic missiles in Cuba.................
Q. Then armed struggle is necessary?
A. I would say that armed struggle is necessary. Arms are necessary to carry out revolution. Otherwise you cannot effect social change.
Q. Is that a lesson from the Chilean experience?
A. The Chilean case is more a proof than a lesson. Why couldn’t the Unidad Popular implement its revolutionary program? That oligarchy defended itself through the parliamentary majority, and through the armed forces. It stopped the process abruptly and established a fascist dictatorship in the country, one of unbelievable cruelty. How did the U.S. gain its independence? It did not win it in Parliament. It won it by revolutionary struggle; and in the end, how was the slave issue resolved in the States? Was it not solved in a violent war? Armed struggle is not one of my ideas. I wish all changes could be achieved peacefully, and I don’t doubt that under certain circumstances in some countries peaceful change can be achieved. But, as a rule, historically, all major social changes have been produced revolutionarily...............
Q. But why does force have to be necessary?
A. Because the ruling social regime stays in power through force. The new social regime also has to impose itself through force; there is no doubt about that. The ruling classes do not give up their interests, they do not give up their privileges peacefully, and they are the ones who employ violence. Historically, the oppressed did not invent violence. And again, I repeat, I wish change could be promoted within societies through peaceful means, but history teaches us otherwise. The French revolution, the major changes, the coming of age of liberal ideas against feudalism, did not take place peacefully. The Russian revolution, the new social order, did not come about peacefully. The Chinese revolution was not accomplished peacefully...............
Q. Is the capitalist system doomed in Latin America?
A. There is no future for Latin American countries along the capitalist route.
Q. Why?
A. Capitalism helped develop certain nations—England, the United States, Germany, France, Japan, they were the initiators of industrial development. In those days, to start an industry you needed only five thousand dollars. Technology was fairly simple so that hardly even engineers were required. This is not the case today, where industry requires high efficiency, enormous investments, complicated technological research, so that small underdeveloped countries cannot compete successfully with the industrialized nations, commercially, financially, technologically. There is no room for waste, for free competition, to reach a level of economic development. There is no alternative but to plan the economy, centralize and pool raw materials, and gain in a few years what would take another system one hundred, two hundred years. I believe that the underdeveloped countries, in order to overcome the enormous technological gap from the developed world, must plan their economics along socialist principles. How can they succeed against illiteracy, ignorance, disease, under the capitalist way?.....................
There are some surprising things about Castro physically. He is taller than expected, and, for a forty-seven-year-old man who has been the leader of his country for fifteen years, he looks surprisingly youthful. At about six-foot-two and 190 pounds, he has the build of a cornerback, or maybe an Ivy League tackle. Considering the hours Castro keeps, his face is remarkably unlined, his eyes unpouched. The hairline is receding a trifle, and the beard is flecked with gray, but the midriff is flat, the eyes are clear, and he is remarkably unchanged from the young man whose last appearance in the United States was at the famous heads-of-state United Nations General Assembly in 1962.....................
The following entourage was a small Alfa Romeo sedan with one ministry official and one bodyguard. The jeep was Russian-made and equipped with a two-way radio placed between the front seats. On the floor was a box of six-inch cigars and a blue metal tin containing candy mints. Across the front dashboard, securely mounted, was a Russian-made AK47 automatic rifle..........
It is questionable whether Fidel Castro cold pass a high-school driver’s education course. He has the habit—admirable under normal circumstances—of wanting to look a person in the eye when he is talking. But we were in the backseat..................
There was no apparent itinerary. In spite of our wariness of his driving, Fidel stopped at red lights and obeyed traffic signals just as if we were out for a Sunday drive. People along the road waved and called out “Fidel, Fidel.” Castro waved back most times. He was very busy talking and explaining everything.....................
We stopped alongside a factory that was being built to produce radios, batteries, and minicalculators. He chatted a bit with the manager, asking him what the building was made of, about construction schedules, the number of workers to be employed, what the projected production schedule was, and if any problems existed. The manager replied that they were on schedule but would be able to move faster if they had more trucks. They talked as if they already knew each other, had talked before, and would again. We soon learned that this was the way most peopled talked to Fidel. They had seen him before, and they did expect to see him again......
Inside, the maitre d’ escorted us to a table as if we were ordinary customers. Daiquiris were served all around and for the next few hours Fidel quizzed us on Watergate and American politics with the same interest that he had demonstrated about the factory. This was July: John Ehrlichman had just gone to trial, the Supreme Court was considering the tape decision, and the Judiciary Committee was getting ready for public debate. “You Americans,” Castro said after a while, “talk a lot about stability and the need to deal with stable governments. I think my government is the most stable in the western hemisphere.” Then he paused and added with a slight smile, “Including, it would seem, your own.”....................
Comparing notes later, it seemed clear we had been with one of the most charming and entertaining men either of us had ever met. Whether one agrees with him or not, Castro is personally overpowering. U.S political writers would call it a simple case of charisma, but it is more than that. Political leaders often can be and are charismatic in a public sense, but rather normal in more private moments. Such is not the case with Fidel Castro. He remains one of the few truly electric personalities in a world in which his peers seem dull and pedestrian...............
Such personal feelings should not be confused with ideological or political agreement on our own part, for there was much on which we were to differ. But from the moment he looked you straight in the eye and spoke directly to every question, from the moment he first leaned eagerly forward to stress a point, his bear no more than six inches away, each of us knew we were in for a fascinating interview and an exciting experience.................
We were not let down. The interview was conducted totally in Spanish. No questions were submitted in advance, and Fidel answered everything put to him. Castro speaks very softly. Contrary to the public image built up over the years in the United States, he converses in a relaxed, but serious, manner. He is the head of his country, and what he says is carefully thought out and logically presented. He knows what he is doing and saying all the time.............
It was so easy to become engrossed in his style and logic that we often found ourselves starting from point A and within ten minutes agreeing with point B. Fidel is a former trial lawyer and he shows it. All his arguments follow a carefully structured presentation. By the time he has built his case, if you do not watch out, he has you convinced of things you do not believe..............
Castro is not a passive talker. His whole body seems to become involved in what he says. His fingers stroke his beard, his arms and hands punctuate his points in a fluid manner. He often raises one finger against his face or in the air as he thinks and talks. Even as he sits quietly talking in his chair there was a magnetic energy and motion to him........................
THE MISSILE CRISIS
Q. You briefly mentioned the October, 1962 missile crisis as one of the topics discussed between President Kennedy and Jean Daniel. In several historical works, especially in Thirteen Days, by Robert Kennedy, we know some of what took place during the October crisis from the American point of view. We have no data on conversations which took place among yourselves and especially between you and Khrushchev during those days.............
A. To what are you referring?
Q. Well, what happened during those days, day by day, especially during the last few days?
A. I can tell you some of what happened; I am not going to tell the entire storey. What I can say is that we saw certain movements in Washington, such as the convocation, special meetings, and other certain measures, which we understood not only by instinct and smell, but by our experience with the way in which Kennedy had imposed the blockade. We declared a state of alarm and mobilized our antiaircraft weapons. When the crisis developed, therefore, we had taken all the military precautions that we could take before the two threats—aerial attack or invasion—occurred. We mobilized our antiaircraft defenses to protect the more important, strategic spots, the missile bases included. Later we saw the alternatives open to the United States: bombardment of the bases or an invasion. We then suggested to the Soviet command that the strategic missiles be dismantled, so that they would not all be in the same position which would facilitate their destruction by aerial attack. There was a critical period after that. The American planes began flying very low and we understood the danger—because if we permitted these flights we were risking a surprise attack. And at a specific moment, when tensions were at a peak, our antiaircraft artillery started shooting at low-flying aircraft. That same day coincided with the shooting down of the U-2................
Q. How many planes were shot down?
A. Only one plane. Who is responsible for the missile crisis? If the United States had not been bent on liquidating the Cuban revolution there would not have been an October crisis. This was first demonstrated with economic aggression and then with the organization of subversive forces against Cuba, the Bay of Pigs invasion. Were we right or wrong to fear direct invasion? Didn’t the United States invade the Dominican Republic? Didn’t the United States bomb North Vietnam? Didn’t they carry on an exhausting war for years in South Vietnam? How could we be sure that we would not be invaded? And this thought determined the setting up of strategic missiles in Cuba.................
LATIN AMERICA
Q. Then armed struggle is necessary?
A. I would say that armed struggle is necessary. Arms are necessary to carry out revolution. Otherwise you cannot effect social change.
Q. Is that a lesson from the Chilean experience?
A. The Chilean case is more a proof than a lesson. Why couldn’t the Unidad Popular implement its revolutionary program? That oligarchy defended itself through the parliamentary majority, and through the armed forces. It stopped the process abruptly and established a fascist dictatorship in the country, one of unbelievable cruelty. How did the U.S. gain its independence? It did not win it in Parliament. It won it by revolutionary struggle; and in the end, how was the slave issue resolved in the States? Was it not solved in a violent war? Armed struggle is not one of my ideas. I wish all changes could be achieved peacefully, and I don’t doubt that under certain circumstances in some countries peaceful change can be achieved. But, as a rule, historically, all major social changes have been produced revolutionarily...............
Q. But why does force have to be necessary?
A. Because the ruling social regime stays in power through force. The new social regime also has to impose itself through force; there is no doubt about that. The ruling classes do not give up their interests, they do not give up their privileges peacefully, and they are the ones who employ violence. Historically, the oppressed did not invent violence. And again, I repeat, I wish change could be promoted within societies through peaceful means, but history teaches us otherwise. The French revolution, the major changes, the coming of age of liberal ideas against feudalism, did not take place peacefully. The Russian revolution, the new social order, did not come about peacefully. The Chinese revolution was not accomplished peacefully...............
Q. Is the capitalist system doomed in Latin America?
A. There is no future for Latin American countries along the capitalist route.
Q. Why?
A. Capitalism helped develop certain nations—England, the United States, Germany, France, Japan, they were the initiators of industrial development. In those days, to start an industry you needed only five thousand dollars. Technology was fairly simple so that hardly even engineers were required. This is not the case today, where industry requires high efficiency, enormous investments, complicated technological research, so that small underdeveloped countries cannot compete successfully with the industrialized nations, commercially, financially, technologically. There is no room for waste, for free competition, to reach a level of economic development. There is no alternative but to plan the economy, centralize and pool raw materials, and gain in a few years what would take another system one hundred, two hundred years. I believe that the underdeveloped countries, in order to overcome the enormous technological gap from the developed world, must plan their economics along socialist principles. How can they succeed against illiteracy, ignorance, disease, under the capitalist way?.....................
(final thoughts expressed by authors)
As to relations with the United States, Castro seems eager that we end our economic blockade, but he is not prepared to make any sacrifices to achieve it. He has patience, he says, and he observes correctly that history seems to be on his side. He seems anxious to assume a position of leadership in a new organization of Latin American countries, one which would exclude but not necessarily be hostile to the United States, and he is careful to draw a distinction between American leadership and the American people....................