|
Call for solidarity of Caribbean women with countries
threatened by US Dear sisters, Although I'm writing in direct response to Jeanne and to the others who've already answered her, it's also the beginnings of a response to Roberta's letter circulated a few months ago, which has never been discussed as far as I know. Jeanne, I'm sorry to have taken so long to respond. Roberta, I apologise for not answering you at all. In answer to Jeanne - yes, I think an immediate response is necessary, considering that the Wall St. Journal is already talking about invading Cuba. (I circulated the article to you a few days ago). At the same time, I think we need to let people know where we stand not only on the invasion of Cuba, but on all the Caribbean countries under immediate threat, and that means Haiti and Venezuela. Cuba is very special for us; we all feel that. It's the Caribbean country against which the US has sustained the most prolonged hostility, including the embargo, it's the place which has shared what it has created with the rest of us - many of us have had free or cheap medical treatment there (including me), we have children studying there, we go to Cuban doctors in our own particular territories. But I think that our defence of the region has to encompass Venezuela, which is already under attack, and Haiti, which some reports say is already threatened. We have to remember that the US and the rest have never forgiven the Haitians for having a successful revolution made by slaves who must not be allowed to succeed. That is why Haiti is one of the poorest countries in the world. In the case of Venezuela, last year the US organised a coup with the white racist elite which the masses of civil society, beginning with women, the bottom of the bottom, reversed. The US is furious. So we have to defend what is being won in our region not only in Cuba but in Venezuela. I was there a few months ago at the invitation of their women's institute, called Inamujer, and the lines were very clearly drawn - on one side, the Chavez supporters who were overwhelming poor and mixed race, on the other, the Chavez opposers who were mainly well-off or rich and white. I was totally blown away when I saw that their new constitution recognizes the value of caring labour, and at how strong and determined the women look. When we defend their victories, we are defending ourselves and our future. Also we have to bear in mind that the US only bombs countries that DON'T have weapons of mass destruction, and preferably any weapons at all. That is, among others, us in the whole Caribbean. Related to this, I think we have to be alert to, and speak out against, all forms of attack. Pre-emptive strikes do not always begin with soldiers. They begin with all kinds of economic and/or political destabilization. Remember Grenada. The other thing is this: I think if we talk of responding only through the NGOs, we put ourselves in a vulnerable position, to be dependent on organisations which in turn are dependent on funding that can be cut off if they go 'too far'. We need to cast a broad net and find out who will be with us. This could lead to a popular campaign against any US pre-emptive strike in Cuba or anywhere else, with emphasis on the region. People will expect and be right to expect that the context be stated: the US has bombed Afghanistan and Iraq to hell, and are talking about 'the next place', with the obvious intention of doing as they like anywhere. There is now no way to avoid facing this reality. I'm not proposing we concentrate on this, but that this is the context of concentrating on our region.. So we need a short statement saying we will not allow this attack to happen. And then, as (at least) one email said, we have to work out what access we have to the media and use it effectively to share information that is being hidden. And we need pre-emptive protest action against the whole doctrine of the pre-emptive strike, with particular reference to Cuba, Venezuela and Haiti. These protest actions could be of two kinds: regular pickets against the US embassy (or its equivalent) in each country, at the same time and with the same placards and chants; and larger immediate pickets at moments of heightened threat. As many of you have heard me saying for some time, I think that we've become unpolitical: the more globalised the threat has become, the more cut off from global movements many of us have allowed ourselves to become; the more the threat to the very survival of our countries (some people are referring to some of us as 'failed states'), the smaller the focus of our work seems to be; the more the need for organising on the ground, the more we're substituting conferences and UN attendances. But the UN has been privatised: Unicef now works with McDonalds and Coca-Cola. We have no choice but to depend on our own people - as many as we can get. There's also a whole global anti-war movement, with mass action, in many, many countries, all of them campaigning not only against the war in Iraq, but the wars to come - a whole global anti-war movement connected to movements against the debt, against globalisation (meaning present global power relations). Why aren't we there? (Before Grenada, many of us would have been. And we didn't do anything about that invasion). It's for Third World Caribbean countries like ourselves to give a lead to those in the anti-war movement in industrial countries, including the US. We also have to let Cuba know urgently that they don't stand alone. The politicians in the Caribbean haven't done enough to show solidarity with Cuba as a Caribbean country on the front line. That's one of the demands we have to make of them if they want our vote. Regards to all of you; I hope everyone is well. Andaiye |