Letters

I am writing in response to the
“Taking Note” column entitled
“A Question of Solidarity” in the
December issue of NACLA Report
on the Americas [Vol. XXVI, No.
3]. You state the obvious when
you say that “Latin America today
is no less desperately in need of
the support we can offer.” But soli-
darity is different from charity.
Many, perhaps most, of the people
I met in the solidarity movement
were involved in solidarity
activism because it was a ready
and handy way to educate North
Americans about U.S. imperialism
and other related issues. We also
engaged in a dialogue between
North Americans and Central
Americans, which helped us edu-
cate ourselves as well.
But the leadership of the largest
U.S. solidarity organization was
not interested in solidarity work
based on North American condi-
tions. They were more interested
in fund-raising drives and lobbying
efforts in response to immediate
Central American crises than in
addressing long-term North Amer-
ican needs.
The solidarity movement never
grew deep enough roots. Working
people in the United States are
exactly like the masses in Central
America in the sense that they too
have their own needs and their
own historical situation. But the
leadership of the solidarity move-
ment did not take this into account,
and thus could not respond,
maneuver or change when political
circumstances changed.
Both the solidarity movement
and the Left in general must under-
take a basic reappraisal of our cur-
rent political situation as North
Readers are invited to address letters to
The Editors, NACLA Report on the Ameri-
cas, 475 Riverside Drive, Suite 454, New
York, NY 70175. Letters may be edited
for length and clarity.
Americans. NACLA Report on the
Americas continues to serve this
purpose by analyzing the hemi-
spheric conditions to which the
Left must respond. Crossroads and
other magazines which focus on
our situation as leftists and work-
ers in the United States is a good
place to look for that “independent
agenda to propel us forward when
outside provocation is lacking.”
Our agenda as North Americans is
by absolute necessity determined
by the conditions of people here.
When the solidarity movement set
itself up as a leftist version of
Oxfam America, it strictly delimit-
ed its own long-term potential.
Sesshu Foster
Los Angeles, CA
Felt that the remarks you made
about Cuba in “A Question of
Solidarity” were arrogant and
superficial. No one has ever said
that Cuba is a human-rights par-
adise; however, Cuba guarantees
certain basic human rights (not
mentioned in your editorial): the
right to employment, the right to
shelter, the right to education, and
the right to health care. For the
majority of the population of Latin
America, these rights are violated
daily.
With respect to the Cuba rally
you criticize, representatives from
many liberation movements includ-
ing the FMLN “intoned the revolu-
tion’s many triumphs,” and praised
Cuba for its internationalist role. I
remember the first time I visited
the 26th of July camp for Salvado-
ran refugees in Havana and saw all
those wounded young FMLN com-
Continued on page 45
ERRATUM
The Introduction to “A Market Solu-
tion For the Americas?” (Vol. XXVI,
No.4) erred on the year of President de
la Madrid’s inauguration in Mexico.
He was elected and took office in 1982.
batants who were being given free
medical care and rehabilitation by
Cuba. While the U.S. government
sends helicopter gunships to El Sal-
vador to massacre people, a poor
Third-World country like Cuba
provides this type of aid.
Cuba is not paradise, and is
admittedly going through its most
difficult time since the beginning
of the Revolution. Yet even the
New York Times concedes that
Cuban socialism means Cubans
suffer equally. Now, more than
ever, is the time to offer solidarity
to Cuba. This includes the need to
present a balanced view of Cuba
with all its contradictions. One can
voice concern over Cuba’s treat-
ment of dissidents like Elizardo
Sanchez, but one must also point
out Cuba’s real human-rights
achievements of which no other
country in the region can boast.
I am sure it would have been a
lot easier to build the “perfect
democracy” in Cuba had there not
been over 30 years of an immoral
embargo, assassination attempts,
sabotage, the Bay of Pigs, Oper-
ation Mongoose, and the present
I am sure it
would have been a lot
easier to build the
“perfect democracy” in
Cuba had there not
been over 30 years of
an immoral embargo,
assassination attempts,
sabotage …
Torricelli Bill, which seeks to starve the Cuban government into submission. However, with all its faults, the Cuban Revolution still represents a beacon of hope and
source of inspiration for many in
the Third World. It needs to be
defended by all those who believe
in peace, justice and the right to
self-determination.
Frank Scoff
Fort Lee, NJ
“n “A Question of Solidarity,” you express deep concern that solidarity work in the United States has contracted precipitously despite continuing needs. You ask
how we could have accomplished
more; how we could have better
educated the public; whether mate-
rial-aid efforts should have been
better supplemented with support
for social change here and in the
region; whether we should have
devoted more attention to move-
ment-building; and whether we
need a strong, independent agenda.
Those same concerns led, via a
grassroots effort, to the Central
America Solidarity Roundtable.
Last October, 30 leaders of nation-
al solidarity organizations met for
three days of intensive sessions.
Together with invited resource
people, we reviewed the past, pre-
sent and future of the movement,
the region, and U.S. policy.
We found the Central America
solidarity movement in the United
States still large, dedicated, experi-
enced and skilled, but with a num-
ber of problems which should be
faced, particularly in organizing
for the long haul.
The U.S. government continues
to roll back Third-World efforts at
independence and nationalism,
imposes development with
inequity and injustice, and threat-
ens democracy itself. Peace
processes can be expected to fail.
All of the conditions needed for
recurrent violent struggles remain.
Environmental collapse in the
region is also a distinct possibility.
Given this situation, we agreed
that we should expand the move-
ment by working with other pro-
gressive movements (such as
labor, environment, women, peace,
people of color, and the faith com-
munity) and with coalitions con-
cerned with the problems of free
trade, and economic and social jus-
tice in the United States. We also
acknowledged that we should bet-
ter coordinate the movement and
educate ourselves in the economics
of aid, trade and alternative models
for sustainable development.
The Roundtable’s report is avail-
able from us at 57 South Main
Street, Pittsford, NY, 14534.
Peter and Gail Mott
for the Central America
Solidarity Roundtable
Pittsford, NY
Deidre McFadyen responds:
Iwas surprised at the volume of
response to my Taking Note col-
umn. A number of people called or
wrote to thank me for openly and
honestly discussing the state of the
solidarity movement. I touched a
nerve with others, who complained
that my comments about Cuba
were unhelpful. I am convinced
more than ever that the solidarity
movement needs a forum where it
is safe to discuss the nature of soli-
darity work and the things we find
troubling about the movements or
political struggles we support.
I agree with Sesshu Foster when
she says that the Latin American
solidarity movement must build
links with working people in North
America. Indeed in this new era of
global economic processes, we
must be able to see the relationship
between the struggle for social
change in the North and the South.
In particular, I think solidarity
committees should pay more atten-
tion to Latin American immigrants
in their own communities. Even if
these Latinos have different poli-
tics than we do, or no interest at all
in political activism (often for very
good reasons), it is incumbent
upon us in the solidarity movement
to support them. Having fled polit-
ical turmoil or economic devasta-
tion, they are often our most
concrete link to the struggles we
are backing. In addition, immi-
grants increasingly fill the the bot-
tom tier of the U.S. labor force,
and so are an essential part of any
conception of the U.S. working
class.
Frank Scoff has misinterpreted
my remarks about Cuba. In fact,
his comments reflect the very
problem I pointed out in my col-
umn. In some circles, you cannot
criticize a leftist government with-
out being a traitor to the cause. I
recognize the many achievements
of the Cuban Revolution. If I
didn’t reiterate them in the column,
it was because I assumed that my
readers had a similar political ori-
entation, and that in the pages of
NACLA Report on the Americas
we could freely discuss how we
might best defend the Revolution.