Fidel, Cuba deserve respect, honour
By Editor
Tue 11 June 2013, 14:00 CAT
Cuba deserves the respect and support of all progressive, fair and just-minded people regardless of their ideological or political outlooks.
And as for us in Africa, especially in southern Africa, we have a special debt that we owe Cuba. And as Dr Kenneth Kaunda correctly observes, Cuba paid a very high price for the liberation of our region from colonialism and apartheid. Thousands of Cubans lost their lives in our service. How much more can one ask from another human being? How far can one go in demonstrating one's love for another than to lay down his life for them?
Cuba is not a country with gigantic natural resources, a lot of money, but it has been able to share whatever little they had, they have with others. Whatever Cuba has, we got a share of it.
In terms of solidarity with other peoples, which country in this world can match the internationalist spirit and actions of Cuba? In terms of sharing with others, which country in this world can match Cuba? We can as well ask: in terms of the Christian spirit and practice, which country in this world is more Christian in its deeds than Cuba?
Well, Dr Kaunda has poured praises on Fidel Castro, the leader of the Cuban Revolution, and all of it is justified and well earned praise. In the Christian sense, in deeds, Fidel is a saint. If Nobel Prizes were given in terms of one's sense of humanity, one's true contributions to humanity, Fidel would be a Nobel Prize winner. But there are other criteria that seem to be ideological more than anything else that may explain why Fidel is not a Nobel Prize winner. We say this because there is no match in the world political leadership for Fidel in many areas of human endeavour, including in the issues of human rights.
Looking at things fairly, without prejudice and objectively, we are thoroughly convinced that no politician in the world, that no country in the world has done more than Fidel and Cuba have to protect human rights.
No children in Cuba have to beg or are homeless in the way we see in other countries; no children have to scrounge for a living in the streets in the way we see in other countries. In the rest of the world - including the developed countries, but mainly in the other Third World countries - millions of homeless children who have no parents or support of any kind are begging in the streets, doing all sorts of things to make a living. In view of this, we ask: is there any politician or country that has done more than Fidel and Cuba have to protect human rights?
Look at the number of sick children who don't receive any medical attention and the numbers of children who are illiterate, even in the developed countries. In Cuba, everyone knows how to read and write. Hundreds of millions of children in the world don't have access to medical treatment, but in Cuba every child has a school to go to and medical care. Has any country done more for human rights in this regard than Cuba has done? And mind you, this is not a rich country in terms of money!
In other parts of the world, children are bought and sold and even exported to other countries. In some cases, quite frequently, children are even sold so that their vital organs can be used for transplants. That has never happened in Cuba. With regard to this aspect, has any country in this world done more than Cuba to protect human rights?
Think of child prostitution, which is quite generalised in the rest of the Third World. There isn't that type of child prostitution in Cuba. Has any country done more for human rights in this regard than Cuba has done?
Many countries have infant mortality rates of more than 100 for every thousand live births. This means that hundreds of thousands of children die each year. However, Cuba - a Third World, under-developed country that has been under a blockade for more than five decades, for more than half a century - has brought down its mortality rates for children under a year old to less than 10 and the figure for one to five-year-olds to practically zero. Since the triumph of the Revolution led by Fidel, the lives of thousands of children have been saved in Cuba. As regards this aspect, has any country done more than Cuba to protect human rights?
In Cuba, every human being has a truly equal opportunity to develop physically and intellectually, without any discrimination based on sex or race. This holds true for everyone, without any differences between rich and poor. Has any country done more for human rights in this regard than Cuba has done?
All this is the result of the Cuban Revolution's humanitarian work of giving everybody opportunities, creating conditions for eliminating injustices, inequalities and providing a healthy environment. In this regard, has any country done more than Cuba to protect human rights?
Life expectancy has increased considerably - to almost 80 - since the triumph of the Revolution. Every citizen has been given dozens of additional years and the possibility of having a healthier, safer life. In other countries of this world, life expectancy is 40, 45, 50, 55 or 60. As regards this aspect, has any country done more than Cuba for human rights?
Discrimination against women - which is so strongly entrenched in all other parts of the world, including the other Third World countries - has disappeared in Cuba. In fact, women constitute nearly 60 per cent of the country's technical workforce and are paid the same wages as men, with no wage discrimination - a form of discrimination that is an everyday phenomenon in the rest of the world. It doesn't exist in Cuba, where women have been liberated and have job opportunities, protection education, health care and nursery schools for their children. Has any country done more for human rights in this regard than Cuba?
Take racial discrimination. The Revolution wiped it out in Cuba. Now, all citizens have full equality, including equal opportunities without racial discrimination - a fact that nobody can dispute in Cuba. Few other countries in the world can say the same. Has any country really done more for human rights in this regard than Cuba?
Look at the effect that equality - equal opportunities and equal treatment - has on human beings and their happiness. People need more than food: they need honour, dignity, respect and to be treated like human beings. In this regard, has any country done more than Cuba to protect human rights?
All over the world, some citizens have been alienated and considered worthless. They are taken to vote for somebody every four, five or six years without even knowing who they are voting for or why - because, often, their low political cultural level and low cultural level in general don't give them a chance to decide freely. They are influenced by all the mechanisms for exerting mental and psychological influence in decision making - and then nobody cares about them anymore. There isn't any sense of identification between such people and the state, the government and the society in which they live. They are condemned to a desperate struggle for survival without any social worth, respect or consideration. In Cuba, the situation is entirely different, with total identification and full participation by citizens in all activities - political activities, activities in defence of their country, cultural activities and activities for developing the country. Has any country done more for human rights in this regard than Cuba?
With the Revolution, Cuba has created a sense of solidarity and fraternity. In this regard, has any country done more for human rights than Cuba?
They have experiences and live in an atmosphere unlike those in many of our countries in the world. There, they share what they have. They don't have any gross inequality, with some having much more than they need and dying of heart attacks and cholesterol, while others starve to death. There, they share everything - their country belongs to all of them, and its riches belong to all of them, too. Has any country done more for its people than Cuba?
There, citizens feel they count; they are a part of society; they feel they have a national dignity and a homeland - something that is very rare and inaccessible to the vast majority of the people in today's world. Has any country done more for human rights in this regard than Cuba?
The list goes on and on. We are talking about things which, in our opinion, constitute true humanitarianism, the policy of promoting the dignity of human beings and their wellbeing. Inequality causes terrible suffering, which is unknown to the Cuban people.
Cuba has been grossly slandered. Its enemies have even spoken of physical violence against people, torture and such things. They have written and multiplied all that calumny against Cuba. But the Cuban Revolution has a characteristic that very few revolutions have had in all of history: the Cuban people have been taught to hate crime, to hate torture, to hate the use of physical violence against individuals, to hate abuses of power. This is what inspires them in their struggle, what mobilises them and unites them: their frontal attack on all those forms of injustice. They have employed this approach consistently throughout their revolutionary history. They have had a humanitarian policy. This is extremely outstanding for a country that has been under attack since the triumph of the Revolution. We say this because there is always a justification for doing cruel things in times of danger in a country that is continually under attack. Since the triumph of the Revolution, nobody has been assassinated, no prisoners have been tortured and no physical violence has been used against prisoners. How many other countries, revolutions, states that have had civil wars or states that have participated in foreign wars can say the same? But Cuba has every right to.
Surely, a country and a political leadership of this kind deserves admiration, respect and honour. And for these reasons, Fidel and Cuba deserve respect, admiration and honour.
Labels: CUBA, FIDEL CASTRO, KENNETH KAUNDA, SIBANZE SIMUCHOBA
Read more...
Cuba has selflessly shared its little resources - Simuchoba
By Moses Kuwema
Tue 11 June 2013, 14:00 CAT
ZAMBIA-Cuba Friendship Association president Sibanze Simuchoba says Cuba has selflessly shared the little resources it has with other needy areas in Africa.
Commenting on the message first Republican president Dr Kenneth Kaunda delivered to revolution leader Fidel Castro on behalf of President Michael Sata in which he recognised and appreciated Cuba's aid to Zambia since independence, Simuchoba said Cuba had invested very wisely in all key areas of which assists human society to advance.
He said Cuba had zeroed in on the wholeness of social well-being.
"They invested in improving knowledge and you find that the beginning is to promote literacy so that people can read and communicate. Their investment in health education has come in to make a difference not only for Cuba but the third world where Cuba has selflessly shared the bit it has with other needy areas in Angola, South Africa," he said.
Simuchoba said Cuba also understood imperialism very well.
"It knows that imperialism is vicious but it has not developed cold feet despite the closeness of the centre of imperialism, the United States. Even with the embargo, they have done better than the third world countries. In terms of Southern Africa, the one big help or contribution Cuba did was their military campaign in Angola," said Simuchoba.
He said although Cuba was not militaristic, it had a strong military because of its cadre of soldiers.
"It has a cadre of soldiers who know what they are in the military for and if they have to go to war, they know what they are fighting for," he said.
While in Cuba last week, Dr Kaunda delivered, through President Raul Castro, President Sata's message to Fidel Castro in which State House recognised and appreciated Cuba's aid to Zambia.
President Sata sought more cooperation with Cuba.
Labels: CUBA, FIDEL CASTRO, KENNETH KAUNDA, SIBANZE SIMUCHOBA
Read more...
COMMENT - Also see this
article with Sibanze Simuchoba here.
Govt’s stance on windfall tax is absurd - analyst
By By Maluba Jere
Sun 02 Jan. 2011, 03:59 CAT
A POLITICAL analyst has described as absurd the government's refusal to heed to calls to re-introduce the windfall tax to help the country benefit from the current surge in international copper price.
Sibanze Simuchoba said it
is regrettable that the government is insisting on doing away with windfall tax, saying it was acting as a flanking of imperialism by insisting on doing so.He said the stance taken by the government leads one to conclude that it has joined the club of those African governments which he termed as
commission-earning bourgeoisies for a few million dollars that may be placed in individual accounts.
“On this part alone, whatever good the government can claim to have done during 2010, it pales into insignificance because windfall tax is a must,” he said.
“...what is critical is that Zambia must earn much more than it is earning now for copper which we have in abundance and the price has reached nearly an all-time high of over US $ 9,000 per tonne.”
Simuchoba said the government had sacrificed one of a few opportunities international capitalism has availed the people of Zambia.
He said he felt strongly that if the government did not take heed on the issue, then its mandate to preside over the public affairs of the country should be as good as withdrawn.
And Simuchoba said there is no reason for imagining that the coming year will be better than the last. He said as the country goes to the polls this year, it was every citizen's wish to have free and fair elections.
Simuchoba said it was unfortunate that very few people registered as voters, saying the government could have done more.
“We have a lot of eligible voters who were left out. First of all, there was no real sensitisation and the issuance of National Registration Cards is done in a conspiratory manner and discourages many from acquiring them,” he said.
“There is always something discouraging to young people - the insistence on villages and chiefs where one comes from and for people born and have lived far away from their fathers and chiefs, they just tend to stay away from acquiring them.”
Labels: SIBANZE SIMUCHOBA, WINDFALL TAX
Read more...
Musokotwane is being treacherous on windfall tax - Lawyer
By Florence Bupe and Chiwoyu Sinyangwe
Fri 26 Nov. 2010, 04:01 CAT
LUSAKA lawyer Sibanze Simuchoba says finance minister Dr Situmbeko Musokotwane is being
treacherous and unpatriotic by refusing to re-introduce windfall tax for mining companies.
In an interview, Simuchoba said
it was surprising that the government, through the Ministry of Finance and National Planning, was adamant on the re-introduction of windfall tax for the mines despite pressure from various stakeholders to do so.
“It is hard to understand why Dr Musokotwane is coming out so strongly against the re-introduction of windfall tax when that is what Zambians want. In fact, I have not heard any mining company oppose windfall tax as strongly as Musokotwane and President Rupiah Banda,” he said.
Simuchoba said it was disappointing for learned people like Dr Musokotwane to gauge Zambia’s mining tax regime against countries like Chile because the ownership of the mining industry was different.
He explained that the bulk of Chilean copper mines were state-owned, and it would be unreasonable to apply certain taxes because this would mean the government taxing itself.
Simuchoba echoed other stakeholders’ concerns that Zambia would greatly lose out on attractive copper prices on the international market because the prices would not always remain high.
Copper is currently trading at over US $8,000 per tonne on the international commodities market.
But an economist advised the government to impose export tax rather than windfall tax, which he said was prone to manipulation.
Export tax responds only and when mines are exporting most of the natural resources, unlike windfall and variable profit tax, which aim to capture abnormal profits by mining firms.
Kelvin Kamayoyo supported calls early this week by US Ambassador to Zambia Mark Storella on the government to revise mineral taxation policies.
Kamayoyo said imposing export taxes on minerals would result in welfare gains and reduce the environmental adverse impacts of their extraction.
Labels: SIBANZE SIMUCHOBA, SITUMBEKO MUSOKOTWANE, WINDFALL TAX
Read more...
Tsvangirai’s lectures on democracy are baseless, says Simuchoba
Written by Chibaula Silwamba
Tuesday, December 02, 2008 5:25:36 AM
THE democracy which Morgan Tsvangirai wants to lecture to people is really baseless, Lusaka lawyer Sibanze Simuchoba observed yesterday.
Commenting on South Africa's former president and mediator in the Zimbabwe crisis Thabo Mbeki's castigation of Zimbabwean opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) leader Tsvangirai over his party's attacks on the Southern African Development Community (SADC) ruling on the Zimbabwe power-sharing deal, Simuchoba said Tsvangirai had no regard and respect for SADC and Mbeki.
"Morgan is using insulting language. So for Morgan only Western powers are important," Simuchoba said.
He said Tsvangirai should realise that the election process that took place in Zimbabwe, in which President Robert Mugabe of the ruling ZANU-PF won, had happened even in other African countries.
"Even in Africa we have examples like in Liberia where George Weah in the first round beat Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf but he didn't get a 50 plus one per cent so there was a re-run where Sirleaf beat George Weah and George Weah tried to murmur but they told him that 'look you lost and let [President] Sirleaf be leader.'" Simuchoba observed.
"Now, [President] Sirleaf is more acceptable to the Western powers because she worked for the IMF [International Monetary Fund] and so on. In that situation, it is acceptable but in Zimbabwe there are people who are saying 'No! No! Mugabe can't be president because he lost in the first round of 29 March.'"
Simuchoba wondered why the Western countries had accepted the election of President Johnson-Sirleaf but not of President Mugabe.
"Why are they accepting that George Weah lost because he won the first round and lost the second round? So this thing happens, you can't say he who wins the first round will win the second round...then there will be no need of having a second round," said Simuchoba.
"The democracy which Morgan wants to lecture to us is really baseless and I think that all well-meaning people will have nothing to do with Morgan. Morgan will never be elected because people of Zimbabwe don't like him."
Mbeki recently castigated Tsvangirai over the MDC's attacks on SADC's recent ruling on the Zimbabwe power-sharing deal, reminding him that Zimbabwe's burden is not carried by Western countries but the region.
According to a lengthy letter, addressed to Tsvangirai dated November 22, 2008, former South African president Mbeki expressed surprise over a letter written to him by MDC secretary general Tendai Biti.
Mbeki reminded Tsvangirai of the burden the region was facing due to the Zimbabwean crisis.
Mbeki's comments follow a letter written to him by Biti in which he described the SADC position on Zimbabwe as a nullity, saying it was difficult for any of the parties to move in any direction for fear of legitimising the SADC summit ruling.
Recently, the extraordinary SADC summit that was convened in Johannesburg decided that both MDC and ZANU-PF should co-manage the Ministry of Home Affairs and that the constitutional amendment Bill number 19, which will pave way for the establishment of the unity government be addressed by both parties.
The summit was convened after Tsvangirai called on the regional bloc to intervene as political parties in Zimbabwe had failed to share ministries equally despite having signed the unity agreement on September 15, 2008. The delivery of social services in that country has broken down and a cholera outbreak has left over 300 people dead.
Labels: MDC, MORGAN TSVANGIRAI, SADC, SIBANZE SIMUCHOBA
Read more...
MPs’ call for media regulation is shameful, says Simuchoba
Written by Maluba Jere in Lusaka and Mwila Chansa in Kitwe
Friday, November 21, 2008 4:42:15 AM
LUSAKA lawyer Sibanze Simuchoba has described as shameful calls by some parliamentarians that the media should be regulated through a statutory body.
And University of Pretoria human rights law lecturer Professor Michelo Hansungule has observed that the current debate against The Post's coverage of the last presidential election raises serious issues of the government's commitment to good governance and press freedom in particular.
Commenting on calls by some members of parliament to regulate the media through a statutory body, Simuchoba said it was sad that such calls were mostly coming from opposition parliamentarians.
Simuchoba said such thoughts should not be entertained by all well-meaning citizens.
He said once regulated, the media would not manage to inform the masses without fear or favour.
Simuchoba said regulating the media would further reduce the gains made in fighting for press freedom.
"My view is a definite no to all these calls by the parliamentarians," he said. "I come from a profession which is highly regulated. But if the media were to be regulated, it would cease to be capable of achieving its purpose."
Simuchoba condemned parliamentarians for basing their argument on the October 30 Presidential election coverage by media houses to muzzle the press.
"Since it’s clear their concern is The Post it can't be justification for regulating the media but the pretext for wanting to do so is to muzzle the press," he said. "If there is anything that The Post did in covering the contestants in the last elections, that's not how to go about it. Society will pass judgment on the media and it will have to cope one way or the other. But all in all, we don't need government regulation."
He added that The Post does not owe any politician anything and that the paper must be left to do its work professionally.
Simuchoba advised those who felt aggrieved by The Post to dialogue saying the route being taken was not right.
Another lawyer Dr Patrick Matibini called on parliamentarians to consider the consequences of statutory media regulation before they formulate and enact such a law.
Dr Matibini said such a move would have a negative bearing on Zambia's democratic process.
And commenting on Gwembe UPND member of parliament Brian Ntundu's call on the MMD government to sort out The Post now that they had won the elections, Prof Hansungule called on the government at the highest level to intervene so as to set the record straight.
"One would ignore the rantings as inconsequential if they were coming from lower-level party officials with hardly any teeth to bite but not when it is coming from such important officials as legislators," Prof Hansungule observed.
He noted that in a democracy, there was nothing wrong with an independent newspaper, which does not depend on tax-payers' money to express a particular position in favour of one or two candidates.
"How many independent newspapers in the United States of America openly supported President-elect Barrack Obama and even campaigned against the election of John McCain?" he asked. "And, in spite of all this, McCain last week in an interview with Jay Leno categorically refused to blame his loss on the media."
Prof Hansungule urged politicians to think beyond their constituencies and even beyond Zambia when making utterances and decisions as doing so would make them decide without the benefit of world civilisation.
"What exactly are politicians made of?" Prof Hansungule asked. "Politicians are strange animals, when a paper writes something praising them, they are all smiles; but when they are attacked or are not covered, they go up to heaven to complain and seek recourse for God to intervene. Politicians are known to like the media so much that they cannot speak or undertake a public function unless in the glare of the media. Strange animals."
Prof Hansungule wondered if some of the politicians who wanted The Post to be sorted out would operate in countries with numerous independent newspapers that were free to report about anything.
"Look at how we have destroyed government media over the years! Recently, I asked a couple of Nigerian and other West African students in my class to take a look at the Zambian government media through the internet to assess how they practice press freedom and the right to information as part of their continuous assessment; they were shocked at the low level of critical reporting in the government media," he explained. "There is nothing from the government media to show us 40 years of independence. But now, politicians, instead of focusing on how to have a stronger free media, want to kill the only [independent] newspaper in the country!"
He added that Zambia needed more free press, which he said was the country's greatest deficits.
"The essence of a newspaper or media house is to report even things you do not want to hear or read about," he stated. "It is the only means to promote democracy which it does by promoting debate and giving people a chance to understand the issues and personalities of those that have volunteered to govern them."
Prof Hansungule noted that most people in Zambia did not know anything about the personalities of some politicians and that someone needed to dig out this information and bring it to them as objectively as possible.
"When you do not agree and feel seriously hurt by a news report, you don't abuse a state institution like Parliament and call for 'action' by government against a newspaper. You go to court and complain there," he stated. "It is completely unacceptable and the height of irresponsibility for a politician or NGO official to call on the government to deal with a newspaper because it has published what to him is unacceptable."
Prof Hansungule stated that politicians had a duty to defend freedom and that independent press was key to freedom.
"Whoever is responsible for the final decision against The Post, please don't take us to Zimbabwe where press freedom died long time ago," he stated. "Remember, in the next few months you will need a free press most of you to take your messages to the electorate for the 2011 elections," said Prof Hansungule. "Even those that will lose the 2011 elections will need a free press to trade accusations on how they lost and who was behind their loss! Sense must prevail in the media debate."
Labels: CENSORSHIP, MEDIA, MPs, REGULATION, SIBANZE SIMUCHOBA
Read more...
