Exactly 20 years ago, an event took place that some have come to consider the greatest defeat of imperialism in America since the one suffered on the sands of Playa Girón in April 1961: the burial of the Yankee neocolonial project known as the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).
This was symbolically decreed by Venezuelan Commander and President Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías in a vibrant and profound anti-imperialist speech at the José Maríaa Minella stadium in the resort town of Mar del Plata, Argentina, packed with more than 40,000 people.
With his passionate style, Chávez uttered the historic phrase: "FTAA, FTAA, to hell with it," which resounded like a final sentence and had previously shaken the streets of the Argentine city in a massive march of social movements, unions, students, and organizations from across the continent.
Throughout the day, Cuba was present with a large and diverse delegation of more than 200 participants—sports stars, artists, scientists, intellectuals, students, and representatives of mass organizations—whose performance, as well as every detail of what was happening at the Third People's Summit—parallel to the official Summit of Presidents—was closely followed by Commander-in-Chief Fidel Castro Ruz.
Although not physically present, the influence of the historic leader of the Cuban Revolution was felt, both in the voice of the peoples and in that of the leaders who confronted, in the discussions at the Summit of the Americas, the attempt by the George W. Bush administration to impose the FTAA.
The undisputed leaders who stood up to him were Chávez; Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva of Brazil; and the host, Néstor Kirchner. Paraguay and Uruguay also opposed it, resulting in one of the most resounding victories for the Latin American ideal of independence, unity, and integration against Washington's project of domination, which, under the euphemism of "free trade," sought to reinforce the status of Latin America and the Caribbean as Washington's backyard.
The idea of the FTAA had been proposed by the Clinton administration at the First Summit of the Americas, held in Miami in 1994. By 2001, at the Third Summit in Quebec, Canada, all the countries present, except for Venezuela led by Chávez, voted in favor of the FTAA, with the idea that negotiations would be concluded by January 1, 2005, and its implementation in December of that same year. But by then, the balance of power in the region had changed, fracturing the so-called "Washington Consensus."
Social movements had been fighting hard against the FTAA for a decade, and as progressive and leftist governments took office, the results of that struggle began to become apparent.
Cuba had not remained on the sidelines. Fidel had become one of the key strategists in the fight against the FTAA. Since the late 1990s, the Commander-in-Chief had emerged as one of the most critical and lucid voices against the initiative.
Through speeches, interviews, and reflections, Fidel not only warned of the economic and political risks of this agreement, but also led an ideological and diplomatic battle that would culminate in its rejection across the continent years later.
For Fidel, the FTAA was not a simple trade agreement. He defined it as an "instrument of annexation," a "new colonialism" that sought to "return Latin America to the era of fruit picking." He insisted that the United States did not want regional integration based on equality, but rather an asymmetrical relationship that would perpetuate its economic and political dominance.
He also warned about the disappearance of national currencies, the loss of local industries, rising unemployment, financial dependence, and that, under the guise of free trade, there was a plan to crush any attempt at regional autonomy.
"The United States wants to swallow up Latin America and the Caribbean whole, through the so-called FTAA," he said in 1999. He added: "They don't want union, because union gives strength."
One of the central themes of his struggle was the need to "raise awareness," as he realized that the greatest danger was not the position of intellectuals—most of whom opposed the FTAA—but the misinformation of the vast majority. He championed the proposal to hold referendums before any approval of the agreement, so that the people could decide. "There can be no annexation if there is a referendum," he warned.
Fidel's strategy was not limited to denunciation, but turned Cuba into the epicenter of intellectual and political resistance to the FTAA. The forums organized in Havana, especially the international conferences on Globalization and Development Problems and the Hemispheric Meetings to Fight the FTAA, were fundamental spaces for articulating the counteroffensive. Fidel participated directly in these events, exchanging ideas with intellectuals, economists, and social movements from around the world, forging alliances and consolidating arguments.
When the battle against the FTAA had matured, Fidel, together with Chávez, promoted the alternative. Thus, in December 2004, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) emerged, an integration based on cooperation and solidarity, not on the market, an ethical and political response to the neoliberal model represented by the FTAA.
Direct witnesses to the organization of the Third People's Summit—the people's counter-summit or Stop Bush—the great march and the mass rally in the Mar del Plata stadium, recall Fidel's significant influence—from a distance—in its preparation and implementation.
Journalist Randy Alonso, intellectual Abel Prieto, and other Cubans who participated in the event followed Fidel's precise instructions on organizational matters and in the search for unity among the different leftist forces gathered there.
In Havana, prior to the events, Fidel had also held talks with Argentine Luis D'Elía, leader and founder of the Federation of Land, Housing and Habitat (FVT), and Miguel Bonasso, national deputy for the city of Buenos Aires, in which they reviewed the agenda of the People's Summit and the various ideas.
It was Fidel who proposed the participation of Diego Armando Maradona, the Argentine soccer star, as a symbol that could contribute to the mass appeal and communicational impact of the march and the event at the stadium.
When analyzing this whole story, it is impossible not to link it to the political, diplomatic, and communicational battle waged by José Martí at the end of the 19th century against the "invitation from American Rome" represented by the International American Conference (1889) and the Monetary Conference of the Republics of America (1891), in which U.S. Secretary of State James G. Blaine advocated the initiative of a Customs Union. Martí saw in that project a mechanism to ensure the "economic and political domination" of the United States over the Americas, recently liberated from Spain.
A century later, for Fidel, the FTAA was an updated version of the same annexationist invitation.
Although Bush left that summit with his tail between his legs, imperialism did not sit idly by. It then moved on to an offensive that sought to satisfy its interests, separately, with each of the countries, through the signing of bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs).
Chávez was prescient when he said in his speech at the World Cup stadium that a battle had been won, but that the struggle would continue for a long time. "The battle of the FTAA, as Hebe de Bonafini rightly said, we have undoubtedly won; but beware, this is only one battle, one of many battles that remain for us to fight throughout our lives. Now, I said that we have a double task: to bury the FTAA and the imperialist, capitalist economic model, on the one hand; but on the other hand, comrades, it is up to us to be the midwives of a new era, the midwives of a new history, the midwives of a new integration."
Twenty years later, the burial of the FTAA on November 4 and 5, 2005, in Mar del Plata, Argentina, continues to be an inspiration for understanding that it is not impossible to defeat imperialism, and that the best tactic and the best strategy continues to be unity, such as that forged between social movements and progressive and leftist governments with a common goal and with crystal clarity about where and who the main enemy to defeat is.
Fidel was always very clear about this, and that allowed him to become a strategist in leading the battle against the FTAA and achieving the final victory. This undoubtedly paved the way for ALBA, the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), and other mechanisms for integration in the Americas.
