February 16, 2006, Press declaration

Discussion of the postponement of a trip by a Left Party delegation by the leadership of the CP of Cuba and the Cuba vote in the European parliament
By André Brie

Concerning the on-going discussion on the postponement of a trip by a delegation of the Left Party by the leadership of the CP of Cuba and on the Cuba vote in the European Parliament, the European deputy, André Brie, declares:

Because I am time-wise not in a position to answer to each individual letter and each mail individually, I ask for your understanding for this form. I draw your attention at the same time to the joint declaration by five Left Party deputies in the European Parliament:

1)    I am not willing to respond to allegations of betrayal, being called reactionary, comparisons with the war credits in 1914, the Enabling Act of 1933 or proposals that we and I should congratulate Pinochet to his birthday. If the tragic history of the SED and CPSU trials is now to be repeated as a cheap farce, I want to be counted out as a participant.

2)    Solidarity with Cuba, in particular against the policy of the USA contrary to international law, for us and for me is a natural thing often practiced also in the European parliament. At the same time, despite many other tasks, the continuous dealing with the human rights violations of the USA in every area is at the centre of our work. That is comprehensively documented and we practice it not only behind a green desk.

3)    I know, I understand and I appreciate very well that Cuba, to many Left people, is in the best sense a matter dear to their heart and that solidarity with Cuba is a part of their political biography. Solidarity with Cuba, also the fact that Cuba often realises social human rights in an exemplary way and in confrontation with US policy, however, do not mean that one should pass over the violation of human rights in silence. I remember that I was already massively attacked for that in 1999. Independently of whether one finds my convictions right or wrong, nobody should be surprised about the continuity in my political position:

First of all, it has been one of the most essential constituents of the founding consensus of the PDS and has been principle of our party programme since 1990 to base ourselves on the universality of human rights. That meant and means the unity of social and collective, political and individual human rights just as well as the consequence to demand the realisation of human rights not only from the political enemy but also from the political friend. In the preamble of the current programme, it says unmistakably: “We are united by the irreversible break with the disdain of democracy and political rights of freedom as they have been practiced in and by not so few left parties, among them the PDS” At another place, it is being stated: “Equality without liberty is oppression.” This conclusion must not be abandoned if the mistakes of the past are not to be copied and the chances for a re-conquest of the socialist idea for a strong and sustainable left movement be destroyed.    
    
Beyond that I am convinced that precisely the Left and socialism require the universal validity of human rights. Their neglect in my opinion is one of the reasons for the failure of the USSR and the GDR. Also in this respect I see no reason to fall back behind the conviction of Rosa Luxemburg also quoted in the party programme that “… the democratic forms of political life in every country… are indeed most valuable, yes even indispensable bases of socialist policy.” Who considers freedom and democracy in the light of the US threats against Cuba as secondary and as a danger for the security of socialism, in my opinion is too short-sighted. Socialism cannot survive with a disregard or disdain of whatever kind of individual freedom rights.

Finally: our and my credibility and political capacity for action depends on the consequence which we apply in dealing with human rights violations by the USA, Russia, the EU etc. We are distinct from other parties by the fact that we do not only talk about these questions where it is politically opportune for us. Precisely this, we often enough reproach to others. Therefore, we should not and will not practice it ourselves (with opposite political signs).

Individual political freedom rights may appear to others in the light of the “cause”, the revolution etc. as subordinated questions. To me these are the core of our learning process, of the already mentioned breach with SED politics and part of socialist renewal. And political freedom also holds and especially for the critic and opponent, or it isn't freedom at all. The price of freedom is not any lower, and especially its essence is not.