“In the year 2000, Russia began to recuperate strength in the international arena, and its effects we are seeing at present . . . in a new type of relation that Cuba is developing with the Russian government and people.”  So stated Raúl Castro, President of the Council of State and of Ministers of Cuba, during the visit to Cuba of Vladimir V. Putin, President of the Russian Federation, on July 11, 2014.

      Raúl also stated, with reference to the cooperative relation between the Soviet Union and Cuba during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, that “the decisive aid of the USSR . . . was a generous aid, without which, we are able to affirm, the Revolution would not have been able to endure.”

      During the visit of the Russian President, the Russian and Cuban governments signed ten documents that establish instruments of cooperation.  These include an agreement to study the conditions of the petroleum deposits and oil wells in Cuban territory, in order to maximize the process of extraction and to increase efficiency.  They include a Russian commitment to construct four electric generating units in Cuba and to cooperate in the modernization and construction of hydroelectric energy installations.   And they contain a program of cooperation in culture and the arts, including music, dance, visual arts, and sculpture, and including as well museums and libraries.

     In addition, Putin announced the cancellation 90% of the Cuban debt with Russia, which had emerged during the time of the Soviet Union, and which had reached 35 billion dollars.  The remaining 10% will be reinvested by Russia in Cuba in programs of cooperation that will continue until 2020.  Raúl described the cancellation of the debt as “another and recent example of the great and clear generosity of the Russian people toward Cuba.”

     During the visit, Putin met with Fidel Castro.  They discussed the historic ties between the two nations and peoples as well as the growing commercial and economic interchange between the two nations in the context of the present international situation.  In addition, the historic leader of the Cuban Revolution explained the results of Cuban scientific studies that are creating real possibilities for increased food production in countries with limited resources that confront threats derived from Climate Change.

     Putin’s visit to Cuba is the first stop in a four-nation tour that includes Nicaragua, Argentina and Brazil, where he will attend a summit of the countries of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). The visit by the President of the Russian Federation to Latin America is an indication of an emerging network of political alliances and economic and cultural relations, which includes the countries of BRICS; the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC; see “The Declaration of Havana 2014” 3/14/2014); the relations of Russia as well as China with CELAC and with Latin American nations; the emerging relationship between Russia and China; and the relations of Russia and Latin America with the Islamic Republic of Iran.  This alternative network consists of the formerly colonized nations of the Third World plus China and Russia, and it seeks to develop relations among nations that are mutually beneficial. It represents a potential and real alternative to the international projection of the United States and Western Europe, which seeks, in the context of a structural crisis of the world-system, to preserve the neocolonial core-peripheral relation with the nations of the South.  We have entered a new stage in international relations, in which the unsustainable neocolonial world-system is being challenged, and an alternative more just and democratic world-system is being constructed from below (see “A change of epoch?” 3/18/2014; and “The alternative world system from below” 4/15/2014).


Key words:  Third World, revolution, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism, democracy, national liberation, sovereignty, self-determination, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, Cuba, Latin America, world-system, world-economy, development, underdevelopment, colonial, neocolonial, blog Third World perspective, Russia

Posted December 12, 2013
​
     By 1801, Toussaint L’Ouverture was officially recognized by France as governor of its San Domingo colony and had de facto control of the colony, having led successful military campaigns to expel English troops and to subdue a counterrevolutionary force that sought to establish an independent nation under exclusive mulatto control.   Toussaint had restored agricultural production to its pre-1789 level, using a strategy of capitalist agricultural production for export, with French proprietors of plantations and with emancipated slaves working as wage laborers (see “Toussaint L’Ouverture” 12/10/2013; “The problem of dependency” 12/11/2013).
 
     Toussaint sought to legitimate the revolution with legal authority through a new Constitution.  The German sociologist Max Weber distinguished three types of authority: legal, traditional, and charismatic.  Legal authority is exemplified by a President, whereas traditional authority is possessed by a King or chief.  Toussaint had charismatic authority, which is held by those with unusual or exceptional characteristics (see “Toussaint L’Ouverture” 12/10/2013).  Thus Toussaint was seeking the institutionalization of charismatic authority, a process that Weber called the routinization of charisma (Weber 1947:328-73).

      The proposed Constitution was prepared by a committee of six, composed of rich whites and mulattoes whom were appointed by Toussaint.  It fully reflects the Toussaint’s thinking.  The new Constitution abolishes slavery, and it established full equality for all, regardless of color.  It protects the property rights of the plantation owners, including those who were absent from the colony, except for those who had been engaged in activities against France.  The Constitution appoints Toussaint Governor for life, and it gives him the authority to appoint a successor.  It concentrates power in the hands of the governor, giving him the authority to appoint municipal administrators, who have the authority to nominate members of the legislative assembly.  It does not decree the independence of the colony; rather, it decrees that blacks in San Domingo are citizens of France.  It gives France no real authority over the colony; French officials are to advise the governor, but they cannot overrule his decisions.  Thus the new Constitution establishes the de facto independence of the colony.  But France has the obligation to provide capital and administrators for the economic development of the country.  Toussaint thus was proposing that the colony have dominion status, and that France set aside colonial intentions and work in cooperation with Toussaint for the economic development of the colony and the cultural formation of the people (James 1989:263-66).

     Many from the North interpret Toussaint’s proposed constitution as a bid for personal power and as a confirmation of the adage that “power corrupts” and of the belief that revolutionary processes generally lead to a new form of authoritarianism.  But such interpretations are examples of Northern narrow mindedness and cultural blindness.  The Constitution sought to give legitimacy to what was de facto emerging and to strengthen tendencies that were prerequisites for the economic and cultural development of the colony.  Toussaint faced powerful forces from above: Great Britain, the United States and Spain sought to control the colony and restore slavery.  France under Jacobin rule had signaled the kind of cooperation that Toussaint understood to be necessary, but in 1801 France was ruled by Napoleon Bonaparte, who intended to restore slavery.  At the same time, he faced opposition from below, from those who wanted: to declare independence and sever ties with France, erroneously trusting the promises of cooperation of the United States and Great Britain; to set aside the policy of conciliation toward whites and to engage in vengeful violence; and/or to break up the plantations into subsistence plots.  Toussaint was seeking legitimation in order strengthen his capacity to respond effectively to the maneuverings of the forces from above and to manage the confusions emerging from below. 

     The Constitution would have given unchecked legal authority to a person who represented the best hopes of the majority for the long term and who intended to use his authority to promote the economic and cultural development of the colony.  During the twentieth century, revolutionary processes would develop structures of popular democracy and popular participation.  But let us not judge Toussaint by the standards of today.  In the context in which Toussaint was operating, with powerful forces of opposition, with limited democratic structures everywhere in the world, and with the limited political formation and experience of the people, it was necessary to concentrate power in his hands. 

      What Toussaint proposed in 1801 was almost workable.  The crucial missing element was the failure of the Jacobin Revolution to consolidate power in France.  Toussaint correctly placed his hopes on the re-emergence of Jacobin values in France, for there was no other possibility for the development of the colony.  It did not come to be.  But let us imagine the impact on the world if it had: a developed nation of the North, whose development was made possible by colonialism and slavery, cooperating with a charismatic leader lifted up by the colonized and the enslaved, with the intention of promoting the economic and cultural development of the colony.  With a concrete example of this kind, it may have been possible for humanity to begin to construct an alternative to the neocolonial and undemocratic world-system, thus preventing the structural crisis of the world-system that today threatens the survival of humanity.  .

      Toussaint’s proposal for North-South cooperation is today more urgent than ever.  As in Toussaint’s time, the cooperation of the political centers of the world-system may well be necessary for the revolutionary transformation emerging in Latin America and the Third World to be sustained.  Perhaps in our day the global constellation of forces necessary for the definitive transformation of the world-system can be mobilized. 

 
References

James, C.L.R.  1989.  The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution, Second Edition, Revised.  New York: Vintage Books, Random House.

Weber, Max.  1947.  The Theory of Social and Economic Organization.  Translated by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons.  Edited with an Introduction by Talcott Parsons.  New York: The Free Press, Macmillan Publishing Co.


Key words: Third World, revolution, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism, democracy, national liberation, sovereignty, self-determination, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, Cuba, Latin America, world-system, world-economy, development, underdevelopment, colonial, neocolonial, blog Third World perspective, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Toussaint L’Ouverture, charismatic leader, North-South cooperation