By WILLIAM DEVINE

HAVANA

In an earlier article we wrote about
the Havana Green Belt, a new agricul-
ture project on land surrounding the
Cuban capital, designed to make
Havana self-sufficient in certain crops
-and in dairy farming.

We left out, however, one major as-
pect, because it seemed to call for spe-
cial treatment. This is the fact that
within the Green Belt a new approach
is being developed toward Cuba’s
small, private farmers.

And in the long run—personal spe-
culation only—this new approach may
turn out to be the most fundamental
feature of the Green Belt.

But first, some background about
Cuba’s private farmers. There are pre-
sently some 200,000 of them through-
out Cuba, on plots of land ranging up
to a maximum of 150 acres—although
most own less than half that amount.

The 150-acre ceiling was established
by the Second Agrarian Reform of
October, 1963. The first Agrarian Re-
form of May 17, 1959, had set the up-
per limit at 1,000 acres.

But beginning with the first Agrar-
ian Reform, the former small share-
croppers or tenants—farmers, who had
eked out an eviction-threatened exist-
ence under the old regime, were given
full title — free — to the land they
worked.

At the time of the second Agrarian
Reform, counter-revolutionary _ele-
ments (including many who had been
cut down from a thousand acres)
spread the word that the small farm-
ers would be next in having their land
taken away.

But Fidel stressed then that the sec-
ond Agrarian Reform would be the
last, and that the small farmers need
have no worries about losing their
land—a pledge he has emphasized re-
peatedly since.

Fidel has further constantly under-
lined that the Cuban Revolution is
based on the alliance of workers and
farmers, and that the farmers’ wishes
to own their lands will be fully res-
pected as long as those wishes con-
tinue.

The rest of the country’s land, the
former huge native and foreign-owned
plantations, sometimes running to
thousands of acres, is state-owned.
Current division of arable land is some
62 percent for the state, with 39 per-
cent owned by small farmers.

With their 38 percent of the land,
the small farmers are an important
force in the economy. They grow, for
example, 25 percent of the island’s
Sugar cane, 88 percent of its tobacco
and raise 43 percent of its cattle.

And now, time to get back to the
Havana Green Belt, and that new ap-
proach to small farmers that we men-
tioned at the beginning.

To start with, there is this fact: 60
Percent of the land in the Green Belt
area is owned by some 1,700 small
farmers. So the small farmers are in-
itially a vital factor in the Green Belt
plans. ;

_ Fidel spoke about this whole ques-
tion in a speech last Jan. 2. He point-
ed out that the small farmers used
very primitive agricultural methods,
stemming from conditions of underde-
velopment and technical backward-

ness. This, in turn, resulted in low pro-
ductivity.

To raise the productivity of the
small farmers’ land, said Fidel, it was

necessary to rally support on a na- -

tion-wide scale, taking into considera-
tion the nation’s needs. And he added:
“In this sense we had to overcome a
period of mercantile relations between
the socialist state and the small far
mers.”

By “mercantile relations,” Fidel was
referring to a price-structure period
following ‘the Revolution when prices
would go up for crops in short supply.
If carrots were scarce, the price rose,
and next year there would be an
abundance of carrots, but no beets. So
beet prices: went up, and then there

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—DECEMBER 6, 1968—Page 8

OO —— .

CUBA'S APPROACH
TO PRIVATE FARMS.

would be beets and carrots but nothing
of something else. And so on, as Fidel
said, in a “vicious circle.”

In addition, innumerable contracts
with various state agencies burdened
the whole procedure, and rather than
resolving the price fluctuations, often
worsened them.

Under such conditions, said Fidel,
agriculture in the small farm sector
would never be developed nor would
the country benefit, “and in the final
analysis: we would not contribute to
the creation of revolutionary aware-
ness among the farm population.”

And so, Fidel stated subsequently,
in Havana province (particularly in the
Green Belt), “we have begun a new
policy, directed toward the rational
and optimum use of all lands—state
as well as privately owned . . . (so
that) ‘both the farmer and the nation
will benefit it.”

The new policy is known as the
“microplan” system. Under it, each
small farmer agrees—voluntarily—to
incorporate his farm into the overall
Green Belt plan, and that his land will
be used to produce the crops called
for in the Green Belt.

Then, the state makes all the invest-
ments necessary for the production of
the crops involved. This includes

pet epest ad
SLOT A

pelts boo Sat neveiesrictie “edi jug ecto 9d) bre-—-er

ploughing, fertilizers, machinery, in-
Stallations and so on. (New housing is
also included, gratis.)

Help in the planting is given by vol-
unteers from the city, and if help is
needed in the harvesting, city volun-
teers will also be on hand for this.

And none of this costs the small
farmer one single centavo.

In return, his job is to tend the
crops, using adequate technical means
supplied by the state, and to derive
the maximum yield from the crops. At
harvest time, he sells the crops to th
state. Se

Thus, the nation gets a bigger and
better crop and the small farmer is
guaranteed his income from the _ be-
ginning.

It should be noted that the small
farmers have all along received great
amounts of aid from the state, includ-
ing credits and even use of state ma-
chinery and fertilizers. But the new

‘Green Belt policy is a much more “‘in-

tegrated” process, and carries with it
guarantees of optimum production
from all the land for the common
weal.

The crops currently being planted
in the Green Belt (fruit, gandul beans,
coffee) won’t produce for another year
or two. So in the meantime, the far-

mer is paid a monthly allotment until
such time as his crop is ready for ha
vest and sale.

Also, each small farmer may use
given portion of his land for crops am
livestock for his own needs. And the” :
land remains his own, as long as he —
works it.

The small farmers, said Fidel, have —
greeted this new po.icy with “extt@
ordinary enthusiasm.” And, he added —
in his Jan. 6 speech, other small fal
mers in other parts of the country ame
asking when the microplans will come —
to their region. Fidel indicated they —
would as soon as possible. ae

From mare nostrum

to mare liberum

By BERT WHYTE

The U.S. 6th Fleet, with its
aircraft carriers, atomic subma-
rines and military hardware, has
long regarded the Mediterranean
as “Mare Nostrum’”. Carrying
out the Pentagon’s self-assigned
role of “cops of the world’”—to
use the trenchant words of 4
Phil Ochs song—the fleet helped
prepare an attack on Syria in
1957 ‘and landed marines in the
Lebanon in 1958.

Today a Soviet fleet in the
Mediterranean has ended this
American hegemony and the sea
has become “mare liberum” (sea
Open to all nations).

This change has caused the
American press and its allies 1n
aggression to wax hysterical
about “Soviet threat” hanging
over the NATO southern flank.

Most of the 350 million peo-
ple living in the 17 countries in
the Mediterranean basin think —
otherwise. The Arab countries,
among others, see the presence
of Soviet warships as a guaran- |.
tee of peace and security, anda |
threat only to those who plot |
military gambles. The Arabs re- } .
member the provocative actions |
of the 6th fleet aircraft carriers
near Arab shores during the Is-
raeli aggression in June last

year.

Writing in the journal Red
Star, Soviet Vice-admiral V-
Smirnov charges that for two
decades the U.S. 6th fleet has
been used for brazen interfer-
ence in the home affairs of Me-
diterranean countries. It has al-
ways been prepared to strike
blows at enemy objectives with
nuclear and conventional wea- —
pons.

“Our state, which is a Black —
Sea and hence a Mediterranean
power,” says Smirnov, “could
not remain indifferent to the in-
trigues of the trigger-happy mili-
tarists near its borders and the
borders of other socialist states. —
It could not permit anyone tO ©
turn the Mediterranean into 4
seat of war likely to plunge hu-
manity into the abyss of a nu-
clear missile catastrophe.

“Our fleet in the Mediterran-
ean is an eyesore only for those
who sow their seeds of mistrust,
hostility and military pressure.

“The presence of our war-
ships does not allow the U.S. 6th
fleet to carry out with impunity
the Pentagon’s aggressive de-

- signs and to lord it there aS
unceremoniously as it did be-
fore.

“The presence of Soviet war-
ships in the Mediterranean is 4
guarantee of peace and security |
in that region.” Re”

Soviet warships are staying 10
the Mediterranean with the aP- —
proval of Arab countries and in
accordance with the principles
of the United Nations charter. —

Before steps can be taken to
relax tension in the area the-
Pentagon must accept that the |
era of the big stick in the Medi- — .
terranean has ended. me

pict abd ni

eh PN