I'm not the one defending the sovereignty of States. All countries that have signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights defend state sovereignty. It is one of the pillars of the UN system. It is mentioned in Article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations Nations, as well as in Article 1 of two covenants. The United States, Canada and Cuba have all recognized the principle of state sovereignty. I mention these three countries, because we're in Canada, and we're discussing the United States and Cuba. The merits of this principle have long been proven.
I think I may have not expressed myself correctly. I didn't say that Canada is not in a position to lecture anyone. Canada's record in terms of protecting human rights is remarkable. What I'm recommending is that...
I can be pragmatic. There's a problem in Cuba. In a certain way, the nation is under siege. The country has been at war for the last 50 years. There have been no bombings, because this wasn't an option. But in 1961, Cuba was invaded. Afterwards, there was the Cold War, and later, the disintegration of the communist bloc and the dismantling of the Soviet Union. However, beginning in 1990, laws were passed to reinforce the embargo. Cuba wasn't attacked per se, but its economy was stifled. The ultimate objective was to bring about a complete collapse of the country's economy. Unfortunately, that didn't happen and the embargo remains in place. In order to protect itself, Cuba... The United States criticizes Cuba for not adopting a market economy.
The beauty of the UN, created in 1945, is the plurality of democracies. In fact, a UN committee is examining the issue of renewed and restored democracies. Every year, very interesting reports on the importance of fostering democratic plurality in the world are published.
A neo-liberal democracy, such as the one in place in Canada and the United States, is not the best kind of democracy in the world. Therefore, it is not the kind of model that the United States can impose on someone else. What right does the United States have to pass legislation that dictates to Cuba the type of democracy it must embrace, whether it be neo-liberal or one based on a certain type of economy? What right does it have to do that when the UN Charter stipulates that all States are equal? That's what the concept of sovereign equality implies. States cannot intervene in the domestic affairs of other States. The right to self-determination must not be dismissed lightly. It is one of the pillar of the UN system.
To defend itself, Cuba tells its citizens that they are free to express themselves, but that if they act on the messages being broadcast by Radio Martí, they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Is Cuba doing the right thing and in the best way? Probably not.
The Cuban people are mature and ready for a multi-party system. In Cuba, many political parties can co-exist in the national assembly, provided that these political parties participate in democratic debate, and promote democracy in compliance with Cuban law. A law on the financing of political parties, such as the one that exists in Canada and elsewhere, will eventually be adopted in Cuba.
I would have a serious problem with a political party financed by the Cuban-American Foundation, or in accordance with chapter 3 of the report presented by the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba, being allowed to sit in the national assembly in Havana.
I remind you that this 400-page report, which was tabled by Colin Powell in 2004 and then by Condoleezza Rice last year, increased the funding to Cuban civil society organizations to the level of $40 million, without defining what civil society is. This is done openly. Try to imagine the Iranian government or some Islamic organization deciding to openly finance a Canadian political party, to the tune of millions of dollars, with the objective of furthering the cause of Arab or Taliban rights. It would really be terrible.