Identidades in English No 4, December 2014 | Page 17

This movement has accomplished great achievements, such as the First World Summit of Afrodescents and the International Year and Decade
for People of African Descent, the Resolution for
which constitutes concrete evidence of the independent nature of a global anti-racism movement,
one that issues both strong criticisms and solid
proposals regarding hegemonies and inequalities
that persist. In recent years, highlights include legal and institutional instruments against racism in
several of the continent’s countries, and the approval of the Inter-American Convention against
All Forms of Racism.
In the spring and summer of 2012, two academic
events in Washington and Havana, and another more political - in Caracas, gave way to the creation of ARAAC, its mission to face the problem
of racism, but while always affirming the power
and interests of governments whose records are
an embarrassment.
In Cuba, the ARAAC chapter was publicly announced in August 2013. In a Havana bookstore,
three doze n interested academics did what we
have done so many times: we intensely discussed
the racial problem; serious and profound things
were said; traumas and frustrations were shared;
we spoke of pressing needs and dangers. But, as
is always the case, the representatives of power,
who could and should acknowledge their responsibility and come up with effective solutions,
were not there.
A new person in charge of Human Rights for the
ARAAC showed up at this meeting, giving a
highfaluting and unintelligible speech. Another
meeting was planned for the next month, at which
proposals and measures were supposedly going to
be discussed.
When it took place, at the Casa de ALBA Cultural
in Havana, the prior gathering’s spirit had been
watered down into a strange, panic-laden climate.
It was obvious that those in power (although invisible) had seen to this; very evident was their
annoyance and discomfort with the ideas and expectations the August meeting had generated.
Before a shocked audience, and with face filled
with obvious panic and tension, Gisela Arandia,
ARAAC coordinator, presented insipid dissertations about “Chávez and Africa,” “Specifics

about Abolition in Brazil” and “The Life and
Work of Evarist Estenoz.”
In truth, there were participants who advocated
for transparency and publicity for these debates
on race as well as project goals.
Intellectuals Tomás Fernández Robaina, Tato
Quiñones and even Zurbano, who did not seem to
know about the change in plans, made valid
points and proposals for promoting a consistent
approach to the subject. Notwithstanding, from
that day on, the Human Rights coordinator never
showed up again, and the project has become
mired in a kind of lethargy that Zurbano now laments.
A few days after the first meeting, which did fuel
the expectations of some enthusiasts, I presented
my doubts about the future of the proposal we
agreed upon at that meeting in “Mesa de los leales
maltratados” (Cubanet, August 9 2013) precisely
because of this new platform’s lack of institutional independence, and because of the authorities’ consistent refusal to allow for an open debate
and the activation of mechanisms and designs
connected to the structural nature of racism, one
that affects us all in some way. Among other
things, I warned that:
“It is good to remind the ARAAC-Cuba leaders
and members that external and internal pressure
regarding the race problem is growing.
Thus, if they don’t want to take on the risk of a
new failure, they should face the problem headon and meaningfully …”
“The first thing these consecrated warriors for
equality should do is set aside their political and
ideological preferences regarding social, human
and moral assessments and considerations linked
to the race problem. Independent of their ideological leanings, if these activists do not
acknowledge the Cuban authorities’ historical responsibility for deepening the inequalities they
say they want to combat, their declared goals will
not progress much at all.
If the ARAAC-Cuba does not want to go down in
history as a new instrument for fraud and manipulation, it should make itself an authentic mechanism for applying pressure on the authorities and
demand that they respect their citizens and their
commitments above all.”
17