Cable no. 347 from the Czechoslovak Embassy in Havana (Pavlíček)

Telegram from Havana File # 11339

Arrived: 2.11.62 03:35

Processed: 2.11.62 05:00 Office of the President, G, Ku, 6

Dispatched: 2.11.62 06:00

NEWSFLASH!

Re. your 031.583

Your request will clarify the differences of opinions in the government, as well as our uneasiness. On the basis of [Soviet Premier Nikita S.] Khrushchev’s last letter about the dismantling [of the missiles] supervised by the UN—without informing Fidel [Castro]—there was a harsh exchange of opinion in the government; we do not know the contents of the debate, but can for example deduce the views of the hitherto unbalanced socialist thoughts of members like [Minister of Education Armando] Hart, [economic advisor Raúl Cepero] Bonilla, [Minister of Health José Ramón] Machado, [Minister of Construction Osmani] Cienfuegos, Yadur [not further identified] and others. Also [Ernesto “Che”] Guevara, but he only learned of the dismantling in the evening hours of Sunday, was crushed and could not believe that the defensive agreement remained unfulfilled. Mory Jansov’s commentary was also interesting, in line with [Cuban Foreign Minister Raúl] Roa’s viewpoint about which I write separately. Fidel prevented the danger of further divisions with the publication of his 5 Points and the request that unity be maintained at all costs in the government, as well as his personal explanation to the people about the USSR’s actions meant to prevent a loss of prestige and block the anti-Soviet campaign. Our uneasiness then came at the stage where there were efforts to prevent disunity and divisions which would weaken the revolution and cause internal wavering. The situation on Monday and Tuesday resembled this exactly as the press, radio, and television were left to themselves, nobody directed them, causing the people to be let down; only the news that Fidel would appear and a national campaign to have Fidel’s 5 Points fulfilled contributed to a sense of solidarity and unity, although with deep reflections regarding the relationship to the USSR.

Pavlíček 347