The Christian Science Monitor has recently published a series of stories on Cuba's disgruntled youth, women dissidents, blogger Yoani Sánchez and the independent library movement. To read the series, click on this story.
Through his biting lyrics, Bian Rodríguez vents the anger he says other young Cubans also feel at being trapped in a system that doesn't represent them, won't allow them to speak freely, and – worst of all – stifles their ability to get ahead. Click here for full story
Only a handful of Cuban dissidents are willing to take on the risk of fighting for basic freedoms. While these spirited few – many of whom are now women – don't wield much clout, they insist that more people are quietly asking them how to get involved.Click here for full story
Cuban blogger Yoani Sánchez won the Spanish equivalent of the Pulitzer Prize, but her government did not allow her to leave the country to receive it.Click here for full story
A government critic's collection includes Bibles, books by Cuban defectors, and positive biographies about Fidel Castro. His collection of movies, mostly documentaries about Cuban human rights violations or nonviolent reformers such as Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr., was taken away by security agents.Click here for full story
Monday, July 28, 2008
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
U.S. - Cuba Trade by the Numbers
The figures in the tables below provide an interesting snapshot of current U.S. - Cuba trade relations that will assuredly be eye-awakening for at least some on both sides of the Cuban embargo debate. To be sure, the figures raise a litany of questions that merit discussion here. And so, I ask you what you take away from it...
Exporting to Cuba
Table I. U.S. Trade with Cuba, 2000-2007
Year
Total Exports (Value in millions of U.S. dollars)
2007
$447.1
2006
$340.5
2005
$369.0
2004
$404.1
2003
$259.1
2002
$145.9
2001
$7.2
2000
$7.0
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Statistics, "Trade in Goods with Cuba,"http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c2390.html (accessed July 2008).
Table II. Select U.S. Exports to Cuba, 2007
Goods
Value (in millions of U.S. dollars)
Corn
$109.019
Meats (including poultry)
$84.825
Wheat
$70.175
Animal Feed
$56.813
Soybeans
$43.773
Rice
$24.676
Oilseeds/Food Oils
$20.451
Wood (logs and lumber)
$8.956
Vegetables
$2.260
Fruits (including frozen juices)
$1.926
Pharmaceutical preparations
$1.866
Source: Adapted from U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Statistics, "U.S. Exports to Cuba from 2003 to 2007 By 5-digit End-use Code," http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/product/enduse/exports/c2390.html (accessed July 2008).
Table III. Top States: Exports to Cuba, 2007
State (ranked in order of exports)
Total Exports (value in millions of U.S. dollars)
Louisiana
$173.270
Texas
$57.795
Florida
$42.015
Virginia
$32.630
Minnesota
$21.141
Kansas
$19.826
Nebraska
$18.881
Georgia
$15.389
Illinois
$5.643
North Carolina
$3.281
Alabama
$3.019
Arkansas
$1.377
Source: U.S Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, State Export Data, http://tse.export.gov (accessed July 2008).
Table IV. Cuba's Top Five Trading Partners (Imports), 2006
Country (ranked in order of imports by Cuba)
Exports to Cuba (in billions of U.S. dollars)
Venezuela
$2.209
China
$1.569
Spain
$0.846
Germany
$0.616
United States
$0.484
Source: Cuba, Oficina Nacional de Estadisticas (ONE), Anuario Estadistico de Cuba 2006 (2007).
Exporting to Cuba
Table I. U.S. Trade with Cuba, 2000-2007
Year
Total Exports (Value in millions of U.S. dollars)
2007
$447.1
2006
$340.5
2005
$369.0
2004
$404.1
2003
$259.1
2002
$145.9
2001
$7.2
2000
$7.0
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Statistics, "Trade in Goods with Cuba,"http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c2390.html (accessed July 2008).
Table II. Select U.S. Exports to Cuba, 2007
Goods
Value (in millions of U.S. dollars)
Corn
$109.019
Meats (including poultry)
$84.825
Wheat
$70.175
Animal Feed
$56.813
Soybeans
$43.773
Rice
$24.676
Oilseeds/Food Oils
$20.451
Wood (logs and lumber)
$8.956
Vegetables
$2.260
Fruits (including frozen juices)
$1.926
Pharmaceutical preparations
$1.866
Source: Adapted from U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Statistics, "U.S. Exports to Cuba from 2003 to 2007 By 5-digit End-use Code," http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/product/enduse/exports/c2390.html (accessed July 2008).
Table III. Top States: Exports to Cuba, 2007
State (ranked in order of exports)
Total Exports (value in millions of U.S. dollars)
Louisiana
$173.270
Texas
$57.795
Florida
$42.015
Virginia
$32.630
Minnesota
$21.141
Kansas
$19.826
Nebraska
$18.881
Georgia
$15.389
Illinois
$5.643
North Carolina
$3.281
Alabama
$3.019
Arkansas
$1.377
Source: U.S Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, State Export Data, http://tse.export.gov (accessed July 2008).
Table IV. Cuba's Top Five Trading Partners (Imports), 2006
Country (ranked in order of imports by Cuba)
Exports to Cuba (in billions of U.S. dollars)
Venezuela
$2.209
China
$1.569
Spain
$0.846
Germany
$0.616
United States
$0.484
Source: Cuba, Oficina Nacional de Estadisticas (ONE), Anuario Estadistico de Cuba 2006 (2007).
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Cuba Funds Frozen By Congress
Let's hope that Congress has the best of intentions.
Below is the article which was front page news in the Nuevo Herald this morning. Congress has frozen funds granted under USAID's Cuba program due to several reports of fraud.
Cashmere sweaters and Godiva chocolates apparently passed the muster for USAID auditors. Roughly 83% of the funds are spent in Miami or abroad instead of using the funds granted under the Helms-Burton Act to promote democracy and create solidarity with human rights activists on the island.
Drastic changes must be implemented to ensure that they are used accordingly to ‘promote a peaceful transition to democracy in Cuba by assisting the development of Cuban civil society.’
In a quest to get the funding hold lifted, U.S. AID on Friday ordered a bottoms-up review of all its Cuba democracy programs and suspended a Miami anti-Castro exile group that spent at least $11,000 of federal grant money on personal items.
Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., ordered a hold on the U.S. AID Cuba program funding last month, in part in response to a $500,000 embezzlement at the Center for a Free Cuba in Washington disclosed earlier this year, federal officials said.
In a memo sent Friday to various members of Congress, Stephen Driesler, AID's deputy assistant administrator for legislative and public affairs, said the agency recently implemented stricter financial reviews. That new review turned up irregularities at the Grupo de Apoyo a la Democracia (Group in Support of Democracy), a Miami group criticized in the past for using federal funds to send Nintendo games to Cuba.
The executive director of Grupo de Apoyo admitted that an employee used the organization's credit card for thousands of dollars in personal items and then billed them to the grant aimed at bringing democracy to Cuba, Driesler's memo said.
The group's funding has been suspended pending further review, and the money has been reimbursed, Driesler said. In a telephone interview, he declined to say what items were purchased.
'' U.S. AID has decided to conduct an immediate review of all the grants to determine where financial vulnerabilities exist and how best to address these vulnerabilities to strengthen the program for future success,'' his memo said. ``All grants are currently undergoing review, and pending the outcome of these reviews, some grants will be partially suspended.''
Grupo de Apoyo Executive Director Frank Hernández Trujillo did not return several messages seeking comment.
The announcement that U.S. AID would conduct a thorough review of its controversial $45 million program is considered a significant development that illustrates increased congressional oversight over the program.
A report by the Cuban-American National Foundation released in May showed that less than 17 percent of $65 million in federal Cuba aid funds spent during the past 10 years went to ''direct, on-island assistance.'' The bulk of the money, the report said, went to academic studies and expenses of exile organizations, mostly in Miami and Washington.
The report echoed findings by The Miami Herald in 2006 and a congressional Government Accountability Office audit that found lax oversight of the programs and came as the Bush administration prepares to dole out a record $45.7 million in Cuba democracy grants.
In an important shift, the Bush administration this year ordered a major change in the grants, favoring international advocacy groups over Miami exile organizations.
''Yes, we were worried,'' Driesler said in an interview. ``When we have problems with two institutions within six months out of 11 active grantees, you say, `We hope this is not a pattern, but we better pause and check and make sure.'
"We are focusing on procurements, validating that purchases being billed are being delivered, that the purchase price on the invoice is accurate and that the purchase was legitimate for a government program.''
Frank Calzon, executive director of the Center for a Free Cuba, stressed that the $500,000 fraud at his organization was not discovered by a federal audit but by Calzon himself. He said Berman, who heads the House Foreign Affairs Committee, pushed for the audits because he is against President Bush's Cuba policy.
POLITICS CHARGED
''I think any additional oversight is fine; I don't have any problem with that,'' Calzon said. ``I would say that it is simply motivated by politics. If Mr. Berman were in agreement with the president's Cuba policy, he would not be on this fishing expedition.''
Berman's office did not return a call seeking comment.
Critics say AID's move did not go far enough.
''Those of us who have been following this issue are alarmed about the program,'' said Sarah Stephens, whose organization, Democracy in the Americas, lobbies for a change in Cuba policy.
"We are pleased that Congress has started asking questions and, given what we have learned about possible corruption and waste, we believe Congress needs to stop this funding and continue asking the hard questions.''
Below is the article which was front page news in the Nuevo Herald this morning. Congress has frozen funds granted under USAID's Cuba program due to several reports of fraud.
Cashmere sweaters and Godiva chocolates apparently passed the muster for USAID auditors. Roughly 83% of the funds are spent in Miami or abroad instead of using the funds granted under the Helms-Burton Act to promote democracy and create solidarity with human rights activists on the island.
Drastic changes must be implemented to ensure that they are used accordingly to ‘promote a peaceful transition to democracy in Cuba by assisting the development of Cuban civil society.’
Funding for free Cuba is frozen
BY FRANCES ROBLES
BY FRANCES ROBLES
Congress has put the U.S. Agency for International Development's $45 million Cuba program's 2008 funding on hold, following a series of troubling audits and cases of massive fraud, The Miami Herald has learned.
In a quest to get the funding hold lifted, U.S. AID on Friday ordered a bottoms-up review of all its Cuba democracy programs and suspended a Miami anti-Castro exile group that spent at least $11,000 of federal grant money on personal items.
Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., ordered a hold on the U.S. AID Cuba program funding last month, in part in response to a $500,000 embezzlement at the Center for a Free Cuba in Washington disclosed earlier this year, federal officials said.
In a memo sent Friday to various members of Congress, Stephen Driesler, AID's deputy assistant administrator for legislative and public affairs, said the agency recently implemented stricter financial reviews. That new review turned up irregularities at the Grupo de Apoyo a la Democracia (Group in Support of Democracy), a Miami group criticized in the past for using federal funds to send Nintendo games to Cuba.
The executive director of Grupo de Apoyo admitted that an employee used the organization's credit card for thousands of dollars in personal items and then billed them to the grant aimed at bringing democracy to Cuba, Driesler's memo said.
The group's funding has been suspended pending further review, and the money has been reimbursed, Driesler said. In a telephone interview, he declined to say what items were purchased.
'' U.S. AID has decided to conduct an immediate review of all the grants to determine where financial vulnerabilities exist and how best to address these vulnerabilities to strengthen the program for future success,'' his memo said. ``All grants are currently undergoing review, and pending the outcome of these reviews, some grants will be partially suspended.''
Grupo de Apoyo Executive Director Frank Hernández Trujillo did not return several messages seeking comment.
The announcement that U.S. AID would conduct a thorough review of its controversial $45 million program is considered a significant development that illustrates increased congressional oversight over the program.
A report by the Cuban-American National Foundation released in May showed that less than 17 percent of $65 million in federal Cuba aid funds spent during the past 10 years went to ''direct, on-island assistance.'' The bulk of the money, the report said, went to academic studies and expenses of exile organizations, mostly in Miami and Washington.
The report echoed findings by The Miami Herald in 2006 and a congressional Government Accountability Office audit that found lax oversight of the programs and came as the Bush administration prepares to dole out a record $45.7 million in Cuba democracy grants.
IMPORTANT SHIFT
In an important shift, the Bush administration this year ordered a major change in the grants, favoring international advocacy groups over Miami exile organizations.
''Yes, we were worried,'' Driesler said in an interview. ``When we have problems with two institutions within six months out of 11 active grantees, you say, `We hope this is not a pattern, but we better pause and check and make sure.'
"We are focusing on procurements, validating that purchases being billed are being delivered, that the purchase price on the invoice is accurate and that the purchase was legitimate for a government program.''
Frank Calzon, executive director of the Center for a Free Cuba, stressed that the $500,000 fraud at his organization was not discovered by a federal audit but by Calzon himself. He said Berman, who heads the House Foreign Affairs Committee, pushed for the audits because he is against President Bush's Cuba policy.
POLITICS CHARGED
''I think any additional oversight is fine; I don't have any problem with that,'' Calzon said. ``I would say that it is simply motivated by politics. If Mr. Berman were in agreement with the president's Cuba policy, he would not be on this fishing expedition.''
Berman's office did not return a call seeking comment.
Critics say AID's move did not go far enough.
''Those of us who have been following this issue are alarmed about the program,'' said Sarah Stephens, whose organization, Democracy in the Americas, lobbies for a change in Cuba policy.
"We are pleased that Congress has started asking questions and, given what we have learned about possible corruption and waste, we believe Congress needs to stop this funding and continue asking the hard questions.''
Monday, July 21, 2008
Is there a potential U.S. - Russia Showdown Over Cuba / Venezuela Looming?
This piece by Jaime Suchlicki raises interesting and frankly frightening questions about the potential for a new missile crisis scenario with Cuba again or a new actor Venezuela serving as the backdrop. I for one would hope that such gloom and doom scenarios are just that and are limited to the province of intellectual curiousity, but if history has taught us anything it has taught that this merits tracking. Comments?
----------------------------------------
Jaime Suchlicki*
A New Missile Crisis?
In 1962, the Soviet Union introduced nuclear missiles into Cuba bringing the world to the brink of a nuclear holocaust. That crisis was resolved after the U.S. navy blockaded Cuba and Nikita Khrushchev removed the missiles from the island.
A more ominous and difficult crisis may be brewing in the Caribbean. Russia is again the principal actor, with Cuba or Venezuela the main supporting actors.
On July 21, 2008, the Russian newspaper Izvestia, reported, citing an unidentified “highly placed” Russian military source, that Russia may send its military aircraft to bases in Cuba in response to U.S. plans to deploy elements of a missile defense in Europe. Russia has two aircrafts capable of flying directly to Cuba. The Russians supersonic Tu-60 a nuclear bomber known as the “White Swan” and the strategic bomber Tu-95 known as the “Bear” could be deployed. The Izvestia report, reproduced by the Moscow correspondent for Bloomberg Sebastian Alison, claims that only discussions are taking place at the Staff of Russia’s long-distance strategic aviation command. The Russian source is quoted as saying: “I am not going to say that there is nothing behind the talks.”(1) In mid July, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned that Moscow would take counter measures against U.S. plans and today former Russian top defense ministry official Leonid Ivashov said that Cuba could be best used by bombers for “brief stopovers.”(2)
It is possible that the Russians may be willing to gamble again in Cuba. Yet given the difficult economic crisis Raul faces and the succession process taking place in the island, it is not likely that Raul and his military would like to promote a new crisis with the U.S. Russian nuclear bombers in Cuba may also violate the Kennedy/Khrushchev 1962 accord.
Today, officials at the Russian Ministry of Defense denied that Russia is contemplating such a move, while the Kremlin declined to comment. The Russians denial, however, does not extend to Venezuela. Given the fact that President Hugo Chavez is visiting Moscow this week and that he has recently strengthened military ties with Russia, the timing of the Izvestia announcement raises a red flag. Chavez is shopping for Russian air defense systems, submarines and other weaponry. Since 2003, he has purchased more than $4. 4 billion of Russian military equipment. Venezuela is now Russia’s third biggest weapons customer after China and India.
Does the price of Russian friendship include the possibility of Chavez allowing nuclear bombers being deployed or visiting briefly the South American country? If that were to happen, the U.S. would face a more difficult scenario than in 1962. Blockading Venezuela, given its size and borders, would be almost impossible. The Russian planes will not be sitting targets as the Russian missiles were in 1962, especially if Russian planes “visit briefly” Venezuelan airfields. The Russian action would not necessarily be considered illegal and the widespread support the U.S. received from the world community in 1962 would be impossible to duplicate.
If the Russians decide to gamble in Cuba or Venezuela, it would represent a challenge to the current and future administration in Washington, one perhaps more complicated than the 1962 nuclear crisis.
_______________________________________
Notes
(1) “Russia Mulls Regular Bomber Flights to Cuba” Agence France Press, July 21, 2008. (2) “Russia May Send Military Aircraft Back to Cuba” by Sebastian Alison, Bloomberg, July 21, 2008.
_______________________________________
* Jaime Suchlicki is the Emilio Bacardi Moreau Distinguished Professor and Director, Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies, University of Miami. He is the author of Cuba: From Columbus to Castro and Beyond, now in its fifth edition.
----------------------------------------
Jaime Suchlicki*
A New Missile Crisis?
In 1962, the Soviet Union introduced nuclear missiles into Cuba bringing the world to the brink of a nuclear holocaust. That crisis was resolved after the U.S. navy blockaded Cuba and Nikita Khrushchev removed the missiles from the island.
A more ominous and difficult crisis may be brewing in the Caribbean. Russia is again the principal actor, with Cuba or Venezuela the main supporting actors.
On July 21, 2008, the Russian newspaper Izvestia, reported, citing an unidentified “highly placed” Russian military source, that Russia may send its military aircraft to bases in Cuba in response to U.S. plans to deploy elements of a missile defense in Europe. Russia has two aircrafts capable of flying directly to Cuba. The Russians supersonic Tu-60 a nuclear bomber known as the “White Swan” and the strategic bomber Tu-95 known as the “Bear” could be deployed. The Izvestia report, reproduced by the Moscow correspondent for Bloomberg Sebastian Alison, claims that only discussions are taking place at the Staff of Russia’s long-distance strategic aviation command. The Russian source is quoted as saying: “I am not going to say that there is nothing behind the talks.”(1) In mid July, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned that Moscow would take counter measures against U.S. plans and today former Russian top defense ministry official Leonid Ivashov said that Cuba could be best used by bombers for “brief stopovers.”(2)
It is possible that the Russians may be willing to gamble again in Cuba. Yet given the difficult economic crisis Raul faces and the succession process taking place in the island, it is not likely that Raul and his military would like to promote a new crisis with the U.S. Russian nuclear bombers in Cuba may also violate the Kennedy/Khrushchev 1962 accord.
Today, officials at the Russian Ministry of Defense denied that Russia is contemplating such a move, while the Kremlin declined to comment. The Russians denial, however, does not extend to Venezuela. Given the fact that President Hugo Chavez is visiting Moscow this week and that he has recently strengthened military ties with Russia, the timing of the Izvestia announcement raises a red flag. Chavez is shopping for Russian air defense systems, submarines and other weaponry. Since 2003, he has purchased more than $4. 4 billion of Russian military equipment. Venezuela is now Russia’s third biggest weapons customer after China and India.
Does the price of Russian friendship include the possibility of Chavez allowing nuclear bombers being deployed or visiting briefly the South American country? If that were to happen, the U.S. would face a more difficult scenario than in 1962. Blockading Venezuela, given its size and borders, would be almost impossible. The Russian planes will not be sitting targets as the Russian missiles were in 1962, especially if Russian planes “visit briefly” Venezuelan airfields. The Russian action would not necessarily be considered illegal and the widespread support the U.S. received from the world community in 1962 would be impossible to duplicate.
If the Russians decide to gamble in Cuba or Venezuela, it would represent a challenge to the current and future administration in Washington, one perhaps more complicated than the 1962 nuclear crisis.
_______________________________________
Notes
(1) “Russia Mulls Regular Bomber Flights to Cuba” Agence France Press, July 21, 2008. (2) “Russia May Send Military Aircraft Back to Cuba” by Sebastian Alison, Bloomberg, July 21, 2008.
_______________________________________
* Jaime Suchlicki is the Emilio Bacardi Moreau Distinguished Professor and Director, Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies, University of Miami. He is the author of Cuba: From Columbus to Castro and Beyond, now in its fifth edition.
USAID issues memo on Cuba Program
A memo that USAID circulated today, signed by Deputy Assistant Administrator Stephen Driesler:
This memo is sent to provide you with the latest details regarding the status of USAID’s Cuba Program. As you know, we have encountered challenges in the implementation of this important program. Audits of USAID’s Cuba Program by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in 2006 and the USAID Office of Inspector General (OIG) in 2007 highlighted issues with grants management. To generalize, these audits found there were internal controls issues both in USAID’s management of the grants, as well as with regard to grantee capacity. USAID responded to the GAO and OIG findings and recommendations by taking the actions stated below.
· A financial monitoring and audit contract was awarded in mid 2008 to facilitate enhanced oversight of grantees’ management of USAID funds. The OIG will oversee the USAID-contracted audits of all the grantees. The audits will review costs incurred from the grant’s inception to the present. These audits will include a review of internal controls and compliance.
· The Latin America and Caribbean Bureau (LAC) will be holding quarterly portfolio reviews of existing grantees to review status, and results of the grants and to highlight potential problems and outstanding issues.
· USAID’s Office of Acquisition and Assistance (OAA) issued additional guidance on pre-award reviews in March 2007, resulting in conduct of pre-award reviews for new awards with written findings issued prior to the awarding of grant funds. This helps ensure that findings are tracked and resolved in a timely manner.
· OAA is employing a system to track compliance with the Single Audit Act, which requires audits of NGOs spending more than $500,000 annually in Federal funds.
Grantees with expenditures below the $500,000 threshold will now be audited internally.
· LAC/Cuba program staff cognizant technical officers (CTOs) conduct systematic grantee on-site monitoring and track submission of required reporting, such as project implementation plans, monitoring and evaluation plans, program narrative reports, financial reports, etc.
· LAC/Cuba program staff has been increased and received training in grants management
· LAC is working to restructure the Cuba program to add an umbrella grant program through a contract in order to improve management capability of small grantees.
Many of these initiatives have only recently begun implementation and we believe that they will have a significant impact over time. Some are bearing fruit already, however, given the problems identified in both audits, issues with some grants have surfaced in the last few months. In particular, you are well aware of the problems with the Center for a Free Cuba (CFC) involving alleged illegitimate use of USAID grant funds by a former CFC employee. This grant was suspended in March 2008 and remains suspended. The Department of Justice and the USAID OIG are conducting ongoing investigations. Significant Congressional concern has been expressed, and the GAO is conducting a follow-on to its 2006 audit which, although broader, encompasses the CFC matter. Given the continuing investigations, significant Congressional concern and review, and the need to ensure USAID is meeting our federal management responsibilities, we have decided to wait until additional information is available from the USAID/OIG as well as other programmatic reviews and audits that USAID is undertaking, to make a decision on reinstatement of the CFC grant.
Recently, another Cuba Program grantee problem surfaced during an USAID-funded financial review of our Cuba program grantees in accordance with the first bullet above. As a result of irregularities identified during this financial review, the Executive Director of Grupo de Apoyo a la Democracia (GAD) notified USAID regarding the use of GAD’s purchase card by one of GAD’s contract employees to purchase unauthorized items. Most of GAD’s funding comes from USAID, therefore it is likely that funds used to cover costs incurred under the purchase card are USAID grant funds. GAD informed USAID that the employee signed a statement admitting to his actions, and promising to repay all improperly incurred expenses. The employee gave GAD a cashier's check for approximately eleven thousand dollars ($11,000), but the amount at issue remains to be determined and is expected to be higher. USAID immediately referred this matter to our OIG and suspended the grant. The OIG investigation is ongoing and USAID/OAA is conducting a review. GAO has also been informed of this situation.
Given the information resulting from the GAO and OIG audits, as well as the problems with the two grantees detailed above, USAID has decided to conduct an immediate review of all the grants to determine where financial vulnerabilities exist and how best to address these vulnerabilities to strengthen the program for future success. All grants are currently undergoing review, and pending the outcome of these reviews, some grants will be partially suspended. Audits of partially suspended grants will be conducted, management and internal controls vulnerabilities that exist will be identified, and any that are significant will be addressed prior to reinstatement of the grant in full.
We recognize and appreciate Congress’ oversight role with regard to use of funds appropriated for USAID’s programs. USAID takes seriously our responsibility as federal managers of appropriated funds, therefore we are focused on taking the steps laid out herein to ensure the future viability of this important program. If you have any questions or need additional information please do not hesitate to let me know.
This memo is sent to provide you with the latest details regarding the status of USAID’s Cuba Program. As you know, we have encountered challenges in the implementation of this important program. Audits of USAID’s Cuba Program by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in 2006 and the USAID Office of Inspector General (OIG) in 2007 highlighted issues with grants management. To generalize, these audits found there were internal controls issues both in USAID’s management of the grants, as well as with regard to grantee capacity. USAID responded to the GAO and OIG findings and recommendations by taking the actions stated below.
· A financial monitoring and audit contract was awarded in mid 2008 to facilitate enhanced oversight of grantees’ management of USAID funds. The OIG will oversee the USAID-contracted audits of all the grantees. The audits will review costs incurred from the grant’s inception to the present. These audits will include a review of internal controls and compliance.
· The Latin America and Caribbean Bureau (LAC) will be holding quarterly portfolio reviews of existing grantees to review status, and results of the grants and to highlight potential problems and outstanding issues.
· USAID’s Office of Acquisition and Assistance (OAA) issued additional guidance on pre-award reviews in March 2007, resulting in conduct of pre-award reviews for new awards with written findings issued prior to the awarding of grant funds. This helps ensure that findings are tracked and resolved in a timely manner.
· OAA is employing a system to track compliance with the Single Audit Act, which requires audits of NGOs spending more than $500,000 annually in Federal funds.
Grantees with expenditures below the $500,000 threshold will now be audited internally.
· LAC/Cuba program staff cognizant technical officers (CTOs) conduct systematic grantee on-site monitoring and track submission of required reporting, such as project implementation plans, monitoring and evaluation plans, program narrative reports, financial reports, etc.
· LAC/Cuba program staff has been increased and received training in grants management
· LAC is working to restructure the Cuba program to add an umbrella grant program through a contract in order to improve management capability of small grantees.
Many of these initiatives have only recently begun implementation and we believe that they will have a significant impact over time. Some are bearing fruit already, however, given the problems identified in both audits, issues with some grants have surfaced in the last few months. In particular, you are well aware of the problems with the Center for a Free Cuba (CFC) involving alleged illegitimate use of USAID grant funds by a former CFC employee. This grant was suspended in March 2008 and remains suspended. The Department of Justice and the USAID OIG are conducting ongoing investigations. Significant Congressional concern has been expressed, and the GAO is conducting a follow-on to its 2006 audit which, although broader, encompasses the CFC matter. Given the continuing investigations, significant Congressional concern and review, and the need to ensure USAID is meeting our federal management responsibilities, we have decided to wait until additional information is available from the USAID/OIG as well as other programmatic reviews and audits that USAID is undertaking, to make a decision on reinstatement of the CFC grant.
Recently, another Cuba Program grantee problem surfaced during an USAID-funded financial review of our Cuba program grantees in accordance with the first bullet above. As a result of irregularities identified during this financial review, the Executive Director of Grupo de Apoyo a la Democracia (GAD) notified USAID regarding the use of GAD’s purchase card by one of GAD’s contract employees to purchase unauthorized items. Most of GAD’s funding comes from USAID, therefore it is likely that funds used to cover costs incurred under the purchase card are USAID grant funds. GAD informed USAID that the employee signed a statement admitting to his actions, and promising to repay all improperly incurred expenses. The employee gave GAD a cashier's check for approximately eleven thousand dollars ($11,000), but the amount at issue remains to be determined and is expected to be higher. USAID immediately referred this matter to our OIG and suspended the grant. The OIG investigation is ongoing and USAID/OAA is conducting a review. GAO has also been informed of this situation.
Given the information resulting from the GAO and OIG audits, as well as the problems with the two grantees detailed above, USAID has decided to conduct an immediate review of all the grants to determine where financial vulnerabilities exist and how best to address these vulnerabilities to strengthen the program for future success. All grants are currently undergoing review, and pending the outcome of these reviews, some grants will be partially suspended. Audits of partially suspended grants will be conducted, management and internal controls vulnerabilities that exist will be identified, and any that are significant will be addressed prior to reinstatement of the grant in full.
We recognize and appreciate Congress’ oversight role with regard to use of funds appropriated for USAID’s programs. USAID takes seriously our responsibility as federal managers of appropriated funds, therefore we are focused on taking the steps laid out herein to ensure the future viability of this important program. If you have any questions or need additional information please do not hesitate to let me know.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Wave of arrests targets Cuban activists
The Foundation for Human Rights in Cuba put out a mid-year report on human rights violations in Cuba, given the recent mobilization by the Castro regime to stop peaceful activists from expressing their opposition to the Cuban government. Below, please find an article from today's Miami Herald front page, discussing the report and the Cuban government's new wave of repression.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/story/608806.html
Wave of arrests targets Cuban activists
Nationwide crackdowns against Cuban government opponents remain consistent.
BY FRANCES ROBLES
Cuban activist Jorge Luis García Pérez has lost count of how many times he has been arrested since last year, when he finished serving every day of a 17-year prison sentence and then some.
García, better known as ''Antúnez,'' thinks it's 15, which would be an arrest a month.
The last detention came over the Fourth of July weekend, when about 200 other anti-government activists also were picked up on highways and at homes, hotels, airports, bus and train stations around the island and prevented from attending a U.S. Independence Day celebration in Havana.
They were held for a few hours or a few days and sent home in what critics say was the latest and most massive illustration of a nationwide operation to crack down on opponents.
''Raúl Castro's strategy is to create a mirage of change for the international community to mask the fact that acts of repression are increasing,'' Antúnez said in a telephone interview from Placetas, Villa Clara, in central Cuba. 'They arrest you and let you go tomorrow to hide the sense that there is a wave of repression. I'd call it a `wave lite.' It's different, and we don't know what lengths it will reach.
``It's an extremely critical situation.''
Raúl Castro, who formally took over the presidency in February, has been hailed internationally for taking initial steps at reform in the months he's been in power. But activists argue that just as he allowed cellphones and computers for the first time, Castro launched a harassment campaign against members of the opposition through frequent detentions. The crusade appears designed to keep the overall number of political prisoners steady while sending a strong message that Castro has a firm grip on dissent.
HOUSE ARREST
Democracy activists in Cuba say the campaign is akin to the 2003 wave of arrests that landed 75 dissidents in prison for as long as 28 years. In a report made public Thursday, the Cuban Council of Human Rights Monitors documented more than 700 short-term detentions so far this year. The group counted at least 44 people put under house arrest between July 2 and 6, and dozens more deported from Havana or prevented from leaving outer provinces.
The increase in detentions came in late June, immediately after the European Union lifted sanctions it had against Cuba since the 2003 arrests.
Dissidents said the level of strong-arm tactics appears to vary from province to province, with Villa Clara protesters suffering the most.
''It hurt them to see how many people were willing to take risks to go to that event,'' said María Antonia Hidalgo, of Holguín in eastern Cuba, who was stopped from attending a July 4 party at the Havana residence of U.S. Interests Section chief Michael Parmly. ``They are afraid to see the truth before their eyes.''
Saying the driver had been in an accident and they needed witnesses, police stopped Hidalgo in a taxi on the way to the Holguín airport. At the airport, authorities questioned her infant daughter's identity papers and did not let them board the flight to Havana. The next day she tried to go by rail but was taken off the train, so she attempted the bus instead.
Police made Hidalgo get off the empty bus because all the tickets ''had been sold,'' she said. Hidalgo never made it to Havana.
In an extraordinary demonstration of its state security apparatus, Cuban agents stopped people nationwide.
Among the nearly 200 detentions: René Gómez Manzano was arrested at Hotel Inglaterra in Havana; Yoel Espinosa at a bus station in Santa Clara; Lourdes Esquibel off the street in Miramar, and Amado Ruiz Moreno at a train station in Placetas.
'Raúl Castro wants to let people know: `We knew you were mobilizing and stopped you at every point in the country,' '' said Cuban American National Foundation spokeswoman Sandy Acosta Cox. 'They established: `We are watching you. We haven't fallen asleep at the wheel.' ''
In Miami, another human rights group -- the Foundation for Human Rights in Cuba -- released a separate 50-page report Thursday detailing the recent wave of temporary detentions of anti-government dissidents. The agency is the human rights arm of the Cuban American National Foundation.
Omar López Montenegro, the human rights foundation's executive director, told a news conference that the brief arrests appear to be part of a new Cuban government tactic aimed at intimidating an increasingly active dissident movement.
''The regime at this moment is trying to scare, to create a mental state within the opposition that something is coming,'' López Montenegro said, ``though that something has not materialized itself.''
Cuban exile organization Democratic Directorate said Castro's new strategy makes it tougher to rally international support for jailed dissidents.
''If someone gets arrested, we do telephone campaigns, calling leaders, calling the prison, getting the international community involved,'' said executive director Marcibel Loo. ``It's harder to get people mobilized if they are released in one day. Maybe it was one day, but it may be a day after they were beaten, and their families were harassed.''
López Montenegro said more arrests reflects increased opposition activity.
''We have noticed that the opposition is much more active, more defiant and, very important, with more vision and strategy,'' said López Montenegro. ``This is hopeful because in the end, the regime is not going to stop repression. That's its nature.''
As an example of intensified opposition activity, López Montenegro cited last month's restaurant protests by eight members of the dissident Federation of Latin American Rural Women. They were briefly arrested when they tried to pay for meals with regular Cuban pesos. The restaurant where the protest occurred accepted payment only in convertible pesos, a parallel currency tied to foreign money such as dollars or euros.
López Montenegro said dissidents have become more active and creative in their protests, because they are better connected to the outside world through cellphones and computers and have learned tactics from anti-government movements in Poland, Serbia and Ukraine.
For example, there are videos of Antúnez on YouTube, where he criticizes things like substandard housing.
Antúnez served 17 years in prison for denouncing the government publicly and for escaping from prison to attend his mother's funeral. He resumed his protests right after his April 2007 release.
`FAITHFUL DISCIPLE'
Antuñez says Raúl Castro's dissident strategy is as harmful as his brother's.
''I don't think this repression is new; Raúl Castro was in his brother's shadow for 50 years,'' Antúnez said. ``He's a participant in all his crimes. He's been a faithful disciple.''
Raúl Castro officially took office Feb. 24 after serving 47 years as his brother's right-hand man.
''They are trying to create a climate of terror so that people do not attend opposition events,'' said Juan Carlos Gonzalez Leiva, who heads the Human Rights Council of Human Rights Monitors. ``They don't even have to be violent. It's a subtle and intelligent way to repress.''
Miami Herald staff writer Alfonso Chardy contributed to this report.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/story/608806.html
Wave of arrests targets Cuban activists
Nationwide crackdowns against Cuban government opponents remain consistent.
BY FRANCES ROBLES
Cuban activist Jorge Luis García Pérez has lost count of how many times he has been arrested since last year, when he finished serving every day of a 17-year prison sentence and then some.
García, better known as ''Antúnez,'' thinks it's 15, which would be an arrest a month.
The last detention came over the Fourth of July weekend, when about 200 other anti-government activists also were picked up on highways and at homes, hotels, airports, bus and train stations around the island and prevented from attending a U.S. Independence Day celebration in Havana.
They were held for a few hours or a few days and sent home in what critics say was the latest and most massive illustration of a nationwide operation to crack down on opponents.
''Raúl Castro's strategy is to create a mirage of change for the international community to mask the fact that acts of repression are increasing,'' Antúnez said in a telephone interview from Placetas, Villa Clara, in central Cuba. 'They arrest you and let you go tomorrow to hide the sense that there is a wave of repression. I'd call it a `wave lite.' It's different, and we don't know what lengths it will reach.
``It's an extremely critical situation.''
Raúl Castro, who formally took over the presidency in February, has been hailed internationally for taking initial steps at reform in the months he's been in power. But activists argue that just as he allowed cellphones and computers for the first time, Castro launched a harassment campaign against members of the opposition through frequent detentions. The crusade appears designed to keep the overall number of political prisoners steady while sending a strong message that Castro has a firm grip on dissent.
HOUSE ARREST
Democracy activists in Cuba say the campaign is akin to the 2003 wave of arrests that landed 75 dissidents in prison for as long as 28 years. In a report made public Thursday, the Cuban Council of Human Rights Monitors documented more than 700 short-term detentions so far this year. The group counted at least 44 people put under house arrest between July 2 and 6, and dozens more deported from Havana or prevented from leaving outer provinces.
The increase in detentions came in late June, immediately after the European Union lifted sanctions it had against Cuba since the 2003 arrests.
Dissidents said the level of strong-arm tactics appears to vary from province to province, with Villa Clara protesters suffering the most.
''It hurt them to see how many people were willing to take risks to go to that event,'' said María Antonia Hidalgo, of Holguín in eastern Cuba, who was stopped from attending a July 4 party at the Havana residence of U.S. Interests Section chief Michael Parmly. ``They are afraid to see the truth before their eyes.''
Saying the driver had been in an accident and they needed witnesses, police stopped Hidalgo in a taxi on the way to the Holguín airport. At the airport, authorities questioned her infant daughter's identity papers and did not let them board the flight to Havana. The next day she tried to go by rail but was taken off the train, so she attempted the bus instead.
Police made Hidalgo get off the empty bus because all the tickets ''had been sold,'' she said. Hidalgo never made it to Havana.
In an extraordinary demonstration of its state security apparatus, Cuban agents stopped people nationwide.
Among the nearly 200 detentions: René Gómez Manzano was arrested at Hotel Inglaterra in Havana; Yoel Espinosa at a bus station in Santa Clara; Lourdes Esquibel off the street in Miramar, and Amado Ruiz Moreno at a train station in Placetas.
'Raúl Castro wants to let people know: `We knew you were mobilizing and stopped you at every point in the country,' '' said Cuban American National Foundation spokeswoman Sandy Acosta Cox. 'They established: `We are watching you. We haven't fallen asleep at the wheel.' ''
In Miami, another human rights group -- the Foundation for Human Rights in Cuba -- released a separate 50-page report Thursday detailing the recent wave of temporary detentions of anti-government dissidents. The agency is the human rights arm of the Cuban American National Foundation.
Omar López Montenegro, the human rights foundation's executive director, told a news conference that the brief arrests appear to be part of a new Cuban government tactic aimed at intimidating an increasingly active dissident movement.
''The regime at this moment is trying to scare, to create a mental state within the opposition that something is coming,'' López Montenegro said, ``though that something has not materialized itself.''
Cuban exile organization Democratic Directorate said Castro's new strategy makes it tougher to rally international support for jailed dissidents.
''If someone gets arrested, we do telephone campaigns, calling leaders, calling the prison, getting the international community involved,'' said executive director Marcibel Loo. ``It's harder to get people mobilized if they are released in one day. Maybe it was one day, but it may be a day after they were beaten, and their families were harassed.''
López Montenegro said more arrests reflects increased opposition activity.
''We have noticed that the opposition is much more active, more defiant and, very important, with more vision and strategy,'' said López Montenegro. ``This is hopeful because in the end, the regime is not going to stop repression. That's its nature.''
As an example of intensified opposition activity, López Montenegro cited last month's restaurant protests by eight members of the dissident Federation of Latin American Rural Women. They were briefly arrested when they tried to pay for meals with regular Cuban pesos. The restaurant where the protest occurred accepted payment only in convertible pesos, a parallel currency tied to foreign money such as dollars or euros.
López Montenegro said dissidents have become more active and creative in their protests, because they are better connected to the outside world through cellphones and computers and have learned tactics from anti-government movements in Poland, Serbia and Ukraine.
For example, there are videos of Antúnez on YouTube, where he criticizes things like substandard housing.
Antúnez served 17 years in prison for denouncing the government publicly and for escaping from prison to attend his mother's funeral. He resumed his protests right after his April 2007 release.
`FAITHFUL DISCIPLE'
Antuñez says Raúl Castro's dissident strategy is as harmful as his brother's.
''I don't think this repression is new; Raúl Castro was in his brother's shadow for 50 years,'' Antúnez said. ``He's a participant in all his crimes. He's been a faithful disciple.''
Raúl Castro officially took office Feb. 24 after serving 47 years as his brother's right-hand man.
''They are trying to create a climate of terror so that people do not attend opposition events,'' said Juan Carlos Gonzalez Leiva, who heads the Human Rights Council of Human Rights Monitors. ``They don't even have to be violent. It's a subtle and intelligent way to repress.''
Miami Herald staff writer Alfonso Chardy contributed to this report.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
What unites Cuban-Americans?
There’s been much talk and discussion lately about what Cuban-Americans think, feel, believe, and aspire to. This discussion is raging not only within our local community - with local politicians regularly making grand pronouncements, but also in national politics, with seemingly every paper trying to decipher who we will support in the Presidential elections. Indeed, most of the discussion is intently focused on “bucketing” the community (e.g., old vs. new, pre and post Mariel, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th generation, etc.), rooting out our differences, and using these differences to anticipate how we’ll vote. The main conclusion from these analyses is quite simple: our community is diverse and we do not have a standard set of beliefs on US issues. This should be a surprise to no one who has interacted with Cubans – adding one more Cuban to a conversation usually means you’ve added another opinion.
The more disturbing conclusion (at the surface) from these analyses is that we, as a community, are splintering on Cuba, and that we no longer agree. As proof, we get the endless litany of issues with yes/no positions: remittances, travel by Cuban-Americans, travel by Americans in general, limits on spending, talking to Raul, softening the embargo, etc. When you focus on these issues, it is plausible to conclude that our community is indeed splintering on the “Cuba issue”. However, both the analyses and conclusion miss the point.
The vast majority of our community does not waver, even for a second, on the fundamental vision that unites us and for which we have tremendous passion – the hope and dream of a free, democratic, and capitalist Cuba. Everyone shares this vision and we are quite united. What observers detect is not a splintering of the vision, but rather a splintering on the tactics.
This division, these disagreements, are mostly driven by frustration. Frustration that we have a vision and a hearty list of tactics to choose from…but that we’re woefully lacking a strategy linking the two. The “old guard” clings to the vision and believes all it takes is just one more year…the “4th generation” looks at the past, believes nothing has worked, and lunges for change will little thought. Basically, we’re missing a strategy we can discuss and rally around.
Unfortunately, the candidates have failed to offer one, with McCain roughly representing the old guard and Obama the 4th generation. Sadly, neither have our current or aspiring local leaders (who should be expected to have one). A lot of saber-rattling, but alas, no unique or new thinking.
So next time you’re attending a political event, and you hear forceful speech on a tactical issue, raise your hand and ask how it all fits together.
The more disturbing conclusion (at the surface) from these analyses is that we, as a community, are splintering on Cuba, and that we no longer agree. As proof, we get the endless litany of issues with yes/no positions: remittances, travel by Cuban-Americans, travel by Americans in general, limits on spending, talking to Raul, softening the embargo, etc. When you focus on these issues, it is plausible to conclude that our community is indeed splintering on the “Cuba issue”. However, both the analyses and conclusion miss the point.
The vast majority of our community does not waver, even for a second, on the fundamental vision that unites us and for which we have tremendous passion – the hope and dream of a free, democratic, and capitalist Cuba. Everyone shares this vision and we are quite united. What observers detect is not a splintering of the vision, but rather a splintering on the tactics.
This division, these disagreements, are mostly driven by frustration. Frustration that we have a vision and a hearty list of tactics to choose from…but that we’re woefully lacking a strategy linking the two. The “old guard” clings to the vision and believes all it takes is just one more year…the “4th generation” looks at the past, believes nothing has worked, and lunges for change will little thought. Basically, we’re missing a strategy we can discuss and rally around.
Unfortunately, the candidates have failed to offer one, with McCain roughly representing the old guard and Obama the 4th generation. Sadly, neither have our current or aspiring local leaders (who should be expected to have one). A lot of saber-rattling, but alas, no unique or new thinking.
So next time you’re attending a political event, and you hear forceful speech on a tactical issue, raise your hand and ask how it all fits together.
Friday, July 11, 2008
The gauntlet has been thrown. Or has it?
Members of a Senate Appropriations panel, yesterday, approved legislation that sought to roll back some of the travel restrictions that have been in place since 2004 (see here or here). This legislation also included a measure to make it easier for US agricultural exporters to sell their wares to the Cuban regime. But with opposition from several Senators (who can place a legislative hold on these measures) and the White House, whether or not you support this change in travel policy (or House plans to expand the definition of "family" in regards to this travel), don't expect any changes soon. Yet, while you likely won't see much movement or a full vote on this legislation until next year, it will no doubt spark further debate about the merits of this potential policy shift, from DC to Miami and everywhere in between.
There are certain things that should be recognized at the outset. For instance, that this vote took place now without any expectation that it would get passed into law until 2009 or beyond, suggests that Democratic congressional leaders would like to make sure that this issue remains contentious during this election season. Seemingly emboldened by certain poll results suggesting that more Cuban-Americans support a loosening of these travel restrictions than support them (see here), Democratic aspirants to Congress and the White House view this as a classic wedge issue and will undoubtedly exploit it as one. The Republicans seem to be willingly or unwittingly playing into their hands by drawing the proverbial line in the sand on this issue (see here).
Both sides of this debate make strong arguments, and so it seems as though the best approach might lie somewhere in between, in which Cuban-Americans are given some added flexibility to directly help Cuban dissidents and to visit ailing family members, but doing so in a way that effectively limits the undeniable financial benefit that the regime would thus reap. So here's a question: what do you consider the strongest arguments for and against current travel restrictions? And what would you consider a suitable and acceptable compromise between both sides of this debate?
It seems as though unless the Cuban-American community begins to civilly sort through these issues now and arrives at pragmatic consensus, the bitter wedge politics will continue through, and far beyond, this November.
But will it? The alternative view to all of this is that this "wedge" is nothing but a clever political construct that does not deserve all of the attention it is currently receiving. The difference between 1 visit every 3 years, to 1 visit per year, and between a per diem spending limit of $50 and $170, can't be honestly viewed as a wide gulf, especially in light of the different ways these things are circumvented and/or not exercised (e.g. non-direct travel and the relatively small number of people choosing to go back to Cuba that frequently).
I think the real story here is what's not being debated. Thanks largely to the efforts of the exile community, the Cuban regime has been widely seen by Americans for what they are - a vile, human-rights abusing, totalitarian dictatorship. Politicians have seen the futility of economic and diplomatic engagement with Cuba that Europe and the rest of the world have constantly attempted with nothing to show for their efforts (besides, of course, the profiting of companies doing business with the Cuban state and thus exploiting Cuban workers). And how does Cuba reward the EU for lifting its sanctions? By continuing to imprison and harass dissidents, by disregarding international agreements that it has hypocritically signed, and by railing against the very countries that did their bidding.
Meanwhile, we witness a similarly vile regime in North Korea, using diplomatic channels very far short of normalization, begin to give up its nuclear ambitions in exchange for the gradual or potential loosening of some US-imposed sanctions (see here or here), thus apparently giving the US one of its biggest victories in years (although compliance and much else remains to be seen) and illustrating the real diplomatic and bargaining power of strong sanctions.
That we're currently debating the aforementioned (non-?)issue, rather than the embargo itself or normalization of relations, let alone the totalitarian regime's nature or merits, should be reason enough to celebrate our past successes and maintain our unity now and in the uncertain future.
There are certain things that should be recognized at the outset. For instance, that this vote took place now without any expectation that it would get passed into law until 2009 or beyond, suggests that Democratic congressional leaders would like to make sure that this issue remains contentious during this election season. Seemingly emboldened by certain poll results suggesting that more Cuban-Americans support a loosening of these travel restrictions than support them (see here), Democratic aspirants to Congress and the White House view this as a classic wedge issue and will undoubtedly exploit it as one. The Republicans seem to be willingly or unwittingly playing into their hands by drawing the proverbial line in the sand on this issue (see here).
Both sides of this debate make strong arguments, and so it seems as though the best approach might lie somewhere in between, in which Cuban-Americans are given some added flexibility to directly help Cuban dissidents and to visit ailing family members, but doing so in a way that effectively limits the undeniable financial benefit that the regime would thus reap. So here's a question: what do you consider the strongest arguments for and against current travel restrictions? And what would you consider a suitable and acceptable compromise between both sides of this debate?
It seems as though unless the Cuban-American community begins to civilly sort through these issues now and arrives at pragmatic consensus, the bitter wedge politics will continue through, and far beyond, this November.
But will it? The alternative view to all of this is that this "wedge" is nothing but a clever political construct that does not deserve all of the attention it is currently receiving. The difference between 1 visit every 3 years, to 1 visit per year, and between a per diem spending limit of $50 and $170, can't be honestly viewed as a wide gulf, especially in light of the different ways these things are circumvented and/or not exercised (e.g. non-direct travel and the relatively small number of people choosing to go back to Cuba that frequently).
I think the real story here is what's not being debated. Thanks largely to the efforts of the exile community, the Cuban regime has been widely seen by Americans for what they are - a vile, human-rights abusing, totalitarian dictatorship. Politicians have seen the futility of economic and diplomatic engagement with Cuba that Europe and the rest of the world have constantly attempted with nothing to show for their efforts (besides, of course, the profiting of companies doing business with the Cuban state and thus exploiting Cuban workers). And how does Cuba reward the EU for lifting its sanctions? By continuing to imprison and harass dissidents, by disregarding international agreements that it has hypocritically signed, and by railing against the very countries that did their bidding.
Meanwhile, we witness a similarly vile regime in North Korea, using diplomatic channels very far short of normalization, begin to give up its nuclear ambitions in exchange for the gradual or potential loosening of some US-imposed sanctions (see here or here), thus apparently giving the US one of its biggest victories in years (although compliance and much else remains to be seen) and illustrating the real diplomatic and bargaining power of strong sanctions.
That we're currently debating the aforementioned (non-?)issue, rather than the embargo itself or normalization of relations, let alone the totalitarian regime's nature or merits, should be reason enough to celebrate our past successes and maintain our unity now and in the uncertain future.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Freedom of the press in Cuba? Not by a long-shot.
A few weeks ago, a poster on this board directed me to an NPR article which in turn, described a series of articles published in the Cuban newspaper Juventud Rebelde, or Rebel Youth. The NPR article described how several intrepid young reporters at Juventud Rebelde broke with a 49-yr tradition and, gasp, actually did a little reporting, i.e., they gathered data and developed an opinion independently of the state. Per NPR, the reporters initially covered the sad state of agriculture in Cuba (plenty of unused farmland and people, but significant food imports), then followed-up with reports on education and a planned report on the economic “reforms” to-date – this last one was shelved after Fidel criticized dissent.
Both the poster and NPR posit that the mere fact that these articles were written is proof that Raul is indeed a reformer and hence, US policy should shift to reflect this. Since I have not read the actual Cuban articles yet, I’ll reserve judgment on their level of independence. Nevertheless, let’s assume that NPR’s assessment is correct. Does this show that Raul is a reformer?
In a word, NO. Publishing a few articles covering areas which 99% percent of the population already knows the answer to (we have limited food and no money) is not reform. You cannot provide a few Sudanese with a bag full of McDonald’s french fries and proclaim that you’ve begun the process to eradicate extreme hunger.
To date, all of Raul’s so-called reforms amount to nothing. The mere fact that we’re calling the ability to buy a cell-phone and a few published, non-propaganda articles “reforms” highlights the incredible repression Cuban’s have experienced.
To demonstrate that he’s a real, potential, reformer, Raul should do one of three things:
Continue the trend with infrequent examinations of aspects of society, BUT, allow for real reporting, where the reporter is free to examine root-causes and draw meaningful conclusions
Continue to limit any critique of the government or its philosophy, but make the reporting style of Juventud Rebelde widespread across Cuba’s newspapers, allowing Cubans to discuss how to improve their society even if within the confines of the regime.
Finally, the easiest but most unlikely option – allow Cubans to read foreign newspapers. What a concept. There are hundreds of organizations who would happily fund a newsstand in La Habana selling the worlds newspapers. And no reverse philosophies either…let Cubans choose whether to buy the New York Times or a North Korean daily.
Then, and only then, will we be talking about reforms.
-------------------
The NPR article follows:
All Things Considered, May 28, 2008 · In Cuba, the daily newspapers are all owned and run by the government or the Communist Party. For years, speeches by Fidel Castro were splashed across Page 1, and barely a critical word was published. But Fidel's brother Raul, who has taken over as president, is now allowing more debate in the Cuban press, and one party-affiliated newspaper is rising to the challenge.
Juventud Rebelde (Rebel Youth) was founded in 1965 as the newspaper of the Communist Youth movement in Cuba. Throughout its existence, the publication mostly has featured whatever dreary "news" party leaders wanted published.
But in recent months, Juventud Rebelde reporters have been encouraged to think like journalists and investigate what's not working in their country.
The newspaper recently ran a critical three-part series on Cuban agriculture. Reporter Dora Perez and a colleague spent weeks talking to farmers and farm workers across the country. They wanted to find out why Cuba, with all its rich farmland, has to import so much food.
"[We heard] nothing but complaints," Perez says. "Our report was very critical. We're bad in agriculture, and we have to say so."
Three months later, Perez followed up with another investigative series, this one on education in Cuba. She found out that many Cuban parents were so unhappy with the quality of their kids' schooling that they were hiring private tutors — something once unthinkable here.
An Unprecedented Approach
For years, Fidel Castro told Cubans that their problems were the result of the U.S. trade embargo, the loss of Soviet aid or globalization: There was always an excuse. But Herminio Camacho, deputy editor of Juventud Rebelde, says it's time for Cuba to acknowledge its own failings.
"These articles aim at raising people's awareness," Camacho says. "People need to know that things don't have to be like this here. We're bringing up problems that can't be blamed on our shortages, or on outside forces, or the embargo, or the world situation."
For a Cuban communist newspaper, this editorial approach is unprecedented. Phil Peters, a Cuba analyst at the Lexington Institute, a Washington-area think tank, is impressed by what he has seen in Juventud Rebelde over the past two years — even though the scope is limited and the paper is still under government control.
"You now have Cuban journalists actually going out and documenting facts and contradicting official versions of the facts," Peters says.
In one notable example, Juventud Rebelde reporters determined that Cuban authorities were grossly underreporting the number of unemployed youth, especially in the countryside. In one province, they found it was 18 times higher than what the government claimed.
Habits Hard to Break as Journalists Seek Independence
Such stories are still the exception in Juventud Rebelde, not the norm. More common are the stories that simply quote government functionaries uncritically. Editor Camacho says he and his reporters are still finding their way.
"We've made progress, but we have a ways to go, because our reporters have been conditioned to think in a certain way," he says. "They have inertia in their thinking. This kind of journalism we're trying to do is hard for us. Throughout our whole lives, we've done it in a different way."
In an effort to break old journalistic habits, Camacho and his fellow editors have eliminated the beat structure at Juventud Rebelde. Reporters now are generalists, not specialists.
"Journalists who take charge of one particular issue can lose their broader vision," Camacho explains. "They develop a close relationship with whoever they're covering, because they see them day after day. It makes it harder to be critical. In order to do this kind of journalism, we had to change that structure."
Stopping Short of Challenging Communist Tenets
What's notable is that Camacho is thinking like a newspaper editor in a democratic society and not as a propaganda boss, which is the role editors in communist countries have more typically played.
His paper stops well short of challenging the ideology of Cuban communism. But for a party organ even to raise sensitive questions could have unforeseeable consequences in a tightly controlled totalitarian state. Some of the paper's recent reporting touches on key elements of the socialist system, such as the state-owned companies that now control every aspect of economic life in Cuba.
"Their reporters went out and documented that a lot of the state enterprises just do not work," notes Peters of the Lexington Institute. "[They found] that there's no functioning supply system and that the enterprises actually exploit and cheat Cuban consumers. It was unbelievable."
Peters, who has been reading the Cuban press for years, says such reporting never appeared during the time Fidel Castro ruled Cuba.
"If Fidel Castro talked about these state enterprises, they were paragons of socialist virtue," Peters says. "It was, 'This is what we live for.' He would always contrast [Cuban] state enterprises with the exploitations that occur in capitalist societies."
Fidel Castro Expresses Displeasure
Indeed, Fidel Castro apparently doesn't much like the pro-reform ideas aired recently in Juventud Rebelde and a few other media. In a newspaper column published last month under the title "Do Not Make Concessions to Enemy Ideology," Castro lashed out at critics of Cuban socialism. "People must be very careful with everything they say," he warned.
Castro, whose mental and physical condition remains a mystery, said he was responding to a comment in one of Cuba's media outlets. He didn't say which one, and Juventud Rebelde editor Camacho says he got immediately nervous it was his paper.
"I'll admit it," Camacho says, "the first reaction I had was to worry. This was Fidel pointing his finger at someone. He's not president of the country anymore, but we still see him as the leader of the revolution."
In discussing Castro's commentary, Camacho was noticeably uncomfortable, speaking slowly and stopping several times to choose his words carefully. For nearly 50 years, Fidel Castro has been all-powerful in Cuba, able on his own authority to squash careers or send people to prison for the rest of their lives.
"For us, a criticism from Fidel is …" Camacho begins, but he does not finish the sentence. "It's more than just the fear. Among other things, we feel in some way like we must be violating his wishes."
Following Castro's critical column, Camacho says he and his fellow editors resolved to be more "responsible." A fully reported article on the shortcomings of the economic reform program was not published.
Despite Skeptics, Paper Forges Ahead with New Direction
Some writers who have broken their ties with the government are skeptical that Juventud Rebelde can be much of a force for change. Independent journalist Reinaldo Escobar, who writes an opposition blog in Cuba, says he is impressed by some of the reporters working at the paper. But he does not see them as allies in the fight for democracy and free expression in Cuba.
"Any professionally aware journalist could write something that coincides with what I'm saying, but they wouldn't be doing so intentionally," he explains. Escobar is working deliberately for political change in Cuba. The Juventud Rebelde reporters are just trying to be journalists.
Shortly after Perez wrote her series on education in Cuba, she got a congratulatory e-mail from Adelaida Fernandez, a prominent Cuban writer. Fernandez had delivered a highly critical speech on Cuban education at a convention of Cuban writers and artists, and in her opening words she cited the Juventud Rebelde stories by Perez.
"I was very proud," Perez says. "One of the best things about being a journalist is when you know that what you write actually reaches people and moves them." It was hardly a radical thought, but coming from a reporter at a Communist Party newspaper in Havana, it was noteworthy.
Both the poster and NPR posit that the mere fact that these articles were written is proof that Raul is indeed a reformer and hence, US policy should shift to reflect this. Since I have not read the actual Cuban articles yet, I’ll reserve judgment on their level of independence. Nevertheless, let’s assume that NPR’s assessment is correct. Does this show that Raul is a reformer?
In a word, NO. Publishing a few articles covering areas which 99% percent of the population already knows the answer to (we have limited food and no money) is not reform. You cannot provide a few Sudanese with a bag full of McDonald’s french fries and proclaim that you’ve begun the process to eradicate extreme hunger.
To date, all of Raul’s so-called reforms amount to nothing. The mere fact that we’re calling the ability to buy a cell-phone and a few published, non-propaganda articles “reforms” highlights the incredible repression Cuban’s have experienced.
To demonstrate that he’s a real, potential, reformer, Raul should do one of three things:
Continue the trend with infrequent examinations of aspects of society, BUT, allow for real reporting, where the reporter is free to examine root-causes and draw meaningful conclusions
Continue to limit any critique of the government or its philosophy, but make the reporting style of Juventud Rebelde widespread across Cuba’s newspapers, allowing Cubans to discuss how to improve their society even if within the confines of the regime.
Finally, the easiest but most unlikely option – allow Cubans to read foreign newspapers. What a concept. There are hundreds of organizations who would happily fund a newsstand in La Habana selling the worlds newspapers. And no reverse philosophies either…let Cubans choose whether to buy the New York Times or a North Korean daily.
Then, and only then, will we be talking about reforms.
-------------------
The NPR article follows:
All Things Considered, May 28, 2008 · In Cuba, the daily newspapers are all owned and run by the government or the Communist Party. For years, speeches by Fidel Castro were splashed across Page 1, and barely a critical word was published. But Fidel's brother Raul, who has taken over as president, is now allowing more debate in the Cuban press, and one party-affiliated newspaper is rising to the challenge.
Juventud Rebelde (Rebel Youth) was founded in 1965 as the newspaper of the Communist Youth movement in Cuba. Throughout its existence, the publication mostly has featured whatever dreary "news" party leaders wanted published.
But in recent months, Juventud Rebelde reporters have been encouraged to think like journalists and investigate what's not working in their country.
The newspaper recently ran a critical three-part series on Cuban agriculture. Reporter Dora Perez and a colleague spent weeks talking to farmers and farm workers across the country. They wanted to find out why Cuba, with all its rich farmland, has to import so much food.
"[We heard] nothing but complaints," Perez says. "Our report was very critical. We're bad in agriculture, and we have to say so."
Three months later, Perez followed up with another investigative series, this one on education in Cuba. She found out that many Cuban parents were so unhappy with the quality of their kids' schooling that they were hiring private tutors — something once unthinkable here.
An Unprecedented Approach
For years, Fidel Castro told Cubans that their problems were the result of the U.S. trade embargo, the loss of Soviet aid or globalization: There was always an excuse. But Herminio Camacho, deputy editor of Juventud Rebelde, says it's time for Cuba to acknowledge its own failings.
"These articles aim at raising people's awareness," Camacho says. "People need to know that things don't have to be like this here. We're bringing up problems that can't be blamed on our shortages, or on outside forces, or the embargo, or the world situation."
For a Cuban communist newspaper, this editorial approach is unprecedented. Phil Peters, a Cuba analyst at the Lexington Institute, a Washington-area think tank, is impressed by what he has seen in Juventud Rebelde over the past two years — even though the scope is limited and the paper is still under government control.
"You now have Cuban journalists actually going out and documenting facts and contradicting official versions of the facts," Peters says.
In one notable example, Juventud Rebelde reporters determined that Cuban authorities were grossly underreporting the number of unemployed youth, especially in the countryside. In one province, they found it was 18 times higher than what the government claimed.
Habits Hard to Break as Journalists Seek Independence
Such stories are still the exception in Juventud Rebelde, not the norm. More common are the stories that simply quote government functionaries uncritically. Editor Camacho says he and his reporters are still finding their way.
"We've made progress, but we have a ways to go, because our reporters have been conditioned to think in a certain way," he says. "They have inertia in their thinking. This kind of journalism we're trying to do is hard for us. Throughout our whole lives, we've done it in a different way."
In an effort to break old journalistic habits, Camacho and his fellow editors have eliminated the beat structure at Juventud Rebelde. Reporters now are generalists, not specialists.
"Journalists who take charge of one particular issue can lose their broader vision," Camacho explains. "They develop a close relationship with whoever they're covering, because they see them day after day. It makes it harder to be critical. In order to do this kind of journalism, we had to change that structure."
Stopping Short of Challenging Communist Tenets
What's notable is that Camacho is thinking like a newspaper editor in a democratic society and not as a propaganda boss, which is the role editors in communist countries have more typically played.
His paper stops well short of challenging the ideology of Cuban communism. But for a party organ even to raise sensitive questions could have unforeseeable consequences in a tightly controlled totalitarian state. Some of the paper's recent reporting touches on key elements of the socialist system, such as the state-owned companies that now control every aspect of economic life in Cuba.
"Their reporters went out and documented that a lot of the state enterprises just do not work," notes Peters of the Lexington Institute. "[They found] that there's no functioning supply system and that the enterprises actually exploit and cheat Cuban consumers. It was unbelievable."
Peters, who has been reading the Cuban press for years, says such reporting never appeared during the time Fidel Castro ruled Cuba.
"If Fidel Castro talked about these state enterprises, they were paragons of socialist virtue," Peters says. "It was, 'This is what we live for.' He would always contrast [Cuban] state enterprises with the exploitations that occur in capitalist societies."
Fidel Castro Expresses Displeasure
Indeed, Fidel Castro apparently doesn't much like the pro-reform ideas aired recently in Juventud Rebelde and a few other media. In a newspaper column published last month under the title "Do Not Make Concessions to Enemy Ideology," Castro lashed out at critics of Cuban socialism. "People must be very careful with everything they say," he warned.
Castro, whose mental and physical condition remains a mystery, said he was responding to a comment in one of Cuba's media outlets. He didn't say which one, and Juventud Rebelde editor Camacho says he got immediately nervous it was his paper.
"I'll admit it," Camacho says, "the first reaction I had was to worry. This was Fidel pointing his finger at someone. He's not president of the country anymore, but we still see him as the leader of the revolution."
In discussing Castro's commentary, Camacho was noticeably uncomfortable, speaking slowly and stopping several times to choose his words carefully. For nearly 50 years, Fidel Castro has been all-powerful in Cuba, able on his own authority to squash careers or send people to prison for the rest of their lives.
"For us, a criticism from Fidel is …" Camacho begins, but he does not finish the sentence. "It's more than just the fear. Among other things, we feel in some way like we must be violating his wishes."
Following Castro's critical column, Camacho says he and his fellow editors resolved to be more "responsible." A fully reported article on the shortcomings of the economic reform program was not published.
Despite Skeptics, Paper Forges Ahead with New Direction
Some writers who have broken their ties with the government are skeptical that Juventud Rebelde can be much of a force for change. Independent journalist Reinaldo Escobar, who writes an opposition blog in Cuba, says he is impressed by some of the reporters working at the paper. But he does not see them as allies in the fight for democracy and free expression in Cuba.
"Any professionally aware journalist could write something that coincides with what I'm saying, but they wouldn't be doing so intentionally," he explains. Escobar is working deliberately for political change in Cuba. The Juventud Rebelde reporters are just trying to be journalists.
Shortly after Perez wrote her series on education in Cuba, she got a congratulatory e-mail from Adelaida Fernandez, a prominent Cuban writer. Fernandez had delivered a highly critical speech on Cuban education at a convention of Cuban writers and artists, and in her opening words she cited the Juventud Rebelde stories by Perez.
"I was very proud," Perez says. "One of the best things about being a journalist is when you know that what you write actually reaches people and moves them." It was hardly a radical thought, but coming from a reporter at a Communist Party newspaper in Havana, it was noteworthy.
The More Things Stay the Same
Amidst all of the coverage of the handful of recently announced economic reforms, the average consumer of news could be forgiven for temporarily forgetting that Cuba is still ruled by an oppressive authoritarian regime. This regime, however, is troubled by no such identity crisis. And so while it ballyhoos and obfuscates with a well-timed hodgepodge of economic reforms to try to signal to the world (and especially to the then sanctioning EU and the still electorally-conscious US) that Raul represents a new hope, the true nature of the regime is revealed by its lack of movement towards political reform and human rights, and more specifically, by actions such as last week's arrest of more than 30 dissidents (most of whom have since been released), the intimidation of many more, and by the previous week's ugly canceling of a planned LGBT parade.
Besides being partially instructive of the repression Cubans face, these latest episodes provided additional poignancy to this past weekend, as I celebrated my country's Independence and the unalienable rights we enjoy and to which all are endowed, and now, as I type these words that would must assuredly precipitate my own arrest had my country been the one 90 miles off our shores.
Besides being partially instructive of the repression Cubans face, these latest episodes provided additional poignancy to this past weekend, as I celebrated my country's Independence and the unalienable rights we enjoy and to which all are endowed, and now, as I type these words that would must assuredly precipitate my own arrest had my country been the one 90 miles off our shores.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Direct support for dissidents in Cuba – a great idea that should be improved and decoupled from remittances
Two recent press-releases (copied below) highlight the value of continued support for dissident groups in Cuba. The first describes how a group of dissidents operating under the broader theme of “con la misma moneda” effectively staged a civil disobedience act by demanding to pay with Cuban Pesos at a restaurant in La Habana (for those unfamiliar with Cuba, Cuban’s cannot use their own currency at most retail outlets). The second, unrelated press release describes how CANF actively supports “Las Damas de Blanco” (a dissident group comprised of wives of political prisoners who frequently stage civil disobedience acts) with monthly financial support.
Clearly, regular civil disobedience across the island, focused on the continued trampling of basic rights, is a powerful tool to expose the regime’s abuses, intellectual dishonesty, and moral bankruptcy. It also clear that these groups need financial support from abroad in order to operate effectively. As one poster previously stated…it is “hard to think of organizing dissent when your belly is empty”. These people have demonstrated the courage and ability to organize such dissent, should be encouraged, and should be provided the means to do so.
Ideally, the US (and the expatriate community) would exclusively focus on funding organizations rather than individuals (a favorite during the Cold War still widely used today) as this would have several benefits as follows:
· would facilitate organizational growth, recruitment, and continuity – i.e., efforts continue even if key members are in prison
· organizations carry more weight and prestige, both inside and outside of Cuba
· the dissident movement would be free from any claims that members were dissidents for personal gain or operatives of a foreign entity/government
· would facilitate practically separating remittances from support for dissidents
Changing the focus to organizations from individuals should be relatively easy. Eliminating/reducing remittances would admittedly be difficult for Cuban-Americans to do. The question remains whether the long term goal is worth short-term sacrifice.
First press release
ACTS OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IN HAVANA LAUNCH THE
THIRD PHASE OF “WITH THE SAME CURRENCY” CAMPAIGN
Havana, June 25, 2008. Yesterday, activists from different organizations carried out acts of civil
disobedience in the city, to launch the third phase of the “With the Same Currency” campaign. The
actions were carried out at the “Lava Dia” restaurant located on Malecón street between
Campanario and Manrique streets, Centro Habana municipality. Four couples of activists entered
the government-run establishment, ordered food and refused to pay in CUC (Cuban Convertible
Peso), demanding their right to pay with the national currency, the Cuban peso, the currency in
which Cuban workers are paid. The management of the restaurant called the police and Lazaro
Joaquín Alonso Román, Alfredo Montana Ramos, Yoriet Cabrera and Roberto de Jesus Guerra
Pérez were arrested. They were all taken to a nearby police station , where they were threatened
with being held until paying the amount owed to the restaurant in CUC. The activists refused to
comply and were finally set free at 1:00 am on Wednesday, June 25.
As of this writing, the whereabouts of Julio Beltrán Iglesias, another activist that refused to
surrender his video camera to the police after filming images of the civic protest, are unknown. Mr.
Beltrán threw the camera to the sea when the police tried to force him to surrender it. At 2 pm Juan
del Pilar Joerna, a human rights observer who was monitoring the event, was also arrested. He was
taken to the Zanja police station, where he was questioned, searched and detained for four hours.
“With these civil disobedience actions we are launching the third phase of the With the Same
Currency campaign”, stated a communiqué issued in Havana by the Federation of Latin American
Rural Women (FLAMUR in Spanish). “We have decided to claim our true national sovereignty,
which comes from the right of every Cuban to have control of their own lives, without interference
from government. Inspired by Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi, Lech Walesa and
others who refused to comply with unjust laws to fight for the rights of their own people, we are
saying NO to the economic apartheid that we suffer in our own land as Cubans”
“These activists have not committed any crime. They did not refuse to pay, but rather just
demanded their right to pay with the currency in which salaries are paid. The government is the one
acting illegally, because on November 21, 2007, FLAMUR delivered 10,738 signatures to the
National Assembly in support of the With the Same Currency Campaign, according to the current
regime’s legislation. Today we have demonstrated that we are organized and committed to our
cause”, declared in Miami Magdelivia Hidalgo, FLAMUR’s International Representative.
Press release two
Las Damas de Blanco seguirán aceptando el dinero del exilio
Agence France Presse
LA HABANA
AP
Dolia Leal (izq.) Berta Soler y Laura Pollan en una marcha en La Habana.
Las Damas de Blanco, familiares de presos políticos cubanos, afirmaron el domingo que continuarán aceptando dinero de organizaciones del exilio anticastrista, tras acusar al gobierno de buscar "ahogarlas'' económicamente. "El gobierno no nos va a ahogar. Vamos a seguir recibiendo porque ese dinero de personas de buena voluntad del exilio cubano nos hace falta, no para comprar armas'', sino para cubrir necesidades de los presos y sus familias, dijo Berta Soler, activista de ese grupo creado para exigir la liberación de 75 opositores condenados en el 2003. Tras acudir a la misa dominical en una iglesia del barrio residencial de Miramar, Soler, con otras 50 Damas de Blanco y una docena de niños, marchó el Día de los Padres con gladiolos por la Quinta Avenida en reclamo por la libertad de los presos.
Soler precisó que la Fundación Nacional Cubano Americana (FNCA), del exilio anticastrista de Miami, les envía en promedio unos $50 cada 45 días por preso político --no detalló a cuántos en total--, y la organización "Plantados'' envía otros $50 cada mes. "Quieren asfixiarnos, porque no nos dan trabajo. Nos botan [despiden] y si uno va a solicitarlo no te lo dan'', afirmó Julia Núñez, otra de las activistas, esposa de Adolfo Fernández, que cumple una condena de 15 años. Cuba alega que esas mujeres y al resto de disidentes son "mercenarios'' de Washington y los acusa de recibir, a través de la misión diplomática de Estados Unidos en La Habana, dinero para acciones de "contrarrevolución'' proveniente de Washington como de organizaciones del exilio dirigidas, según La Habana, por "terroristas''.
"Si vamos a hablar de terrorismo, el primer terrorista es el gobierno cubano. No vamos a ponerle oídos a eso, pero hemos acordado que vamos a recibir dinero del que sabemos su procedencia, para no caer en lo que las autoridades quieren involucrarnos'', añadió Soler, cuyo esposo Angel Moya cumple sentencia de 20 años. La dirigente señaló que el gobierno está restringiendo los recursos que les envían las organizaciones del exilio, al "exigir'' que la persona que hace el envío tenga parentesco cercano. Las Damas de Blanco, Premio Sajarov del 2005 y al que el gobierno cubano considera "punta de lanza'' de Washington, niegan que reciban dinero del gobierno de Estados Unidos.
Clearly, regular civil disobedience across the island, focused on the continued trampling of basic rights, is a powerful tool to expose the regime’s abuses, intellectual dishonesty, and moral bankruptcy. It also clear that these groups need financial support from abroad in order to operate effectively. As one poster previously stated…it is “hard to think of organizing dissent when your belly is empty”. These people have demonstrated the courage and ability to organize such dissent, should be encouraged, and should be provided the means to do so.
Ideally, the US (and the expatriate community) would exclusively focus on funding organizations rather than individuals (a favorite during the Cold War still widely used today) as this would have several benefits as follows:
· would facilitate organizational growth, recruitment, and continuity – i.e., efforts continue even if key members are in prison
· organizations carry more weight and prestige, both inside and outside of Cuba
· the dissident movement would be free from any claims that members were dissidents for personal gain or operatives of a foreign entity/government
· would facilitate practically separating remittances from support for dissidents
Changing the focus to organizations from individuals should be relatively easy. Eliminating/reducing remittances would admittedly be difficult for Cuban-Americans to do. The question remains whether the long term goal is worth short-term sacrifice.
First press release
ACTS OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IN HAVANA LAUNCH THE
THIRD PHASE OF “WITH THE SAME CURRENCY” CAMPAIGN
Havana, June 25, 2008. Yesterday, activists from different organizations carried out acts of civil
disobedience in the city, to launch the third phase of the “With the Same Currency” campaign. The
actions were carried out at the “Lava Dia” restaurant located on Malecón street between
Campanario and Manrique streets, Centro Habana municipality. Four couples of activists entered
the government-run establishment, ordered food and refused to pay in CUC (Cuban Convertible
Peso), demanding their right to pay with the national currency, the Cuban peso, the currency in
which Cuban workers are paid. The management of the restaurant called the police and Lazaro
Joaquín Alonso Román, Alfredo Montana Ramos, Yoriet Cabrera and Roberto de Jesus Guerra
Pérez were arrested. They were all taken to a nearby police station , where they were threatened
with being held until paying the amount owed to the restaurant in CUC. The activists refused to
comply and were finally set free at 1:00 am on Wednesday, June 25.
As of this writing, the whereabouts of Julio Beltrán Iglesias, another activist that refused to
surrender his video camera to the police after filming images of the civic protest, are unknown. Mr.
Beltrán threw the camera to the sea when the police tried to force him to surrender it. At 2 pm Juan
del Pilar Joerna, a human rights observer who was monitoring the event, was also arrested. He was
taken to the Zanja police station, where he was questioned, searched and detained for four hours.
“With these civil disobedience actions we are launching the third phase of the With the Same
Currency campaign”, stated a communiqué issued in Havana by the Federation of Latin American
Rural Women (FLAMUR in Spanish). “We have decided to claim our true national sovereignty,
which comes from the right of every Cuban to have control of their own lives, without interference
from government. Inspired by Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi, Lech Walesa and
others who refused to comply with unjust laws to fight for the rights of their own people, we are
saying NO to the economic apartheid that we suffer in our own land as Cubans”
“These activists have not committed any crime. They did not refuse to pay, but rather just
demanded their right to pay with the currency in which salaries are paid. The government is the one
acting illegally, because on November 21, 2007, FLAMUR delivered 10,738 signatures to the
National Assembly in support of the With the Same Currency Campaign, according to the current
regime’s legislation. Today we have demonstrated that we are organized and committed to our
cause”, declared in Miami Magdelivia Hidalgo, FLAMUR’s International Representative.
Press release two
Las Damas de Blanco seguirán aceptando el dinero del exilio
Agence France Presse
LA HABANA
AP
Dolia Leal (izq.) Berta Soler y Laura Pollan en una marcha en La Habana.
Las Damas de Blanco, familiares de presos políticos cubanos, afirmaron el domingo que continuarán aceptando dinero de organizaciones del exilio anticastrista, tras acusar al gobierno de buscar "ahogarlas'' económicamente. "El gobierno no nos va a ahogar. Vamos a seguir recibiendo porque ese dinero de personas de buena voluntad del exilio cubano nos hace falta, no para comprar armas'', sino para cubrir necesidades de los presos y sus familias, dijo Berta Soler, activista de ese grupo creado para exigir la liberación de 75 opositores condenados en el 2003. Tras acudir a la misa dominical en una iglesia del barrio residencial de Miramar, Soler, con otras 50 Damas de Blanco y una docena de niños, marchó el Día de los Padres con gladiolos por la Quinta Avenida en reclamo por la libertad de los presos.
Soler precisó que la Fundación Nacional Cubano Americana (FNCA), del exilio anticastrista de Miami, les envía en promedio unos $50 cada 45 días por preso político --no detalló a cuántos en total--, y la organización "Plantados'' envía otros $50 cada mes. "Quieren asfixiarnos, porque no nos dan trabajo. Nos botan [despiden] y si uno va a solicitarlo no te lo dan'', afirmó Julia Núñez, otra de las activistas, esposa de Adolfo Fernández, que cumple una condena de 15 años. Cuba alega que esas mujeres y al resto de disidentes son "mercenarios'' de Washington y los acusa de recibir, a través de la misión diplomática de Estados Unidos en La Habana, dinero para acciones de "contrarrevolución'' proveniente de Washington como de organizaciones del exilio dirigidas, según La Habana, por "terroristas''.
"Si vamos a hablar de terrorismo, el primer terrorista es el gobierno cubano. No vamos a ponerle oídos a eso, pero hemos acordado que vamos a recibir dinero del que sabemos su procedencia, para no caer en lo que las autoridades quieren involucrarnos'', añadió Soler, cuyo esposo Angel Moya cumple sentencia de 20 años. La dirigente señaló que el gobierno está restringiendo los recursos que les envían las organizaciones del exilio, al "exigir'' que la persona que hace el envío tenga parentesco cercano. Las Damas de Blanco, Premio Sajarov del 2005 y al que el gobierno cubano considera "punta de lanza'' de Washington, niegan que reciban dinero del gobierno de Estados Unidos.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
