No. 2 Felix Varela Bulletin

No. 2

HMJ

Hurricane Dennis may have done more to advance the cause of freedom in Cuba, than most of our efforts from the U.S. have done in the past few years. While the physical and economic destruction left in Dennis’s wake is a tragedy, it does not compare to the suffering of an entire island for more than forty seven years living under a dictatorship.

Unlike other storms, Dennis has impressed upon the Cuban regime that it cannot be all things to all people all of the time. There is no infrastructure to support its people. Even Party loyalists witness first-hand what an abysmal failure the communist system has been. But they still cling, as does the United Nations, to the failed system.

Yes, the United Nations has commended, yes you heard right, commended the Cuba’s emergency response to similar disasters in the past: “The Cuban way could easily be applied to other countries with similar economic conditions and even in countries with greater resources that do not manage to protect their population as well as Cuba does,” Salvano Briceno, director of the U.N.’s International Secretariat for Disaster Reduction, said in a statement from Geneva last September.

A transition to freedom in the midst of such destruction would be truly tragic, but if it must come then we must be ready. Interestingly, there is no section in the White House Cuba Commission Report on transitions brought about by Hurricanes. But what the things that we can control? What about current U.S. law with regard to Cuba?

For those few souls that have read, in toto, U.S. laws with regards to Cuba and then studied the reality of things, our apologies. For the others that have not read the labyrinth of legal and regulatory schemes, a thumbnail sketch is in order, as we want all of our readers to appreciate the status of things and to think about the next steps in this process.

Never has an international issue of the U.S. been as legally regimented and paper-driven as is U.S./Cuba policy. One Member of Congress even proudly announced that the “embargo” had been “codified” into law. We’ll discuss in a few minutes why the latter may not have been such a good idea, although judging from the press releases and news articles at the time, one would have thought that it was the greatest thing since Ronald Reagan visited La Esquina de Tejas to court Cuban-American voters in 1981.

In a nutshell, our policy is to support the Cuban people while pressuring and isolating the Cuban regime. It can be a neurotic, risky, and ineffective policy, however, with proper enforcement by the Executive Branch and diligent oversight by the Congress, it can work. In our view, our government has not even started to fight the good fight. It is more concerned with keeping domestic constituencies happy, rather than implement and enforcing U.S. laws in a robust and aggressive manner.

The matter of codification of our laws is a double-edge sword. On the one hand, the policy is there to stay, but it also empowered the President to remove sections of the law through executive order. The latter can be all well and good with a President that seeks to not work with the tyrant, but not such a good idea when we have Administrations, such as the Clinton Administration, that seek rapprochement and indeed did act on the question of travel. More on this aspect of the policy in future communications. Back to our review of current policy.

In due fairness to the Bush Administration, it inherited a policy that was young, but in much need of repair as a result of poor enforcement and oversight by prior administrations. The events of 11 September 2001 overtook events early into the administration and Cuba, not a huge priority prior to that, became even lesser so in the aftermath of the worst attack on U.S. soil possibly since the Revolutionary War.

Lets take stock of where the matter is today with the following important nuggets of reality:

• Since the Bush Administration has been in power, trade with Cuba has increased to its highest levels ever since sanctions were first put in place in the 1960s. We are close to reaching the $1 billion mark in food sales to Cuba.

• Governors, Chambers of Commerce, farmers, and makers of other “agricultural” products such as hot sauces, gravies, etc., have been traveling to Cuba in record numbers for trade fairs during the past few years.

• CancerVax – a San Diego, California corporation – was allowed by the Bush Treasury Department to develop a lung cancer vaccine with the Cuban government. Recall that Cuba has been on the U.S. State Department list of state-sponsors of terrorism since 1982, pursuant to Section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (P.L. 96-72). Iran, Libya, Syria, Sudan, and North Korea are the other members of the club. With Cuba as a possible maker of chemical or biological weapons, or its components, is such a business venture a sounds idea? Should we be allowing Cuban scientist access to U.S. technologies and equipment?

• Cuban Diplomats in Washington, DC freely walk the halls of Congress and misinform hundreds of staffers and Members. Do we allow Hamas or Hezbollah to do this? Why should the Cuban government be allowed to do so? Our U.S. Interests Section employees and staff cannot walk the inside office of the “Hall of the Revolution,” why should Cubans in DC be afforded the privilege of freely roaming in our nation’s Capitol Buildings? Sure, it is a free country you say, we are better than them. But we are also a country at war and the Castro regime has sided with our enemies. Congress should have limited access a long time ago, but they ignore it or choose to do nothing.

• Cuban espionage in this country continues unabated. While there have been some successes in this area, i.e., the arrest of Defense Intelligence Analyst (DIA) Ana Belen Montes on September 21, 2001 – 10 days after the attacks – there are many more problem areas in DC and Miami that must be addressed. Interesting side note, Montes had been spying for Cuba since 1985 (i.e., since the second Reagan Administration).

• Stores in Miami – fronts for the Cuban regime – continue to operate freely and without restriction. These stores put precious dollars in the hands of the regime. Sure, the federal government during the Clinton Administration could unleash Reno-led federal forces to raid the home of Elian Gonzalez on Easter weekend, but the Bush Administration refuses to unleash similar shut downs of the Castro front stores in Miami. Where is the Cuban-policy Elliott Ness? There are plenty in the FBI and Treasury, but they are hamstrung by politicians and officials.

• While the Treasury Department enforces the travel-ban and there have been notable enforcement actions, there is a backlog of close to 500 cases. Why is there a back-log? They only have a lawyer or two working on the cases, and maybe a part-time administrative law judge. How can we enforce the law with a paltry one or two lawyers and a part-time, semi-retired judge?

• U.S. tax money for exile groups increases, but not all groups should be receiving that money as a lot of it goes for overhead and some of it for programs of little utility to the people on the island on who need it most. The networks on the island lack basic supplies and communications infrastructure. With more than ten million dollars in this fiscal year alone, why has it not been re-dedicated for that effort? You can send all the medicine and radios and laptops you want, but if there is no order and structure, little can be accomplished in the long run.

• The State Department, Cuban-American groups and leaders, and a few other well-meaning people suggest to the White House that the President should meet with former political prisoners in the White House on historically important days for the Cuban people. Well, that is all well and good for public relations in the U.S., and some people in Cuba – if they see or learn of it, but how does this help the thousands of political prisoners in Cuban jails today?

There are more items that can be included in the bullet listing, but the aforementioned should give you a flavor of the status of things. Let’s return to a review of policy and some recent issue areas of note.

The Bush Doctrine – with us or with the terrorists – should find comfort in the Western Hemisphere policy establishment. It should be no question that there will be no acceptance of regional allies harboring, aiding, or abetting the like of radical groups including indigenous forms of terror of the Americas such as the FARC in Colombia. That said, Cuba remains a significant policy thorn for the U.S. for not only does Cuba clearly violate the Bush Doctrine, she also openly flaunts that she does and is proud of it. But what do we do about it? Reward the regime with more food sales so that it can prop up the tourist hotels or feed the intelligentsia?

While there has been a mind-shift in Washington and the country since 9/11 about how to handle terrorist-related matters, U.S./Cuba policy is in many ways stuck in the Cold War. The latest example of U.S./Cuba policy doublespeak is the White House Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba created in 2003, and its final report issued sometime in May 2004.

We attended some of those meetings and if there was ever an opportunity to be squandered, this was it. The future of the free people of Cuba resides in Cuba, not in some room at the State Department or at some lunch with Cuban-American appointees, waxing nostalgic about ushering freedom to Cuba. These are well-meaning people and they did sacrifice time to work on this effort, but it was a public relations matter, not a serious attempt to force the bureaucracies to “get it together,” as one member would say.

The Commission consisted of representatives from: The Departments of State, the Treasury, Defense, Justice, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, Education, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security, the United States Agency for International Development, National Security Council, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Management and Budget, United States Trade Representative, and the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

If you knew nothing about this issue, and we only told you that more than 20 government agencies were getting together to discuss doing something that cannot be done until something happens to a government 90 miles from U.S. shores, would you think that this made any sense whatsoever? Moreover, add to this that there was no input of note from people on the island—the future leaders – about how to do this, would such meetings make any sense? Would that have worked in Iraq? Afghanistan? Lebanon? Secret, there have been blue ribbon commission studies that have done this work already, some called into creation by the current Governor of the State of Florida (although he was not governor at the time).

It was mostly window dressing, well-intentioned by its participants, but political window dressing. Rather than say so, the usual suspects at Radio Mambi and WQBA and Radio Fe and the print media, droned on and on about how great this process would be, etc. It is what some folks call the “Viva Cuba Libre Strategy,” go to Miami and announce, “Viva Cuba Libre for everybody,” show that we care, and wait until the next political crisis when, of course, we will use more “Viva Cuba Libre” sound bites to mollify tensions and concerns.

Meanwhile, while the Cuba Commission studied, Cuba was on its path to becoming the 25th largest market for U.S. agricultural products. Its Party Officials kept traveling in throughout the heartland making trade deals and organizing trips to Cuba. Cuba kept spying on the United States.

In addition to isolating the Cuban regime, the other part or track of U.S. policy toward Cuba is assisting the people of Cuba. We have done a great deal to help the opposition groups and dissidents in Cuba. Support continues to go down in record numbers and civil society efforts are showing some promise. The Cuban-American community generously supports its families, as it must and should be encouraged to a certain degree. But when compared to the money placed in the coffers of the regime, and the power that food gives a government over its people, our efforts in propping up an opposition movement and dissident movement is a drop in the bucket. We can and must do better.

As we said, there have been successes and we urge you to visit the following State Department web site at http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/46699.htm for more information. However, we take issue with how much money is really making it to Cuba – rather than the groups in Miami, Florida and Washington, DC that have high overhead and other funding issues.

State Department says that it “reprogrammed $14.41 million in 2004 Economic Support Funds (ESF) providing additional funds to support democracy-building efforts in Cuba.” Does this mean that about $1 million was invested in each of Cuba’s current fourteen or so provinces? We have no idea. What we do know from opposition sources on the island is that their most pressing issue is reliable communications with one another. With $1 million or so of resources, per province, we may be able to address that issue. May be not, but we need to start getting more serious about this.

Then there is the issue of the frequency and utility of information broadcasts to Cuba—probably the single most important tool in our efforts at this time. Again, it is a drop in the bucket compared to what the Cuban regime has accomplished right under our very noses.

The State Departments say that it is breaking the information blockade in Cuba and that “Commando Solo has flown on a weekly basis since August 21, 2004. Reception reporting from the island indicates that the TV Marti is being seen like never before. The International Broadcast Bureau’s FY ’06 budget request includes $10 million to acquire and refit a dedicated airborne platform.” Assuming all of this is true, and we have reliable sources in the government advising that frequency of flights may not be accurate, it is not enough!

If we are truly committed to these broadcasts, then it must be done daily, all day, by different platforms and with programming that merits people wanting to watch and that most of the current Radio and TV Marti producers are not involved with. We must force the Cuban regime to spend its precious jamming resources on jamming a signal 24/7 – they cannot sustain this effort and, in light of the recent Hurricane, even more so.

The broadcasts must increase today. We are not sure that purchasing a new plane is what is needed or retrofitting an older one either. Get creative. If it can be done by Cessna, or a balloon, it can be done with satellites and other means. Stop studying so much and do. The people of Cuba need to hear from the outside world.

We will leave the content of Radio and TV Marti for another communication, but will add that when U.S. tax dollars are used on talk shows such as Hermanas Merce or re-runs of Que Pasa USA, something is terribly wrong at management and leadership and we are wasting precious time, money, and effort. We can and must do better.

There is so much more than can and must be done with regards to getting the emphasis moved away from Miami, and more robustly into the island. If this means taking money from exile groups not working up to par, and putting it in the form of supplies and means into the island, so be it. If this means calling a Republican Administration and Republican Congress to task for failing to live up to its promises, so be it.

Given the post-9/11 realities, our country cannot afford to diddle-dawdle with the Castro regime or its proxy, the Chavez regime in Venezuela. Remember, it was a band of terrorists armed with box cutters that, as Castro said in Iran in anther context, “brought America to its knees.”

If groups, radio commentators, politicians, and others in this fight cannot put egos aside, for once, and focus on the struggle at hand, then, as we said in No. 1, let those that want to move this process along do so. We would hope, however, that this were not the case. The collective forces of the Cuban-American community should help lead the way. Stop talking and start doing. Until next time.

Copyright © 2005 – Western Hemisphere Policy Watch
All Rights Reserved.

No. 1 Felix Varela Bulletin

No. 1

HMJ

We write, because we can and because we must. And, as in all a good story, we need context and introduction.

For more than forty years, our parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, sons and daughters have flourished in the most successful Diaspora in the history of this magnificent country. While the bonds of America and Cuba date to the Revolutionary War, it was during the 20th Century that made the Cuban-American success story a reality. Freedom is the vehicle that made this journey possible.

Now our country finds itself in a conflict unlike any other in our history. An enemy without a country wages war against American ideas. All wars requires sacrifices, and most would agree, this war has not really begun in earnest. Who really knows what lay before us but our Creator. Our men and women of the U.S. military – the greatest of armies and navies that this world has ever known – fight for freedom in Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa, the far East, and right here, yes, here in the Western Hemisphere. The Western Hemisphere is not immune to terror.

The Americas have become a breeding ground for terrorists hell-bent on causing the country harm. Middle Eastern-bred terror cells murdered innocents in Argentina in the 1992 and 1994 on attacks against the Jewish communities in that country; there are terrorists operating in the tri-border area of Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay; and now this vermin has become a mainstay in Central America and Mexico seeking to exploit vulnerabilities at our border with Mexico and, farther north, at our border with Canada. As there is much to tell, more on this subject shall be discussed in future communications.

Suffice it to say that for more than forty years the United States has had to deal with the King of Terror for the Americas: Cuba’s Fidel Castro. Do not be fooled into thinking that Castro’s brand of terrorism is any less harmful than its Middle Eastern vintage. He may not have an army of suicide bombers, but a terror regime it is. Our State Department has said so since 1982 when the Reagan Administration had Cuba added to the pantheon of state-sponsors of terror and we will explore this in much detail in future communications.

The 1980s, the Cold War, and Ronald Reagan, reminds me of an interesting time in Cuban exile politics.

The early 1980s was a time when the Cuban-American community in Miami, New Jersey, Texas, Louisiana, California, Puerto Rico and elsewhere was coming of political and economic age. Its great power was harnessed by one man with a vision: Jorge Mas-Canosa. Mas-Canosa started, with the assistance of the Great Communicator, the Cuban American National Foundation (CANF). And a great chapter added to the Cuban-American playbook against the Castro regime that continues to this day.

The creation of CANF laid a foundation that would result in the election in 1989 of the first Cuban-American to Congress, the venerable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. Her election as the first Hispanic woman-ever in Congress would, in turn, prepare the way for her colleagues including Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Robert Menendez, both elected in 1992 and, more recently, Mario Diaz-Balart in 2002 and Mel Martinez in 2004. The list of Presidential Appointments since this time is also impressive and more on this later.

Some of early legislative accomplishments during the 1980s and 1990s are worth mentioning as well. During this time the Cuban-American community played the “Washington game” very well and efforts were marked with great successes. Focusing on the enemy down south and with an eye to giving back to this country for taking them in when they needed it most, Cuban-Americans sought to update and modernize U.S. policy towards Cuba. The goal was to put Cuba on the path to freedom.

These legislative accomplishments were hard-fought in economic and, in some too many cases, the ultimate sacrifice precipitated the changes. The two most important changes in the law: The Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 and the Cuban Liberty and Solidarity Act of 1996. While ours is a somewhat neurotic a policy, the changes in the law placed our policy establishment on notice that it would not be business as usual with regards to Cuba.

Some say that the Cuban Liberty and Solidarity Act was the result, ultimately, of the sacrifice made by three Americans and one Cuban national when the Cuban Air Force shot and destroyed two civilian planes over international waters on February 24, 1996. President Bill Clinton would have probably never signed the bill but for the shoot down. We tend to agree.

The murder of a Vietnam veteran, Armando Alejandre, Jr., Mario de la Pena, Carlos Costa, and Pablo Morales did more, however, than force the hand of a President to sign legislation or get a Congress to act, it forced a new generation of American-born patriots to take a long and hard look at its role in the struggle of its parents and grandparents. It would take the Elian Gonzalez matter a few years later to bring this issue to a head. The only thing was this particular group of Cuban-Americans did not really know what history has in store for it.

Another note on departed heroes is warranted at this juncture. Some people believe that Jorge Mas-Canosa met a similar fate as the young Brothers to the Rescue pilots, albeit, in a much more nefarious and calculating scheme. The advocates of such a scheme offer no proof, just theories. That said, Mas-Canosa’s passing in 1999 was sure a loss for the community, but a lost opportunity for a new generation of leaders. It is a loss that can never be replaced, but it was an opportunity squandered and the long-time leaders of the CANF should have seen to it, but did not.

The new generation of political, business, and cultural leaders is now coming of age. This group has a choice to make: engage in the effort to win this war against the last-remaining Cold War dictator in the Americas, or step aside, and allow those interested in winning to fight the good fight. Some argue that this is an “unfortunate choice.”
Born in freedom, it is not this generation’s struggle really.

One thing is certain, and this goes for all individuals and groups that engage in this last battle over Cuban communism, whether in the United States or in Cuba, it will require sacrifices. Such sacrifices that, somehow, people in the exile community cavalierly forget or ignore. Before we focus on the future, we will need to review the lessons of the past. We must be honest with one another if we are to be successful advocates of change.

Some of the issues that shall be explored in future communications include:

1. Why does one thing get said about U.S. policy in Washington and another in Miami with regards to Cuba? We will name names, issues, and places.

2. Why does Radio and TV Marti programming waste U.S. taxpayer dollars on broadcasting that, frankly, is not better than some of the programming broadcast on Cuba state-owned media? This must change and, as a teaser on future communications, one suggestion will be moving the whole operation back to Washington, DC and replacing the entire Board.

3. Given the economic and political clout of the Cuban-American community throughout the U.S., why is it that money and support is so difficult to come by to fight the good fight?

4. Is the agricultural lobby so effective or are Cuban-American Members being rolled by the very leadership in Congress more interested in cutting deals with Archer Daniels Midland Corporation and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce?

5. Why do we keep inviting Congressional and business leaders to Miami, Florida for fund-raisers and events and not ask for anything in return?

6. Why does the State Department waste U.S. taxpayer dollars in the exile community when it should be used to create a strong and robust opposition movement in Cuba?

7. What was the real reason Amb. Otto Reich was opposed, why some in the Bush Administration never fought to make his recess appointment permanent, and why it was a huge loss to fighting Cuban tyranny?

8. Why are there so many groups in the Cuban-American community, but little action? More importantly, why are some of us so blind to the patently false intention of these advocacy groups that seek to re-invent the wheel, waste time, and do things that have already been done and, worse yet, work against the very things that need to be done to advance the agenda of a peaceful transition to democracy in Cuba? This is especially true of groups that operate in Washington, DC.

9. Why do we spend so much time studying how to help the Cuban people in a transition rather than focusing on building an opposition movement on the island?

10. President George Bush promised change in Cuba, but what is it that five years after that promise there is no change, really, in how the U.S. deals with the tyrant?

11. Why are the same people on the radio in Miami and elsewhere blindly supporting Republican causes that, in reality, do little to advance the cause of freedom for Cuba?

12. When are we going to come to grips with the fact that the future of Cuba rests with the people of Cuba and when are we going to support those people do what needs to be done to take back the country?

13. Why do we allow the Cuban regime to open stores, restaurants, and bars in Miami to siphon off precious dollars to fund the regime? There is such a thing as a Cuban “hawala” system and it is about time folks opened its eyes and the United States government cracked down on it and shut down these operations.

14. When will Television Marti flights of Commando Solo begin on a daily basis and when will we invest in alternative and more cost-effective platforms to make the Cuban regime spend time and money in jamming the signal?

15. When will Cuban-Americans begin to sacrifice once again for the cause of freedom? We can have all the fancy houses, cars, boats, private schools, and vacations in Europe that we want. If this is the life you want, then step aside and let those that want to sacrifice do so.

16. … and many, many more questions and issues.

We are witnessing the transformation of the world and the Western Hemisphere once again in ways few of us could have ever imagined. Cuba is once again on freedom’s path, however, there remains a few more struggles before that dream is a reality. The America and Americans we know, will help that journey. Will Cuban-Americans be ready to assist as well?

HMJ

Copyright © 2005 – Western Hemisphere Policy Watch
All Rights Reserved.

The WHPW Cipher

The WHPW Cipher is a list of terms (many metonyms) used throughout this blog that, for the unseasoned reader, may not make immediate sense. We will add terms as events and ideas warrant (ok, it is not technically a real "cipher" ... just go along with our madness):

When we use "across the pond," we mean the Potomac River and not the Atlantic (i.e., to refer to the United Kingdom). We are usually dicussing interactions between the State Department (Foggy Bottom, DC) and the Department of Defense (Pentagon, Virginia).

A WHPW original (i.e., look at our Fair Use Policy and source it accordingly if you use it), the Bearded One from Havana is Cuban Tyrant Fidel Castro. We try not to honor this fellow on WHPW postings by refraining using his name.

Satan's Caribbean Vacation Spot is used occasionaly to refer to the "cursed" nation of Haiti. Those who know of Haitian folklore know why we use this term. It is also the reason why we advocate a total rebuilding of Haiti, without the UN. Those people really need U.S. assistance and we can do better by them by getting the UN out of Haiti and, more importantly, out of the Western Hemisphere.

The overused, mainly Hollywood term "the Company" (to refer to the CIA), on WHPW is replaced on WHPW with The Watchers (in honor of the newly reorganized IC and the NDI)(here again, source it if you use it).

Foggy Bottom is a metonym for the U.S. Department of State (ironically, that area used to be swamp land).

"HMJ" is an acronym/pseudonym for our principal founder, editor and contributor.

The Little Man from Caracas is Venezuelan Dictator Hugo Chavez. As with the Bearded One, we try not to honor this fellow on WHPW postings by refraining using his name (did we say already source it if you use it?).

WHPW's News Roundup is a summary of news in and about the Western Hemisphere compiled from many sources. We select stories based on direct or indirect impact on U.S. policy goals in the Americas (of course, as we see it).

The Ol'Swamp is used, loosely, to collectively refer to the seat of our federal government, although we usually mean just the U.S. Congress and the people at 1600 Penn.

While we'd like to take ownership of this one, we cannot: Under the Dome refers to Congress, what is taking place in the bowels in the most venerated democratic institution known to the world, ever).

While 1600 Penn, well, The White House.