US Cuba Normalization

Prominent Conservative Wants Big Change in US Policy

2012-01-25T23:47:00.000-05:00

Mort Zuckerman: Time for U.S. to Review Its Cuba Policy

Raul Castro has succeeded Fidel and is reining in the all-pervasive Cuban government

By MORTIMER B. ZUCKERMAN

January 12, 2012

It is past time to change our policy toward Cuba. For over 50 years, the United States has been obsessed with the Cuba of Fidel Castro's time. So much so that many of the circumstances that animate our conversations and views of Cuba today seem to be drawn from the 20th century. They are a throwback to the days when Cuba was a menacing outpost of an aggressive Soviet Union. Admittedly, it's hard to forget the days of the October 1962 Cuban missile crisis. We forced the removal of those missiles, then sought to punish and bring down the Castro regime by a trade embargo (and some madcap covert schemes).

For over 49 years those policies have failed. And they are inappropriate for the Cuba of today. About 70 percent of Cubans were born after the original revolution. They are pressuring the state to get out of their way.

Since a chance meeting with Fidel Castro many years ago, I have had hours of conversation with him over many visits, including one a few weeks ago. Castro has overcome several bouts of serious illness. As he put it, "Nobody thought I would get through my illness, but here I am at work." And so he is, but he is playing a different role. The most critical change is that his brother, Raúl Castro, has succeeded him as president in a transition marked by a noteworthy degree of stability.

Fidel is certainly at work and active and still an inspiration for Cubans. They respect and admire him for establishing an excellent system of free healthcare; an improved educational system; and a relatively colorblind, multiracial society in which most of the institutionalized racism against blacks and mulattoes has been eliminated. They also take pride in the way he stood up to America.

He was teased a number of years ago that if he had been a slightly better baseball pitcher and made it to the major leagues, Cuba and the United States would not have had years of conflict. Castro's response was, "I was a good pitcher, but I am a great revolutionary." He is still involved, for as he has said, "Revolutionaries do not retire." But Fidel's role today is that of the senior statesman concentrating on the international stage, long a key interest for him, rather than the head of state on the domestic stage.

The driver for change in Cuba now is Raúl Castro. The pace of change will be, as he puts it, "without pause, but without haste." To implement his judgment that structural reforms are needed to revitalize Cuba's stagnant economy, he has become the principal architect in abandoning the all-pervasive role of the state and shifting a good part of economic activity to the private sector. Speech is freer. He has called on Cubans to openly air their opinions in the form of numerous town hall-style meetings. He has listened. Policies he announced have ultimately been refined and changed by the process.

He has eliminated excessive bans and regulations, encouraged productivity, and sought to make the government smaller and more efficient. This is a major change from Fidel's totally planned economy to a more market-oriented one, despite the forces of bureaucratic inertia and resistance. For the first time in over five decades, there are new rules that support the legitimization of the private sector. Free-market mechanisms have been embraced, such as self-employment, a new tax code, and liberalized rules on such things as home and auto ownership. Hundreds of thousands of licenses have been granted to Cubans to operate private businesses. A financing mechanism provides credit to would-be entrepreneurs.

Cubans finally have the right to sell and buy their homes. Many Cuban-Americans have been encouraged enough to accelerate the process by sending money to relatives. Cubans are now also allowed to purchase cellphones, DVDs, and other items that were once restricted. All these reforms are helping to change public attitudes; fewer young people want to leave. Not bad for a government that heretofore had followed a centralized communist economic model.

The church has also been positive. It has helped to negotiate the release of political prisoners, now significantly fewer. It has encouraged the move to free markets, providing counseling that reflects the words of the late Pope John Paul II when he called for "Cuba to open to the world, and the world to open to Cuba."
The Cuban-American community in the United States has also changed. Many now believe the embargo should end and the travel ban lifted. This, too, reflects a generational shift. Younger Cuban-Americans, who now outnumber the aging Cuban exiles of the 1960s, have a different attitude. They think of Cuba not in terms of politics and ideology but of family and friendships. Using so-called gift parcels, they are supplying their families in Cuba with tools and other goods for use in small businesses.

President Obama, in tune with these changes, has sought a better relationship with Cuba. He has lifted Bush-era restrictions on family travel and remittances. Last year over 300,000 people took charter flights from Florida to Cuba. Many are from the younger generation, and some no doubt dislike the Cuban leadership and what it represents. But they consider family reunification and support to be their priority. They think that after 50 years, it is time to try something different with Cuba.

The question for Americans is how to relate to the new evolving Cuba. I believe there is wisdom in Henry Kissinger's view. He lived through the grim years as secretary of state, and had said: "It is better to deal straight with Castro. Behave chivalrously," and think in broader terms.

One step to improve our relationship—and advantage America—is to remove the restrictions on exports of agricultural products. All sectors of the U.S. economy would benefit by freeing commodity sales. It would increase our revenues by perhaps $300 million to $500 million a year. Food should not be seen as a weapon but as a way to build a better longer-term relationship between the two countries, as was shown by the experience between East and West Germany.

Our restriction is pointless anyway. Cubans have access to food through imports from countries like Vietnam and China. Our regulations are simply restricting the ability of our farmers and agribusinesses to trade with Cuba while competitors exploit the opportunities to take over the sales we would otherwise have. We don't hesitate to trade with other communist countries. We even offer them credit. It is not very sensible to worry over selling wheat to Cuba and putting that money into the pockets of American farmers. As for restricting travel to Cuba, we have allowed Americans to travel to Iran, China, and Russia.

There is every evidence, moreover, that when we have liberalized intercourse with closed societies, they have become more open, with greater freedoms for their populations. China is a case in point. For this reason, we should be willing to open up Internet access and allow Americans to travel to Cuba.
I recognize there remain serious political issues between Cuba and the United States. The Cubans have jailed Alan Gross, a subcontractor for the U.S. Agency for International Development. He was implementing a U.S. government democracy-building program, distributing computers, cellphones, and satellite communication technologies for nongovernmental organizations. The Cuban government interpreted this as a subversive activity and arrested him. This has now become a main obstacle to improving relations.

The Cuban government wants to have any humanitarian release of Gross matched by some degree of reciprocity. One possibility is that the United States would allow a recently released Cuban spy to serve out his next three years of parole in Cuba rather than in Florida. (He was one of five Cuban officers sent here in the 1990s to spy on anti-Castro militant groups. A release of all five is another possibility.)
Whatever the process, quiet diplomacy should be able to resolve such issues and inspire a more positive rapport. The main hurdle is political: A portion of the Cuban-American community takes a very hard-line view of the Castro government and remains a powerful political force in the key swing state of Florida. The attitude of the presidential candidates will be a good test of their vision and diplomatic skills.

We should not try to seal off Cuba from the American influence that has so profoundly changed much of the rest of the world. We cannot bully a country by starvation or deny its people the right to rejoin their families. We can move forward in our relationship with Cuba and still maintain American interests and values.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/mzuckerman/articles/2012/01/12/mort-zuckerman-time-for-us-to-reviews-its-cuba-policy

Insider Critique of USAID Regime Change Programs

2011-12-29T22:44:00.000-05:00

Time to clean up U.S. regime-change programs in Cuba

BY FULTON ARMSTRONG fultona1@yahoo.com

As USAID subcontractor Alan P. Gross marked his second year in a Cuban prison for carrying out secret “democracy promotion” operations, White House spokesman Jay Carney demanded his immediate release and gloated: “Cuban authorities have failed in their effort to use Gross as a pawn for their own ends.”

The message is simple: Gross is our pawn, not the Cubans’.The administration’s signals throughout the Gross affair have been clear. To Havana, it’s been “no negotiation.” To Gross, “tough luck.” And to Americans who think our 50-year Cuba policy should be reviewed, it is, “Don’t hold your breath.”

When a covert action run by the CIA goes bad and a clandestine officer gets arrested, the U.S. government works up a strategy for negotiating his release. When a covert operator working for USAID gets arrested, Washington turns up the rhetoric, throws more money at the compromised program, and refuses to talk.

For three years, I was the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s lead investigator into the political operations of the State Department and USAID in Cuba and elsewhere in Latin America.

The Cuba programs — designed to identify, organize, train and mobilize Cubans to demand political change — have an especially problematic heritage, including embezzlement, mismanagement, and systemic politicization. Some program successes costing millions of taxpayer dollars, such as the creation of a network of “independent libraries,” were grossly exaggerated or fabricated.

An oversight committee’s mandate is to ensure that funds — about $20 million a year but surging to $45 million in 2009 — are used effectively and in a manner consistent with U.S. law.

State and USAID fought us at every turn, refusing to divulge even basic information about the programs, citing only a document of vague “program objectives.” The programs did not involve our Intelligence Community, but the secrecy surrounding them, the clandestine tradecraft (including the use of advanced encryption technologies) and the deliberate concealment of the U.S. hand, had all the markings of an intelligence covert operation. We never requested the names of their on-island operatives, but program managers claimed that “people will die” if we knew the names of even U.S.-based “partner” groups.

The programs were not a secret in Cuba. The Cuban government had them deeply penetrated. We did not know who Alan P. Gross was — indeed, the State Department vehemently denied he was theirs after his arrest, and even some of our diplomats in Havana thought he was working for CIA. But it was clear that the Cubans had been on him. Cuban television has shown video of other contractors in action on the island.

Only Gross can say what he knew about Cuban law as he carried out his $585,000 contract, including five visits to Cuba. He has said that he was “duped.” We confirmed that State and USAID had no policy in place to brief individuals conducting these secret operations that they are not legal in Cuba, nor that U.S. law does not allow unregistered foreign agents to travel around the country providing satellite gear, wide-area WiFi hotspots, encryption and telephony equipment and other cash-value assistance.

Administration policy is that Cuban recipients not be told the origin and purpose of the assistance — unless they ask directly. Some Cubans can guess, of course, but the implications of non-disclosure, especially as new programs target children as young as 12, are significant in a country that expressly outlaws receiving U.S. funds.

USAID has emerged as a covert warrior to undermine anti-U.S. regimes worldwide — without the burden of accountability imposed on the Intelligence Community. The regime-change focus of the programs is explicit: Rather than fund them under education and cultural authorities, the Bush and Obama administrations have insisted on citing authorities in the Helms-Burton “Libertad Act” prescribing a post-Castro future for Cuba.

Fixes have been repeatedly proposed to increase efficiencies and steer funds to help the Cuban people improve their lives, such as by taking advantage of the incipient economic adjustments that Raúl Castro has begun — to help people help themselves, not just organize and mobilize them for protests. USAID’s firm reaction has been that the programs are not to help Cubans live better lives today but rather help them demand a better future tomorrow. Regime change.

Like the other millions of dollars we have spent to topple the Cuban government, these programs have failed even to provoke the regime, except to arrest Gross and hassle people who have accepted assistance from other on-island operators.

Our policy should be based on what’s effective at promoting the U.S. national interest — peaceful, democratic and evolutionary change — not engaging in gratuitous provocations. Rhetoric and actions that prolong the prison stay of an innocent American apparently duped into being a pawn in the U.S. government’s 50-year effort to achieve regime change in Cuba are counterproductive. It’s time to clean up the regime-change programs and negotiate Alan P. Gross’s release.

Fulton Armstrong has worked on the Cuba issue on the National Security Council during the Clinton administration and later as National Intelligence Officer for Latin America and senior advisor on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/25/v-fullstory/2559755/time-to-clean-up-us-regime-change.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy

Grand Valley State University Baseball Team

2011-12-22T09:35:00.000-05:00

GVSU to Cuba for baseball, med supplies
Lakers play 6 games in 4 days against Cuban team

Published : Wednesday, 21 Dec 2011, 5:05 PM EST

By Steve Kelso
ALLENDALE, Mich. (WOOD) - Skylar Hoke is a freshman right-handed pitcher for the Grand Valley State University Lakers. When he makes his college debut, it will be in Havana, Cuba.

The Lakers will be only the second team from the United States to play against a Cuban team in Cuba when they travel to the island for a four-game series between January 3-9, 2012.

They'll face a Cuban national university team , but they're also joining forces with First Hand Aid , a Grand Rapids-based organization that has delivered medical supplies to Cuba for more than a decade.

"Every three months we travel down and just bring hundreds of pounds of medical supplies that Cuba cannot get because of the embargo," said First Hand Aid director Marc Bohland. "It cannot be sold to them. It can only be donated."

For GVSU head baseball coach Steve Lyon, it's a dream come true. It's a chance for his team to play against some of the best ball players in the world and an opportunity to build the character of his players as they bind together as a team.

"This is going to be an experience for them, baseball-wise," he said, "but also just culturally and the humanitarian efforts that we are going to be doing while we are there, I think, is an extremely important experience for our guys to have."

Hoke, the freshman pitcher, is not exactly sure what to expect. He's both excited and a little nervous.

"It will make you realize just how much and how special and how fortunate we are to have it here," he said.

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/sports/GVSU-to-Cuba-for-baseball-med-supplies

Cantaclaro's Insight on Alan Gross and The Five

2011-12-15T06:32:00.000-05:00

The following appeared as comments to an excellent post by Phil Peters at the Cuban Triangle http://cubantriangle.blogspot.com/2011/12/alan-gross-on-his-own.html

Anonymous said...

Mr. Peters,

I suspect, although the Cubans themselves are a little confused about what they are accusing Alan Gross of, that Alan Gross was arrested because he was attempting to set up a mesh network in Cuba, of the type that the State Department has been developing to use in hostile totalitarian countries that do not allow their population to have permanent or temporary internet access and that, although the efforts to develop such a network in Cuba while Alan Gross is arrested, they will be resumed with more precaution once he is released.

So I believe that this is one additional reason for the Cuban government to refuse to release Alan Gross.

Not only is he their sole negotiation chip for the release of their five cuban spies imprisoned in the US, but while he is imprisoned, the Cuban government is reasonably certain that the US government will not continue to make efforts to provide clandestine internet access to a part of its population.

This is a message to discuss a small part of the problem people may not normally be aware of.

In a series of future ones, if you allow me, I'll try to comment by parts the whole Alan Gross five Cuban spies enchilada.

Cantaclaro

DECEMBER 4, 2011 1:23 AM

Anonymous said...

The official Cuban government version of events is that:

1- During the nineties the right wing Cubans in the United States were financing a series of terrorist incidents in Havana hotels to scare off foreign tourists and that the US government was not doing anything about it.

2- The Cuban government sent over to the US a series of agents to infiltrate these right wing groups discover their plans and communicate them to the Cuban government so that the terrorist activities in the island could be neutralized.

3- After obtaining sufficient evidence of these activities from his agents, Fidel Castro decided that the Cuban government should contact the FBI and provide them with this information to give the FBI the necessary leads to investigate these right wing groups, verify their criminal activities, prosecute them and put an end to them.

4- Instead of doing this the FBI handed over the information that had been provided by the Cuban government to the right wing Cuban groups in the United States that Castro accused of promoting terrorism.

5- Then, with the active aid of these Cuban right wing groups, the FBI reversed engineered the information to trace back the Cuban government informants infiltrated within these groups.

6- Once located, these Cuban government agents were placed under observation, proof of their activities was gathered and once a sufficient amount was available they were finally arrested and prosecuted.

7- All those arrested accepted they were Cuban agents but stated that they were not in the US to spy on the US government or military but that their sole purpose was to report on the right wing groups financing and promoting terrorist activities inside the island.

8- The US government prosecution on the other hand attempted to prove that they were guilty of more heinous crimes such as spying on the US government and being involved in the plot that resulted in the downing of two planes and the death of four Cuban American Castro opponents on 2/24/1996.

Several very important conclusions that have a bearing on the present imbroglio can be derived from all the ground we have covered so far.

From the Cuban government perspective, the FBI acted in bad faith when it used the evidence about a group promoting terrorist activity that the Cuban government had supplied it to prosecute the informants instead of the perpetrators of a terrorist activity.

What was even more aggravating was that this bad faith action made Fidel Castro look like a snitch to his own subordinates and thus undermined their loyalty to him.

This is a very serious charge on a regime that is held together in by the bonds of loyalty between the charismatic supreme leader and his subordinates.

Fidel Castro and his brother must do their utmost to recover these convicted spies in order to try to regain the full confidence of their subordinates that is needed to ensure their own future political survival in a very hostile world.

This is the reason that they attach so much importance to recovering them.

While they remain in prison, their subordinates have a reason to distrust them and this weakens the monolithic coherence of the Cuban totalitarian regime!

When that trust begins to disappear, such totalitarian regime, based on personal loyalty to a charismatic leader, also starts to crumble.

It is crucial for the regime's survival to regain it as rapidly as possible.

In the next installment I shall talk about the trial and conviction of the Cuban five.

Cantaclaro

DECEMBER 4, 2011 10:50 AM

Anonymous said...

The official Cuban government line is that the five Cuban agents who were tried on spying charges received excessive sentences for two reasons:

1- The prosecutor pressured other codefendants who turned state evidence into accusing them of crimes they did not commit in order to receive a reduction of their sentence.

2- The Miami venue of the trial exposed the jury to a lot of unfavorable community pressure and made a fair trial impossible.

The first situation might have occurred but there is little proof that it could have had a significant weight in the outcome of the trial.

There is evidence in the court records to indicate that the prosecutor was aware of the weakness of some of the more serious accusations for which he thought there was insufficient evidence and tried to withdraw them but was restricted from doing so by the judge.

So the reason for the severe sentences does not lie in the conduct of the prosecutor but with that of the jury which throughout a very long trial was under the constant influence of a very hostile community opinion.

Indeed in the court records there are jury complaints presented to the judge that their photographs were being taken as they left the court and that their license plate numbers were also being recorded and being published in the communities spanish newspapers.

Moreover, these were constantly making hostile comments against the accused and drumming up community public opinion against them all along the prolongued trial.

When the testimony was concluded, after a very short deliberation, the jury convicted the defendants on all counts including those that the District Attorney had attempted to withdraw because he thought he had insufficient proof.

Cantaclaro

DECEMBER 5, 2011 12:31 PM

Anonymous said...

With respect to Gross, whatever we might think about the fact that Cuban law restricts people's right to have access to the internet and to be informed, it is a fact that the introduction and distribution of the software and hardware he brought to Cuba had been prohibited and that he broke this law.

Therefore, although this goes against the right of the Cuban population to be informed, the Cuban government had every legal right to convict him for this "crime".

Now the Cuban government is evidently using him as a negotiating chip and is not going to let him go until they get their five agents back.

However, this does not mean that they are proposing a one to five swap.

Obviously they are willing to negotiate and are willing to throw in other political prisoners to close the deal.

The Obama administration, on the other hand, seems to be in a lose lose situation in an election year.

If it does not get Alan Gross back it will probably loose part of the Jewish vote and part of the vote of the rest of the electorate because it will be accused by its Republican opponents of being weak and allowing itself to be pushed around by a third world dictatorship.

On the other hand, if it swaps the five Cuban agents for Gross, it will keep the Jewish vote but loose part of the Cuban vote and part of the vote of the general population because its opponents will accuse it of giving in to blackmail from a weak third world country dictatorship.

Since the Jewish vote is more important to the Obama administration than the Cuban vote, which is predominantly Republican anyway, the Democratic administration will probably want to strike a deal with the Cuban government that will allow Gross and the five Cuban agents to return to their countries before next year's November election.

However, it can not afford to make a one for five deal because this would give credence to the blackmail accusation and cost it votes among the non Jewish and non Cuban electorate.

Thus it is forced to attempt to get some other goodies to even the basic one for five deal deal to give less weight to the blackmail accusation and allow it to save face with the voters.

What those other goodies will be is what is probably being negotiated under the table at present by both governments at present.

The Cubans are probably willing to throw in two Cuban Americans accused of an armed invasion of the island, several Cuban convicted CIA agents, other Cuban political prisoners and even two Salvadoreans convicted of participating or planning terrorist activities that took place in Cuba.

The problem is many of these other possible assets, given their rap sheet, might not be palatable to the US government.

However, something will probably be finally worked out before the November 2012 Presidential Elections.

The timing of the swap will probably depend on the convenience of the Obama administration.

The Cuban government is probably ready to carry out the swap at anytime since it will strengthen its public support and will open the door to new negotiations that could ease the effects of the US embargo.

The deal will probably take place much earlier and further away from November of 2012 if the Obama political advisors expect the net effect on voters to be unfavorable for the democrats and closer to the date of the elections otherwise to allow the results to be less harmful in the first case or more beneficial in the second for the Obama administration.

Cantaclaro

National Council of Churches Cuba Trip

2011-12-08T20:41:00.002-05:00

U.S. churches will continue to press
for Cuba-U.S. normalization, Kinnamon says

After 53-year embargo, NCC churches ‘live in hope’ of reconciliation

by Jerry L. Van Marter
Presbyterian News Service

HAVANA, Cuba ― The National Council of Churches in the U.S.A. (NCC) will continue to press for normalization of relations between the U.S. and Cuba, an end to the 53-year-old U.S. embargo of Cuba and release of the “Cuban Five” held in U.S. prisons, NCC General Secretary Michael Kinnamon told a packed press conference here Dec. 2.

Kinnamon, speaking at the conclusion of a week-long visit by 15 U.S. religious leaders, told the crowd of Cuban and international journalists “we come not as politicians or diplomats but as religious leaders. Our first responsibility is to pray for the leaders of both countries and we will … but our churches represent 50 million Christians, so we believe we have some influence and we’ll use it.”

Everyone the delegation spoke with ― from Cuban President Raul Castro to the head of the U.S. government’s Cuban Interest Section here, John Caulfield ― expressed the desire to end the embargo. “The question,” Kinnamon said, “is how to get there.”

Castro, Kinnamon said, “insisted that everything is on the table. All the Cubans require, he told me, is that talks be held in an atmosphere of mutual respect.”
Kinnamon said he and Castro discussed “small steps” that can be taken: cooperation on drug and human trafficking in the Caribbean, coordinated air traffic control (communication about the 50 weekly flights currently operating between the U.S. and Cuba is done by telephone, not electronic tracking), weather monitoring and improved telecommunications.

The chances of even small steps to improve Cuba-U.S. relations “are complicated in an election year,” Kinnamon conceded, “but I am a person of faith so I always live in hope,” adding that “since 1968 the position of the NCC (on normalization) has been strong and consistent, taken out of our faith position of reconciliation.”

The NCC will continue to press for a review of the sentences ― anywhere from 20 years to life ― levied against the Cuban Five, who were convicted of espionage in the U.S. even though they were monitoring the activities of Cuban expatriate counterrevolutionaries plotting against the Cuban government.

Numerous international human rights organizations have branded the sentences ― four of the five have been imprisoned for 13 years; the fifth, Rene Gonzalez, was “freed” this fall to stringent “supervised release” and is not allowed to leave Florida ― unjust. Kinnamon said “they should not have been tried.”

Of more immediate concern to the churches, Kinnamon said, is the ability of family members to visit the imprisoned Cubans, at least two of whom are U.S. citizens. Two of the wives and all of the men’s children have never been allowed to visit them in prison. “We ache with them for this situation that weighs so heavily,” he said.

Kinnamon said he also raised with Castro the situation of American Alan Gross, who has been held in a Cuban prison for more than a year for allegedly smuggling illegal telecommunications equipment onto the island. “[Members of the NCC delegation] met with Alan Gross and talked about his sense of being unjustly accused and about his concern for his family, several members of which are seriously ill, including his daughter with cancer,” Kinnamon said.

“I raised the Alan Gross case with President Castro,” Kinnamon said. “I am not here to pass judgment but I care about him as a person ― the humanitarian issue.”

Kinnamon said that while political and human rights discussions occupied some of the delegation’s time, “the primary purpose of our visit has been to be in communion and conversation with our church partners here in Cuba.” Kinnamon praised the Cuban Council of Churches, saying that “U.S. churches need the Cuban churches in order to feel whole and complete.”

In times of economic transition in Cuba and “economic tensions” in the U.S., “it is the call to the churches of both countries to offer a word of hope in response to the anxiety and fear in both countries.”

Contact NCC News Service: 212-870-2228 | E-mail mailto:pjenks@ncccusa.org |

http://www.ncccusa.org/news/111208pressconference.html

President Obama Loses Way on Cuba

2011-09-30T11:41:00.003-05:00

September 12 meeting with Hispanic journalists

QUESTION: Richardson is right now trying to get access and the liberation of Alan Gross. His detention came in the middle of your efforts to try to change a little the US policy towards Cuba. What’s the situation with Gross right now, how far might this case torpedo somehow your visions for that change of policy and are you disappointed with Cuba’s response to your steps?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Richardson is acting as a private citizen on a humanitarian mission to try to free Gross. We’ve said repeatedly that Mr. Gross should be free, that the conviction was not based on evidence or rule of law [1], also that there is an humanitarian issue here involved given Gross precarious health. So anything to get Mr. Gross free we will support [2], although Mr. Richardson does not represent the US government in his actions there.

More broadly, the policy we have had to facilitate additional remittances and travel for family to Cuba, we continue to think is the right one [3].

It empowers Cubans inside of Cuba who are able to have other sources of income, meet their families, get new ideas and exposure to what’s going on outside of Cuba. We think it creates more space inside Cuba for freedom and civil liberties.

The Cuban government has said that it wants to transition, to loosen up the economy, so that businesses can operate more freely. We have not seen evidence that they have been sufficiently aggressive in changing their policies economically, and they certainly have not been aggressive enough when it comes to freeing political prisoners [4] and giving people the opportunity to speak their minds [5].

And when you think of what’s happening around the world, everywhere people are crying out for freedom, you are seeing enormous changes taking place in the Middle East just in the span of 6 months, you are seeing there are almost no authoritarian communist countries left in the world and here you have this small island that is a throwback to the 60s. [6] Obviously is not working for them, the standard of living has not improved significantly, in fact they are deteriorating. [7] In many cases, peoples’ liberties continue to be constrained at a time when the world is more open and people have more information than ever before.

So it’s clearly time for the Cuban regime to change. Whether they are going to seize that opportunity, so far we have not seen the kind of evidence that we’d like to see, but that change is going to take place. [8]

(unofficial transcript by a participating journalist)

****************************

September 28, 2011 Remarks by the President in an "Open for Questions" Roundtable

MS. MEDINA: This next question is about Cuba, and it comes from Florida: What is your position regarding Cuba and the embargo? What should the Cuban people expect from you and your government during the remainder of your term, and in the future if you’re reelected?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, what we did with respect to Cuba was recognize that the Cuban people now have not enjoyed freedom for 50 years, and everywhere else in the world you’ve been seeing a democratization movement that has been pressing forward. Throughout Latin America, democracies have emerged from previously authoritarian regimes. The time has come for the same thing to happen in Cuba. [9]

Now, what we’ve tried to do is to send a signal that we are open to a new relationship with Cuba if the Cuban government starts taking the proper steps to open up its own country and its own -- and provide the space and the respect for human rights that would allow the Cuban people to determine their own destiny. [10]

I changed the remittance laws so that family members could more easily send money back to Cuba, because that would give them more power and it would create a economic space for them to prosper. Within Cuba we have changed the family travel laws so that they can travel more frequently, as well as laws that relate to educational travel. [11]

And so we’ve made these modifications that send a signal that we’re prepared to show flexibility and not be stuck in a Cold War mentality dating back to when I was born. [12] On the other hand, we have to see a signal back from the Cuban government that it is following through on releasing political prisoners, [13] on providing people their basic human rights, in order for us to be fully engaged with them. And so far, at least, what we haven’t seen is the kind of genuine spirit of transformation inside of Cuba that would justify us eliminating the embargo. [14]

I don’t know what will happen over the next year, but we are prepared to see what happens in Cuba. If we see positive movement we will respond in a positive way. Hopefully, over the next five years, we will see Cuba looking around the world and saying, we need to catch up with history. [15] And as long as I’m President I will always be prepared to change our Cuba policy if and when we start seeing a serious intention on the part of the Cuban government to provide liberty for its people. [16] But that’s always my watchword, is are we seeing freedom for the Cuban people to live lives of opportunity and prosperity. If we are, then we’ll be supportive of them.

MR. LERNER: Those conditions will suffice -- human rights, free political prisoners? No demand for a change in the economic structure, for example?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, it’s very hard to separate liberty from some economic reforms. If people have no way to eat other than through the government, then the government ends up having very strict control over them, and they can be punished in all sorts of ways for expressing their own opinions. That’s not to say that a condition for us releasing the embargo would be that they have a perfect market system, because obviously we have trade and exchanges with a number of countries that fall short of a liberal democracy. [17]

But there is a basic, I think, recognition of people’s human rights that includes their right to work, to change jobs, to get an education, to start a business. So some elements of freedom are included in how an economic system works. And right now, we haven’t seen any of that. [18]

But let me just say this. Obviously if we saw a release of political prisoners, the ability for people to express their opinions and to petition their government, if we saw even those steps those would be very significant, and we would pay attention and we would undoubtedly reexamine our overall approach to Cuba if we saw a serious movement in that direction. [19]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/28/remarks-president-open-questions-roundtable

****************************

My comment, posted to ABC blog

What if Cuba demanded that the US have free health care and higher education like it does, or ended use of the death penalty and runaway gun use, before it was “open to a new relationship”?

President Obama has either fallen into a 100 year old trap of assuming that the US has the right to shape Cuba’s domestic polity or is just looking for excuses.

He is badly informed about what is happening inside Cuba today.

Thanks to the assistance of Spain and the Catholic church, all persons deemed prisoners of conscience have been released. Those still imprisoned are guilty of violent crimes, including hijacking. China and Saudi Arabia and other countries have more serious problems of repression than Cuba does but that does not inhibit our bilateral relations with them.

Cuba is in the early stages of transforming its economy and social system, similar to the first steps in China and Vietnam, but the direction is clear as every serious international reporter has documented. Obama could be taking positive steps to foster change instead of buying into the politics of the minority of hard liners in the Cuban American community who cannot recognize or tolerate self-directed evolution.

The President has acted forcefully on Cuban American travel and remittances but timidly on restoring the rights of the rest of us.

Cuba is one more issue where the excitement of campaign promises to meet with US opponents for real dialog has been replaced by tired rhetoric of conditionality.

John McAuliff
Fund for Reconciliation and Development

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/obama-open-to-a-new-relationship-with-cuba/

Ros Lehtinen Letter on Sex Traficking and excerpts from US report

2011-07-07T22:25:00.001-05:00

June 28, 2011
The Honorable Hillary R. Clinton
Secretary
U.S. Department of State
Washington, DC 20521
Dear Secretary Clinton:
In light of the recent publication of the 2011 Trafficking In Persons Report, once again, Cuba ranks as a Tier 3 country. Cuba has been a Tier 3 country since 2003 as the regime continues to sexually exploit women, children, and oppresses the Cuban people. Due to the fact that the Cuban regime has not shown any progress regarding trafficking of persons, I would urge the administration, within all applicable rules and guidelines, to reverse its current policy and suspend all educational and cultural exchanges with the Cuban regime pursuant to the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000.
According to U.S. law, “countries on Tier 3 may not receive funding for government employees’ participation in educational and cultural exchange programs.” Under the repressive Cuban regime, anyone who is involved in cultural and educational exchanges are direct employees of Raul and Fidel Castro. The tyrants use these exchanges as a political instrument to promote their communist agenda while maintaining absolute control over the daily lives of the Cuban people.
Last year, President Obama granted a partial waiver for Cuba to allow funding for educational and cultural exchanges. However, according to the 2011 report, the Cuban regime “does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and is not making significant efforts to do so.” This report clearly illustrates the failure of the Obama administration’s partial waiver, particularly last year’s, to improve or enhance the lives of the Cuban people.
These exchanges only serve as a propaganda tool for the authoritative Castro brothers and do not help bring freedom and democracy to Cuba.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Sincerely,
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN
Chairman

Full text of annual report on trafficking from the State Department:

Tier Placements

OFFICE TO MONITOR AND COMBAT TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
Trafficking in Persons Report 2011
[Introductory Material also available in Chinese | French | Russian | Spanish | Arabic | Persian]

TIER 1
Countries whose governments fully comply with the Trafficking Victims Protection Act’s (TVPA) minimum standards.

TIER 2
Countries whose governments do not fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards.

TIER 2 WATCH LIST
Countries whose governments do not fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards AND:

a) The absolute number of victims of severe forms of trafficking is very significant or is significantly increasing;
b) There is a failure to provide evidence of increasing efforts to combat severe forms of trafficking in persons from the previous year; or
c) The determination that a country is making significant efforts to bring itself into compliance with minimum standards was based on commitments by the country to take additional future steps over the  next year.

TIER 3
Countries whose governments do not fully comply with the minimum standards and are not making significant efforts to do so.

Full list of tier placements

CUBA (Tier 3)

Cuba is a source country for adults and some children subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking. Some Cuban medical professionals assigned to work abroad have claimed that their passports were retained as a means of keeping them in a state of exploitation, thus preventing them from traveling freely. Prostitution of children reportedly occurs in Cuba as prostitution is not criminalized for anyone above 16 years old. The scope of trafficking within Cuba is particularly difficult to gauge due to the closed nature of the government and sparse non-governmental or independent reporting.

The Government of Cuba does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and is not making significant efforts to do so. The government did not publicize information about government measures to address human trafficking through prosecution, protection, or prevention efforts during the reporting period.

Recommendations for Cuba: Investigate reports of involuntary labor of Cuban citizens; in partnership with trafficking victim specialists, ensure adults and children have access to specialized trafficking victim protection and assistance; take measures to ensure identified sex and labor trafficking victims are not punished for unlawful acts committed as a direct result of being trafficked; and publicize measures to address human trafficking through prosecution, protection, or prevention efforts.

Prosecution

The Government of Cuba did not report discernible progress on investigating or prosecuting trafficking offenses or convicting and punishing trafficking offenders during the reporting period. Cuba appears to prohibit most forms of trafficking activity through various provisions of its penal code; however, the use of these provisions could not be verified, and prostitution of children over the age of 16 is legal, leaving children over 16 particularly vulnerable to commercial sexual exploitation. The government did not share official data relating to Cuban investigations, prosecutions, and convictions of trafficking offenders, including any officials complicit in human trafficking, in 2010 or any other year. The government did not report any anti-trafficking training provided to officials.

Protection

The government did not publicize official data on protection of trafficking victims during the reporting period. The government did not report any procedures in place to guide officials in proactively identifying trafficking victims in vulnerable groups (such as people in prostitution) and referring them to available services. The government operates at least two well-regarded facilities for the treatment of children who have been sexually and physically abused. In addition, the government operates a nationwide network of shelters for victims of domestic violence or child abuse, but the government did not verify if trafficking victims received treatment in these centers. Adult victims reportedly reside in these shelters voluntarily. The government provided no evidence that it encouraged trafficking victims to assist in the investigation and prosecution of trafficking offenders. The government did not report on the existence of any procedures to ensure identified trafficking victims were not punished for crimes committed as a direct result of being trafficked.

Prevention

To date, the government has made limited anti-trafficking prevention efforts. The government did not implement any known public awareness campaigns to prevent forced labor or forced prostitution. The government did not report the existence of an anti-trafficking task force, monitoring mechanism, or anti-trafficking action plan. Transparency was lacking in the government’s trafficking-related policies and activities; it did not report publicly on its efforts. The government made no known efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex. The government has not reported identification of a child sex tourism problem involving its nationals or within Cuba. Cuba is not a party to the 2000 UN TIP Protocol.

THAILAND (Tier 2 Watch List)

Thailand is a source, destination, and transit country for men, women, and children who are subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking. Individuals from neighboring countries, as well as from further away such as Uzbekistan and Fiji, migrate to Thailand for reasons including to flee conditions of poverty. Migrants from Burma, who make up the bulk of migrants in Thailand, seek economic opportunity and escape from military repression. The majority of the trafficking victims identified within Thailand are migrants from Thailand’s neighboring countries who are forced, coerced, or defrauded into labor or commercial sexual exploitation; conservative estimates have this population numbering in the tens of thousands of victims. Trafficking victims within Thailand were found employed in maritime fishing, seafood processing, low-end garment production, and domestic work. Evidence suggests that the trafficking of men, women, and children in labor sectors such as commercial fisheries, fishing-related industries, and domestic work was a significant portion of all labor trafficking in Thailand.

UN-affiliated NGO research made available during the year reported a significant population of trafficking victims in the country. An estimated 23 percent of all Cambodians deported by Thai authorities at the Poipet border were trafficking victims. The UN Inter-Agency Project on Human Trafficking (UNIAP) estimated that Thai authorities deport over 23,000 Cambodian trafficking victims a year. Similarly, Lao authorities reported during the year that groups of 50 to 100 Lao trafficking victims were among the thousands of Lao nationals deported by Thai authorities. An assessment of the cumulative risk of labor trafficking among Burmese migrant workers in the seafood industry in Samut Sakhon, Thailand found that 57 percent of these workers experience conditions of forced labor. An IOM report released in May 2011 noted prevalent forced labor conditions, including debt bondage, among Cambodian and Burmese individuals recruited – some forcefully or through fraud – for work in the Thai fishing industry. According to the report, Burmese, Cambodian, and Thai men were trafficked onto Thai fishing boats that traveled throughout Southeast Asia and beyond, and who remained at sea for up to several years, did not receive pay, were forced to work 18 to 20 hours per day for seven days a week, and were threatened and physically beaten. Similarly, an earlier UNIAP study found 29 of 49 (58 percent) surveyed migrant fishermen trafficked aboard Thai fishing boats had witnessed a fellow fishermen killed by boat captains in instances when they were too weak or sick to work. Fishermen typically did not have written employment contracts with their employer. Observers noted that traffickers (including labor brokers) who bring foreign victims into Thailand generally work as individuals or in unorganized groups, while those who enslave Thai victims abroad tend to be more organized. Informed observers also reported that labor brokers, some of whom facilitate or engage in trafficking, are of both Thai and foreign origin and work in networks, collaborating with employers and, at times, with law enforcement officials.

Migrants, ethnic minorities, and stateless people in Thailand are at a greater risk of being trafficked than Thai nationals, and experience withholding of travel documents, migrant registration cards, and work permits by employers. Undocumented migrants remain particularly vulnerable to trafficking, due to their economic status, education level, language barriers, and lack of knowledge of Thai law. The greatest risk factor for highland women and girls to being trafficked was their lack of citizenship. Some children from neighboring countries are forced to sell flowers, beg, or work in domestic service in urban areas. During the year, Vietnamese women were found to have been confined and forced to act as surrogate mothers after being recruited for work in Bangkok. Most Thai trafficking victims abroad who were repatriated back to Thailand during the year had been exploited in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Bahrain, and China. Thai victims were also repatriated from Russia, South Africa, Yemen, Vietnam, the United States, the United Kingdom (UK), and Singapore. Thai nationals are also known to be trafficked to Australia, Canada, Germany, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan, and Timor-Leste. Some Thai men who migrate for low-skilled contract work and agricultural labor are subjected to conditions of forced labor and debt bondage. Sex trafficking generally involves victims who are women and girls. Sex tourism continues to be a problem in Thailand, and this demand likely fuels trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation. Thailand is a transit country for victims from North Korea, China, Vietnam, Pakistan, and Burma destined for third countries such as Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Russia, Western Europe, South Korea, and the United States. There were reports that separatist groups recruited teenaged children to carry out attacks.

The Government of Thailand does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so. The government continued implementation of its human trafficking law and conducted awareness-raising activities on human trafficking. The government continued work on its implementation of regulations that will allow trafficking victims to temporarily live and work within Thailand, though victims generally continue to be detained in government shelters. The Thai prime minister chaired meetings with labor and civil society organizations to coordinate anti-trafficking efforts, which led to the development of the Thai government’s second six-year National Policy Strategy on human trafficking for 2011-2016. In July 2010, the prime minister publicly acknowledged the need to improve the government’s weak interagency coordination in addressing human trafficking. The Thai government reported increases in trafficking prosecutions and convictions, but as of May 2011 there was insufficient data available to determine whether each of these could be categorized as human trafficking convictions. Despite these significant efforts, the government has not shown sufficient evidence of increasing efforts to address human trafficking over the previous year, particularly in the areas of prosecuting and convicting both sex and labor trafficking offenders, combating trafficking complicity of public officials, and trafficking victim protection; therefore, Thailand is placed on Tier 2 Watch List for a second consecutive year. Given the significant scope and magnitude of trafficking in Thailand, there continued to be a low number of convictions for both sex and labor trafficking, and of victims identified among vulnerable populations. Direct involvement in and facilitation of human trafficking by law enforcement officials reportedly remained a significant problem in Thailand; authorities reported investigating two cases of complicity involving four officials, including at the police colonel level, though there were no convictions or sentences of complicit officials during the year. The government did not respond to multiple reports of widespread corruption involving the extortion and trafficking of Burmese deportees from Thailand. NGOs reported that problems hindering the government’s anti-trafficking efforts included local police corruption, biases against migrant laborers, the lack of a comprehensive monitoring system of the government’s efforts, lack of understanding among local officials of trafficking, the courts’ lack of a human rights-based approach to labor abuse cases, and systematic disincentives for trafficking victims to be identified. Authorities continued efforts to prevent human trafficking with assistance from international organizations and NGOs, but have not yet adequately addressed structural vulnerabilities to trafficking created by its migrant labor policies. The government should continue to increase its efforts given the significant scope and magnitude of trafficking in Thailand.

Recommendations for Thailand: Enhance ongoing efforts to identify victims of trafficking among vulnerable populations, in particular undocumented migrants and deportees; increase efforts to investigate, prosecute, and convict both sex and labor trafficking offenders; improve efforts to investigate, prosecute, and convict officials engaged in trafficking-related corruption; ensure that offenders of fraudulent labor recruitment and of forced labor receive stringent criminal penalties; improve labor inspection standards and procedures to better detect workplace violations, including instances of trafficking; improve implementation of procedures to allow all adult trafficking victims to travel, work, and reside outside of shelters; provide legal alternatives to the removal of trafficking victims to countries in which they would face retribution or hardship; implement mechanisms to allow adult foreign trafficking victims to reside in Thailand; make greater efforts to educate migrant workers on their rights, their employers’ obligations to them, legal recourse available to victims of trafficking, and how to seek remedies against traffickers; improve efforts to regulate fees and brokers associated with the process to legalize migrant workers in order to reduce the vulnerability of migrants to human trafficking; and increase anti-trafficking awareness efforts directed at employers and clients of the sex trade.

Prosecution

The Thai government made mixed progress in its anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts during the reporting period. Thailand’s 2008 anti-trafficking law criminally prohibits all forms of trafficking and prescribes penalties from four to 10 years’ imprisonment – penalties that are sufficiently stringent and commensurate with penalties prescribed for other grave offenses, such as rape. The Thai government reported 18 convictions in trafficking-related cases in 2010 – an increase from eight known convictions during the previous year; as of May 2011, only five of the 18 convictions reported by the government could be confirmed to be for trafficking offenses. The government also reported initiating 79 prosecutions in 2010, up from 17 prosecutions during the previous year. The police reported investigating 70 trafficking-related cases in 2010, including at least 49 cases of forced prostitution and 11 for forced labor. This compares to the 95 trafficking-related investigations reported in 2009. Very few cross-border labor exploitation investigations led to arrests of alleged traffickers, and even those arrested rarely found themselves prosecuted in court. A study released during the year on the trafficking of fishermen in Thailand found that investigations of alleged human trafficking on Thai fishing boats, as well as inspections of these boats, were practically nonexistent, according to surveyed fisherman, NGOs, and government officials. The justice system remained slow in its handling of criminal cases, including trafficking cases. Additionally, frequent personnel changes hampered the government’s ability to make greater progress on anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts. In December 2010, the police anti-trafficking unit, with assistance from NGOs, raided an apartment in Bangkok and removed 12 Uzbek trafficking victims, successfully identifying some of the victims; others who were likely also victims were returned to the streets or taken to Thai immigration for deportation, depending on their visa status. The alleged trafficker, an Uzbek woman, was initially jailed during a police investigation, but in February obtained bail and has reportedly resumed her involvement in Bangkok’s sex industry. In January 2011, a senior police anti-trafficking officer involved in the investigation of the Uzbek trafficking ring, along with two subordinates, were placed on temporary suspension for allegations of corrupt practices.

The Court of Justice reported that the number of cases it adjudicated involving violations of the 2008 Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act has gradually increased since the law came into force. Sentences for convicted offenders in confirmed trafficking cases ranged from four to 20 years’ imprisonment. In December, a Thai court convicted three defendants in the 2006 Ranya Paew case involving forced labor of Burmese workers in a shrimp processing factory and sentenced them each to 20 years in prison, the maximum penalty under the relevant Thai law; the offenders remain released pending the results of their appeal. In October, a Thai court sentenced a Thai woman to four years’ imprisonment for operating a fraudulent employment agency involved in the trafficking of Thai workers abroad. Media outlets highlighted several arrests in sex trafficking cases. Thai law enforcement authorities cooperated with counterparts from around the world, leading to arrests and convictions of traffickers. Some observers believe that more needs to be done to arrest traffickers within Thailand through cross-border investigations.

Corruption remained widespread among Thai law enforcement personnel, creating an enabling environment for human trafficking to prosper. Allegations of trafficking-related corruption persisted during the year, including in cases of forced prostitution and forced labor of migrants. There were credible reports that officials protected brothels, other commercial sex venues, and seafood and sweatshop facilities from raids and inspections. In addition to well-known corruption of local-level police officers, there were also protective relationships between central-level specialist police officers and the trafficking hot-spot regions to which they were assigned. There was no information indicating tolerance for trafficking at an institutional level. The Department of Special Investigations reported investigating four policemen, undertaking some disciplinary action, for trafficking-related complicity during the year; these investigations were ongoing. The government did not respond to reports that Thai officials were involved in the trafficking of Burmese men, women, and children deported to the hands of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA). Authorities also have not responded to reports that Thai police and immigration officials extort money or sex from Burmese citizens detained in Thailand for immigration violations, and sell Burmese unable to pay to labor brokers and sex traffickers. The government continued efforts to train thousands of police, labor, prosecutors, social workers, and immigration officials on victim identification.

Protection

The Thai government demonstrated limited efforts to identify and protect foreign and Thai victims of trafficking during the year. The Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (MSDHS) reported that 381 foreign victims were classified as trafficking victims in Thailand and received assistance at government shelters during the year, a decrease from the 530 foreign victims assisted in 2009. More than half of the victims assisted during the year were from Laos, and one fourth from Burma. The government continued to repatriate foreign victims of trafficking, including through regular coordination with Lao and Burmese authorities. MSDHS reported that in 2010, 88 Thai nationals were classified as trafficking victims abroad and were repatriated to Thailand with assistance from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs from the UAE, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Bahrain, China, Russia, South Africa, Yemen, Vietnam, the U.S., the UK, and Singapore. This represented a significant decrease from the 309 Thai trafficking victims repatriated from abroad in 2009. The government reported increasing efforts to identify victims of trafficking among vulnerable populations through screening checkpoints at airports and border crossings. However, given the reportedly significant population of trafficking victims in Thailand out of which only 52 trafficking victims were reported identified in immigration detention centers, the government should continue to improve these efforts.

The government provided limited incentives for victims to participate in the investigation and prosecution of their traffickers. The Thai government continued to refer victims to one of nine regional shelters run by MSDHS, where they receive counseling, limited legal assistance, and medical care. Foreign adult victims of trafficking identified by authorities continued to be detained in government shelters and typically cannot opt to reside outside of a shelter or leave before Thai authorities are prepared to repatriate them. The 2008 law contains a provision for granting foreign victims the right to seek employment while awaiting conclusion of legal processes, and the Thai government passed a new regulation in May 2011 to implement this provision. The government passed new regulations that will allow foreign victims to temporarily live and work within Thailand. As a result of this detention practice, foreign victims of trafficking are not afforded the same opportunities as other foreign nationals who seek and receive permission to work in Thailand. There were regular reports during the year of foreign trafficking victims who fled shelters, likely due to slow legal and repatriation processes, the inability to earn income during trial proceedings, language barriers, and distrust of government officials. There were reported instances in which victims opted not to seek designation as trafficking victims due to systemic disincentives, such as long stays in shelters during lengthy repatriation and court processes. NGOs reported that some individuals were trained by labor brokers on how to lie to government officials to prevent being identified as victims. Thai law protects victims from being prosecuted for acts committed as a result of being trafficked. However, some victims were likely punished due to the lack of effective victim identification procedures and authorities’ efforts to arrest and deport immigration violators.

The government generally encourages victims to participate in the investigation and prosecution of trafficking, though some victims opt not to do so. There was no evidence during the reporting period that the government offered legal aid to encourage workers to avail themselves of the opportunity to obtain compensatory damages from employers in cases of forced labor. High legal costs, language, bureaucratic, and immigration barriers, fear of retribution by traffickers, distrust of Thai officials, slow legal processes, and the financial needs of victims effectively prevented most victims from participating in the Thai legal process. While in the past, authorities have assisted trafficking victims receive financial compensation from their trafficking offenders in a few cases, there were no such reported cases during the year. The lack of labor law coverage for fishermen in Thailand under the Labor Protection Act of 1998 makes this population particularly vulnerable to exploitation. Despite a 2005 cabinet resolution that established that foreign trafficking victims in Thailand who are stateless residents can be given residency status on a case-by-case basis, the Thai government has yet to report granting residency status to a foreign trafficking victim.

Prevention

The Thai government made notable efforts to prevent human trafficking, including through collaboration with international organizations and NGOs. Some prevention efforts included the involvement of the prime minister and members of his cabinet. While some activities aimed to raise awareness on trafficking within Thai society as a whole, others attempted to raise awareness among targeted high-risk industries. The government reported that throughout 2010 and early 2011, it reached more than 3,000 people from high-risk groups to raise awareness on trafficking, as well as approximately 2,000 employers to raise awareness on labor rights and trafficking. NGOs noted that awareness of human trafficking and labor rights grew, both among high-risk populations and government officials. The government made increased efforts to educate migrant workers on their rights and their employers’ obligations to them. The government’s Nationality Verification and Granting an Amnesty to Remain in the Kingdom of Thailand to Alien Workers Program offered inadequate legal rights to Burmese and other migrant workers and bound their immigration status to Thai employers, effectively leaving workers without legal recourse or protection from forced labor. Observers remained concerned that the process to legalize migrant workers with its associated fees, as well as costs imposed by poorly regulated and unlicensed labor brokers, increased the vulnerability of migrant workers to trafficking and debt bondage. In some cases, workers reportedly incurred debts imposed by their employers amounting to one year’s wages for the required processing of their registration. During the past year, the government worked with the Government of Burma to open a Burmese government office in Thailand, reducing the need for some undocumented Burmese workers to return to Burma, and thus making them less at risk to being exploited. The government in 2010 announced plans to collect additional funds from migrant workers undergoing nationality verification in order to underwrite the cost of deporting undocumented migrants; if enacted, this could further increase workers’ debt. In October 2010, the prime minister announced the creation of a “Centre to Suppress, Arrest and Prosecute Alien Workers Working Underground and Human Trafficking Processes.” Authorities reported partnering with NGOs and international organizations that fund interpreters to assist the government in responding to foreign language queries reposted to the hotline that receives calls regarding trafficking cases; however, the government’s decentralized call system made it difficult to ensure that localities systematically and adequately responded to calls that were diverted to them - particularly calls that came in from non-Thai callers. The government reportedly disbursed $200,000 from its fund to assist trafficking victims and finance anti-trafficking activities - only a small portion of the government’s overall fund to assist trafficking victims. In April 2010, the Thai government published its own report on the trafficking situation, its efforts to address it, trafficking statistical data, and recommendations on how to improve its operations. The government reported random interviews with Thai migrants at overland border-crossing checkpoints prevented 171 potential victims of trafficking or other exploitation from traveling. Authorities also reported “labor checkpoints” at international airports through which the Labor Ministry works with immigration authorities to randomly interview travelers who may be potential trafficking victims, though the government did not report identifying any potential or confirmed trafficking cases through these efforts. The government conducted awareness-raising campaigns targeting tourists’ demand for child sex tourism, but did not make any other efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sexual acts or forced labor. Thailand is not a party to the 2000 UN TIP Protocol.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (Tier 1)

The United States is a source, transit, and destination country for men, women, and children subjected to forced labor, debt bondage, document servitude, and sex trafficking. Trafficking occurs for commercial sexual exploitation in street prostitution, massage parlors, and brothels, and for labor in domestic service, agriculture, manufacturing, janitorial services, hotel services, hospitality industries, construction, health and elder care, and strip club dancing. Vulnerabilities are increasingly found in visa programs for legally documented students and temporary workers who typically fill labor needs in the hospitality, landscaping, construction, food service, and agricultural industries. There are allegations of domestic workers, foreign nationals on A-3 and G-5 visas, subjected to forced labor by foreign diplomatic or consular personnel posted to the United States. Combined federal and state human trafficking information indicates more sex trafficking than labor trafficking investigations and prosecutions, but law enforcement identified a comparatively higher number of labor trafficking victims as such cases uncovered recently have involved more victims. U.S. citizen victims, both adults and children, are predominantly found in sex trafficking; U.S. citizen child victims are often runaways, troubled, and homeless youth. Foreign victims are more often found in labor trafficking than sex trafficking. In 2010, the number of female foreign victims of labor trafficking served through victim services programs increased compared with 2009. The top countries of origin for foreign victims in FY 2010 were Thailand, India, Mexico, Philippines, Haiti, Honduras, El Salvador, and the Dominican Republic.

The U.S. government fully complies with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking. The government sustained strong federal law enforcement efforts, strengthening support for federal task forces and initiating efforts to improve coordination and proactively identify cases. The government continued to provide funding to NGOs for services to victims and identified an increased number of victims. Immigration relief, which may lead to residency and eventual citizenship, is offered to qualified victims and immediate family members. The government sustained its prevention efforts, continuing to examine federal procurement and specific visa categories for vulnerabilities as well as to undertake public awareness efforts. The U.S. government annually reports on its activities to combat human trafficking in a report compiled by the Department of Justice available at www.justice.gov/ag/publications.htm including detailed information on funding and suggestions for improved performance.

Recommendations for the United States: Improve data collection on human trafficking cases at the federal, state and local levels; continue federal partnerships with state and local law enforcement agencies to encourage training, protocols, and dedicated and incentivized personnel at the state and local level; train field reporting collectors to recognize and report on human trafficking; mandate training in the detection of human trafficking for Department of Labor and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission investigators; increase the incorporation of anti-trafficking efforts into existing structures such as labor, child protection, education, housing, victim services, immigration courts, runaway/homeless youth, and juvenile justice programs; provide victim identification training for immigration detention and removal officers and conduct screening in immigration detention centers; increase funding for victim services, including legal services; offer comprehensive services to identified, eligible victims regardless of type of immigration relief sought, if any; increase training for consular officers to reduce vulnerabilities in visa programs; examine guestworker programs to reduce vulnerabilities; conduct briefings for domestic workers of foreign diplomats to ensure that they know their rights; improve oversight and enforcement of employment-based visas to forestall vulnerability and abuse; increase cooperation between the private and public sectors to encourage business practices that rid supply chains of human trafficking; and expand anti-trafficking outreach, services, and training in the insular areas.

Prosecution

The U.S. government demonstrated significant and sustained progress in its anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts through 2010. The United States prohibits all forms of trafficking in persons through criminal statutes that were enacted almost 150 years ago in the wake of the U.S. Civil War to effectuate the Constitutional prohibition of slavery and involuntary servitude. These statutes were updated and modernized by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA) and subsequent legislation. Enforcement of the involuntary servitude and slavery efforts has since been carried out under the umbrella term “trafficking in persons.” U.S. law prohibits peonage, involuntary servitude, forced labor, sex trafficking, and servitude as well as confiscation or withholding of documents, such as passports. U.S. criminal law also prohibits conspiracy and attempt to violate these provisions, as well as obstructing enforcement of these provisions. Sex trafficking prosecutions involving minors do not require a showing of force, fraud, or coercion. Additional federal laws can also be utilized in trafficking prosecutions and traffickers may be convicted under those statutes instead of specific trafficking offenses.

Penalties prescribed under these statutes range from five to 20 years’ imprisonment for peonage, involuntary servitude, forced labor, and domestic servitude, and up to life imprisonment for aggravating circumstances. Penalties for sex trafficking range up to life imprisonment with a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years for sex trafficking of minors and 15 years for sex trafficking by force, fraud, or coercion or sex trafficking of minors under age 14. There is also a five-year maximum penalty for the related offense of fraud in foreign labor contracting under a related statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1351, which can be used in trafficking prosecutions. Under federal law, those who financially benefit through participation in a trafficking venture with knowledge or in reckless disregard of the trafficking conduct are subject to sentences equivalent to the underlying trafficking statutes. These penalties are sufficiently stringent and commensurate with penalties prescribed under U.S. law for other serious offenses, such as rape, kidnapping, or if death results from the trafficking situation.

Federal trafficking offenses are investigated by federal law enforcement agencies and prosecuted by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). The federal government tracks its activities by Fiscal Year (FY) which runs from October 1 through September 30. In FY 2010, collectively federal law enforcement charged 181 individuals, and obtained 141 convictions in 103 human trafficking prosecutions (32 labor trafficking and 71 sex trafficking). These numbers do not reflect prosecutions of cases involving the commercial sexual exploitation of children that were brought under statutes other than the TVPA’s sex trafficking provision. This represents the largest number of federal human trafficking prosecutions initiated in a single year, including large-scale, complex cases. In FY 2010, the average prison sentence imposed for federal trafficking crimes was 11.8 years and prison terms imposed ranged from three months to 54 years. In the past year, notable federal prosecutions included the longest sentence returned in a single-victim forced labor case - a 20-year sentence for holding a woman in domestic servitude for eight years; the initiation of the largest trafficking case to date involving the exploitation of over 600 Thai agricultural workers which is pending trial; multiple cases involving the systematic nonviolent coercion of groups of documented guestworkers; a life sentence in a sex trafficking case; convictions of 10 defendants in a multinational organized criminal conspiracy that exploited guestworkers in 14 states; and a bilateral enforcement initiative with Mexico resulting in indictments of sex trafficking networks under both U.S. and Mexican law.

Traffickers were also prosecuted under a myriad of state laws, but no comprehensive data is available on state prosecutions and convictions. All 50 states prohibit the prostitution of minors under state and local laws that predate the enactment of the TVPA. By the end of the reporting period, forty-five states had enacted specific anti-trafficking statutes using varying definitions and a range of penalties. Over the last decade, human trafficking cases under state statutes were initiated in 18 states. The majority of state cases involved child sex trafficking; at least three states used their state statutes for forced labor prosecutions. State laws are enforced by approximately 16,000 local, county and state agencies. While state prosecutions continue to increase, one study found that less than 10 percent of state and local law enforcement agencies surveyed had protocols or policies on human trafficking, and recommended augmented training, standard operational protocols, and dedicated personnel within police agencies.

The lack of uniform nationwide data collection remained an impediment to compiling fully accurate statistics. Activities were undertaken during the reporting period to address this issue, but differing data systems used by the diverse array of enforcement agencies now partnering on human trafficking issues remain difficult to integrate. Amendments to the TVPA in 2008 tasked the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to incorporate human trafficking offenses in the annual statistics collected from police forces nationwide; development of technology to implement this mandate was underway during the reporting period and it is expected that collection will begin in early 2013. The Department of Defense (DoD) undertook a similar effort to amend its criminal data systems, but did not collect information during the reporting period. As part of their responsibilities under their federal grants, 39 task forces reported 750 investigations during the reporting period, although it is unknown how many were state versus federal investigations, how many convictions resulted, or to what extent the data included investigations that required stabilization of potential victims but that did not ultimately culminate in the official identification of victims under the TVPA.

DOJ continued to fund 39 anti-trafficking task forces nationwide, each comprised of federal, state, and local law enforcement investigators and prosecutors, labor enforcement, and a nongovernmental victim service provider. DOJ implemented a number of new measures to address critiques that state law enforcement participation mainly continued pre-existing programs to combat commercial vice and that the success of the task forces had varied widely. To further develop best practices, DOJ funded three Enhanced Collaboration Model Task Forces in Illinois, California, and Texas, in which state and federal law enforcement agencies and service providers addressed sex and labor trafficking whether victims were citizen or noncitizen, adult or child. DOJ, in cooperation with the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor, also announced the creation of Anti-Trafficking Coordination Teams to bring together federal investigators and prosecutors to develop and implement coordinated, proactive federal interagency investigations and prosecutions in select areas nationwide. The Department of State announced the creation of a dedicated anti-trafficking unit within the headquarters staff of the Diplomatic Security Service.

Efforts continued to incorporate civil enforcement in the anti-trafficking response. The Department of Labor (DOL) carries out civil law enforcement in the nation’s workplaces and its field investigators are often the first government authorities to detect exploitative labor practices; the investigators then coordinate with other law enforcement agencies to ensure restitution on behalf of trafficking victims. DOL investigators have not yet been funded, trained, or given the mandate to focus on human trafficking cases and did not receive mandatory trafficking-specific training during the reporting period. Anti-trafficking activities have not been funded or disseminated to labor and employment agencies within state and territorial governments. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which investigates discrimination charges against employers, held a public hearing devoted to human trafficking, taking testimony on identification and remediation of trafficking cases and identifying possible future actions. DOJ began partnering with the EEOC to strengthen referrals and protocols and to develop victim identification training for EEOC attorneys and investigators. During the reporting period, the EEOC completed two investigations and filed civil actions against the alleged traffickers; two other investigations were ongoing at the close of the reporting period.

There were no reports of official complicity in human trafficking during the reporting period.

The U.S. government undertook considerable law enforcement training efforts during the reporting period. In collaboration with NGOs, DOJ launched an online task force resource guide, and conducted a national training for 700 task force members and law enforcement, governmental, and nongovernmental partners, which included advanced training to identify, investigate, and prosecute human trafficking cases and assist human trafficking victims. The national training conference was followed by a series of regional conferences to build upon the exchanges of expertise at the national conference. The DOJ task forces trained over 24,278 law enforcement officers and other persons likely to come into contact with human trafficking victims. The FBI provided comprehensive anti-trafficking training to over 1,000 new agents and support personnel and specialized training for agents assigned to the FBI Civil Rights squads in field offices around the country as well as training 960 state and local law enforcement officers. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) provided advanced training to 72 veteran U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agents and overview training to all agents attending the ICE Training Academy, and updated mandatory training for more than 40,000 Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers and agents. DHS launched web-based training and continued in-person trainings that reached more than 14,000 federal, state, and local law enforcement officials during the reporting period. Information about services for human trafficking victims is included in the training offered to participating agencies in cooperative agreements following section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which authorizes state and local law enforcement agencies to carry out enforcement of certain immigration authorities related to the investigation, apprehension, and detention of unauthorized immigrants in the United States. NGOs reported instances in which noncitizen trafficking victims in 287(g) locations were fearful to report crimes. DoD continued mandatory training to its law enforcement personnel on identification, investigation, and information sharing with civilian and host nation law enforcement agencies.

Protection

The U.S. government demonstrated sustained protection efforts, increased numbers of victims assisted, and continued efforts to address challenges to increase identification and service provision. The U.S. government has formal procedures to guide officials in victim identification and referrals to victim services provided by NGOs, and funds an NGO-operated national hotline and referral service.

The U.S. government and its federally funded trafficking victim service providers encouraged foreign national and U.S. citizen victims to assist with investigations and prosecutions. The TVPA provides two principal types of immigration relief to foreign trafficking victims: 1) continued presence, which allows temporary immigration relief and may allow work authorization for victims who are also potential witnesses in an investigation or prosecution; and 2) T nonimmigrant status or “T visas,” which allow for legal immigration status for up to four years for victims who cooperate with reasonable law enforcement requests for assistance with an investigation or prosecution. Testimony against the trafficker, conviction of the trafficker, or formal denunciation of the trafficker is not required, nor is sponsorship or approval by an investigating agency. Victims may also apply for T visas on behalf of certain family members, including spouses and unmarried children under 21, parents and minor unmarried siblings of victims under 21, and parents and minor unmarried siblings of victims 21 and over if the relative faces danger as a result of the victim’s escape from the trafficker or cooperation with law enforcement. T visa holders and their family members are authorized to work and after three years are then eligible for permanent residence status and eventual citizenship.

Also available is U nonimmigrant status or a “U visa,” which allows for legal immigration status for up to four years for victims of certain crimes, including trafficking, who cooperate or are willing to cooperate with reasonable law enforcement requests in the investigation or prosecution of the qualifying criminal activity. An arrest, prosecution, or conviction is not required. Victims may also apply for U visas on behalf of certain family members, including spouses and minor children, and parents and minor siblings of victims under 21. U visa holders and their family members are authorized to work, and after three years are then eligible for permanent residence status and eventual citizenship.

In FY 2010, continued presence was issued to 186 potential victim-witnesses, a decrease from 299 last year. T visas were granted to 447 victims and 349 immediate family members of victims, representing an increase from 313 and 273, respectively, last year. Five hundred and eighteen T visa holders, including 309 victims and 209 family members, became lawful permanent residents in FY 2010, which puts them on a path to obtaining U.S. citizenship.

Unlike T visas, the number of U visas granted to trafficking victims is not tracked.

Foreign nationals in the United States without a lawful immigration status generally are not eligible for federal public benefits such as food assistance and health care programs; there are exceptions, including services provided by homeless shelters and emergency medical assistance. When continued presence is granted or a potential victim has made a bona fide application for a T visa, HHS can issue a certification letter. That enables the victim to receive public benefits and services to the same extent as a refugee, which includes targeted assistance with income, health care, and employment searches as well as access to all assistance programs available to citizens. In FY 2010, 449 such certifications were issued to foreign adults and 92 eligibility letters were issued to foreign children, an increase from 330 for adults and 50 for children in FY 2009. Certified victims came from 47 countries. Primary countries of origin for foreign victims were Thailand, India, Mexico, Honduras, Philippines, Haiti, El Salvador and the Dominican Republic. Fifty-five percent of foreign adult victims were labor trafficking victims, of which 70 percent were men and 30 percent were women; 12 percent were adult sex trafficking victims, all of whom were women; and 10 percent were victims of both sex and labor trafficking. Sixty-two percent of foreign child victims were labor trafficking victims, of which half were boys and half were girls; 29 percent were sex trafficking victims, of which 30 percent were boys; and nine percent were victims of both labor and sex trafficking.

From July 1, 2009, to June 30, 2010, DOJ and HHS provided trafficking victim assistance funding to NGOs that served at least 1,472 potential victims (foreign nationals and citizens), more than double the number served in 2009; the exact number is unknown because some victims were assisted with funding from both agencies but an unduplicated count is not available. Adult victims who were citizens, including Native Americans, are not included in the number of victims served. In 2010, DOJ released a new funding opportunity that includes a focus on adult U.S. citizen victims that can also serve Native Americans. DOJ took steps to gauge the need and the type of culturally competent services required to assist trafficked Native Americans with the hope that a pilot project can be developed in the future, and provided specialized training to law enforcement and service providers in jurisdictions serving Native American communities.

Federally funded victim assistance included services coordination and referrals, medical care, dental care, mental health treatment, sustenance and shelter, translation and interpretation, immigration and legal assistance, and transportation. In FY 2010, DOJ provided grant funding to 34 NGO service providers to assist foreign nationals and six to assist U.S. citizen and lawful permanent resident victims, and HHS provided funding for services that were delivered by more than 100 NGO service providers.

DOJ used an increase in victim services funding to create the Enhanced Collaborative Model Task Forces, with half of the funding applicable for services. The other half supported law enforcement investigations and coordination aimed at identifying victims. As increasing numbers of victims have been identified and assisted, HHS has directed an increasing percentage of available funding toward services for victims, their family members, and potential victims. The NGO contractor of the HHS services program reports having contributed non-government funds to support this effort.

Under the HHS services program, there is a maximum reimbursement amount allowed per month for each victim and a maximum number of months during which a victim may be assisted, with some exceptions allowed. NGOs reported cases in which the limits have been reached and they are no longer providing services to the victim before a case came to trial. However, once a victim is certified by HHS or, in the case of a minor, receives an eligibility letter from HHS, that individual is eligible for services, including income supports, health care, and social services, through the provider network that assists refugees resettle in the United States. While legal services are often crucial to access civil and immigration remedies and undertake the advocacy necessary to navigate the complex federal system of benefits and the justice system, the HHS services program does not allow reimbursement for immigration legal assistance. In 2010, DOJ extended its program to offer this assistance. Should a foreign national victim decide not to report the crime or comply with reasonable law enforcement requests, DOJ and HHS funded services must in most cases be terminated; approval for continuation on a case-by-case basis is sometimes granted, and the law provides an exception to the cooperation requirement where physical or psychological trauma renders a victim unable to participate in an investigation or prosecution. Services under the HHS services program must be discontinued if an adult victim pursues long-term immigration relief other than the T visa.

NGOs reported isolated incidents of officers citing victims risking withdrawal of benefits when faced with reluctant victims; NGOs also reported continued challenges in getting law enforcement to recognize reluctant victims for protection purposes. Law enforcement continued to face challenges in identifying child victims of sex trafficking, particularly because the victims are often provided false identification by their traffickers and at least initially self-identified as adults. There was no targeted federal funding to support state child welfare agencies’ anti-trafficking efforts. In some states, state child welfare agencies’ missions did not formally extend to human trafficking, focusing instead on children who have been abused, abandoned, or neglected by caretakers and have not been expanded to reflect the anti-trafficking policy developments of the last decade. NGOs reported that these programs generally did not assist children over 14 years of age. State and local law enforcement, in some jurisdictions, was hampered by a lack of mandates, protocols, and training to identify and respond to child trafficking victims. The challenge of incorporating modern anti-trafficking concepts into these existing institutions has resulted in misidentification and referrals to juvenile justice or immigration systems rather than protective services. During the reporting period, the states of Illinois, Georgia, New York, Connecticut, and Florida created new procedures to increase identification or conducted initiatives to train child protection workers on human trafficking.

When an unaccompanied child (UAC) comes to the attention of federal authorities, those children are usually put into the care and custody of HHS, Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), Division of Unaccompanied Children’s Services (DUCS). DUCS screens UACs to identify potential victims of trafficking. UACs who may be trafficking victims are referred to the ORR Anti-Trafficking in Persons Division (ATIP) for an eligibility determination. If the UAC is found to be a trafficking victim by ORR/ATIP, they are eligible for federal long-term foster care through the same program that cares for unaccompanied refugee minors who come to the United States. UACs who are not determined to be victims of trafficking by ORR/ATIP remain in the ORR/DUCS program until they reunify with a sponsor in the United States, age-out of care, return to their home country, or adjust their legal immigration status. Children may also be referred directly to ORR/ATIP for assistance without being placed in the ORR/DUCS program. Sometimes service providers believe a child may be a trafficking victim but HHS cannot substantiate the claim.

A study of UACs in immigration proceedings, a population vulnerable to trafficking, indicated a substantial gap between the number of children service providers identified as victims and the number of children who received federal benefits. For those unaccompanied children who may be trafficking victims and in deportation proceedings, the 2008 amendment of the TVPA allows for procedural protections such as access to counsel and child advocates. HHS funds projects to coordinate pro bono legal assistance and child advocates. Funding of direct counsel is not permitted, and not all of these children are matched with a pro bono attorney that is willing to volunteer their time to represent the child. In practice, child advocates are not always provided for these children as child advocate programs are only available in few areas due to funding constraints.

While federal, state and local grant programs exist for vulnerable children, including those who are on the streets, NGOs reported that identified child trafficking victims faced difficulties accessing needed services. HHS-funded short-term shelter programs served 44,000 homeless and runaway youth and more than 800,000 youth received contact from an HHS-funded street outreach worker, but these programs require training and specialized services to be able to identify and assist child trafficking victims. HHS conducted training for runaway and homeless youth services in an effort to fill this gap. Additionally, the executive branch proposed additional funding for training within the runaway and homeless youth system to identify, prevent and address sex trafficking of minors. DOJ continued grants for services coordination, technical assistance, and comprehensive services to U.S. citizen child victims of both sex and labor trafficking; 45 citizen child victims received services through this program.

In 2010, the United States’ Return, Reintegration, and Family Reunification Program for Victims of Trafficking reunited 165 family members with trafficked persons in the United States and assisted three victims in returning to their country of origin. In September, 2010, due to lack of funding, the program was suspended; approximately 89 individuals are on a waiting list for assistance, unable to reunify with their family members in the United States.

While the TVPA sets forth a federal victim protection framework and principles that covers victims in all 50 states and territories, such protections were not also codified in most state laws. Nine of 50 states, as well as Washington, DC, offered state-funded public benefits to trafficking victims; 18 permitted victims to bring civil lawsuits; seven encouraged law enforcement to provide supporting documentation for T visa applications; 21 instituted mandatory restitution; and nine required that victims’ names and/or locations be kept confidential. DOJ took positive steps to eliminate barriers, educate administrators, and encourage the states to use the federal Crime Victims Fund to fund mainstream crime victim service providers to assist trafficking victims.

The TVPA provides that victims should not be inappropriately incarcerated, fined, or otherwise penalized for unlawful acts committed as a direct result of being trafficked. NGOs reported identifying increased numbers of potential victims in deportation proceedings and immigration detention. The prostitution of children has traditionally been handled by some state governments as a vice crime or a juvenile justice issue, and the anti-trafficking approach of the TVPA has been slow to fully permeate the state juvenile justice system. DOJ made efforts to engage state juvenile justice professionals in order to increase identification of minor trafficking victims and has trained state prosecutors. In 2009, the most recent year for which data is available, 235 males and 844 females under 18 years of age were reported to the FBI as having been arrested for prostitution and commercialized vice, an increase from 206 males and 643 females in 2008. Jurisdictions continued to formulate varying responses to help decrease arrests and view trafficked persons as victims; several states passed laws decriminalizing children found in prostitution, diverting arrested children into shelters and services, or allowing prostitution convictions to be expunged.

DHS hired six additional Victim Assistance Specialists nationwide, bringing the total to 18 human trafficking specialists and 250 generalists who are trained on the issue. All asylum field offices conducted training on identifying trafficking victims in the context of affirmative asylum adjudications, and this training is required for all incoming asylum officers. CBP has mandatory training and protocols in place to screen unaccompanied children for trafficking victimization. A study reported that the screenings are not effective because they are not conducted in a child appropriate manner by child welfare specialists in appropriate facilities. As in the last reporting period, detention and removal officers did not receive training on victim identification and did not conduct screenings in immigration detention centers. HHS conducted online trainings on identification, outreach and services and the HHS hotline center conducted general awareness and identification trainings nationwide. The Department of Education increased efforts to provide educational resources to school districts to help them prevent, identify and respond to human trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of children, training chiefs of school police forces and surveying school districts for promising practices that can be disseminated nationwide. States have not yet created programs to increase awareness or identification within schools.

Prevention

The U.S. government made significant progress on addressing prevention throughout the reporting period, continuing efforts to ensure government procurement is free from forced labor, examine visa categories for vulnerabilities, and conduct public awareness activities. The Cabinet-level President’s Interagency Task Force (PITF) is statutorily directed to coordinate federal efforts to combat trafficking in persons. The Senior Policy Operating Group, which meets quarterly and consists of senior officials designated as representatives by PITF members, coordinates interagency policy, grants, research, and planning issues involving international trafficking and the implementation of the TVPA.

The U.S. government undertook multiple efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex and forced labor. The Departments of Agriculture, Labor, and State completed recommendations to Congress on how to reduce the likelihood that imported agricultural products and commodities are produced with the use of forced labor and child labor. The Departments of State and Defense were part of a multi-stakeholder process that led to 60 private security companies signing on to an International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers. These companies pledged to uphold a number of principles in their company policies and in the conduct of their personnel, including not engaging in human trafficking, sexual exploitation, or prostitution. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) launched a code of conduct that prohibits USAID contractors, subcontractors, grantees, and sub-grantees during the period of performance of their contracts or awards from engaging in trafficking in persons, procuring commercial sex acts, or using forced labor. DOL published an updated list of 128 goods from 70 countries that DOL had reason to believe were produced by child labor or forced labor in violation of international standards, and released the ninth annual Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor and a revised list of products produced by forced or indentured child labor. DHS continued to enforce the prohibition against importing such products under the relevant statute, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930. New legislation was proposed but not passed to increase enforcement capabilities in this area. DoD continued its demand reduction campaign to help make contractors, government personnel, and military members aware of common signs of human trafficking and hotline numbers to report suspected incidents. Enforcement of the zero-tolerance policy involved two service members who were punished for prostitution offenses, which included withholding promotions, reducing grades, levying fines, and restricting movement to the base.

State and local jurisdictions also engaged in a number of efforts to reduce demand for commercial sex. Some jurisdictions tested various combinations of arrests, shaming, and education of apprehended purchasers of prostitution. NGOs devoted to ending demand for commercial sex developed school curricula, conducted outreach campaigns, and worked with law enforcement. Reports continued to reflect significant numbers of arrests for commercial sexual activity. Data continued to reflect the arrests of more women than men for such activity; state and local law enforcement arrested 38,593 women versus 16,968 men for prostitution offenses and commercialized vice in 2009, the year for which the most recent data is available.

Allegations against federal contractors engaged in commercial sex and labor exploitation continued to surface in the media. During the reporting period, allegations were investigated and one employee was dismissed by a DoD contractor. The Inspectors General at the Departments of State and Defense and USAID continued their audits of federal contracts to monitor vulnerability to human trafficking and issued public reports of their findings and reparations. USAID also created an entity dedicated to proactively tracking contractor compliance with the authority to suspend contracts and debar contracting firms, a positive step toward increasing enforcement in this area. No prosecutions occurred and no contracts were terminated.

The U.S. government continued prevention efforts within its temporary worker and student programs. The A-3 and G-5 visa categories allow persons to enter the United States as domestic workers of foreign diplomatic or consular personnel (“foreign mission personnel”) or foreign employees of international organizations. The Department of State continued its ongoing work to help protect these visa holders, including implementing a system to track the visa application process of A-3 and G-5 visa holders, to require their payment into bank accounts, and to track allegations of abuse. During the reporting period, there were more than a dozen allegations of various forms of abuse and domestic servitude, including civil lawsuits against, and criminal investigations of, foreign mission personnel. The Department of State put procedures in place to closely review and, where appropriate, to deny A-3 and G-5 visas for workers of foreign mission personnel in the United States against whom serious allegations of abuse had been lodged. Under U.S. law, a foreign mission will lose the ability to sponsor additional domestic workers if the Secretary determines that there is credible evidence that a domestic worker was abused and that the mission tolerated the abuse; no suspensions occurred within the reporting period. However, the threat of suspension has been effective in alerting missions to the importance the Department places on the treatment of domestic workers and the need for missions to ensure that domestic workers are treated in accordance with Department guidance. The Department also issued new guidelines on prevailing wages for domestic workers employed by foreign mission personnel, including a prohibition against lodging deductions for live-in workers, and capping the percentage of salary that can be assessed for three meals per day at 20 percent. A-3 and G-5 visa holders who filed civil lawsuits against their former employers were eligible for temporary immigration relief and work authorization.

DOJ and DHS led several investigations and prosecutions for trafficking of temporary agricultural workers on H-2A visas and temporary hospitality, food service, and construction workers on H-2B visas. Employers who have committed certain violations of the temporary worker programs may be barred from filing future applications for a three-year period; five H-2B employers – the first ever – and three H-2A employers were barred during the reporting period, for a total of eight debarred employers. A DOL regulation came into effect during the reporting period that strengthened protections for agricultural guestworkers by prohibiting foreign recruiters from charging workers certain fees. Reports indicate that recruiters adjusted their practices by charging fees after the workers had obtained their visas and levying charges under the guise of “service fees,” which are permitted under the regulation; indebtedness prior to arrival in the United States is a common mechanism of making victims vulnerable to control and compelled work. Recruiters discouraged former workers from reporting labor violations, claiming that U.S. embassies or consulates would not grant future visas for those who complain – assertions that are false and contrary to U.S. law. Workers also feared seeking assistance because of blacklisting and other retaliation against workers who complain about their conditions. The new regulation addresses these issues by imposing on employers an affirmative obligation against retaliation, the failure of which can result in removal from program participation.

During the reporting period, the Department of State received a significant increase in the number of complaints regarding the J-1 Summer Work Travel program, which provides foreign students an opportunity to live and work in the United States during their summer vacation from college or university. Complaints were reported from foreign governments, program participants, their families, concerned American citizens, the media, law enforcement agencies, other federal and local agencies, and the Congress. These included reports of fraudulent job offers, inappropriate jobs, job cancellations on arrival, insufficient number of work hours, and housing and transportation problems. To minimize the risk that J-1 Summer Work Travel program participants may become victims of crime, the Department adopted new program-wide regulations and undertook a pilot program requiring verified employment prior to arrival in the United States, prohibiting the use of third party staffing agencies, and enhanced oversight by the Department of State.

The U.S. government continued measures to inform and educate the public, including potential victims, about the causes and consequences of human trafficking. HHS distributed public multi-lingual awareness materials, including brochures, fact sheets and posters, as part of an extensive nationwide campaign that began in 2004 and funded an NGO to operate a national hotline. In FY 2010, the hotline received a total of 11,381 phone calls, an increase of more than 4,000 from the previous year. The hotline received a broad range of calls, from information requests and wage disputes to exploitation and abuse. Of all legally documented foreign nationals, the national human trafficking hotline received the highest number of calls from J-1, H-2A, H-2B, A-3 and G-5 visa holders. HHS also funded 18 projects to conduct outreach, public awareness, and identification efforts. Embassies and consulates worldwide continued distribution of a “know your rights” pamphlet and oral briefings for approved student or work-based visa applicants – efforts which resulted in 624 calls to the national hotline in FY 2010. DHS launched the “Blue Campaign,” an initiative to coordinate and enhance the Department’s anti-human trafficking activities. International and domestic awareness campaigns included multi-lingual television and radio announcements, billboards, newspaper advertisements, victim assistance materials, and indicator cards for law enforcement. DHS also expanded online resources, including social media, and distributed a virtual toolkit to employers in the lodging, transportation, entertainment, agricultural, manufacturing and construction industries. DOL launched a nationwide campaign to inform low-wage workers in such industries as construction, janitorial work, hotel services, food services and home health care about their rights and how to recover wages owed; the campaign did not include specific anti-trafficking information.

The United States does not directly participate in UN peacekeeping and has only a minimal presence within those operations. Nevertheless, pre-deployment anti-trafficking training takes place for all military personnel. DoD updated its mandatory general human trafficking awareness training, with the potential to reach 3.5 million military members and civilian employees.

U.S. laws provide extraterritorial jurisdiction over child sex tourism offenses perpetrated overseas by U.S. citizens. DHS made seven criminal arrests resulting in five indictments and six convictions in child sex tourism cases in FY 2010.

U.S. Insular Areas

The U.S. insular areas consist of American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), Guam, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Federal authority over these areas resides in the Department of the Interior (DOI), which participated in the President’s Interagency Task Force in 2010. While the U.S. government has compacts of free association with Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, they are independent of the United States and thus discussed and ranked in separate narratives. The insular areas are a destination for men and women subjected to forced labor, debt bondage, and forced prostitution.

In the Territory of American Samoa, there were no new reported human trafficking cases. The legislature did not pass a bill, introduced in October 2009, which would have criminalized human trafficking as a felony offense.

In CNMI, there were six reported human trafficking cases involving multiple victims held in clubs, restaurants and massage parlors. A trend was observed involving the cancellation of victims’ return airplane tickets upon admission, stranding them with no financial means to return and rendering them wholly dependent on their employers. During the reporting period, the Federal Labor Ombudsman identified 71 victims of trafficking or fraud in labor contracting, of whom about 20 percent were sex trafficking victims. In 2010, the NGO working on the local anti-trafficking task force assisted 36 human trafficking victims and 40 fraud in labor contracting victims; an additional 31 victims qualified for services but could not be assisted due to insufficient funds.

In the Territory of Guam, DOJ prosecuted a multi-victim sex trafficking case, convicting a karaoke bar owner who forced multiple young women from Chu’uk in the Federated States of Micronesia and one juvenile girl into prostitution. The Guam legislature did not address a draft bill that would have closed loopholes that allow massage parlors to conduct illicit activities. There continued to be concern that a military build-up on Guam could involve labor exploitation and trafficking of the thousands of guestworkers expected; efforts were made by federal actors to have this considered in the planning stages. DOJ led a coordinated effort to identify human trafficking cases, provide services to victims, and bring the traffickers to justice in Guam and the CNMI. Uniquely, this effort included participation of foreign consulates from source countries and cross-training with investigators and other government officials from other Pacific jurisdictions.

In the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico there were no reported trafficking cases. NGOs worked to bring the issue to the attention of the legislature, law enforcement, service providers and the public at large. Puerto Rico had no local anti-trafficking law; there is an outstanding proposal to revise the penal code to include trafficking. There were no local government efforts or coordination with federal authorities to address human trafficking.

There were no documented cases of human trafficking in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

In the aftermath of the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, ICE officers in the U.S. Virgin Islands were placed on alert for potential human trafficking, but no victims were identified.

SAUDI ARABIA (Tier 3)

Saudi Arabia is a destination country for men and women subjected to forced labor and to a much lesser extent, forced prostitution. Men and women from Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, and many other countries voluntarily travel to Saudi Arabia as domestic servants or other low-skilled laborers, but some subsequently face conditions indicative of involuntary servitude, including nonpayment of wages, long working hours without rest, deprivation of food, threats, physical or sexual abuse, and restrictions on movement, such as the withholding of passports or confinement to the workplace. Recent reports of abuse include the driving of nails into a domestic worker’s body. Although many migrant workers sign contracts delineating their rights, some report work conditions that are substantially different from those described in the contract while others never see the contract at all, leaving them vulnerable to forced labor, including debt bondage. Due to Saudi Arabia’s requirement that foreign workers receive permission from their employer to get an “exit visa” before they are able to leave the country, some migrant workers report that they were forced to work for months or years beyond their contract term because their employer would not grant them the exit permit. Local and international media reported in May and June that some Nepalese domestic workers had been recruited to work in Kuwait and then illegally transported to work in Saudi Arabia against their will.

Women, primarily from Asian and African countries, were believed to have been forced into prostitution in Saudi Arabia; others were reportedly kidnapped and forced into prostitution after running away from abusive employers. Yemeni, Nigerian, Pakistani, Afghan, Chadian, and Sudanese children were subjected to forced labor as beggars and street vendors in Saudi Arabia, facilitated by criminal gangs. Saudi authorities reported fewer Yemeni children may have been forced to work in Saudi Arabia during the reporting period. Some Saudi nationals travel to destinations including Morocco, Egypt, Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh to solicit prostitution. Some Saudi men used legally contracted “temporary marriages” in countries such as Egypt, India, Mauritania, Yemen, and Indonesia as a means by which to sexually exploit young girls and women overseas.

The Government of Saudi Arabia does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and is not making significant efforts to do so. In a positive development, the government undertook some efforts to improve its response to the vast human trafficking problem in Saudi Arabia, including training government officials on its 2009 anti-trafficking law and conducting surprise visits to places where victims may be found. The government also achieved its first conviction under its human trafficking law. Nonetheless, the government did not prosecute and punish a significant number of trafficking offenders or significantly improve victim protection services during the year. The government’s policy of allowing Saudi citizens and residents to sponsor migrant workers and restrict their freedoms, including exit from the country, continued to obstruct significant progress in dealing with human trafficking. While Saudi Arabia continued to discuss alternatives to its sponsorship law, the government did not implement any new system. Domestic workers – the population most vulnerable to forced labor – remained excluded from general labor law protections, and employers continued to regularly withhold workers’ passports as a means of keeping them in forced labor.

Recommendations for Saudi Arabia: Significantly increase efforts to prosecute, punish, and stringently sentence traffickers, including abusive employers and those culpable of trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation, under the 2009 anti-trafficking law; enforce laws prohibiting employers from withholding migrants’ passports and arbitrarily denying permission for exit visas as a means of preventing trafficking abuses; reform the structure of the sponsorship system to discourage employers from withholding workers’ passports and restricting workers’ movements; institute a formal victim identification mechanism to distinguish trafficking victims among the thousands of workers deported each year for immigration violations and other crimes; ensure that victims of trafficking are not punished for acts committed as a direct result of being trafficked, such as running away from abusive employers; ensure trafficking victims in practice are able to pursue criminal cases against their employers; improve victim protection at the Riyadh shelter by transforming it into an open shelter where victims are not locked in; enforce labor laws and expand full labor protections to domestic workers; and continue and expand judicial training and public awareness campaigns on recognizing cases of human trafficking.

Prosecution

The Government of Saudi Arabia made limited law enforcement efforts against human trafficking during the reporting period. The “Suppression of the Trafficking in Persons Act,” promulgated by Royal Decree number M/40 of 2009 defines and prohibits all forms of human trafficking, prescribing punishments of up to 15 years and fines of up to $266,667. Penalties may be increased under certain circumstances, including trafficking committed by an organized criminal group or committed against a woman, child, or person with special needs. These penalties are sufficiently stringent and commensurate with penalties prescribed for other serious crimes. Since the law includes some concepts unrelated to human trafficking, the government must disaggregate law enforcement activity under this law to indicate which prosecutions and convictions are for trafficking. Although the 2009 anti-trafficking law does not address withholding passports and exit visas as a means of obtaining or maintaining a person’s forced labor or service, Council of Ministers decision 166 of 2000 prohibits the common practice of withholding workers’ passports. The Council of Ministers statement accompanying the 2009 anti-trafficking law secures the right of victims to remain in Saudi Arabia during the investigation and court proceedings, incentivizing their assistance in prosecutions. The government’s Permanent Committee on Trafficking funded and organized regional trainings for 48 judges, lawyers, recruitment officers, social workers, and police officers on the 2009 anti-trafficking law and the definition of trafficking. During the reporting period, the government reported receiving 23 accusations of trafficking, resulting in 13 ongoing investigations and 10 prosecutions. One of these cases resulted in a successful conviction. On January 9, 2011, the Medina Summary Court sentenced a 54-year old Saudi woman accused of abusing and severely injuring her Indonesian maid to three years in prison, but denied the victim any monetary compensation associated with the criminal case. The victim is, however, entitled to monetary compensation in the ongoing civil trial. According to the Permanent Committee on Trafficking, government authorities also arrested individuals in at least nine other trafficking cases. The government neither reported any arrests, prosecutions, convictions, or sentences for forced prostitution, nor did it report efforts to enforce the Council of Ministers decision prohibiting the confiscation of foreign workers’ passports; this practice continued to be widespread. The government also did not report any investigations, arrests, prosecutions, or sentences of government officials for trafficking-related complicity.

Protection

Saudi Arabia made limited progress in protecting victims, but its overall efforts remained inadequate during the reporting period. Despite unannounced visits by the Permanent Committee on Trafficking to deportation centers, prisons, shelters, juvenile detention centers, equestrian clubs, and camel races to identify victims, procedures were not implemented to systematically identify victims of trafficking among vulnerable populations and the Committee did not report any victims identified during their visits. As a result, many victims of trafficking are likely punished for acts committed as a result of being trafficked. Under Saudi law, foreign workers may be detained, deported, or in some cases, corporally punished for running away from their employers. Council of Ministers decision 244 authorizes the Permanent Committee on Trafficking to exempt trafficking victims from these punishments, but victims are often detained or deported without being identified. Women arrested for prostitution offenses face prosecution and, if convicted, imprisonment or corporal punishment, even if they are victims of trafficking.

The 2009 anti-trafficking law affords victims explanation of their legal rights in a language they understand, physical and psychological care, shelter, security, and the ability to stay in Saudi Arabia to testify in court proceedings. However, many victims sought refuge at their embassies instead; source countries report handling thousands of complaints of unpaid wages, physical or sexual abuse, or poor working conditions each year. One victim received medical and legal assistance from the Government of Saudi Arabia for injuries inflicted by her trafficker, including services for reconstructive surgery. It remains unclear, however, whether these rights are afforded in regular practice. No shelter or services are available to victims of sex trafficking. The government operated a short-term shelter for female runaway domestic workers in Riyadh, some of whom were likely subjected to physical or sexual abuse by their employers. In previous years, victims of physical and psychological abuse at these shelters reported that they were unlikely to receive assistance and some reported long waiting periods before the conclusion of their cases. The women were not free to leave and experienced restrictions on communication with family or consular contacts. In smaller cities in Saudi Arabia with poor access to the government shelter, victims of trafficking were kept in jails until their cases were resolved. Updated information on the conditions at these shelters was not available at the end of the reporting period. The government did not operate any long-term shelters or facilities to assist male victims of trafficking.

Saudi Arabia offered temporary relief from deportation to two victims who identified themselves to authorities. However, victims who have run away from their employers, overstayed their visas, or otherwise violated the legal terms of their visas were frequently jailed without being identified as victims. Some Saudi employers prevented foreign workers from leaving the country by refusing permission for them to get exit visas; this resulted in workers working beyond their contract terms against their will, languishing in detention centers indefinitely, or paying money to their employers or immigration officials to let them leave. Some police officers assisted victims by referring them to the government shelter. Other police officials, however, returned foreigners to their employers, pressured them to drop cases, or persuaded victims to take monetary compensation in lieu of filing criminal charges against their employers. Some employers file false counter-claims against foreign workers for theft, witchcraft, and adultery in retaliation for workers’ claims of abuse; as a result, in many cases, the workers rather than the employers are punished, which discourages workers from reporting abuse. The government provided some legal assistance to victims of trafficking, including the victim whose employer was sentenced under the 2009 anti-trafficking law. Nonetheless, few migrants successfully pursue criminal cases against abusive employers due to lengthy delays in the immigration and justice system.

Prevention

The government has made nominal progress in preventing human trafficking during the reporting period, but systemic problems resulting from sponsorship system regulations persisted. The Ministry of Islamic Affairs continued to encourage imams to regularly include anti-trafficking messages in their Friday sermons. To increase workers’ awareness of their rights, the Ministry of Labor continued to produce a guidebook for migrant workers in Arabic, English, and some source country languages. The government failed, however, to significantly reform the sponsorship structure to discourage employers from withholding workers’ passports and restricting workers’ movements. The structure of the sponsorship system, which holds employers responsible for the foreign workers they employ, enables employers to withhold foreign workers’ passports and restrict workers’ movements. Saudi Arabian law enforcement authorities had previously taken an administrative or civil approach in addressing cases of exploitation of workers, such as assessing fines, blacklisting or shutting down employment firms, issuing orders for employers to return withheld passports, or requiring employers to pay back wages. Despite efforts by the Permanent Committee on Trafficking to train law enforcement officials on the criminal punishments that can be levied in worker abuse cases, these punishments are not yet widely applied. In addition, domestic workers remain excluded from general labor law protections. In the reporting period, Saudi Arabia did not take actions to reduce the demand for prostitution or child sex tourism by Saudi nationals or acknowledge that trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation was a problem affecting
the Kingdom.

Courtland Milloy: For American and Cuban people, divide not that deep

2011-06-07T21:44:00.000-05:00

By Courtland Milloy, Tuesday, June 7, 8:37 PM Washington Post

HAVANA — While the Ballet Nacional de Cuba was in the District recently, I happened to be pirouetting around this town with a group of journalists from the United States. Not exactly a fair cultural exchange, but the Cuban people were gracious hosts nonetheless.

We got to dine at the homes of community activists and engage in frank talk about Cuba’s social inequities. We also met Johana Tablada, deputy director for North American Affairs in the Cuban Foreign Ministry, who offered tea and a critique of the high life she experienced while staying with friends in well-to-do Chevy Chase.

“I say, listen, maybe you have the 10 brands of cereal. Maybe you have the 100 options of clothing, which I like,” Tablada said. “But I don’t miss it when I’m here. I will go over at lunchtime and see my mom. Up in Washington, people do not stop; they do not look around. There is always something for you to consume, that consumes your life without you.”

More remarkable than Tablada’s take was the extent to which her country’s brand of socialism seems to terrify the U.S. government. An ongoing, half-century-long economic embargo aims to bring Cuba to her knees while a spurious designation of the country as a “state sponsor of terrorism” leaves the door open for regime change by force.

In April, The Washington Post reported that the new chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), told a filmmaker in 2006 that she would welcome the assassination of Cuban leader Fidel Castro.

And yet, here we were for a week of eyeballing in the forbidden land, the trip sponsored by the Institute for the Study of Advanced Journalism at North Carolina A&T University. Meanwhile, up at the Kennedy Center Opera House in Washington, the Cuban ballet was performing “Don Quixote.”

What a weird diplomatic dance.

During a visit to one home on the outskirts of the city, some of us watched a taped documentary that had run on Cuban television in 2008. It was called “Raza,” about the persistence of racism. In it, a white Cuban ballet instructor claimed that the reason blacks don’t make good ballerinas was that their “glutes” were too big and their feet “too inflexible.”

Now suppose Judith Jamison and the Alvin Ailey Dance Troupe in New York could freely travel and give lie to such a notion — if only for the sake of those Afro Cuban girls who might have heard such discouraging words?

There are so many ways our countries could help one another. Instead, American arrogance and Cuban pride shortchange us all.

Heriberto Feraudy of the Cuban Artists and Writers Association told us that he liked the American people but not the U.S. policy towards Cuba. I asked what the difference is. After all, the United States is us.

“The American people don’t run the country,” Feraudy said through an interpreter. “President Obama doesn’t run the country.”

Asked who does, he said he didn’t know. All he knew was that polls show more than 70 percent of Americans favored lifting the embargo and restoring diplomatic relations with Cuba — Obama, too. And still the embargo remains.

The Cato Institute, a Washington-based think tank, says the embargo “has made the Cuban people a bit more impoverished, without making them one bit more free.”

The Cubans we met were not enslaved commie automatons. Many were intrigued by Cuba’s transitioning from guaranteed government jobs to opportunities for self-employment. Just not at any cost.

“In the past, people were losing their values over tourism, doing anything for the green paper,” said Abel Contreras, our guide from the state-owned Havanatours. “This is my own opinion. One of the best things this government has done is to give us the possibility of being ourselves, of having self-respect and not being treated like a brothel of the United States.”

That said, he noted how much the people of both countries have in common.

“You like baseball; we like baseball,” Contreras said. “We like jazz; you like jazz. You want universal health care and a good education for all; so do we. Both countries are struggling to find solutions to those problems.”

And don’t forget the food. Contreras likes black beans and rice; I like red beans and rice. Hold the political hot sauce, and our tastes are not so different after all.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/courtland-milloy-for-american-and-cuban-people-divide-not-that-deep/2011/06/07/AG5uVRLH_story.html#weighIn

OFAC Goes After Barclays

2010-08-24T10:48:00.003-05:00

Barclays fined $298m for sanction breaking

Barclays faces penalty from US authorities for handling covert financial transactions involving banks in Cuba, Iran and Libya

* Andrew Clark
* guardian.co.uk, Monday 16 August 2010 20.27 BST

Barclays is to pay $298m (£190m) in fines to the US authorities for "knowingly and willfully" violating international sanctions by handling hundreds of millions of dollars in clandestine transactions with banks in Cuba, Iran, Libya, Sudan and Burma.

The British bank yesterday agreed to pay financial penalties to settle two criminal charges laid by the US department of justice, which accused Barclays of violating a "trading with the enemy" act which prohibits business with certain countries viewed as threats to national security.

Documents filed at a federal court in Washington accused Barclays of handling money transfers totalling $500m from banks in prohibited countries through its dollar clearance branch in New York between 1995 and 2006. Barclays is not alone in facing such charges: Lloyds TSB and Credit Suisse both settled with the US government last year over similar dealings with institutions in repressive regimes.

"For more than a decade, Barclays knowingly and willfully engaged in practices outside the US that caused its New York branch and other financial institutions located in the US to process payments in violation of US sanctions," says an affidavit filed by the US government, which described Barclays as a London-based institution employing 144,000 people in 50 countries with 48m customers.

Under a deferred prosecution agreement signed by Barclays' general counsel, Mark Harding, the bank has agreed to a string of measures to improve training and tighten internal procedures, and to co-operate with any further investigation by the US authorities. The bank is paying $149m to the US department of justice and a further $149m to the office of New York's district attorney.

The deal went before a Washington judge for approval yesterday. But judge Emmet Sullivan adjourned the hearing, saying he wanted Harding to appear in person: "He's the one who signed the pleadings and he should be here."

The episode is an embarrassing blot for Barclays, which has been working hard to build its presence in the US with a view to becoming a top-tier Wall Street player. Barclays bolstered its presence in investment banking two years ago by buying much of the US operation of bankrupt Lehman Brothers in a deal worth $1.75bn.

Court documents reveal that Barclays co-operated proactively with the US authorities, initially approaching the US treasury's office of foreign assets control in May 2006 to own up to four sanctions-busting transactions.

A Barclays spokesman confirmed that the bank was "in the process of seeking court approval" for a settlement with prosecutors but added: "Because this matter is pending before the court, at this time we will have no further comment."

The US government has vowed to come down hard on sanctions-busting. Cuba has been barred from business with the US since President Kennedy's tenure in the White House in the early 1960s. Sanctions have been in place against Iran since 1995 and were imposed on Sudan and Burma in 1997. Libya was on a list of "state sponsors of terrorism" until 2006, although relations have since thawed.

Prosecutors contend that foreign banks with a presence in the US have colluded in giving institutions in these repressive regimes a back-door route into the American financial system. Lloyds TSB agreed to pay $350m in January 2009 for its dealings with Libya, Sudan and Iran, while Switzerland's second biggest bank, Credit Suisse, struck a deal in December paying $536m for violating sanctions against Iran.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/aug/16/barclays-fined-for-sanction-breaking

Letters

The blockade against Cuba and the banks
Cuba is not the object of any "international sanctions" (Barclays faces $298m fine for breaking sanctions, 17 August). It has been the target for 50 long years of a unilateral US government policy of economic, commercial and financial blockade – as your article illustrates – but one that the international community has overwhelmingly condemned for 18 consecutive years at the UN general assembly. In the successive resolutions on the issue passed over those years, the UN has called on the US to lift this illegal and inhumane measure, which is found to be in violation of basic principles of international law, the UN charter and the freedom of trade and navigation. This year the UN general assembly will no doubt ratify this position for the 19th time. One can only hope that the US government will listen to that worldwide clamour and abandon such an unhelpful policy in favour of a constructive one.
René J Mujica Cantelar
Ambassador of Cuba to the UK

• I never thought I'd rush to the defence of our reviled banks. But news that the US is still enforcing its discredited policy of sanctions on Cuba and that Barclays has been fined by the US justice department for facilitating trade with, among other countries, Cuba appals me. Recently the US has been relaxing the moratorium on Cuba and we have seen a welcome liberalisation there with the release of political prisoners and a lifting of the heavy hand of the state on private enterprise. Therefore I am shocked that Barclays should be penalised in this manner.

Benedict Birnberg
London

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/23/blockade-against-cuba-barclays-bank

Gov. Bill Richardson Washington Post Op Ed

2010-08-16T11:14:00.000-05:00

Time for Western Hemisphere countries to collaborate

By Bill Richardson
Saturday, August 14, 2010; A13

Arizona's attempt to create and enforce its own immigration policy has once again amplified -- and politicized -- the immigration debate in this country. But the fallout of that debate extends beyond our borders. The anti-

immigrant push in Arizona has further alienated our neighbors throughout Latin America, who had been hoping for better relations with the United States after President Obama's election. We need to turn this opportunity to our advantage and engage with our neighbors throughout the Western Hemisphere.

Latin America has perhaps the greatest impact, in terms of trade and culture, on the daily lives of most Americans. U.S. exports to Latin America have grown faster in the past 11 years than to any other region, including Asia. Hispanics represent the biggest ethnic and most sought-after voting bloc in the United States. And nearly every country in North America, Central America, South America and the Caribbean now has a democratically elected government.

The time is right to leverage our trade and partnerships and advance a more collaborative relationship with our neighbors to the south. The Obama administration should consider these five steps:

-- First, it should aggressively lobby Congress for a comprehensive immigration law. Such legislation would include increased border security; a crackdown on illegal hires; and an accountable path to legalization that requires the 11 million immigrants here illegally to learn English, pass a background check, pay fines and get in line behind those who are trying to enter our country legally. Illegal immigrants come to our country from Central and South America and the Caribbean. This is not just an issue with Mexico; it is a hemispheric issue that needs a comprehensive response.

-- Second, as a first step to changing our policy toward Cuba, the president should issue an executive order to lift as much of the travel ban as possible. The travel ban penalizes U.S. businesses, lowers our credibility in Latin America and fuels anti-U.S. propaganda. Lifting the ban would also be a reciprocal gesture for Cuba's recent agreement, negotiated among the Catholic Church, the Spanish government and President Ra?l Castro, to release political dissidents. Obama has taken significant steps to loosen restrictions on family travel, remove limits for remittance and expand cooperation in other areas such as expanding the export of humanitarian goods from the United States into Cuba. Loosening travel restrictions is in U.S. interests and would be a bold move toward normalization of relations with Cuba.

-- Third, embark on a new Alliance for Progress with Latin America and the Caribbean, modeled on President John F. Kennedy's vision for the hemisphere. This should not be a one-sided alliance preconceived on expansion of U.S. markets, nor an agreement that imposes a U.S. solution. We need a new partnership in which we close the gap between the haves and have-nots by addressing both human and economic needs and giving more priority to the indigenous people of this hemisphere.

The United States needs to craft a hemispheric agenda that includes and emphasizes solutions to energy demands and climate change in Latin America and the Caribbean. Perhaps we need a hemispheric agreement on renewable energy that provides the technical know-how for the Americas and dramatically expands the biofuel agreement with Brazil. We also need to move quickly toward a real carbon-trading system that would reward countries that protect their forests.

-- Fourth, we should continue to seek trade agreements that are free and fair and contain strong standards on labor, the environment and human rights. Pending trade agreements with Colombia and Panama should be approved by Congress and once again establish the United States as a reliable trading partner. Additionally, the Obama administration should seek a hemispheric agreement on common labor, environmental and human rights standards. This bold move would promote our interests and image in the region.

-- Finally, we need a hemispheric accord on crime and violence. In New Mexico, we are working with law enforcement at the local, state and federal levels and on both sides of our border with Mexico to share intelligence and stop the illicit trade of narcotics, illegal guns and human trafficking. These are transnational issues that involve a coordinated effort to protect the safety of law-abiding citizens of the United States and Mexico. We must not allow the immigration debate to distract from our national responsibility to engage with our neighbors in Latin America and the Caribbean. Better hemispheric relations should be a foreign policy priority, not an afterthought.

The writer, a Democrat, is governor of New Mexico. He is former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and former energy secretary.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/13/AR2010081304982.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

OFAC Nails UN Bank For Dealing With Cuban Diplomats to the UN

2010-07-27T12:38:00.000-05:00

Export Law Blog (blog) - July 19

By Clif Burns

The latest monthly release of civil penalty information by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) describes a penalty “settlement’ with the United Nations Federal Credit Union, which agreed to pay $500,000 to settle charges that the UNFCU “dealt in property in which Cuba or a Cuban national had an interest’ as they quaintly say it in OFAC-speak. In ordinary English this means that UNFCU engaged in banking transactions with Cubans, likely with Cuban diplomats to the United Nations.

Of course, we have to say the transactions were likely with Cuban diplomats because, given OFAC’s longstanding aversion to providing anything but the most minimal details about its penalty settlements, the notice leaves out such crucial details as whether the Cubans involved were diplomats, non-diplomatic Cuban officials, ordinary Cubans, or herds of Cuban cattle. Nor were the types of transactions involved mentioned or their amounts.

In this case, the absence of details makes OFAC look foolish by suggesting the possibility that OFAC is penalizing the UNFCU for providing banking services to Cuban diplomats posted to the U.N. Apparently, such diplomats need to travel with suitcases of Cuban pesos and pay for their meals in the U.N. cafeteria with their national currency.

If that’s what OFAC is doing, it would be in direct contravention of the U.N. Headquarters Agreement, particularly given that the UNFCU is located in the U.N. Headquarters area. Article V, Section 15(4) of that agreement provides that even with respect to diplomats from countries not recognized by the United States, such as Cuba, the U.S. must accord them the same privileges and immunities as other diplomats while within the headquarters district. If a diplomat from France can bank at the UNFCU located in the U.N. Headquarters district, so can Cuban diplomats, no matter how much OFAC hates Castro and his diplomatic lackeys.

The UNFCU website has this statement (click on “Account Restrictions”) about its ability to deal with Cuban diplomats:

Please be aware that UNFCU, under authorization from the US Treasury Department, is only permitted to operate accounts for actively employed UN staff stationed in Cuba, Iran, Burma, and for Cuban citizens who are stationed in the United States.

Based on this, perhaps what was going on and again OFAC forces us to speculate was that the UNFCU was providing banking services to Cubans at U.N. locations outside the United States. The UNFCU website’s branch listing shows that the UNFCU has branches in Geneva, Vienna, Rome and Nairobi. Of course, the UNFCU’s extra-territorial application of U.S. sanctions could create a new problem for itself because these sanctions could well violate local laws that prohibit discrimination based on national origin.

Additionally, and more significantly, the UN could always solve the problem by only providing office space to financial institutions that do not, like UNFCU, discriminate against UN members based on national origin.

Who is a spy and why?

2010-07-02T07:53:00.000-05:00

Agents
La Alborada - July 2

The FBI has charged eleven people with conspiracy to act as agents of a foreign government --Russia-- without notifying the Attorney General. That's not "spying" or "being an unregistered foreign agent," but conspiracy to act as an agent. The Associated Press interpreted the news this way: "Russian agents infiltrated US society, charges say": infiltrated not the government or the Pentagon, but society. Nothing that we have found in the news so far suggests that the accused gathered any information of significance. The indictment charges that the defendants were paid or expected to be paid by Russia for their work.

The eleven defendants were arrested and jailed. Proceedings in the matter will determine whether or not they are guilty of any of the charges brought. If they are found guilty, they will surely serve time in prison.

They will never be called "dissidents," the generic name given to a number of people in Cuba who include agents of the US government. Many of them have been jailed since 2003. The evidence against the latter, obtained in part from Cuban security agents who had been posing as collaborators and also, as was the case here, by surveillance, was summarized in a book, Los Disidentes, published soon afterwards in Cuba.

The evidence showed that the dissidents were coordinated, directed, and financed by the US Interests Section in Havana, and also from Madrid. The declared independent journalists turned out to be independent from the Cuban government, but not from the US. They were told what kind of information they should generate; on their compliance depended the support, including payment in money and kind, that they received from the Interests Section, at which they often met to coordinate their activities.

The financing of dissidents --or subversives, depending on point of view-- in Cuba by the US is no secret. Congress periodically appropriates money in the millions of dollars officially earmarked to support the dissidents. When it is the US that does this, it considers it proper and necessary, a matter of course. It sees no need to make such payments a covert operation; in fact, it announces the payments proudly. The US also helps to arrange favorable media coverage for the dissidents.

The mass media never, ever, mention the evidence of control of and payment to the dissidents arrested in 2003. It, too, considers it normal that the US should sponsor them, or pretends that there is no connection, although charges of such an arrangement have become a major factor in reporting on the alleged Russian agents.

Russia is not attempting to overthrow the US government, nor could it do so; certainly not by using the kind of information that is at issue in the current case. The US no doubt has its own agents and spies in Russia, but it is not seeking to overthrow the Russian government. The US, however, is committed by law to overthrow the Cuban government, which is the ultimate goal of the blockade. Alan Gross was in Cuba surreptitiously under a grant dedicated to such a purpose. In 2003, in fact, the Bush administration served notice to states that it did not like that they could experience the same shock and awe to which Iraq was subjected.

SInce 1959, the US has sponsored and/or sheltered a variety of terrorists, such as Luis Posada Carriles, whose goal is to overthrow the government of Cuba by force. It was because of this that Cuba sent agents to Florida to gather information on what these elements were planning. That information did not remain secret, however; Cuba turned it over to the FBI. As a result, the FBI arrested the Cuban Five, who are now serving up to two consecutive life sentences.

Whatever one thinks of the Cuban government, it should not be hard to see why the Cubans would be upset at the financing and directing of US agents on the island, to the point of imprisoning them, especially considering US policy and the circumstances of 2003.

What justifies the difference in approach to the case of those charged as Russian agents and the case of the US agents in Cuba? Essentially, it comes down to two things: 1) Because we are Good and they are Bad; and 2) Because we can do it.

The policy --and law-- as to Cuba remains in effect. There is nothing to suggest that, if the Cubans did not react to the funding and direction of dissidents on the island, the US would cease to sponsor agents there. On the contrary, there would likely be more such agents in Cuba.

The US has Cuban agents in jail, and Cuba has US agents in jail. If there is the will to improve relations between the two governments, one place to start would be to exchange them.

LA ALBORADA
Washington, DC
nuevas@earthlink.net
Cuban American Alliance Education Fund
www.cubamer.org

American Businesses Hoping to Cash In On Cuba

2010-05-27T22:15:00.002-05:00

CNBC.com
| 26 May 2010 | 01:03 PM ET

American industries of all kinds—from travel and telecom to construction and energy—would be poised to profit if the 52-year trade embargo with Cuba were lifted. Among the first businesses to cash in would be those involved with tourism, most experts agree.

“I believe U.S. travel and tourism companies will be the first to benefit,” said Larry Register, president of the Cuba Business Bureau consulting firm.

“The travel sector already is getting prepared for what might happen,” said Kirby Jones, president of the U.S.-Cuba Trade Association.

In fact, the U.S. travel industry already has seen a significant growth in Cuban tourism, even with the embargo still in place.

President Obama, who has called for “a new era” in relations with the island country, lifted nearly all restrictions on Cuban Americans' travel there in April, 2009. This year, more than 20,000 Cuban-Americans travel to their homeland each month, compared to 9,000 before the restrictions were lifted. The Bush Administration had allowed only one visit per person every three years.

Last week, the U.S. agency that enforces Cuba sanctions approved 42 new travel and other service providers, allowing them to do business with Cuba. There were no such approvals last year.

If travel restrictions to Cuba were lifted for all Americans, first-year projections suggest that 800,000 to 1 million Americans would visit, said Jones, whose Alamar Associates consulting firm staged a U.S.-Cuba tourism summit in Cancun earlier this year.

“There were 120 people there,” Jones said. “All major travel-sector tour operators came to meet with Cuban officials to discuss the potential of doing business and how it might be done.”

Cuba began developing its tourism industry after the 1989 collapse of the Soviet Union, which had granted Cuba billions of dollars in annual subsidies. Last year, more than 2.5 million tourists visited Cuba, mostly from Europe and Canada. Tourism is now Cuba’s biggest source of foreign income.

Jones, who has advised U.S. companies on Cuba since 1974, is not optimistic about an outright end to the Cuban trade embargo. But he thinks a piece of legislation moving through Congress may serve much the same purpose.

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., is sponsor of a bill that would eliminate some of the cumbersome restrictions faced by farmers who have been selling food to Cuba since 2001.

The Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 lifted part of the trade embargo, allowing the sale of food and medical supplies to Cuba’s 11 million people. Since then, a steady flow of U.S. corn, cattle, wheat, rice, apples, cereal and soybeans has made its way to Cuba, which must import 70 percent of its food.

But the reform bill mandated that Cuba had to pay cash upfront for all transactions—allowing no credit. It further stipulated that both parties to any transaction had to use a bank in a third country, disallowing any direct dealings between U.S. and Cuban financial institutions.

Even with those restrictions, U.S. exports to Cuba reached $710 million in 2008, before the global recession forced the cash-poor island to cut back 26 percent last year to $528 million.

Peterson’s bill would do two things. First, it would allow direct transactions between U.S. and Cuban banks. Farmers have long been complaining that the forced use of another foreign bank adds needless cost and prevents expansion of their business.

The second part of the bill is more controversial. It would lift the travel ban for all U.S. citizens, so the resulting increase in tourism would help Cubans generate the cash they need to buy more U.S. goods.

“They’re within 10 votes of getting this passed in the House,” Jones said. “I’ve been following this issue for 35 years and I’ve never seen anything like this. They’re not quite there yet, but it’s closer than it’s ever been.”

A lifting of travel restrictions would sound the death knell for the embargo, Jones believes.

“Right now, most U.S. companies cannot buy or sell goods with Cuba,” he said. “But the validity of having a trade embargo when a million Americans are going there every year loses all sense of logic. I can imagine the head of John Deere thinking to himself,. ‘I can’t sell tractors down there, but my son can go for spring break?’ The embargo would begin to be dismantled.”

Jones envisions an American tourism influx that would lead to ATMs, U.S. cellphone coverage, and airplane maintenance facilities.

“There are any number of areas that will be opened up if there is free and open travel to Cuba,” he said.

Travel and tourism may top the list of business sectors that would benefit from a lifting of the Cuban trade embargo, but they’re followed closely by mining, oil, telecommunications, construction supplies—and virtually everything else.

“Who wouldn’t want to do business in Cuba? They need everything.” said George Harper, an attorney whose Miami firm often deals with Cuban trade ssues.

“You name it—construction, road building, services of all kinds, banking insurance,” added Harper, who was born and raised in Cuba. “It’s an absolute gold mine for any company that wants to expand.”

Beyond travel, the two biggest sectors with potenital for doing business in Cuba are mining and energy, experts say.

Cuba’s nickel deposits are the third-largest in the world and represent its second most valuable export behind sugar. There are no nickel deposits in the United States, which imports imports all of its nickel, mostly from Canada and Australia. It’s is used widely as an alloy, much of it in the production of stainless steel products.

Copper, chromium, and cobalt also are mined in Cuba, with lesser quantities of salt, lead, zinc, gold, silver. Immense iron reserves have not yet translated into much production.

In 2004, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated that drilling off the coast of Cuba could yield 5 billion barrels of oil or more. The Brookings Institute has said that Cuban oil reserves are "equal to major fields in Alaska people want to drill."

Senators Lisa Murkowski, (R)-Alaska, and Mary Landrieu, (D)-La., drafted legislation last year that would lift the trade embargo enough for U.S. oil executives to do business in Cuba, but the bill has languished. In the meantime, a multitude of other countries have moved in.

“Cuba has entered into quite a few partnerships to aggressively explore their coast,” said Jones, of the U.S.-Cuba Trade Association. “Canada, the UK, Spain, Norway, Brazil, Russia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Venezuela – all are partnering with Cuba to get at its oil.”

The United States still has a huge advantage over other countries because of its proximity to Cuba, even if it’s late to the game. Transportation costs over 90 miles of water would be miniscule when compared to Asia or Russia.

"We feel that a greater reliance on American technology to develop their resources could have a positive influence on the Cuban culture," said Robert Dillon, spokesman for Murkowski. "American companies are the best equipped and experienced to deal with offshore drilling like this, and we feel that American oil workers are missing out."

U.S. infrastructure companies stand to gain if the trade embargo is ended or loosened, said Register of the Cuba Business Bureau. “There is need for building supplies, highway development and building renovations.”

Another area worth exploring “right now” involves U.S. telecommunication firms,” Register added.

When it eased travel restrictions, The White House also announced it would exempt U.S. telecommunications companies from the trade embargo. Companies like Verizon , Sprint and AT&T could bring better phone and internet service to the island to “promote the freer flow of information,” a White House statement said.

But the Cuban government rejected such an arrangement. An executive of the government-owned telecommunications company, ETECSA, said two obstacles would first need to be removed. The U.S. froze $160 million in ETECSA funds in 1996, and they want it back. And the agreement that forces Cuba to pay U.S. companies through third countries—the same obstacle the Peterson bill would address—would need to be rescinded.

“It may seem like the Obama administration has expanded communication possibilities,” said ETECSA exec Vivian Iglesias. “But we know that unless restrictions like the (Cuban Democracy Act) and others that have been tightened since 1992 don’t change, there can’t be any normal communication.”

“The causes that led to the theft of our funds are still in place,” she said. “If those restrictions don’t change, that prevents direct communication between the United States and Cuba.”

In October 2009, a small Miami company, TeleCuba Communications Inc., announced it had obtained U.S. permission to lay fiber-optic cable to the island, but the Miami company admitted it has not yet received permission from Cuba.

While U.S. efforts are stalled, an Italian joint venture that began 12 years ago has developed a widespread cellphone system. Italy now owns 27 percent of ETECSA. Venezuela is spending $63 million to build an undersea fiber-optic cable across the Caribbean that is expected to be completed next year.

Business opportunities may abound in Cuba, but many impediments remain before U.S. firms can take advantage.

“I don’t think the embargo will be lifted in my lifetime,” said Cuban-born Harper, the Miami attorney. “But I’m 67. Maybe in my children’s lifetimes.

“I think the Castro boys will find a way to keep it in place,” he continued. “The embargo has been a good friend of theirs. There are few other things they can rally the Cuban people behind. It would be very difficult to keep control over people if there’s a free flow of information.”

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37339627/

Oil for U.S. and Cuba's troubled waters

2010-05-27T21:45:00.002-05:00

By Ken Stier, contributor

May 26, 2010: 10:45 AM ET

(Fortune) -- Among the many good reasons to jettison our failed economic embargo against Cuba is one with timely new resonance: oil.

Cuba has plenty of it -- offshore in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) -- and exploration is about to being in earnest with American companies stuck on the sidelines.

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates the nation has about 4.6 billion barrels and nearly 10 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the North Cuba Basin, and possibly four times that much in its portion of the Gulf of Mexico. The lower estimate would put Cuba on a par with Ecuador or Colombia.

But monetizing these resources is a real challenge: The 48-year old U.S. embargo and Washington's diplomatic muscle have thwarted any real progress so far. But this edifice is under siege. The Spanish, through their energy giant, Repsol, are bringing a deep-water oil drilling rig to Cuba this fall.

Trade sanctions dictate that the rigs can not contain more than 10% of U.S.-made components, which can include software. Most rigs worldwide typically top that. To get around the restrictions, Repsol contracted for a Chinese, purpose-built rig from Saipem, the offshore drilling unit of Italy's Eni, SpA, which will operate the rig. When Repsol first drilled off Cuba's shore in 2004, its core samples were promising enough to bring on partners for this go-round, including Norway's Statoil and India's national oil company. Repsol did not reply to repeated requests for comment.

After Repsol starts drilling, other international oil companies with concession acreage off Cuba are expected to hire the Saipem rig, explains Jorge Pinon, a Cuban energy expert, with 32 years industry experience, including a stint as president of Amoco Oil Latin America before retiring in 2003 from BP, which had taken over Amoco.

"That rig is going to hang around in Cuban waters for quite a while," says Pinon, now a Florida International University fellow. "And if any of these drilling jobs hit pay dirt and substantial reservoirs are found, then the pressure in Washington is going to be such that you will see the embargo, as far as the oil industry is concerned, falling apart."

Fears of another spill

More worrisome to some is a petroleum stampede in Cuba with American companies -- and their environmental standards -- on the sidelines

"The sobering fact that a Cuban spill could foul hundreds of miles of American coastline and do profound harm to important marine habitats demands cooperative and proactive planning by Washington and Havana to minimize or avoid such a calamity," argues a recent Brookings Institution briefing paper.

Cuba's EEZ stretches to less than 50 miles from Key West but the embargo prohibits the U.S. from offering any assistance at all; by contrast there are agreements in place with Canada and Mexico to facilitate U.S. aid.

Both Statoil and Saipem have extensive deepwater experience, but other operators in the 59 Cuban concession areas -- held by the Chinese, Vietnamese, Malaysians, Venezuelans, among others -- don't or have less stellar environmental records.

Fears of a spill like that at the BP-contracted Deepwater Horizon rig might be an argument for the U.S. to try to head off Cuban exploration, but that seems an increasingly untenable tack, especially because Havana has been offering U.S. companies part of the action for years.
0:00 /2:42Cheap oil: Careful what you wish for

A history of failed efforts

Politics have derailed earlier overtures: During a 2006 summit in Mexico between Cuban officials and U.S. oil executives, the U.S. Treasury insisted the Cubans be booted from the U.S.-owned hotel where they were staying. But industry is again quietly lobbying, and Washington seems to be listening. After trying for a year to get a license to visit Cuba, the Houston-based International Association of Drilling Contractors was recently granted one to go to Havana, which was first reported by Cuba Standard, the leading independent site for business news on Cuba.

"It's inevitable that Cuba will explore and exploit their offshore hydrocarbon resources, and it would benefit both the American public and the Cuban people to make sure it is done right," argued a recent IADC position paper circulating in Washington.

Even more potent is the lobbying heft of the Petroleum Equipment Suppliers Associations, whose members include Halliburton (HAL, Fortune 500), Fluor (FLR, Fortune 500) and Bechtel. Industry sources credit PESA for a provision in a pending energy bill that would permit extensive industry contacts with Cuba.

A member company executive confirmed the industry sees "great opportunity" in Cuba while expressing concern that the time it takes to work out suitable conditions -- tax protocols, IP and contract sanctity protection -- could leave American companies trailing their international rivals.

Lifting or relaxing the embargo is just one step the Obama administration needs to take toward opening two-way trade with Cuba. The only real exception to the embargo -- for U.S. agricultural sales approved after 2001's devastating Hurricane Michelle -- is stymied because credit-starved Cuba has to pay cash up front. Removing that restriction could double sales to roughly $1.5 billion a year.

That is part of the "tremendous authority" the president has to advance bilateral relations, argues Jake Colvin, vice president for global trade issues at the National Foreign Trade Council, which opposes the embargo.

The Council recently joined eight other leading business organizations to support the pending Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act, to better position American businesses for the eventual lifting of the embargo. Seeing Exxon Mobil (XOM, Fortune 500) invest in Cuba probably requires "fundamental change" in bilateral relations, Colvin adds.

Not everyone wants the embargo to go

That the White House, and a Democratic Congress, haven't done more to jump-start that process has frustrated some supporters who note the sway that Cuban exiles have with Washington.

Albert Fox, Jr., founder of the Alliance for Responsible Cuba Policy, points to an April 15 fund-raiser in Miami that reportedly netted $2.5 million for President Obama. The event was hosted by the singer Gloria Estefan, whose father served as a bodyguard to Cuban dictator, Fulgencio Batista, who was overthrown by Castro in 1959.

"This perception that things are loosening is just nonsense. The embargo is tighter today than it has been at any time in the last 51 years," argues Fox.

But even though calls for lifting the embargo grow louder as Cuba's current leadership appears ready to change, many warn the U.S. not to jump the gun.

"American companies need to take in to account business interests are not necessarily the national interest all the time," said Frank Calzon, executive director of the Center for a Free Cuba, and independent organization promoting a democratic transition in the island-nation. "The Cuban regime is coming to an end, there is no question that they are on their last phase now and I think this is the worst possible time for anyone to try to invest."

--Contact Ken Stier at kenfortune@earthlink.net.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/25/news/economy/oil_cuba.fortune/

Optimism About Travel Legislation

2010-05-12T11:53:00.002-05:00

11 May 2010 8:30 AM
By Patrick Mayock
Associate News Editor
patrick@hotelnewsnow.com

http://www.hotelnewsnow.com/articles.aspx?ArticleId=3300&PageType=News&ArticleType=35

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico—When President Obama lifted long-standing restrictions on Cuban-Americans visiting their native island in April 2009 after nearly two decades, it seemed only a matter of time before the United States further eased its embargo on the Caribbean nation, potentially opening a flood of travel and investment while altering the landscape of the region’s tourism industry.

That time could be less than a year away, if pending legislation makes its way through Congress as is projected, panelists said during a general session at the 14th annual Caribbean Hotel & Tourism Investment Conference last week.

The Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act (H.R. 4645), which prohibits the U.S. president from regulating travel to and from Cuba and liberalizes agricultural trade with the communist nation, could be brought to a vote in the House of Representatives as early as July, according to Timothy Ashby, a corporate attorney with Miami-based Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal.

The legislation already has enough votes to pass, Ashby said, though Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has asked bill co-sponsor Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minnesota) to ensure 220 votes (the bill only needs 217 votes to pass) before she brings it to a vote.

If the bill passes the House, it will be attached to an appropriations bill in the Senate, which likely would be voted on between the midterm elections and the Christmas holiday recess, Ashby said. Then it would go to President Obama, who already has said he would sign it into law. The law would open travel to Cuba for all U.S. citizens beginning in 2011.

Impact on Caribbean

Lifting travel restrictions on Cuba would provide an immediate boon for the country’s travel industry, Ashby said.

U.S. travel restrictions to Cuba could be lifted by as early as next year, said Timothy Ashby of Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal.

Within the first year travel restrictions are lifted, the U.S. International Trade Commission predicts Cuba will receive between 554,000 and 1 million travelers from the U.S. The Cuban Ministry of Tourism agreed with those projections, adding the country could expect 3 million U.S. tourists within the first five years.

The Economist Intelligence Unit projects a 15-percent to 20-percent increase in international arrivals and a 10-percent increase per year in foreign exchange earnings, said Emily Morris, the Unit’s Cuba country analyst.

“By year 2014, you have Cuba just narrowly overtaking the Dominican Republic as the first tourist destination in the Caribbean,” she said.

Cuba is already preparing for this influx of visitors. The country is looking to expand its existing supply of 50,000 hotel rooms by at least 20,000 rooms during the next five years, according to Carlos Vogeler, regional representative for the Americas for the United Nations World Tourism Organization.

Even without expansion, the country's tourism industry is showing growth. Cuba received 2.4 million tourists during 2009, 40 percent of whom came from Canada, That represents a 3.4-percent increase from 2008 to 2009. (The world’s international tourism market declined 4.3 percent last year.)

The country received US$2.3 million in tourism-related receipts during 2009.

Any short-term benefits that befall Cuba would not adversely affect the rest of the Caribbean travel industry, the panelists agreed. On the contrary, lifting travel restrictions would instead strengthen the region’s appeal throughout the world.

“If such a thing would happen, it’s not something to fear in the Caribbean. It’s something to welcome,” Vogeler said. “That will definitely impact positively … the whole market.”

“Development of Cuban tourism actually creates a bridge for an increase in the total volume of tourists to the Caribbean,” Morris said, adding the island would create a natural route via air or sea for travelers and businesspeople.

Morris did acknowledge a short-term negative impact on the Dominican Republic, Cuba’s closest competitor. But after a slight setback during 2011, the country would eventually approach 5 million international tourist arrivals by 2014.

Investment

A lift of travel restrictions also could usher in a swell of U.S. investment in Cuba.

“The Cubans are also open to U.S. investment,” Ashby said. “ … They would welcome U.S. investors as they would welcome tourists.”

The Rubio File

2010-05-07T15:41:00.003-05:00

Human Event Interviews Rubio

HE: When we spoke a year ago, we discussed Cuba. When would you approve of lifting the economic embargo against Cuba?

Rubio: When Cuba joins the rest of the civilized world in how it treats its people. That is freeing political prisoners, it means free and fair elections They can choose any form of government they like, but they have to have freedom of the press, freedom of religion, freedom of expression. The fundamental rights that we believe are endowed to every human being by our Creator. That’s the kind of country that I’m interested in us having a relationship with. And the embargo serves as leverage for us to be able to accomplish that. You have, as we speak right now, a number of dissidents and hunger strikes in Cuba. And their brave wives are marching every Sunday. And they’re being beaten, taunted, hassled and harassed. These are women. They’re called the women in white. They’re providing an extraordinary example of just how repressive this regime is and how it’s on the wrong side of history.

HE: So I take it you mean the recognition of the end of the embargo has to come with the end of the Castro brothers?

Rubio: Not only the end of the Castro brothers, but also political reform in the return of political freedom to the people of

Cuba

. The embargo gives us leverage to negotiate that. Cuba trades with every other country in the world. The fact of the matter is that the U.S. embargo is not the reason their economy is failing. Their economy is failing because they’ve embraced a combination of socialism and incompetence, which may be an oxymoron because they’re both the same thing. The point being that I would love for the United States to have a close economic relationship with a free Cuba. I think we’re going to see that very soon, God willing.

HE: Now assuming that free and fair elections were held in this new environment that you described, would you support resuming diplomatic relations before the settlement of Cuban properties.

Rubio: Before the settlement of Cuban properties in terms of their previous owners? I think that’s something for the Cuban people to determine through their new political system that’s in place. They have the right to that determination and to choose any form of government they please. What I’m interested in is having the United States having strong diplomatic and economic ties to a free and fair

Cuba

. A lot of times past, the issue of property rights there was going to have to be confronted like it was confronted in Eastern Europe. But I wouldn’t impose an external mandate. I think the links between Cuban exiles and their families in

Cuba

are close enough that they will be able to establish some sort of an orderly process for property rights to be respected, either returned to their rightful owners or paid for their loss.

HE: That leads to another question about the Obama Administration’s reverting back to the Clinton-era policy of travel and remittances by Cuban Americans to their families living on the island. Does this help the cause of freedom?

Rubio: It’s hard to tell people they can’t visit their dying grandmother or dying mom. And I get that and it’s sad. By the way, the Bush-era policies allowed people to travel once every three years. Unfortunately, that’s not what’s happening. What’s happening now is that the Castro government is using travel and exile travel as a way to fund its repressive regime. I also think it threatens the immigration status of Cubans. Cubans come to the

United States

on the basis of the Cuban Adjustment Act, which says that Cubans are exiles. Cubans are here because they have no political freedoms. But it’s hard to argue you’re in exile when a year and a month after you arrive, you’re returning repeatedly to the country you’re exiled from. How do you argue that you’re an exile when exile is supposed to be people that can’t return for political purposes? And after 13 months in the country, you’re traveling back? It threatens the exile status of the Cuban community. And it also provides a source of hard currency for the Castro regime. They use the dollars from remittances and from travel to fund their repressive operation. I think it was wrong to lift those travel restrictions.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=36858

********************

Monday, March 15, 2010

Why Are Florida Cubans Lukewarm On Rubio?

By David Gauvey Herbert

Marco Rubio was born in Miami to Cuban-born parents, became the first Cuban-American speaker of the Florida House, and he takes a hard line on U.S. policy towards Havana. Rubio leads Gov. Charlie Crist by approximately 28 percentage points in the race for the GOP Senate nomination, and in a matchup with Rep. Kendrick Meek, the presumptive Democratic nominee, he wins by 5 points.

So with Marco Rubio poised to become the nation's third Cuban-American senator, why haven't the rainmakers in Florida's Cuban-American donor community rallied to his side?

His challenges begin with the US-Cuba Democracy PAC. The Florida-based lobbying group is prolific, contributing more than $760,000 to congressional candidates in 2008. In this cycle, it had donated $225,000 to 111 House and Senate candidates across the political spectrum as of Feb. 21, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Rubio is not one of them.

Instead, the PAC has thrown in its lot with Meek, already having given him $7,500 -- more than any other Senate candidate and as much as it gave Reps. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., and Albio Sires, D-N.J., the top House recipients.

Mauricio Claver-Carone, the director for US-Cuba Democracy PAC's Washington operations, stressed that the committee has nothing against Rubio. At a December panel discussion hosted by the committee, Rubio, Crist and Meek all toed the same anti-Castro line, he noted. So then why Meek?

"He's the only one who's been in Congress and has a long track record of being an outspoken advocate for human rights and a strong

Cuba

policy," Claver-Carone said. "Charlie and Marco are great, and they would be great members of Congress, but they haven't had that yet. They've talked about it and they've advocated, but never from a legislative perspective."

Claver-Carone added that the PAC follows an "incumbency rule" in its giving and considers Meek an incumbent of sorts since he is currently in the House. But the PAC gave $7,000 to former Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., in his 2004 campaign to become the first Cuban-American senator, even though Martinez had never served in Congress.

The 25 Cuban-Americans who make up US-Cuba Democracy PAC's board, which includes some of the biggest rainmakers in South Florida, haven't rallied behind Rubio either. As of the end of the fourth quarter 2009, its board members had donated $31,200 to Crist, $14,950 to Meek, and $73,800 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, but just $8,150 to Rubio.

The donation numbers for the first quarter of 2010 are not yet available, and several members of the board did not return phone calls about their donations.

Rubio, despite his dominance in the polls, trails both Crist and Meek in cash on hand. Rubio had around $2 million in his coffers at the end of 2009, while Meek had $3.37 million and Crist had $7.56 million.

Does Rubio have a Cuban-American problem? No recent polls have broken down Cuban-American support for Rubio and Crist. But a Public Policy Polling survey released March 10 shows Crist faring better than Rubio with Hispanics in a general election matchup. Crist wins Hispanic voters -- Cuban-Americans account for close to half of Florida's Hispanic vote -- by a 43-22 margin over Meek in a potential matchup. Rubio, meanwhile, trails Meek by a 48-35 gap among Hispanics. Both Republicans would defeat Meek, according to the poll, but Crist enjoys a wider margin of victory, thanks in part to this differential.

Crist has a history of electoral success with this group: He won 70 percent of Cuban-American voters in his 2006 race for the governor's mansion.

Alex Burgos, a spokesman for Rubio's campaign, said he is confident his candidate has Cuban-American support.

"Marco is a product of this community," he said. "He is the proud son of Cuban exiles."

Still, while Rubio would love to carry the Cuban vote, Little Havana isn't his base. His most strident supporters have largely been white conservatives -- including Tea Partiers nationally. They are the ones who shook the rafters at his CPAC speech last month and continue to pour money into his coffers with one-day online fundraising drives, or "money bombs." Moderate Floridians still favor Crist, but among self-described conservative voters, Rubio trounces the governor by a 69-12 margin in the PPP poll.

Rubio, meanwhile, has taken stances at odds with the Latino community. He is against any immigration reform bill that provides a path to citizenship for the nation's 12 million illegal aliens; a spokesman said Rubio believes the 1986 amnesty was "a mistake." He also opposes counting undocumented immigrants in the Census for the purposes of federal aid and congressional reapportionment.

That stance drew a stern rebuke from Arturo Vargas, executive director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials. The organization honored Rubio in 2007 when he became the first Cuban-American leader of the Florida House, but "that was a very different Marco Rubio," Vargas told the Miami Herald last week.

"I know that in visiting Florida there has been some significant disappointment in the positions he's taken," Vargas told NationalJournal.com.

Cuban-Americans who want Washington to take a hard line with Havana need allies in Congress more than ever. One of Congress' most outspoken advocates for the Cuban embargo, Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, R-Fla., announced last month that he will not run for re-election. Former Sen. Martinez, another strong anti-Castro voice, resigned in September before the end of his term.

The Obama administration, meanwhile, has tried to offer Havana an olive branch by loosening travel restrictions for Cuban-Americans. The US-Cuba Democracy PAC and other hardliners want Havana to release political prisoners and legalize opposition political parties before Washington offers any carrots.

It's worth noting that Crist has had problems in South Florida, too. Diaz-Balart and his brother, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R), who are two of Congress' most anti-Castro members, pulled their endorsement of Crist in December. At the time, Lincoln Diaz-Balart remarked cryptically, "We take our endorsements seriously, but the governor knows why we withdrew and he left us with no alternative."

*****************

Posted on Wed, Dec. 30, 2009

Crist off his game

BY MICHAEL PUTNEY

mputney@justnews.com

Charlie Crist is off his game. Way off his game, which was spectacular when it was good. He had the easy rhythm of public life down perfectly. Deferential to the Legislature (even when it didn't deserve it), easily accessible to the media (on a first-name basis with most) and wildly popular with most Floridians, Democrats as well as Republicans. Nowadays, Democrats have pretty much abandoned him, and hard-core GOP conservatives are flocking to Marco Rubio. Charlie's not only lost his mo, he's lost his mojo.

That was sadly obvious at the annual luncheon of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC, which brought together nearly 400 of the biggest movers and shakers in the Cuban-American community last week to hear all the Senate candidates. It's a tribute to PAC's clout that all four agreed to appear in the same room at the same time. They wouldn't debate or take questions, but it was still the most important moment yet in this young Senate campaign. A very good moment for one of the candidates (Marco Rubio), pretty good to fair for two others (Maurice Ferre and Kendrick Meek) and an awful one for Crist.

Each candidate spoke for five to seven minutes, giving everyone a chance to compare and contrast. And what a contrast it was.

Democrat Ferre read a well-crafted, thoughtful speech linking progress on human and civil rights in Cuba to any future U.S. diplomatic overtures.

Fellow Democrat Meek pointed out that he has consistently voted against relaxing travel and trade with Cuba, followed the advice of his three Cuban-American congressional colleagues and has the president's ear.

Eloquent paean to free Cuba

Rubio delivered an eloquent and unscripted paean to a free Cuba that had intellectual heft and emotional power, particularly his disdain for Americans willing to put on moral blinders in order to sell

Cuba

food and agricultural products .

That left Charlie, who got up and said sincerely -- his favored leitmotif -- that he loves freedom and hopes Cuba will one day be free and a ``shining city on a hill'' like the United States is to the world. Then he told the story of his grandfather, Adam Christodoulou, who came to this country from Greece at the age of 8, shined shoes, saved his money and became an American success story.

It's a lovely story, although telling it over and over in political settings seems to both cheapen its value and aggrandize the teller. It certainly resonated with a roomful of Cuban immigrants, but I suspect the group at the Biltmore most wanted to hear the governor speak substantively about Cuba policy issues -- trade, travel, the embargo, freeing political prisoners and dealing with the Castros and their successors. From Crist, however, nary a word, only his hope that Cuba will one day be free. Inexplicably, the governor didn't refer to a set of talking points on Cuba that had been carefully prepared for him. ``He decided to ad lib for some reason,'' says one of the people who prepared the talking points for Crist. ``I don't know why.''

Key endorsement lost

More bad news for Crist was delivered the next day: Reps. Lincoln and Mario Diaz-Balart, arguably the two most popular Cuban-American politicians in South Florida, had withdrawn their endorsement. ``He knows the reason why,'' was all that Lincoln would say publicly.

One reason, I'm told, involves Crist ignoring Lincoln's recommendation for the appointment of a Gadsden County prosecutor to a local judgeship. Seems that prosecutor had mentored the congressman's son, Daniel, a law student at Florida State.

But there's more to it than pique over a rejected judicial appointment. The Diaz-Balart brothers have a close relationship with Kendrick Meek, who has followed their lead and that of Ileana Ros-Lehtinen on Cuba. The brothers were evidently feeling that by endorsing Crist they'd betrayed Meek, who sat on the sidelines instead of endorsing their Democratic opponents last year. So, the Diaz-Balarts met privately with Meek and his mother, former Congresswoman Carrie Meek, before the PAC luncheon and said they'll be sitting on the sidelines during the 2010 Senate race.

They'd told Crist a few weeks earlier, but it took a call from Lincoln's top aide last week to get the Crist campaign to remove the Diaz-Balarts' names as endorsers from the governor's campaign website.

Crist can still win the GOP Senate nomination without Cuban-American votes, but it will be very hard. Harder yet if he doesn't win over, or win back, hard-core conservatives and mainstream Republicans who are gravitating toward Rubio. The latest poll shows them tied -- tied! -- at 43 percent in a race that was Crist's to lose. Unless he straightens up, toughens up and smartens up, he will.

http://burnafterreading.nationaljournal.com/2010/03/why-are-florida-cubans.php?print=true

NCC CWS Letter to President re Religious Travel

2010-05-05T21:06:00.004-05:00

May 4, 2010

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We uphold you, Mrs. Obama, and your family in our fervent prayers, with every good wish for the health of our nation and its leadership toward a more peaceful and just world.

As leaders of Church World Service and the National Council of Churches in the USA, we write to you on behalf of our member communions to request that you end the restrictions on religious travel to Cuba. We appreciate your expressed willingness to review and revise long-standing U.S. policy toward Cuba and have
welcomed your removal of restrictions on Cuban-American travel. We urgently ask that you now change the Cuba policy of the United States in ways that will assist the churches in their work and have wider benefits for our country and for the people of Cuba.

Since 2005, U.S. church denominations, mission agencies and ecumenical organizations at the national and regional levels have suffered from severe restrictions on religious travel. Our institutions are currently eligible only for very limited licenses. Some of our institutions have been unable to secure even these limited licenses.

In 2008 we addressed an earlier letter to you wherein we stated:

These impractical restrictions have reduced our ability to send religious delegations to Cuba, limited our opportunities to accompany and support our Cuban church partners, and have the effect of severely limiting participation in Cuba missions by many U.S. churches and congregants.

Churches across the theological spectrum have called for the elimination of these restrictions which have now interrupted relationships, fellowship, and exchanges which began more than one hundred and twenty-five years ago.

Insomuch that Congressional action is not required, we ask you to lift these restrictions. This is a matter of direct institutional importance to U.S. communions and religious institutions.

Beyond this immediate step, we also ask that OFAC liberally grant visas for U.S. travel to Cuban pastors and other religious leaders; and, work closely with Congress to end the travel ban for all Americans. We are convinced that it is time to change this ineffective and counter-productive U.S. policy toward Cuba.

Thank you for your considered attention to these concerns of the churches.

Respectfully yours,

Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon
General Secretary
National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA

Rev. John L. McCullough
Executive Director and CEO
Church World Service

c/o Martin Shupack, Church World Service, 110 Maryland Ave., Suite 404, Washington, DC 20002 shupack@churchworldservice.org; 202-481-6934

http://www.ncccusa.org/news/100505cubatravel.html

Business Letter Supporting Ag and Travel Legislation

2010-04-19T21:47:00.000-05:00

April 13, 2010

The Honorable Collin C. Peterson
U.S. House of Representatives
2211 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-2307

Re: H.R. 874, To Allow Travel Between the United States and Cuba

Dear Congressman Peterson:

We write to express our strong support for H.R. 874, which would remove restrictions on U.S. citizens to travel to Cuba.

The United States should immediately remove travel restrictions and allow Americans to act as ambassadors of freedom and American values to Cuba. From farmers and manufacturers to human rights and religious groups, as well as a large and growing number of Cuban Americans,the American people recognize the unfairness and incongruity of restricting travel to Cuba. It is simply wrong that American citizens cannot travel freely to Cuba but are not restricted by the
United States from traveling to places like North Korea and Iran.

Current policies towards Cuba have clearly not achieved their objectives. Without the support of our allies and the larger international community, U.S. sanctions serve only to remove the positive influences that American businesses, workers, religious groups, students and tourists have in promoting U.S. values and human rights. Sanctions are also blunt instruments that generally harm the poorest people of the target country rather than that country’s leaders.

This is certainly true of the U.S. ban on travel to Cuba. The United States continues to lose influence by voluntarily isolating its citizens from Cuba. Far from providing leverage, U.S. policies threaten to make the United States virtually irrelevant to the future of the island.

We support the complete removal of all trade and travel restrictions on Cuba, and believe that Congress has a unique opportunity to take a step forward to end nearly 50 years of isolation from the Cuban people by passing H.R. 874. We urge your support for this important piece of legislation. Continuation of the status quo could leave the United States isolated from the Cuban people for another generation.

Sincerely,

AdvaMed
Coalition of Service Industries
Emergency Committee for American Trade
Interactive Travel Services Association
National Foreign Trade Council
National Retail Federation
Organization for International Investment
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
U.S. Council for International Business
USA*Engage

Rep. Mike Honda Op Ed Calling for End of Embargo

2010-04-19T21:36:00.000-05:00

Time to lift the embargo on Cuba
BY MICHAEL HONDA
honda.house.gov

Few know that Cuba, infamous for its socialism, cigars and salsa, was recently the United States' largest rice export market and is the fifth largest export market in Latin America for U.S. farm exports. Cuba holds $20 billion in trade with America over a three-year term. Our economy could benefit mightily from better relations, yet we alienate this potential ally.

When I traveled to Cuba with a congressional delegation, it became clear that the embargo is imprudent politically, economically and socially. Everyone we met with -- U.S. and Cuban government officials, trade organizations, journalists, cultural attachés, foreign diplomats and rural farmers -- confirmed this point.

Politically, now that Latin America stands beside Cuba -- as evidenced by diplomatic reinstatements with holdouts El Salvador and Costa Rica -- and the reintegration of Cuba into the Organization for American States and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CLACS) -- the United States risks ruinous relations with countries who see the blockade as backward. The United States is already marginalized: CLACS explicitly bars U.S. participation.

The impact of this Latin tack towards insularity is not insignificant. Consider grandstanding by Brazil's President Lula da Silva, who rebuffed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's efforts to bring Brazil in on Iran sanctions while courting Cuba's leadership. Lula, capitalizing on Cuba's appetite for growth, proposed investments in industrial, agriculture and infrastructure projects, including ports and hotels, and an agreement with Brazil's oil company.

We will see more of this. The Cubans are seeking suitors. Like the Bank of the South, Latin America's attempt to wean countries off U.S. institutions like the World Bank, the longer we keep Cuba at arm's length, the more likely Brazil and others will take our place. The longer we keep Cuba listed as a state sponsor of terrorism, an allegation roundly criticized by diplomats, the more we risk the credibility of our national security regime and reputation in the region.

Economically, the case for cooperation is even clearer. Despite the trade embargo, there is some engagement. Cuba continues to be reliant on U.S. agriculture. Since 2002, we have been Cuba's largest supplier of food and agricultural products, with Cuba purchasing more than $3.2 billion worth of products since 2001.

This agricultural reliance is in jeopardy, which puts American farmers at risk. In 2008, U.S. food imports to Cuba totaled $712 million, declined to $533 million last year and are declining this year. Cuba, having witnessed strong economic growth in the early 2000s at 11 and 13 percent, is now struggling to make ends meet, slipping below 2 percent in 2009. Beyond foodstuffs, other natural resources offer potential for partnership. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates nine billion barrels of oil are available in Cuba, plus an estimated nine billion cubic meters of natural gas. The Cuban government cites higher oil numbers, at 20 billion barrels. Either way, there's money to be made, and Cubans welcome participation. While the United States disengages, countries like Brazil, Russia, Venezuela and China are talking. We are clearly missing investment opportunities.

Socially, Cubans emphatically embrace the cultural convergences between our countries. Their love of music, art, dance, history and architecture is ubiquitous, drawing 2.5 million tourists annually to Cuba, 800,000 of which are Canadian. If the travel ban was lifted, two million Americans are expected to travel there immediately, and ultimately growing to four million. This is hardly surprising. Havana retains the Caribbean's largest, oldest, and best-preserved Spanish colonial architecture. The city's charm is intoxicating.

We should expand cooperation on education, medicine, science and sports through nonpolitical, people-to-people exchanges. The U.S. president has the authority to return the rules for academic, science, religious and other ``purposeful travel'' so that exchange can flourish again. This is how we rebuild relations.

None of this negates the sobering negatives characterizing U.S.-Cuba relations. Cubans remain poor, irrespective of education (at nearly 100 percent literacy) and healthcare (everyone is covered, for everything). The government is inadequately serving the population, and there is a palpable, public rethink surfacing within society, from government officials to academics to farmers. Reform is coming, though not as soon as, or in the form, the United States prefers.

America's annual $60 million in democracy-building, which is covertly distributed for explicitly stated regime change, exacerbates the problem by goading the government, jeopardizing the safety of reformers and marginalizing the U.S. Interests Section there. The American penchant for positioning Cuba-related communiqués as primarily human-rights reprimands resonates rankly as an inconsistent singling out.

Amid the acrimony, the United States and Cuba are cautiously coordinating on areas of mutual interest, like migration, counter-narcotics and disaster preparedness. The United States must build on this sooner rather than later, before others opt in while we opt out.

Cuba is not the enemy. She may frustrate the American proclivity for democracy promotion, but her behavior is nothing near as nefarious as U.S. allies elsewhere. The time to engage is now. Cubans are increasingly confabbing about reform while we sideline ourselves from the conversation.

Michael Honda is a U.S. congressman from the 15th District in California.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/04/13/v-fullstory/1577713/time-to-lift-the-embargo-on-cuba.html#ixzz0lbVZM0tV

Secretary of State at University of Louisville

2010-04-12T15:33:00.002-05:00

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
University of Louisville
Louisville, KY
April 9, 2010

QUESTION: Thank you, Senator Clinton. Given the fact that probably the Cuban missile crisis may be the greatest example of a deterrent, that’s been almost 50 years ago. Is there any talk within the Department of maybe normalizing relationships with Cuba?

SECRETARY CLINTON: That’s a really – that’s a topic of conversation a lot. I don’t think that there is any question that, at some point, the people of Cuba should have democratically elected leaders and should have a chance to chart their own future. But unfortunately, I don’t see that happening while the Castros are still in charge. And so what President Obama has done is to create more space, more family travel, more business opportunities to sell our farm products or for our telecom companies to compete dealing with common issues that we have with Cuba like migration or drug trafficking. In fact, during the height of the terrible catastrophe in Haiti because of the earthquake, we actually helped some of the Cuban doctors get medical supplies who were already operating there.

So there are ways in which we’re trying to enhance our cooperation. But it is my personal belief that the Castros do not want to see an end to the embargo and do not want to see normalization with the United States, because they would then lose all of their excuses for what hasn’t happened in Cuba in the last 50 years. And I find that very sad, because there should be an opportunity for a transition to a full democracy in Cuba. And it’s going to happen at some point, but it may not happen anytime soon.

And just – if you look at any opening to Cuba, you can almost chart how the Castro regime does something to try to stymie it. So back when my husband was president and he was willing to make overtures to Cuba and they were beginning to open some doors, Castro ordered the – his military to shoot down these two little unarmed planes that were dropping pamphlets on Cuba that came from Miami. And just recently, the Cubans arrested an American who was passing out information and helping elderly Cubans communicate through the internet, and they’ve thrown him in jail. And they recently let a Cuban prisoner die from a hunger strike. So it’s a dilemma.

And I think for the first time, because we came in and said, look, we’re willing to talk and we’re willing to open up, and we saw the way the Cubans responded. For the first time, a lot of countries that have done nothing but berate the United States for our failure to be more open to Cuba have now started criticizing Cuba because they’re letting people die. They’re letting these hunger strikers die. They’ve got 200 political prisoners who are there for trivial reasons. And so I think that many in the world are starting to see what we have seen a long time, which is a very intransigent, entrenched regime that has stifled opportunity for the Cuban people, and I hope will begin to change and we’re open to changing with them, but I don’t know that that will happen before some more time goes by (Applause.)

US, Cuban officials discuss Haiti quake assistance

2010-03-17T22:32:00.000-05:00

US, Cuban officials discuss Haiti quake assistance
17 Mar 2010 23:40:07 GMT
Source: Reuters
* Meeting held at experts' conference in Santo Domingo

* Cuba, U.S. involved in huge Haiti relief effort

By Manuel Jimenez

SANTO DOMINGO, March 17 (Reuters) - U.S. and Cuban officials met in the Dominican Republic on Wednesday to discuss international cooperation on assistance for Haiti after the catastrophic earthquake there, diplomats said.

The meeting took place in Santo Domingo on the sidelines of an international conference of experts and officials from the Haitian government, donor nations, United Nations agencies and humanitarian groups to draft a reconstruction plan for the poor, quake-stricken Caribbean nation.

The United States sent thousands of soldiers and aid workers to Haiti after the Jan. 12 earthquake, and Cuba sent hundreds of doctors and health personnel, all part of a huge international relief effort. Haiti says more than 300,000 people may have been killed in the catastrophe.

Diplomats said Cheryl Mills, counselor and chief of staff to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and another senior State Department official, Julissa Reynoso, met in Santo Domingo with Cuban Deputy Foreign Minister Rogelio Sierra and a senior Cuban Health Ministry official.

Washington maintains a longstanding trade embargo against communist-ruled Cuba and nearly a half-century of hostile relations means that high-level meetings between the two countries are few and far between.

The diplomats, who asked not to be named, said the U.S. and Cuban officials discussed aid for Haiti, including Cuba's capacity to help provide medical care for the hundreds of thousands of injured and homeless Haitian quake victims. More details of what they discussed were not immediately known.

The U.S. delegation also held separate meetings with delegations from several other countries, including Venezuela, the diplomats said.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, like his ally Cuba, is a fierce critic of U.S. policies. Shortly after the quake, Chavez accused the United States of using the disaster as a pretext to occupy the devastated Caribbean country by sending troops. He recommended Washington should send doctors instead.

Three days after the quake, U.S. officials announced the Cuban government had agreed to let the U.S. military use restricted Cuban air space for medical evacuation flights carrying Haitian victims, sharply reducing the flight time to Miami.

Some analysts expressed hopes that this kind of U.S.-Cuban cooperation could lead to a thaw in frosty ties between Havana and Washington, which U.S. President Barack Obama said last year he would like to restore to a better footing.

But the Feb. 23 death of a Cuban political prisoner on a hunger strike, and the continuing detention in Cuba of a U.S. contractor accused by Havana of distributing illegal communications equipment have stoked mutual criticisms between the two longtime ideological enemies.

The experts meeting in Santo Domingo this week worked on a draft of a reconstruction plan for Haiti, whose leaders say $11.5 billion will be needed for recovery and rebuilding in what was already the Western Hemisphere's poorest state.

The plan will be presented for approval and funding at an international donors conference in New York on March 31. (Editing by Pascal Fletcher and Eric Beech)

Minnesota Agricultural Delegation

2010-03-07T07:05:00.000-05:00

MARSHALL, Minn. — Kari Howe, regional economic development program specialist with the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, was part of the Minnesota Agriculture and Rural Leadership program international mission to Cuba Feb. 15 - 25

Howe of Bemidji was a member of the 36-person MARL Class V delegation that departed from Minneapolis for Miami on Feb. 15.

Florida provided a preamble for the group of the culture and agriculture it would see in Cuba. The group spent Monday and Tuesday in Florida to learn about U.S. agricultural industries comparable to those it would see in Cuba.

The charter flight from Miami to Havana departed on Wednesday.

“This was a valuable experience for MARL participants,” said Tim Alcorn, MARL executive director. “Our time in Florida was a great primer for the Cuba agriculture we saw. We left Cuba with a far better feel for the economic issues facing the communist country as a result of the U.S. embargo that has been in place since the Cuban revolution in 1959.”

MARL program leader Mike Liepold said the current state of U.S. and Cuban relations impacted the trip. “It was like being in time travel. There was 100 years of technology differences living side by side everywhere, Liepold said.

“There were 1950 Chevys all over. We saw 20,000-acre farms, next to people working fields with oxen. We saw homes constructed with marble interiors and basic one-room houses in the country. We met with government farm managers and workers as well as a few independent growers. It was meeting with the Cuban people that we found especially memorable. The trip was truly a life-changing experience,” he said.

The group’s agenda during its nine days in Cuba included stops that helped participants understand the country’s food distribution systems, both the staple commodity grain markets for the ration stores and the higher value restaurant and tourist food markets. Both are current markets for Minnesota farmers. Estimates place the growth potential of the market at over $1 billion if the current travel ban were ended.

Examples of food distribution system stops include a farmers’ market where Cubans with higher incomes purchase food to supplement the rations of staples provided by the government. Also, a grocery much like a U.S. supermarket, but with far more limited types and quantities of food available, including processed and frozen foods. The market and store were busy, but only a small percentage of Cubans can afford to purchase food at either business.

The group also saw portions of the Cuban agricultural production systems, including a state-run farm called Finca Cimex, where vegetables and ornamental plants, primarily cactus, are grown.

The time spent learning about the cane sugar industry in Florida proved beneficial as a stop was made at a closed cane sugar mill. Nearly half of the mills in Cuba were shuttered from 2000–2009. While the local mill was closed, cane is still produced in the area for processing at a different mill 200 kilometers away.

The Cuban market also holds good potential for tourism, which translates into demand for higher quality foods, particularly dairy and meat products that Minnesota could provide in the future. Cuban restaurant menus already heavily feature pork, chicken and cheese, but good quality beef and dairy products are in short supply. The proximity to Cuba gives the U.S. a natural advantage in the delivery of fresh, high quality food products simply because of transportation advantages.

However, the barrier to shipping beef, dairy, and many other products for that matter, into Cuba is price. The route that many products must take to get to Cuba under the U.S. trade embargo makes them extremely expensive, which places U.S. products at a competitive disadvantage when trying to serve the tourists to the country, who come primarily from Canada and Europe, with a smaller percentage from Mexico and South American countries.

The state of relations with Cuba is an ongoing political process in the U.S. Congress. While the MARL group was in Cuba, U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson, chairman of the U.S. House Agriculture Committee, was preparing legislation for introduction to make the sale of agricultural products to Cuba easier. Also included in the bill is language to ease the tight travel restrictions that prevent most U.S. citizens from being allowed to travel to Cuba.

The MARL program is a public-private partnership. Southwest Minnesota State University administers it and the University of Minnesota Extension coordinates the curriculum. The program is privately funded. Class members pay a participation fee, but the majority of funding comes from contributions from private sector associations, organizations, businesses, corporations, foundations, and individuals provide the majority of the funds to operate the program.

Two-thirds of the participants are agricultural producers and the other third are agribusiness people and other types of rural leaders.

http://www.bemidjipioneer.com/event/article/id/100016621/

H.R. 4645 Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act

2010-02-25T13:26:00.002-05:00

Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act (Introduced in House)

HR 4645 IH

111th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 4645

To remove obstacles to legal sales of United States agricultural commodities to Cuba and to end travel restrictions on all Americans to Cuba.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 23, 2010

Mr. PETERSON (for himself, Mr. MORAN of Kansas, Ms. DELAURO, Mrs. EMERSON, Mr. DELAHUNT, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. BERRY, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. CHILDERS, Mr. MINNICK, Mr. BOSWELL, Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN, Mr. SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. MASSA, Mr. BRIGHT, Mr. ELLSWORTH, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. KAGEN, Mr. SNYDER, Mr. POMEROY, Mr. KIND, Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. BOUSTANY, Mr. COSTA, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, Mr. ROSS, Mr. TANNER, Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois, Mr. RYAN of Ohio, Mr. HINCHEY, Ms. LEE of California, and Mr. BOUCHER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Agriculture and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To remove obstacles to legal sales of United States agricultural commodities to Cuba and to end travel restrictions on all Americans to Cuba.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act'.

SEC. 2. TRAVEL TO CUBA.

(a) In General- On and after the date of the enactment of this Act, and subject to subsection (b)--

(1) the President may not regulate or prohibit, directly or indirectly, travel to or from Cuba by United States citizens or lawful permanent residents, or any of the transactions incident to such travel; and

(2) any regulation in effect on such date of enactment that regulates or prohibits travel to or from Cuba by United States citizens or lawful permanent residents or transactions incident to such travel shall cease to have any force or effect.

(b) Exceptions- Subsection (a) shall not apply in a case in which the United States is at war with Cuba, armed hostilities between the two countries are in progress, or there is imminent danger to the public health or the physical safety of United States travelers.

(c) Applicability- This section applies to actions taken by the President before the date of the enactment of this Act that are in effect on such date of enactment, and to actions taken on or after such date.

(d) Inapplicability of Other Provisions- The provisions of this section apply notwithstanding section 102(h) of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996 (22 U.S.C. 6032(h)) and section 910(b) of the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7210(b)).

SEC. 3. CLARIFICATION OF PAYMENT TERMS UNDER THE TRADE SANCTIONS REFORM AND EXPORT ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2000.

Section 908(b)(4) of the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7207(b)(4)) is amended--

(1) in subparagraph (B), by striking `and' at the end;

(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

`(D) the term `payment of cash in advance' means, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the payment by the purchaser of an agricultural commodity or product and the receipt of such payment by the seller prior to--

`(i) the transfer of title of such commodity or product to the purchaser; and

`(ii) the release of control of such commodity or product to the purchaser.'.

SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF DIRECT TRANSFERS BETWEEN CUBAN AND UNITED STATES FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS UNDER THE TRADE SANCTIONS REFORM AND EXPORT ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2000.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the President may not restrict direct transfers from a Cuban financial institution to a United States financial institution executed in payment for a product authorized for sale under the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.).

Is travel legislation in trouble?

2010-02-09T11:33:00.000-05:00

Cuba travel bill buried in political agenda
1:05am EST

By Esteban Israel

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A bipartisan drive in Congress to end a Cold War-era travel ban on Cuba was buried during the healthcare reform debate but its supporters hope to dig it out this year.

Sponsors of two bills allowing Americans to travel freely to Cuba, introduced last year in the Senate and the House of Representatives, say a flood of dollars from the pro-embargo Cuban-American lobby might also have played a part.

"Support has not waned but it's clear that the debate over healthcare has consumed the first year of the (Obama) administration and has had a similar impact in terms of congressional action," Representative Bill Delahunt, a Democrat and one of the authors of the bill, told Reuters.

Co-sponsor Jeff Flake, a Republican representative, said the votes were there to pass the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act this year but the Democratic majority in the House was divided over whether to take it to the floor for a vote.

"This is not an issue that is at the top of their agenda or anywhere close and it's also an issue that splits part of their caucus," he said. "I still think it could happen this year."

The bill has 178 backers in the House, 40 votes short of the 218 needed but still a "big number," Flake said.

If passed, the act would be a bold step toward ending the 48-year U.S. trade embargo against Cuba and likely would flood the communist-run Caribbean island with American tourists attracted by its beaches and revolutionary mystique.

The U.S. National Tour Association estimates at least 850,000 Americans would fly to Cuba, just 90 miles off the Florida coast, in the first year after sanctions were lifted. U.S. and Cuban tour operators will meet next month in the Mexican resort of Cancun to draw up plans for that day.

The Cuba travel bills were introduced last year as President Barack Obama promised to "recast" troubled relations with Cuba. But the expectations raised when Obama lifted travel restrictions for Cuba-Americans are now all but gone.

"MONEY TALKS"

The explanation may lay, in part, in a strategy change by Cuban-Americans opposed to the Castro leadership. In the last few years, they have given Democratic lawmakers generous donations in the hopes of preventing any relaxation of the U.S. trade embargo.

Public Campaign, a non-partisan group, estimated hardline Cuban-Americans gave more than $10 million in contributions to politicians since 2004.

Mauricio Claver-Carone, director of the pro-embargo U.S.-Cuba Democracy Public Action Committee, sees a clear link between those money flows and the apparent stall of the bills.

"There is undoubtedly a connection," he told Reuters. "One of our goals was to break the political barrier and make Cuba policy a bipartisan issue."

U.S. tourism would be a life-line for the cash-strapped Cuban government, he said, allowing it to almost double the island's gross domestic product in the first year.

Divisions among Democrats emerged in November when 53 representatives signed a letter against any changes in the U.S. Cuba policy based on human rights concerns.

Public Campaign said 51 of the 53 had received a total of more than $850,000 in contributions from the U.S.-Cuba Democracy Public Action Committee and other pro-embargo donors.

"The letter, I think, was a strong indication the votes are not there," Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Democrat from Florida who gathered the signatures, told Reuters.

"I have about 20 more Democrats who didn't sign the letter but would not vote to lift the travel ban. That, combined with the overwhelming majority of Republicans, indicates the votes are just not there."

Supporters of the bill acknowledge the Public Action Committee has been effective.

"They've always had money and, in Washington, money talks," said Delahunt.

BACKGROUND NOISE

Supporters of the bill play down the impact of recent rifts between Washington and Havana, notably Cuba's detention last December of a U.S. contractor accused of distributing illegal satellite communications gear.

Cuban President Raul Castro, who took over from his ailing older brother Fidel in 2008, said the contractor incident showed Obama was committed to destroying the island's socialist system, just as his 10 predecessors were.

The renewed tension was reflected in The Washington Post's editorial page, where a recent piece said the travel bill should be frozen until Cuba frees the detained contractor.

But supporters called it "background noise" and said the act was not so much about rewarding the Cuban government as guaranteeing the right of Americans to travel.

Senator Byron Dorgan, a Democrat whose bill has 38 co-sponsors, said the current policy only punishes Americans.

"This describes the goofy position we put ourselves in by inhibiting the right of the American people to travel," Dorgan said. "Do you think there will be a ghost of a chance of saying we are going to now restrict the right of the American people to travel to China? You will be run out of town."

(Editing by John O'Callaghan)

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6180PP20100209

My comment:

The key to success in Congress is the leadership role of the President. He needs to reverse the Bush Administration's crippling restrictions on educational, cultural, religious and humanitarian people-to-people travel. He should also make clear that he is prepared to sign legislation to end all travel restrictions.

John McAuliff
Fund for Reconciliation and Development

Questions about detained DAI subcontractor

2010-01-14T17:04:00.000-05:00

The subcontractor is named, but little else is clear

La Alborada - January 13

It has taken a long time, but finally the subcontractor has been named. He is Alan P. Gross, head of Joint Business Development Center (JBDC) in the Chevy Chase suburb of Washington, D.C.

The New York Times and the Washington Post both covered the news yesterday in reports not from wire services but by respective teams of assigned staff writers, each including a team member in Mexico City. The Times gave as its primary source unnamed "American officials"; the Post cited "former colleagues and other sources." It sounds like the State Department gave selected information to the two chosen newspapers, but not for attribution, and did so in Mexico City --not in New York and Washington-- for whatever reasons.

The reports suggested the understanding that readers should reach. That is, essentially, that Gross is a social worker who likes to help people in other countries, and would certainly not be a government agent. The Times transmitted the unofficial official story this way: "American officials say that Mr. Gross had gone to Cuba as part of a United States government program and was providing encouragement and financial assistance to religious nonprofit groups...[the unnamed officials] flatly dispute any allegations that he is a spy."

The Times cited also unnamed people who know Gross: "Mr. Gross has visited Cuba several times, delivering computer and satellite equipment to three Jewish community groups, according to people with knowledge of his work...The people who know about his work, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment on the matter, said Mr. Gross was sent to research how the groups were making use of the equipment he had previously distributed to them."

This information contradicts the version of the American officials. While the officials talked about "encouragement and financial assistance," people "with knowledge of his work" said that Gross was sent to research how groups were making use of the computer and satellite equipment he had previously delivered. And the latter statement, of course, contradicts earlier assertions from the contracting company, DAI, that Gross was in Havana handing out equipment to underserved Cubans. As we point out below, all of this is contradicted in turn by the Post's account.

The Times did cite someone by name, a friend, who offered that "The Alan I know is someone who is concerned only about helping improve the human condition, not meddling in people’s politics." But another unidentified source, an unnamed "aide to a Democratic Senator," opined that "This is the kind of thing we do all over the world when we are trying to reach people their governments don’t want us to reach. It’s naïve to think that if we asked Cuba for permission, we’d get it."

The Post, for its part, cited its own unidentified sources to the effect that Gross was "working on a U.S. government project to help the island's Jewish community access the Internet." Matching the Times, it also cited an acquaintance's opinion that Gross was innocent: "It was probably pure naiveness, innocence -- not seeing anything wrong with what he was doing...He's definitely not a shrewd, calculating person. He's someone who genuinely gets into situations because he thinks he can help."

The Post's unnamed "sources familiar with Gross' work" explained that "he was helping Cubans download music, access Wikipedia and read the Encyclopaedia Britannica, which was provided on flash drives. The project is also aimed at helping members of the small Cuban Jewish community communicate among themselves and with Jews overseas," activities different from those mentioned by all of the other sources cited. The president of the contracting corporation, Development Alternatives, said that Gross "was trying to facilitate communications in 'a nonviolent, non-dissident religious organization."

Given the kaleidoscopic series of opinions, we looked on Internet for information on Gross' corporation. A direct link to the company was inactive, but on a page in cache, dated November 24, 2009, the company had this to say about itself:

The World Is Your Marketplace!

JBDC provides practical 21st century solutions to business, government, associations, and humanitarian aid organizations, globally. JBDC brings three decades of experience from completing successful results-oriented projects in more than 50 countries, with expertise in:

1. Economic and Community Development
2. New Media Technical Implementation Strategies
3. Rural Internet Access and Intranet Development
4. Global Managed VSAT Services
5. Business and ICT Development Services
6. Trade Facilitation

JBDC is described elsewhere as "a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation that fosters economic strength and independence of emerging free-market business communities," and, more specifically, in these terms:

JBDC brings 21st century solutions to business, associations, government and aid organizations in emerging markets, globally.

JBDC is dedicated to designing, funding and implementing programs to advance economic and business development locally and globally. In recent years JBDC has supported Internet connectivity in locations where there was little or no access. In the past two years JBDC has installed more than 60 satellite terminals, bringing Internet access, email, VoIP, fax and the like to remote locations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Armenia, and Kuwait.

The site also lists the following areas of operation for JDBC: "Africa, Caribbean, Latin America, Middle East, Fr. Soviet Union." The areas of work are listed on another site as "Iraq, Afghanistan, Central and Eastern Europe, Former Soviet Union, Middle East".

The latter site, with information dated 2005, provides the following data, which highlight the underlying tension between JDBC's status as a tax-exempt non-profit organization helping people to communicate and its market-driven and business-oriented mission:

Chief Executive Profile
Mr. Gross is founder and executive director of JBDC. He has worked in nearly 60 countries in areas of economic and business development, trade and investment, market development, institutional monitoring and evaluation, and organizational development.

Mission
Advance the business, economic and independent development of emerging communities as they progress toward free-market economies and enterprise systems. Foster the development of private enterprise in emerging markets by using reliable, results-oriented business practices.

Programs
These are to be accomplished by infusing human, technical and financial capital in "next phase" businesses. JBDC sponsors MicroNet, providing broadband internet access for microenterprises in remote locations, globally. JBDC collaborates with private industry to address development issues with 21st century solutions.

Accomplishments for Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2005
1. Established new VSAT installations in Afghanistan, Armenia, Iraq and Kuwait.
2. Continues to support MicroNet activities and USAID-funded IQCs, such as RAISE PLUS and AMAP.
3. Continued support for humanitarian activities in Cuba, Palestine and Israel.

Objectives for Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2006
1. Secure new funding as appropriate to accomplish mission.
2. Expand operations in new target countries.
3. Manage ongoing activities worldwide.

For calendar year 2004, the company reported revenue of $405,419 in Program Services (Contributions and Government Grants were zero). Apparently, its micro-clients were able to come up with almost half a million dollars collectively to pay for the company's services that year.

In sum, we now know the name of the subcontractor, but not what his company really does, although the company itself says that it focuses on creating access to Internet through its own satellite network. Mr. Gross is described as a social worker, but his small charitable company, ranging worldwide, advances expert market-driven "solutions." Information published by the Times and the Post is contradictory internally to the respective reports and between them, as well as compared to what the company that contracted him says. "American officials" were a source for both newspaper stories, but declined to identify themselves.

Surely, there is more to this story.

We still have not heard from Cuba. New and contradictory information from that country, but from named officials, can be expected.

Legislation Will Ease Ag Exports

2009-12-17T13:12:00.000-05:00

Bill should help exports to Cuba

Dec 16, 2009 9:37 AM, By David Bennett, Farm Press Editorial Staff

Under the leadership of Montana Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, senators said the department’s interpretation of the phrase “payment of cash in advance” was incorrect and would, contrary to their intent, stymie trade.

Agriculture trade between the United States and Cuba is expected to increase under a provision inserted into the massive appropriations bill for fiscal year 2010.

The provision — Section 619 of H.R. 3288, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 — essentially explains how Congress intends the U.S. Treasury Department to interpret a key phrase in legislation passed earlier this year.

Under the leadership of Montana Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, senators said the department’s interpretation of the phrase “payment of cash in advance” was incorrect and would, contrary to their intent, stymie trade.

“For the second year in a row, Congress has been very explicit in expressing its intentions to the Obama administration about U.S. agricultural trade with Cuba,” said Betsy Ward, USA Rice Federation president and CEO. “Though these directives have been single-year policies, we strongly support them for the ongoing momentum they provide to pass comprehensive U.S.-Cuba trade-and-travel legislation.”

As a measure of what’s at stake, USA Rice says Cuba is potentially a 400,000 to 600,000 ton-per-year market for U.S. rice.

With the blessing of the Obama administration and aimed at easing travel and trade with Cuba, Congress placed three items in the fiscal 2009 omnibus bill. Several of the items had to do with travel to Cuba and one concerned agriculture-related sales.

(For more, see Easing Cuban trade and travel.)

The Obama administration implemented the travel provisions in late summer.

The agriculture trade item wasn’t accepted as easily with the Treasury Department’s vow to continue rules put in by the Bush administration in 2005, requiring Cuba to pay for U.S. agricultural commodities prior to shipment through onerous, third-party transactions. With the newly inserted provision, Cuba will be able to wire payments directly to the United States while commodities are being shipped.

President Obama is expected to sign the bill Dec. 18.

Asked if the earlier objections by some Cuban-American politicians to weakening the trade embargo had eased, one rice industry insider says, “I don’t know they’ve quieted down. They haven’t changed their minds, at all. But this is being done (even though) the opposition is still there.”

Looking at the possibility of a massive increase in agricultural exports to Cuba, “hopefully there won’t be any more shadow dancing or tightrope walking in terms of how Treasury implements this language,” says the insider.

For more on Cuba/U.S. trade, see http://deltafarmpress.com/searchresults/?ord=d&terms=Cuba+trade.

e-mail: dbennett@farmpress.com

http://deltafarmpress.com/rice/rice-trade-1216/

Sen. John Kerry Op Ed Calls for Non-Tourist and All Travel

2009-12-08T15:03:00.000-05:00

Open Cuba to U.S. travelers

By John Kerry, special to the St. Petersburg Times

Published Monday, December 7, 2009

For nearly 20 years after the fall of Saigon, the Vietnam War took a less bloody but equally hostile form. The United States and Vietnam had no diplomatic relations. Vietnamese assets were frozen. Trade was embargoed. But in 1995 the United States normalized relations with Vietnam. The Cold War had ended, and we even signed a trade deal with a country where 58,000 Americans had given their lives.

The result? A Vietnam that is less isolated, more market-oriented, and, yes, freer — though it has miles to go.

Yet when it comes to a small impoverished island 90 miles off the coast of Florida, we cling to a policy that has manifestly failed for nearly 50 years.

While our Cuba policy has largely stood still, reality has changed dramatically. Today, the Cuban "threat" is a faint shadow, change is afoot in the Cuban leadership, and — importantly — Cuban-Americans increasingly seek broad, far-reaching interaction across the Florida Straits.

We need a Cuba policy that looks forward, brings our strengths to bear, and builds on what works to help the Cuban people shape their country's future.

Democracy in Cuba rightly remains an American policy goal. But for 47 years, our embargo in the name of democracy has produced no democracy at all. Too often, our rhetoric and policies have actually furnished the Castro regime with an all-purpose excuse to draw attention away from its many shortcomings. We have played to Fidel Castro's strengths, not ours.

Fortunately, we know there is a different strategy that can succeed. The Clinton administration refocused policy around what matters: on the Cuban people, not the Castro brothers; on the future, not the past; and on America's long-term national interests, not the political expediencies of a given moment.

We improved cooperation on issues like migration and fighting drug trafficking. Family travel in both directions skyrocketed, and the regime's portrayal of us as the neighborhood bully was readily debunked. Americans helped repair a synagogue roof, and Baltimore Orioles players visiting Cuba for an exhibition game gave children bats and balls — gestures of American generosity.

As promised, the Obama administration has expanded licenses for Cuban-Americans — albeit only Cuban-Americans — to travel to Cuba. Controls on family remittances, gift parcels and telecommunications transactions have been loosened as well. Mid-level talks about immigration and postal relations have resumed. And we've turned off an Orwellian electronic billboard flashing political messages from our Interests Section in Havana.

These are positive steps, but they are only a start. So what comes next?

First, at a minimum, the administration should reinvigorate people-to-people relations. When announcing expanded family travel, the president said, "There are no better ambassadors for freedom than Cuban-Americans." True, but there are 299 million other Americans whose challenging minds, economic success, love for democracy and solid values make them proud ambassadors as well.

Second, the administration should review the programs that the Bush administration funded generously to substitute for people-to-people diplomacy.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is already considering how best to reform Radio and TV Martí. After 18 years TV Martí still has no significant audience in Cuba. U.S. civil society programs may have noble objectives, but we need to examine whether we're achieving them.

In addition, I am announcing my support for the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act. Nowhere else in the world are Americans forbidden by their own government to travel. Americans who can get a visa are free to travel to Iran, Iraq, Sudan, and even North Korea. This act does not lift the embargo or normalize relations. It merely stops our government from regulating or prohibiting travel to or from Cuba, except in certain obviously inappropriate circumstances.

Free travel is also good policy inside Cuba. Visiting Europeans and Canadians have already had a significant impact by increasing the flow of information and hard currency to ordinary Cubans. Americans can be even greater catalysts of change.

Studies of change in Eastern and Central Europe find the more outside contact a country has, the more peaceful and durable its democratic transition. That's one reason why all of Cuba's major prodemocracy groups support free travel, as do longtime Castro critics like Freedom House and Human Rights Watch. A majority of Cuban-Americans have joined the rest of the country in supporting travel to Cuba by all American citizens.

Today, we have a choice: seek solace in old rhetoric, ignore change and resist it, or mold it and channel it into a new policy to help achieve our goals. After 50 years of failure, it's time to try something new.

John Kerry, D-Mass., is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

© 2009 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/open-cuba-to-us-travelers/1057098#

Christiane Amanpour's CNN Interviews on Travel

2009-12-07T18:28:00.000-05:00

AMANPOUR: Welcome back.

Fifty years after Fidel Castro declared Cuba a communist state, the US embargo remains. But the Castro brothers retain their iron grip.

It's been a fraught history between the two nations, from the Bay of Pigs invasion to the Cuban missile crisis. But for the first time now, a US president has been elected without making concessions to the powerful Cuban-American lobby.

In a moment, we'll talk to a US congressman who's trying to change American policy on Cuba - Howard Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

We asked the Cuban government representatives to join us, but they all told us they were not available at this time. We hope that they will in the future.

But right now we're joined here in our studio by Jose Miguel Vivanco, the director of Human Rights Watch Americas Division, which just published a highly critical report on Cuba. And from Washington, US Congressman Howard Berman, who joined us from Capitol Hill and who's been holding those hearings.

Welcome both gentlemen to our program.

Congressman Berman, if I could ask you, what precisely is the point of your hearings? What can you achieve?

REP. HOWARD BERMAN (D), CALIFORNIA: I'd like the Congress to re-examine the ban on travel. Americans can go to a country, Iran, that is developing a nuclear weapon that is the leading state sponsor of terrorism. During the Cold War, we never restricted the ability of Americans to go to the Soviet Union or other Soviet block countries.

I think our current policy interferes with what I consider a fundamental American right, the right of American citizens to travel.

AMANPOUR: And just to be clear, Congressman, if you lift the ban on Americans traveling, in a sense, de facto, the embargo collapses, correct?

BERMAN: No. I think the embargo and the travel ban are two very separate issues. There are all kinds of items - we have an embargo on Iran right now. We don't have a travel ban on Americans going to Iran.

AMANPOUR: OK.

BERMAN: And they're - they're are two separable (ph) issues.

AMANPOUR: All right. Let me turn to Jose Miguel Vivanco who's just come back from Cuba. You've written a highly critical report for Human Rights Watch called "New Castro, Same Cuba." What did you find there?

JOSE MIGUEL VIVANCO, DIRECTOR, HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH, AMERICAS: Well, the conclusion is that under Raul Castro, essentially is the same type of repression that has been ongoing in Cuba for 50 years under Fidel Castro is - is very much in place.

AMANPOUR: More specifically?

VIVANCO: Specifically going after anybody who disagrees with the system. You know, in other words, you have a system - a totalitarian system that negates the exercise of fundamental freedoms and rights. No - no free speech, no right to association, no right to, you know, to create a union, labor rights, no political rights to elect, you know, anybody who is not endorsed or official candidate of a.

AMANPOUR: So do you - do you believe that the travel ban should be lifted, for instance, as Congressman Berman says?

VIVANCO: Absolutely. And we submitted, actually, a - a letter to the committee of Chairman Berman, requesting and supporting to - to release the travel ban.

Essentially, our position is human rights conditions are still extremely poor. You know, Raul Castro's record is characterized by massive and gross violations of human rights. The best way to address this problem is by not only lifting the travel ban, but also replacing the embargo with effective pressure that could be exercised essentially multilaterally.

AMANPOUR: Let me play this sound bite from Yoani Sanchez, the notorious now blogger there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

YOANI SANCHEZ, CUBAN BLOGGER (through translator): They threw me in the backseat of the car, upside down. Then a very strong man placed his knee on my chest and I couldn't breathe.

The man in the front seat was hitting me in my back and pulling my hair. He said, "Yoani, this is it," and, at that moment, I thought I was going to die.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Congressman Berman, does that kind of - of testimony from inside Cuba, what you've just heard about the Human Rights Watch's rather scathing report, does that make it more difficult for you as you're holding these hearings?

BERMAN: I think it makes our case more compelling.

AMANPOUR: How's that?

BERMAN: Because the Cuban dissidence, the people - the brave people in Cuba who are standing up to this despotic regime, they want more contact with Americans. They want Americans coming to Cuba. They believe this will help bring down the wall that separates the government from its own people.

Our whole history with Eastern Europe and - and Russia, Americans traveling there meant American contact with dissidents, promoting American values, bringing to the people of these countries, as they would to the Cuban people, the story of what - of what freedom and liberty are really like.

AMANPOUR: Congressman Berman, as chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, what do you see happening in your committee in Congress regarding the Cuban issue? Is sentiment shifting away from this - this embargo?

Certainly, Cuban Americans, by a vast majority, want the embargo lifted and certainly the travel ban lifted.

BERMAN: Well, you make a very good point. The - there is a change of position going on within the Cuban-American community. More and more of them realize the futility of the travel ban in terms of achieving our shared goals, and in addition we now have something like 175, getting close to - getting close to half of the members of Congress co-sponsoring the legislation to repeal the travel ban.

There is no doubt that we are in a much better situation now than we were, even a few years ago, not because of anyone being enamored with Castro. We - we stand, I think, united in a bipartisan way against his repressive policies. But because we believe that the Cuban people and the American people will be better off.

AMANPOUR: The Cuban government often says that these repressive measures are in place to defend against a hostile United States. Do they have a point?

VIVANCO: Well, they have (ph) - using that, manipulating the US foreign policy of isolation. That's why - that is one of the reasons why we believe it's necessary to change the policy.

The policy of isolation that is essentially a policy of regime change, because that is what Washington has been trying for almost 50 years. Regime change is rejected by the - the rest of the world. Nobody in Europe agree with the US. Nobody in Latin America. No - no - there is not a single, you know, solid democracy in the world that is supporting regime change and isolation against the - the Cuban government.

So that's why it's important to build up a multilateral coalition that has the political power and the moral authority to exercise an effective pressure on the Cuban government.

AMANPOUR: Congressman Berman, again, to you also, the Cubans often justify whatever policy they have as standing against hostility from the United States. Do they have a point? And how can you promote change? It's obviously not going to come from outside, like regime change. How can you promote change there, if that's what you're seeking?

BERMAN: Well, I'm not - I'm not here to say that getting rid of the travel ban will meet the immediate change in - in the regime. But my - in my heart of hearts, I believe that Castro does not want the travel ban to be repealed. He loves using American policy as a scapegoat for his own repression and for the terrible economic conditions the Cubans now live under. We are serving his purposes by our current policy.

AMANPOUR: And do you believe that this will get through Congress and get through the Senate? What do you believe?

BERMAN: I think it has a better chance than it's had since the policy was formulated.

AMANPOUR: All right. Thank you very much, indeed, Congressman Howard Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Thank you very much, indeed. And Jose Maria (ph) Vivanco, thank you very much indeed for joining us.

And when we come back, we will speak to two who've just been there, including a European commissioner who met with the country's leader and also a former US State Department official who's also just returned from Cuba. That's when we return.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): The worst impact of the embargo is on food and problems with medicine. There are things we simply can't get because of the embargo.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): I wish they would fix everything because I have family in the United States - my brother, cousins. Speaking for myself, I personally have more hope in Obama than in any other American president that there has been.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Cuban people don't have anything against the American people, if you know what I mean, and we need to have relationships with them, just like with the rest of the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: That was the view from the streets of Havana just a few hours ago. And joining me now, two people who've just returned from Cuba, Karel de Gucht, European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aide, and Lawrence Wilkerson, co-chairman of the US-Cuba Policy Initiative, now at the New American Foundation and former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Both of you gentlemen, thank you so much for joining us.

Let me go to you, Mr. de Gucht. Can you just tell me - look, it's clear that the embargo has not worked, but also your policy of constructive engagement has not worked. What are you proposing now as a way to change what's happening in Cuba?

KAREL DE GUCHT, EU COMMISSIONER FOR DEVELOPMENT: First of all, the European Union does not support an embargo on Cuba. But you're right that also our policy of engagement up to now can show very little results.

We have come to the conclusion that most obviously pressure on this regime is not going to automatically change it. And that's why we have a policy to engage and also to engage in a way that we support directly the Cuban people.

For example the - after the hurricanes, we - we come in with help. We are helping to restructure the - the agricultural sector in - in Cuba, which is - this is primarily poorly managed (INAUDIBLE) with big state enterprises. We want to have subsistence agriculture.

So we try to engage with them and - and hope that over time the regime will change.

Now, the question is.

AMANPOUR: So, you're hoping.

DE GUCHT: . is there a way to make a change.

AMANPOUR: Basically you're hoping that it's going to collapse from within?

DE GUCHT: No, I've - I've never said that I - I hope that it collapses from within. I'm not talking about regime change. I think that should not be the purpose of our political actions.

AMANPOUR: OK.

DE GUCHT: But then, of course, we - we need the political courage to look at all the element of the discussion, and one of the elements that has not yet been mentioned in - in this program is the case of the Cuban Five.

It's obvious that if you want to negotiate on the liberating - the liberation of - of the all the political prisoners, then you have to talk also about all of the problems, included, I think, the Cuban Five.

AMANPOUR: OK. Let me ask.

DE GUCHT: . including the embargo and then I think we could come to a political result.

AMANPOUR: Let me ask Lawrence Wilkerson.

You've just come back from Cuba as well. Did you meet with any of the leaders there? What is your proposal for promoting change there? You also were talking about engagement, right, Mr. Wilkerson?

LAWRENCE WILKERSON, US-CUBA POLICY INITIATIVE: That's correct. And let me say first that I agree with Chairman Berman that this issue before us right now is full travel. And that's not an issue about Cuba, that's an issue about the rights of American citizens, and it's unconstitutional that we restrict them from traveling to Cuba.

Furthermore, we have a tyranny of the minority in this country right now. That is to say Cuban-Americans can visit Cuba, a very small minority, while the majority of Americans can't. That's unconstitutional. We need to change that.

AMANPOUR: Right. But the point is not about America's constitutional rights. It's about - it's about Cuba, right? I mean, it's about everybody except the United States thinking that the embargo has been ineffective.

Do you believe the embargo should be lifted?

WILKERSON: The embargo has been a colossal failure. The embargo has done nothing but isolate the United States of America.

AMANPOUR: Should it will lifted?

WILKERSON: There is a lot of Latin American leader. It should be. There is not a Latin American leader from Luis Inacio da Silva in Brazil to Stephen Harper in Canada who hasn't made it one of his talking points with the American president for some time now to lift the stupid, idiotic embargo.

It makes no sense. We need to move towards normalized relations.

AMANPOUR: So how do you promote change, or do you not promote change? Do you just have relations with this - with this government and wait out the Castro brothers until the end of their natural lives?

WILKERSON: Well, it's - it's quite clear that Raul and Fidel are not going to live that much longer. Isolated the way we are now on our side of the Florida Strait, we will have zero influence over what replaces the Castros.

I do not think that 50 years of failure is testimony to the reason we should continue it. We need to adopt a new policy. That policy needs to be a policy of engagement, so that we can have more impact on raising the standards of living of the average 11.5 million Cubans and so that we can be around when the change does, inevitably, occur.

AMANPOUR: OK. Let me just put this sound bite up from Representative Connie Mack, who obviously opposes Chairman Berman's travel ban hearings here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. CONNIE MACK (R), FLORIDA: This is a Castro bailout, Mr. Chairman, a bailout for beating, a bailout for oppression, a bailout for rape, a bailout for torture, a bailout for corruption, a bailout for tyranny.

Mr. Chairman, going sightseeing to view political prisoners will not bring democracy to Cuba.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: OK. I want to go to you, Mr. de Gucht, because it looks like Europe and certainly this - the Spanish EU presidency that when they take over the leadership, you want to remove Cuban rights from the so-called "Common Position." Why would you do that? What effect would that have?

DE GUCHT: Well, simply because we think that the Cubans have a point. We have relations with a lot of oppressive regimes and - and we have a special regime for Cuba. It makes no sense singularizing them. I think we should stop the singularizing but also be much fervor (ph) on what we expect them to do in the future.

Another remark I would like to make, if - if you permit me to do so, is - is that the idea that if the Castros physically were to disappear, which is going to happen sooner or later with everybody of us, by the way, that all of a sudden the regime would change. I don't think that's true. I'm just (INAUDIBLE).

AMANPOUR: Mr. Wilkerson, last question to you. What do you think President Obama could do more than he's doing already? We've already established that he's not in hoc (ph), so to speak, to the Cuban-American lobby and the majority of Cuban-Americans want the embargo lifted.

What should the president of the United States be doing now?

WILKERSON: This may surprise you. I like what he's doing. He's moving very slowly, very incrementally. He's got a lot of other things that are far more important on his plate from Afghanistan to health care, and I like what he's doing. At low levels right now, we're having talks on immigration, on postal service and other matters like that, and I think he's moving as fast as he can.

AMANPOUR: Thank you very much indeed. It looks like it is moving, certainly compared to what was going on over the last several years.

Both of you gentleman, thank you very much for joining us and we'll continue to look at this issue.

And we have something special for you from Cuba when we come back - a side of Havana and the rest of the island that you may not normally see.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Cuba is one of the most musical countries in the world, and that is the Buena Vista Social Club which helps send Cuban music global.

But listen to the new sound that our Morgan Neill found coming out of Havana these days, and meet the man who's making it.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MORGAN NEILL, CNN HAVANA BUREAU CHIEF (voice-over): Aldo Rodriguez of Los Aldeanos - in English, The Villagers - is part of Cuba's underground hip hop movement. He lays down basic tracks in his bedroom on an old computer. He says distribution is hand to hand on homemade CDs, copied over and over.

His lyrics are direct, and they don't pull punches. For example, in the song "Ya Nos Cansamos" (ph), which translates roughly as "We're Fed Up," you'll find this verse...

ALDO RODRIGUEZ, CUBAN HIP-HOP ARTIST (through translator): They're always saying everyone is equal, but you tell me if the doorways are falling down in the generals' houses. Of course in Cuba all the hospitals are free. But who do they treat better, the officials or me?

NEILL: "It's not anything bad," he says, "It's just the truth, and the people aren't used to hearing it.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Aldo Rodriguez says that he's got nothing against his government, but he also says that he will not be silent. "I'm young and I've got a right to express myself," he says.

Human Rights Watch Supports End of Trade and Travel Bans

2009-11-19T13:55:00.000-05:00

HRW: We favor an end to the travel ban

On the eve of a House committee hearing on the U.S. travel ban to Cuba, a Human Rights Watch official went on record as saying that his organization believes "lifting the travel ban represents an essential step towards ending a U.S. policy that has failed for decades to have any impact whatsoever on improving human rights in Cuba."

In a letter to the chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Rep. Howard Berman (D-Ca.), José Miguel Vivanco, director of the HRW's Americas Division, pointed out that HRW had just issued a report critical of the Cuban government and then made the following points:

"Efforts by the U.S. government to press for change by imposing a sweeping ban on trade and travel have proven to be a costly and misguided failure. The embargo imposes indiscriminate hardship on the Cuban population as a whole and has done nothing to improve the situation of human rights in Cuba.

"Rather than isolating Cuba, the policy has isolated the United States, enabling the Castro government to garner sympathy abroad while simultaneously alienating Washington's potential allies.

"There is no question: the Cuban government bears full and exclusive responsibility for the abuses it commits. However, so long as the embargo remains in place, the Castro government will continue to manipulate U.S. policy to cast itself as a Latin American David standing up to a U.S. Goliath, a role it exploits skillfully.

"Ending the travel ban is a step in the right direction toward reforming this failed policy, and Congress should act swiftly to pass the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act.

"...Human Rights Watch recommends that the U.S. government replace its failed embargo policy with a more effective, multilateral approach. Our report lays out a proposal for the United States to work with allies in the European Union, Canada, and Latin America to forge a new coalition that will exert targeted pressure on the Raúl Castro government to release all political prisoners."

Rep. Berman and Sen. Lugar Call for End of Travel Embargo

2009-11-17T10:21:00.000-05:00

Lift the ban -- let Americans visit Cuba

Miami Herald
Posted on Tue, Nov. 17, 2009

BY RICHARD G. LUGAR and HOWARD L. BERMAN
www.lugar.senate.gov
U.S. law lets American citizens travel to any country on earth, friend or foe -- with one exception: Cuba. It's time for us to scrap this anachronistic ban, imposed during one of the chilliest periods of the Cold War.

Legislation to abolish restrictions on travel to Cuba has been introduced in both chambers of Congress. And on Thursday the House Foreign Affairs Committee will hold a hearing examining the rationale for the travel ban.

This ban has prevented contact between Cubans and ordinary Americans, who serve as ambassadors for the democratic values we hold dear. Such contact would help break Havana's chokehold on information about the outside world. And it would contribute to improving the image of the United States, particularly in Latin America, where the U.S. embargo on Cuba remains a centerpiece of anti-Washington grievances.

While opponents argue that repealing the travel ban would indicate approval of the Cuban human rights record, many human rights organizations -- among them Freedom House and Human Rights Watch -- have called for abolishing travel restrictions.

There is no doubt that Raúl Castro's government continues to ban most political activity not controlled by the Cuban Communist Party. Opposition parties are illegal, virtually all media remain state controlled, and Cuba has the highest number of political prisoners of any country in the Americas. But isolation from outside visitors only strengthens the Castro regime.

U.S. travelers' dollars, furthermore, could aid the underground economy and the small self-employed sector permitted by the state, strengthening an important foundation of independence from Cuba's authoritarian system.

Travel ban defenders view sanctions as leverage over the Cuban government and their abolition as a concession. But over the last five decades, it has become clear that isolation will not induce the Castro regime to take steps toward political liberalization. Conditionality is not leverage in this case.

Our current approach has made any policy changes contingent on Havana, not U.S. interests, and it has left Washington an isolated bystander, watching events on the island unfold at a distance.

Finally, while travel restrictions are contrary to our foreign policy interests, they also impede the right of Americans to freedom of speech, association and to travel. Sometimes a travel ban may be necessary, but nothing about the Cuba situation today justifies such an infringement on our basic liberties.

The Obama administration has already made a move in the right direction by lifting restrictions on travel and remittances for Cuban-Americans and opening the way for greater telecommunications links with the island.

It is now time for the Congress to take the next step for all Americans.

Sen. Richard G. Lugar, R-Ind., is the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Rep. Howard L. Berman, D-Calif., is chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/other-views/story/1337127.html

PAC Shifts Votes

2009-11-16T23:36:00.000-05:00

Posted on Mon, Nov. 16, 2009
Money talks: Report links donations, Cuba embargo support
Lesley Clark | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: November 16, 2009 11:20:13 AM

WASHINGTON — Supporters of the U.S. embargo against Cuba have contributed nearly $11 million to members of Congress since 2004 in a largely successful effort to block efforts to weaken sanctions against the island, a new report shows.

In several cases, the report by Public Campaign says, members of Congress who had supported easing sanctions against Cuba changed their position — and got donations from the U.S.-Cuba Democracy Political Action Committee and its donors.

All told, the political action committee and its contributors have given $10.77 million nationwide to nearly 400 candidates and members of Congress, the report says.

The contributions include more than $850,000 to 53 Democrats in the House of Representatives who sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi earlier this month opposing any change to U.S.-Cuba policy. The average signer, the report says, received $16,344.

The top five recipients of the embargo supporters' cash: Miami's three Cuban-American Republican members of Congress, 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain and New Jersey Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez, whose parents fled Cuba before his birth.

The report comes as defenders of the embargo fend off efforts to repeal a decades-old ban against U.S. travel to Cuba. Proponents of greater engagement with Cuba contend that they have the votes, and a hearing on the issue is scheduled for Thursday before the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Critics of U.S.-Cuba policy long have suggested a link between campaign contributions and policy. Public Campaign — which advocates for public financing of political campaigns — says the contributions raise questions about the role that money plays in lawmakers' decision-making.

"The pressure they get to raise money plays heavier in their decisions than it ought to," said David Donnelly, the national campaigns director for Public Campaign. "We think this is a damning pattern. We think these are good people caught in a bad system. If members of Congress have to spend too much time raising money, they have to listen to people who give money."

The director of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC, Mauricio Claver-Carone, defended the contributions as support for lawmakers who side with Cuban-Americans who think that easing sanctions against Cuba will only benefit the Castro regime.

"I will not apologize for the Cuban-American community practicing its constitutional, democratic right to support candidates who believe in freedom and democracy for the Cuban people over business and tourism interests," Claver-Carone said. "Unions help elect pro-union candidates. The Chamber of Commerce helps elect pro-business candidates. AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) helps elect pro-Israel members. Who are we supposed to help? Pro-Castro members?"

Public Campaign looked at the Cuba committee because of a seeming disconnect between congressional votes and public opinion polls that suggest most Americans support lifting a ban on travel to Cuba, Donnelly said.

"On this issue there appears to be a clear distinction between what the American public appears to want and what some in Congress are advocating," Donnelly said, pointing to a World Public Opinion survey in April that found 70 percent of Americans support travel to Cuba.

Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., who backs greater engagement with Cuba, said the report wasn't a surprise.

"I don't know how else you can explain how our current policy has survived for so long without yielding any meaningful results; it's all politics," Flake said.

The report says that at least 18 House members — including several from agriculture-rich districts — received campaign contributions from the PAC or its donors and switched their positions on Cuba, from voting in favor of easing travel restrictions to voting against any efforts to soften the embargo.

Rep. Mike McIntyre, D-N.C., said his changed views came from humanitarian interests and concerns about oppression in Cuba. He said he spoke with Florida Republican Reps. Lincoln and Mario Diaz-Balart about their family's experience in Cuba under Fidel Castro.

"I thought, 'This is not right, and it's not humanitarian, and it doesn't promote democracy and I'm not going to support someone who is repressive and evil,' " McIntyre said. "Yes, I changed my vote. That's the reason I changed: the horrors they suffered."

"They're really savvy people," Lars Schoultz, a professor of political science at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill and the author of "That Infernal Little Cuban Republic: The United States and the Cuban Revolution," said of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC. "They know one vote is one vote. They scratch around and see who might be open to their way of thinking."

Claver-Carone, who started the PAC in 2003, said agricultural and business interests had heavily lobbied members of Congress before the committee was in operation.

"The farm lobby came in and they were telling people, 'Cuba is like Costa Rica,' " Claver-Carone said. "We came in and started telling people, 'Hey, here's what's really happening in Cuba.' "

Though hard-line embargo supporters traditionally have been considered Republicans, the report shows the PAC shifting contributions to Democrats as they assumed control of the House and Senate in 2006.

In the 2004 election cycle, the PAC gave just 29 percent to Democrats. By 2008, the Democrats' share was up to 59 percent.

(Barbara Barrett and David Goldstein contributed to this article.)

****************

My comment:

For an analysis of how pro-embargo PAC money has been directed to members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, go to
http://thehavananote.com/2009/11/the_money_game_1.html

For data on the PAC money received by Democratic signers of the anti-travel letter to Speaker Pelosi, go to
http://uscubanormalization.blogspot.com/2009/11/democratic-representatives-sign-anti.html

The PAC’s anti-Obama pro-Jeb Bush position can be seen at
http://uscubanormalization.blogspot.com/2009/11/clipping-file-us-cuba-democracy-pac-and.html

The general impression is that the money for the PAC is largely from conservative Republican Cuban Americans in the Miami area. However as far as I know, there has not been a serious analysis of the donor list and what their motives may be. Public information about all donors can be found at
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgave2.php?cycle=2008&cmte=C00387720

Text of Letter from Anti-Travel Democrats

2009-11-11T23:44:00.000-05:00

November 3, 2009

Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Office of the Speaker H-232, US Capitol
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Madam Speaker:

With Cuba being the subject of much media attention in recent days, we write to reaffirm the strong support within the House Democratic Caucus for maintaining current United States policy towards Cuba.

As you know, current US policy as codified under the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (Libertad) Act of 1996, conditions the lifting of any trade, travel, and financing transactions with the Castro regime, on its unconditional release of political prisoners; recognitions and respect of the fundamental human, civil and political rights of the Cuban people; legalization of independent civil society groups, including journalists, political parties and labor unions; and democratic reforms leading to free and fair elections.

Under the Libertad Act of 1996, Congress also committed to empowering Cuba's courageous human rights and pro-democracy advocates in their struggle against oppression. With that commitment, Cuba's pro-democracy movement has grown exponentially and — in a country where the totalitarian regime controls all national media, writing "counter-revolutionary" articles for foreign websites can lead to a 20-year prison term, and Internet access is restricted to 1.3% of the population — has demonstrated tremendous resiliency.

For these reasons, reneging on our commitment would help to strengthen the Cuban regime's censors and do a grave injustice to those brave Cuban civil society leaders that challenge the regime's brutal repression on a daily basis. Any legislation that would seek to ease or lift sanctions, in disregard of these conditions in law, would send a devastating message to Cuba's opposition movement and legitimize an ailing dictatorship.

President Obama has honored his campaign promise to ease regulations on family travel and remittances, but has stated that he supports remaining sanctions. Specifically, the President said "My policy toward Cuba will be guided by one word: libertad'... the road to freedom for all Cubans must begin with justice for Cuba's political prisoners, the right of free speech, a free press, freedom of assembly, and it must lead to elections that are free and fair. That is my commitment."

President Obama has demonstrated his support for the remaining sanctions by word and deed. As evidenced by his signing an extension of the Trading with the Enemy Act towards Cuba, which authorizes restrictions on travel to Cuba.

Perhaps most importantly, the President has said he will maintain the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba until the Cuban government shows progress on human rights and democracy. We could not agree more.

A dictatorship and state sponsor of terrorism that has no regard for civil rights, religious freedom, open media, or any of the democratic ideals that we cherish, cannot be rewarded with legislation in Congress that would remove US sanctions and subsidize the Castro regime's human rights abuses.

We salute the President's vision for U.S. policy towards Cuba, and it is our strong belief that any effort to upend the President's agenda would undermine the goal that he shares with so many House Democrats — fostering respect for justice and freedom in Cuba.

Madam Speaker, thank you for your kind attention to this matter. We look forward to working with you to ensure that we honor the values that embolden our democracy, and that the Cuban government honors its obligations to its people.

Clipping File: US-Cuba Democracy PAC and the Republican Party

2009-11-11T22:22:00.002-05:00

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879435046687885.html

Saturday, April 4, 2009

Some Cuban-American circles have pressed to maintain U.S. restrictions [on family travel] because of their antipathy for Fidel Castro and his brother, Raul, who replaced him as leader after Fidel became ill. "How do you help people speak out about human rights violations if you're basically extending the dictatorship abroad?" said Mauricio Claver-Carone, director of U.S. Cuba Democracy PAC.

*****************

http://www.justnews.com/politics/10581251/detail.html

POSTED: Thursday, December 21, 2006

Mel Martinez anoints fellow Republican Jeb Bush the first Cuban-American governor of Florida during a meeting of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy Pac at the Biltmore Hotel.

CORAL GABLES, Fla. -- It was a who's who of Cuban-Americans on Wednesday at the Biltmore Hotel, with special recognition for outgoing Gov. Jeb Bush.

U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., applauded Bush "for having been our friend, for having been on the side of freedom and for always having been someone who understood and loved the Cuban-American community, so much so that I today gave him the title of the first Cuban-American governor," he said.

Bush, in his formal remarks, gladly accepted the title.

"If Bill Clinton can be the first African-American president, I can be the first Cuban-American governor of the state of Florida," Bush said to laughter and applause.

Politicians from near and far praised Bush, who is nearing the end of his eight-year term. Even U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., showed up. He urged political leaders to act as a voice for Cubans and voiced his support for the Cuban embargo.

"Trading with Castro is not the way to bring about democratic change in Cuba," Brownback said.

The real reason for Bush, Brownback and everyone else's appearance was the cause of a free Cuba and concern for U.S. policy.

"The problem is not between the United States and Cuba," former Deputy Secretary of State Otto Reich said. "The dialogue that has to take place is between the Cuban government and the people of Cuba. Once that dialogue has taken place and the people of Cuba have had their liberties restored by that government, which is fully capable of restoring it, then the United States would be willing to begin a dialogue with the government of Cuba."

Not that long ago, the only group capable of drawing a crowd with the same type of political clout as the one at the Biltmore on Wednesday was the Cuban-American National Foundation. Now, the loudest voice for Cuban exile politics appears to be the U.S.-Cuba Democracy Pac.

"This group represents the entire community and is genuinely representative of the consensus of thought of the Cuban-American community, and that's why this group is so respected," U.S. Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, R-Miami, said.

Copyright 2006 by Local10.com. The Associated Press contributed to this report. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

*****************

http://www.miller-mccune.com/politics/cuba-libre-345?article_page=2

"One of the fundamental strengths of our community has always been unity, and that unity has always been at the core of the economic and political success of Cuban Americans," says Mauricio Claver-Carone, the 32-year-old spokesman of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC. "So when your campaign is based on a strategy of ‘divide and conquer,' I personally (don't believe), and our committee personally doesn't believe, that that is particularly helpful, because basically what you're doing is you're showing the world a disunified community."...

...The network was revealed prominently in early March, when two Democratic members of Congress from South Florida, Kendrick Meek and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, told The Miami Herald they will not support Garcia, Martinez and Taddeo in their races against the Diaz-Balarts and Ros-Lehtinen. They couldn't support their fellow Democrats, Meek and Wasserman Schultz said, because of their friendships with the Republican incumbents.

Democratic Party activists were incensed, especially with Wasserman Schultz. She is co-chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's Red to Blue program, which has a stated purpose of finding districts with vulnerable Republicans and replacing them with Democrats. The Democratic activists pointed to another kinship she had with the Diaz-Balarts: the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC. In the past two election cycles, Wasserman Schultz received $22,000 from the committee, and members of the PAC's board of directors gave her another $29,000 in individual contributions, for a total of $51,000. Meek received $10,500 from the PAC.

Wasserman Schultz is hardly alone. Florida's Democratic U.S. senator, Bill Nelson, has taken campaign contributions of about $44,000 from the PAC and individuals on its board of directors.

****************

http://www.capitolhillcubans.com/2009_04_05_archive.html

From March 24 letter to Pres Obama published on Capitol Hill Cubans

However, in regard to Cuban American travel, we are troubled by the explanation in the “Guidance on Implementation of Cuba Travel and Trade-Related Provisions of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009” that the general license grants “unlimited” lengths of stay in Cuba. We believe that this will serve to channel U.S. taxpayer dollars directly to the regime because retirees and Supplemental Security Income recipients could remain on the island indefinitely while collecting U.S. taxpayer-provided benefits.

Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Kendrick Meek

Mario Diaz-Balart, Albio Sires

Robert Andrews, Frank Pallone

**********************

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20369459/

Associated Press, Aug 21, 2007

MIAMI - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is leaping into the long-running Cuba debate by calling for the United States to ease restrictions for Cuban-Americans who want to visit the island or send money home...

...Mauricio Claver-Carone, head of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC, which supports full sanctions, said Obama’s statement could hurt U.S.-Cuban relations at a crucial time.

“I’m sure he’s well intentioned,” Claver-Carone said, but he added that with the death of Castro possibly approaching and the potential for change on the island, such a statement could send the wrong message.

“It entrenches the regime at this historic time,” Claver-Carone said.

********************

Complaint filed against Cuban lobbying group

A watchdog group in Washington has filed a complaint against a Cuban-American lobbying group, which called the allegation a 'political hit job.'

By Pablo Bachelet, pbachelet@MiamiHerald.com. Posted on Wed, Nov. 29, 2006

WASHINGTON - A watchdog group has alleged a Cuban-American lobbying organization that favors tougher sanctions against Cuba broke Federal Election Commission regulations by having illegal links to a nonprofit group.

But the U.S.-Cuba Democracy Political Action Committee denied the allegations and noted that the watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which has filed several complaints against it, has received donations from groups opposed to U.S. sanctions on the island.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics filed a complaint in September asserting that several members of the nonprofit Cuba Democracy Advocates Inc. had illegal links to the PAC, which is supposed to operate independently of any other organization.

Leopoldo Fernández Pujals founded two nonprofit U.S. organizations in 2000 to oppose the communist government, using some of the proceeds of his $366 million sale of Spanish fast-food chain Telepizza in 1999, according to the FEC complaint.
Those two organizations eventually became Cuba Democracy Advocates, and Fernández appointed Mauricio Claver-Carone as director and Miami-Dade car dealer Gus Machado as treasurer. Machado then went on to create the PAC and Claver-Carone became its Washington director.

Claver-Carone and Machado, according to the complaint to the FEC, have ''day-to-day operational control'' of both the PAC and Cuba Democracy Advocates.

THE RULES

According to FEC rules, a connected PAC can only raise money from its affiliated organization, but the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC has raised $1.25 million from 3,000 individuals, mostly members of the Cuban-American community.

The group has donated to dozens of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and is widely seen as successfully influencing congressional votes on Cuba sanctions.
Claver-Carone denied the two organizations had done anything wrong, noting that the PAC is run by a 26-member board and a seven-member executive committee, most of whom have no connection with Cuba Democracy Advocates.

''So long as majority of board members do not cross over, there's absolutely no problem whatsoever,'' he told The Miami Herald. "Of the 26 board members, only one crosses over, and that's me.''

Claver-Carone said the latest complaint is the fourth filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics against his organization, constituting what he called a "political hit job.''

'AGAINST US'

''They're getting money from people that advocate against us,'' he said, citing a $75,000 donation to the watchdog group by the ARCA Foundation, a family-owned foundation, which says on its website that it pursues more social justice and equity. The ARCA group also has donated to groups like the Latin America Working Group and the Lexington Institute -- all opposed to U.S. policies on Cuba.

The FEC decided against prosecuting the group's previous allegations. Claver-Carone says refuting each allegation means paying a law firm between $15,000 and $20,000.

Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, denied the group is targeting the Cuba Democracy PAC for political reasons.
''We believe they should follow FEC law,'' she said.

****************

From Capitol Hill Cubans, the PAC's blog

Don't Make the Same Travel Mistake
at 9:30 AM Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Last year, we expressed concern that:

"[Anti-sanctions advocates'] most paradoxical political platform is that 'national reconciliation' between Cuban nationals on the island and those in exile is best pursued by eliminating regulations on Cuban Americans visiting family members in Cuba. Factually, this argument fails to consider that, while most of the exile community in the United States is white, the vast majority of the population and most of democracy's advocates in Cuba are of African or mixed descent and have no family members living in the United States. The result would be a policy that not only creates an underclass among those -- the majority -- without family abroad, but also foments division among Cuba's active and courageous democratic opposition. It would set back rather than advance national reconciliation in Cuba."

- Mauricio Claver-Carone, "Why Travel to Cuba Must be Regulated," The Miami Herald, March 1st, 2008

Yesterday, it was reported:

"Representing 25-odd different groups, black dissidents in Cuba argue that racial disparities on the island are worsened by the Obama administration's recent decision to allow Cuban-Americans to freely send remittances (worth an estimated $1.5 billion yearly) to their relatives. More than 85 percent of Cuban-Americans are white, they say, so the beneficiaries in Cuba of the new remittances policy will also be white."

- Carlos Moore, "Is Black America's Honeymoon with the Castros Over?," McLatchy Newspapers, December 1st, 2009

As regards the future, please keep in mind:

"Whites are clearly preferred in the government controlled and highly profitable tourism industry, from taxi drivers to waitresses and hotel maids. Meanwhile, blacks in Old Havana are continually stopped by police for I.D. checks on suspicion of black market activities."

- Miami Herald Staff Report, "A Barrier for Cuba's Blacks," June 20th, 2007

Therefore, don't make the same mistake by unconditionally allowing tourism travel to Castro's Cuba.

http://www.capitolhillcubans.com/2009/12/dont-make-same-travel-mistake.html

Letter from anti-travel Democrats

2009-11-11T13:24:00.000-05:00

More Democrats oppose lifting Cuban travel ban

BY LESLEY CLARK
lclark@MiamiHerald.com
More than 50 House Democrats sent a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi supporting current Cuba policy, which embargo-supporters say effectively means that a bill to open Cuba to tourists is dead.

The Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act would prevent President Barack Obama from regulating or prohibiting travel to or from Cuba by U.S. residents.

But now 53 Democrats in the House have told Pelosi that they oppose lifting the ban, blunting the momentum that proponents of lifting the travel ban have had under a Democratic president and Democratic-led Congress.

``Any legislation that would seek to ease or lift sanctions . . . would send a devastating message to Cuba's opposition movement and legitimize an ailing dictatorship,'' states the letter signed by Florida Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Kendrick Meek, Alcee Hastings and 50 others.

The letter notes that President Barack Obama lifted travel restrictions for those with family on the island, but has said he backs further sanctions against the island.

``It is our strong belief that any effort to upend the president's agenda would undermine the goal that he shares with so many House Democrats -- fostering respect for justice and freedom in Cuba,'' the letter states.

Wasserman Schultz, who helped gather signatures, said the letter is aimed at showing that a number of Democrats oppose easing sanctions against Cuba, a stance that is traditionally associated with Republicans.

``We felt it was important to show that when push comes to shove, the votes aren't there,'' Wasserman Schultz said. ``The number of Republicans opposed combined with these Democrats would seem to spell that it would not be successful.''

Proponents of lifting the travel ban, however, said they've got 180 sponsors to repeal the decades-old ban and said the letter doesn't change the outlook for getting the bill passed.

``We're continuing to gather support,'' said Rep. Bill Delahunt, D-Mass., who has sponsored one of several bills that seek to allow Americans to travel to Cuba.

With 218 votes needed for passage and 258 Democrats in the House, pro-embargo lobbyist Mauricio Claver-Carone said the numbers just are not there.

``Democrats alone can not pass any legislation to unconditionally lift the ban,'' he said.

Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Arizona, one Republican who has championed easing sanctions, said the letter suggests backers of the embargo are getting nervous.

Congressional Quarterly Evaluates Prospects for Travel

2009-11-11T13:07:00.000-05:00

CQ WEEKLY - COVER STORY
Nov. 9, 2009 - Page 2580

Exporting Democracy in a Suitcase
By Jonathan Broder, CQ Staff

In a quiet but determined campaign to change U.S. foreign policy, a bipartisan pair of House members is relentlessly pressing fellow lawmakers to support ending restrictions on travel to Cuba and permitting American citizens to visit the island freely for the first time in almost five decades.

Democrat Bill Delahunt of Massachusetts and Republican Jeff Flake of Arizona corner colleagues in their Capitol Hill offices, on planes, at private Washington dinner parties and on the sidelines of public events. Flake even uses his workout time at the House gym to garner support for their bill, dubbed the Free Travel to Cuba Act, which would incrementally remove elements of a sweeping economic embargo first put in place by President John F. Kennedy in 1961.

The congressmen have stepped up their lobbying to seize upon the changing domestic political landscape - in particular a new president whose attitude toward Cuba is less doctrinaire than his predecessors' and a growing desire among younger Cuban-Americans to cast off the Cold War policy of isolation that has defined Washington's tortured relations with Havana for so many years.

"They have really done a full-throttle whip operation," said Mauricio Claver-Carone, who heads U.S.-Cuba Democracy, a political action committee in Hialeah, Fla., that raises money for candidates who want to preserve the embargo. "They are out there on a daily basis. You'd think there was no other important issues out there for them."

Such comments underscore rising concerns among pro-embargo activists and lawmakers as the free-travel measure gains momentum on both sides of the aisle. With the House Foreign Affairs Committee scheduled to hold hearings on the travel ban next week, 53 House Democrats last week rushed a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., affirming their support for retaining the full embargo against the government of Fidel and Raul Castro and warning against lifting or relaxing the sanctions.

Regardless, Delahunt and Flake say they are making headway with their argument that political change will come quicker to Cuba through the island's exposure to American visitors and their ideas. "The current policy has proven to be an abysmal failure," Delahunt said. "What's changed in 50 years? Nothing."

What has changed is the views of many lawmakers and government officials in Washington, and of generations of Cuban-Americans in Florida, New Jersey and elsewhere.

During the administration of George W. Bush, the House voted no fewer than five times to attach amendments to spending bills that would have relaxed limits on travel to Cuba, only to have the language dropped before final passage in the face of Bush's veto threats.

By contrast, President Obama used an executive order in April to remove all restrictions on travel to the island by Cuban-Americans and on their remittances to relatives there. And in a signal to the American business community, he has opened the way for U.S. telecommunications companies to pursue deals in Cuba and begun a dialogue with Havana on immigration issues. Moreover, while the president says he favors leveraging the embargo to push the Castro regime into granting Cubans additional political freedoms, he hasn't threatened to veto any legislation that would relax economic sanctions, including the Delahunt-Flake effort.

No less important to the domestic political equation is the shift in attitudes among Cuban-Americans. Several recent surveys show most Cuban-Americans now say all U.S. restrictions on travel to Cuba should be lifted, and that point of view is even embraced by a majority of the community's older, more hard-line members. One survey, conducted in April by Miami-based Bendixen & Associates, the largest Hispanic polling firm, found that Cuban-Americans favor lifting the trade embargo altogether, in contrast with just a few years ago when a majority was opposed.

Economic conditions in the United States are also driving the anti-embargo campaign. Advocates note that the recession has heightened interest among American farmers and travel companies in doing business with Cuba, and they are sending that message to their representatives in Washington.

Against this backdrop, advocates for opening the doors to Cuba have renewed their push in both the House and Senate, and their congressional opponents are gearing up for a showdown, which could come early next year. Big campaign donations from a small group of die-hard Cuban-Americans indicate it will be a hard-fought battle. Expectations are that the fight will focus first on lifting the travel ban, and there are bills to do so in both chambers. Three other measures have been introduced in the House and Senate that would relax restrictions on trade with the island.

Legislation to remove the travel ban is regarded as having a good chance of passing the House. So far, 179 other lawmakers have signed onto the Delahunt-Flake bill, leaving its list of cosponsors within striking range of the 218-vote majority needed to guarantee House passage.

Congressional aides say a House victory would increase pressure for passage in the Senate, where the chief sponsors of a companion bill, Democrat Byron L. Dorgan of North Dakota and Republican Michael B. Enzi of Wyoming, are working to line up support. And in that event, it is highly unlikely Obama would veto the measure, these aides say.

Still, Senate passage remains a challenge. New Jersey Democrat Robert Menendez, a Cuban-American, is leading the opposition to the measure, and he has a critical ally in Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who controls which bills reach the Senate floor.

The Last Cold War Vestige

Just like the iconic 1950s American automobiles that still rumble through the crumbling streets of Havana, relations between Cuba and the United States have been stuck in a time warp since the early days of the Cold War. Indeed, the trade embargo is an icon itself - the last vestige of virulent anti-communism in U.S. foreign policy, still operating some two decades after the Cold War ended.

The distrust between Washington and Havana reaches back to 1960, a year after Fidel Castro took power, when he nationalized all American-owned businesses without compensation. Castro's move prompted Kennedy to sever diplomatic relations with the island nation in 1961 and impose a trade and travel embargo by executive fiat.

That same year, the United States backed Cuban exiles in an abortive attempt at Cuba's Bay of Pigs to seize back the island. Fearing another invasion, Castro allowed the Soviet Union to bring in nuclear missiles. That led to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, when Washington and Moscow came their closest to nuclear war. In a last-minute deal, the Soviets agreed to withdraw their missiles from Cuba in exchange for the removal of U.S. nuclear missiles based on the Soviet border in Turkey.

Since then, several U.S. presidents have tightened sanctions on Cuba, and Jimmy Carter used his powers to relax the embargo. In 1996, however, following Cuba's downing of two aircraft flown by U.S.-based Cuban exiles, an outraged GOP-led Congress enshrined the trade embargo in law, making it permanent and requiring enactment of a new law to change it in any substantial way.

Congress has reversed this policy only once, and in the most limited of ways. In 2000, after Hurricane Michelle devastated Cuba and Havana requested help to cope with the storm's aftermath, Congress cleared legislation that permitted the sale of food and medicine to Cuba but barred public or private U.S. financing of Cuba's purchases. The measure also cemented into law the executive order that restricted travel to Cuba.

Later in 2005, Bush tightened the rules for such sales, requiring Cuba to pay for U.S. food shipments before they had even left port. Cuba also wasn't permitted to send its payments directly to U.S. banks, requiring instead transfers through third countries.

While the Delahunt and Dorgan bills would only lift the travel ban, measures introduced in the House by Kansas Republican Jerry Moran and New York Democrat Charles B. Rangel and in the Senate by Montana Democrat Max Baucus and Indiana Republican Richard G. Lugar would go further, relaxing the regulations for trade payments that Bush ordered.

Anti-embargo lawmakers and advocates argue that the travel ban has failed to bring about any of the democratic changes in Cuba that congressional hard-liners demanded when they voted to make it law in 2000. If anything, they note, the ban has provided Raul Castro, who took over power from his ailing older brother last year, with an excuse to blame the United States for the island's economic woes.

Ever since the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union and the withdrawal of its economic subsidies to Havana, Cuba's economy has been struggling. It has the third-largest nickel reserves in the world, bringing in $2.7 billion in export earnings in 2007. But world nickel prices have dropped more than 40 percent amid the global economic downturn, severely curtailing the island's biggest export. Hurricanes have seriously damaged the island's sugar production, and Cuba must depend on cheap oil from its ally, Venezuela.

Tourism is now the country's biggest source of hard currency, bringing in almost $3 billion annually. Foreign investments, primarily from Spain, have added hundreds of millions of dollars, and remittances from Cubans living in the United States have yielded more than $1 billion annually. That figure is expected to increase with Obama's order lifting limits on such payments.

The embargo and travel ban have also isolated the United States diplomatically from the rest of the world. It's the only country that still imposes an economic boycott on Cuba, which is only 90 miles from U.S. shores.

"We scream that we want Cuba to change, but at the same time, we cut off contact," said Phil Peters, a Cuba expert at the conservative Lexington Institute. "That doesn't work in foreign policy."

As if to underscore that conclusion, the U.N. General Assembly voted last month for the 18th straight year to condemn the U.S. economic embargo of Cuba. The vote was 187-3, with only Israel and Palau, a Pacific island nation of just 21,000 people, supporting the United States. Yet even Israel has strong economic ties with Cuba.

Moreover, travel advocates say, the large number of Americans - not only tourists but scholars, professionals, church groups and sports teams - who would go to Cuba if the ban were lifted would produce an explosion of human contact that would overwhelm the ability of Cuban authorities to control it and inevitably liberalize Cuban society.

"Let the Castro brothers deal with spring break once or twice, and we'll see how much control they still have," Flake said.

Meanwhile, Flake and other lawmakers who want to remove travel restrictions stress that the political significance of the shift in attitudes among Cuban-Americans cannot be overestimated. The community's support today for lifting the restrictions contrasts sharply with the days when older, more conservative Cuban exiles, known as historicos, dominated the community and led demonstrations that called for even tougher policies toward Cuba.

"They used to have parades, and they would be shaking their fists and their voices would be trembling on street corners," recalled Frank J. Guarini Jr., a seven-term House Democrat from New Jersey who retired in 1992. He was succeeded by Menendez, who later was appointed to the Senate in 2006. "But today, the younger generation is not as emotionally involved with the issue as their parents and grandparents were."

Indeed, Marco Rubio, the 38-year-old Cuban-American running for the 2010 Republican nomination for an open Senate seat in Florida, isn't campaigning on the embargo at all. A campaign spokesman said Rubio, who was born in Miami, supports the embargo. But in Rubio's campaign appearances, "it just hasn't come up," the spokesman said.

Lugar, who wrote Obama earlier this year urging greater engagement with Havana, agrees that it is time for an overall change in U.S.-Cuba policy. "Our whole protocol of sanctions has not worked to bring down the Cuban government or modify the power of Cuba in any substantial way," he said.

Driving such calls for change, especially among Republicans, is the potential for increased trade. With all of the obstacles that have been put in the way, U.S. food and pharmaceutical sales to Cuba earned a paltry $712 million in 2008. But with a relaxation of travel and trade restrictions, that figure is bound to grow, Lugar says. "This is a very good time for public diplomacy," he said. "And it can occur very profitably for Americans though trade in food and medicine."

Another issue that could break in favor of free-travel advocates is the questionable legality of Obama's decision to change policy and permit Cuban-Americans to travel freely to Cuba while denying that right to others. "Obama has created a situation where there is one class of Americans that has no restrictions whatsoever, while the rest of us are still under Cold War restrictions," the Lexington Institute's Peters said. "That's a little hard to sustain."

Growing Concern on Right

Advocates for maintaining a tight embargo minimize the support that Delahunt and Flake have gathered for their bill. For example, Claver-Carone argues that the avowed supporters of the Delahunt measure are essentially the same lawmakers who supported a 2007 amendment to a five-year reauthorization of farm programs that would have relaxed Bush's restrictions on Cuban payments for U.S. food shipments. That amendment was rejected, 182-245. "All the cosponsors of the Delahunt bill are within that 182," Claver-Carone said. "So there are no new faces."

But a comparison of the names of the supporters of both measures suggests the pro-embargo crowd may be overly optimistic. While the numbers are roughly the same, Claver-Carone's claim doesn't acknowledge a number of freshman lawmakers who have signed on as cosponsors. Moreover, Flake says he has won the support of an unspecified number of lawmakers who had opposed earlier legislative bids to remove the Cuba travel restrictions. Because they don't want to advertise their change of heart, Flake said, they are not signing on as cosponsors and will quietly vote for it when it reaches the floor.

Quarterbacking opposition to lifting the travel ban is Menendez, who strongly believes that it remains an effective tool that denies badly needed dollars to the Castro regime.

"Sitting on a beach smoking a Cuban cigar or sipping a Cuba Libre doesn't promote democracy and human rights," the senator said. "I would say to those who say travel is the silver bullet to change the Castro regime, then why is it that the millions of visitors from all over Europe, Canada, Mexico and Latin America have not created one iota of democratic change or a greater respect for human rights inside of Cuba?"

In addition to his passion for the fight, Menendez also wields power with Obama as an important Democratic vote on such issues as a health care overhaul and with his colleagues in his role as one of the chief campaign strategist and fundraisers in the run-up to the 2010 midterm election as chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

Menendez has been able to attract generous donations from hard-liners in the Cuban-American community, a group that historically has directed most of its money to Republicans. According to a report coming out this month by Public Campaign, a nonpartisan campaign finance watchdog group, a Cuban-American financial network that opposes any weakening of trade and travel restriction on Cuba donated $145,700 to Menendez's campaign organization during the first eight months of this year - more than five times the amount raised from the pro-embargo network in 2006.

"That's a dramatic shift," said David Donnelly, Public Campaign's national campaign director. He said the shift in contributions to Democrats was evidence the group is worried it could lose this fight in the Senate.

And Dorgan has little doubt that if his bill, which now has 33 cosponsors, comes up for a vote, it will pass comfortably. "There is a critical mass now that understands the need to lift travel restrictions and move forward with a different strategy," he said. "I don't think this is going to be a razor-thin margin. Of course, our problem is getting it up on the floor."

That might actually be a big problem. Menendez has a strategic supporter in Reid, who is the gatekeeper for all legislation that reaches the floor. "Sen. Reid remains concerned about political freedoms and human rights in Cuba and continues to support the embargo," said Jim Manley, his chief spokesman. Manley declined to speculate whether Reid would bring up the free-travel bill. "He's always interested in hearing views of senators on this topic," he offered.

Dorgan and Enzi also may face trouble earlier in the legislative process. Their bill awaits action by the Foreign Relations Committee, whose chairman, Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry, hasn't made up his mind yet about how he will vote on it. Until then, said Kerry spokesman Frederick Jones, it is unclear when the committee will consider the bill.

Obama Hangs Back

Some advocates for lifting the travel restrictions fear that a lack of active support from the Obama administration may be hindering their effort.

"It's very disappointing," said Theodore Piccone, deputy director of foreign policy studies at the Brookings Institution, which issued a report in April that recommended a U.S. policy of engagement toward Cuba that de-emphasizes the importance of public reciprocal gestures by Havana. Obama's insistence that the Castro regime publicly make concessions to the United States in return for Obama's lifting of travel and remittance restrictions on Cuban-Americans "gives Havana too much control in deciding the pace of change," Piccone said.

Philip Brenner, a Cuba expert at American University, warns the administration should not expect responses from Havana that would encourage Obama to put his weight behind the free-travel legislation.

"The Cuban government hasn't figured out how to deal with any influx of U.S. investment and tourists," said Brenner, who is allowed to visit Cuba as an academic. "They need investment and tourism. But they're desperately afraid that it will overwhelm them."

Already, he says, ordinary Cubans working as taxi drivers for foreign tourists earn more in a month than what a Cuban doctor earns. "So, young people are choosing to become taxi drivers instead of going to medical school and serving the greater good," Brenner said. "A million more American tourists will only further undermine the whole socialist idea of the government providing people with what they need."

Flake suggests that Cuba might resolve such problems by simply abandoning its communist system and adopting the free-market, democratic model. Meanwhile, he says, Americans should be free to travel wherever they want. "If someone is going to limit my travel, it should be a communist government, not the U.S. government," he said.

Lately, Flake has been appealing for congressional support of the free-travel bill by portraying it as a legislative stroke that knocks the ball into Havana's court. He recalls a visit to Cuba several years ago, when he says he half-seriously taunted Cuban officials by telling them of his plans to lift the travel ban. "And if you don't shape up, we'll lift the full embargo," he said he told them.

Congressional aides who focus on the Cuba question predict the House and Senate will pass some kind of legislation to relax the embargo. These aides also say it would be difficult for Obama to veto such a bill, given his repeated calls for greater engagement with the world. Others, including Piccone, say it appears that Obama may have carved out Cuba as an exception to that policy, leaving them baffled. "Engagement is what he campaigned on," he said. "And Cuba is the exception? Why?"

Piccone answers his own question, suggesting it probably has something to do with the politics of Obama's presumed campaign for a second term. He notes that Obama carried Florida last year without the support of the state's powerful Cuban-American community, but his political advisers are fearful he may not be able to repeat that trick in 2012. As a result, he says, they are advising him to keep his distance for now from the Cuba legislation.

Lugar agrees with this analysis. "Many people in his party are saying, 'Fair enough, Mr. President. Maybe put a toe in the water and see what a cautious approach leads to, what sort of reaction will there be from Cuban-Americans, the older types,'" he said. "So he's decided not to plunge into this wholesale, but rather very cautiously."

But Lugar has his own advice for the president. The bills that would lift travel and trade restrictions present the president "a good opportunity to get over a particular patch of history without knowing precisely what the Cuban reaction is going to be," he said. "But from our standpoint, we can be advocates for freer trade, for more human contact. This seems to me to be a good path for the president to take."

FOR FURTHER READING:

The Delahunt-Flake bill is HR 874; the Dorgan-Enzi bill is S 428; the Moran bill is HR 1737; the Baucus-Lugar bill is S 1089; the Rangel bill is HR 1531; Cuba trade, CQ Weekly, p. 1641; U.S. foreign policy, p. 898; trademark disputes with Cuba, p. 520; U.S.-Cuba relations, p. 457; agricultural exports allowed (PL 106-387), 2000 Almanac, p. 2-13; Cuba trade embargo becomes law (PL 104-114), 1996 Almanac, p. 9-6.

Source: CQ Weekly
The definitive source for news about Congress.
(c) 2009 Congressional Quarterly Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Boston University Conference on Cuba Travel

2009-11-09T11:03:00.000-05:00

By Pooja Bachani

Published: Monday, November 9, 2009
The Daily Free Press, Boston University

The United States must lift the embargo and travel restrictions enacted in 1962 in order for Cuba to move forward, Cuban and American political leaders said.

Rep. Bill Delahunt, D-Mass., who commented by phone, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Senior Advisor Fulton Armstrong and Carl Meacham, senior foreign policy advisor to Sen. Richard Lugar discussed the fate of the U.S.-Cuba relationship at the School of Management Friday in a panel.

The panel was scheduled to include Senator John Kerry, D-Mass., who was not able to make it due to what Boston University international relations professor Susan Eckstein called “other commitments.” The attendance after the announcement dropped from about 80 to about 50 people and eventually dwindled to about 20.

“We would like to see a liberalization of the people to people exchange, but the current administration is responding very slowly,” Meacham said. “The process mirrors how air is let out of a balloon, very slowly.”

During former President George Bush’s second term, “travel regulations where tightened significantly, with additional restrictions on family visits and educational travel,” according to a Congressional Research Service for Congress report.

“Travel helps open the mind of people to new ideas and it is a great place to start,” Meacham said.

College of Arts and Sciences senior Cari Brennen said she agreed.

“The travel policy is a great place to start building better relations between U.S. and Cuba,” Brennen said. “I would love to go to Cuba from an academic prospective and as a tourist.”

“Lifting the travel restrictions will serve as a catalyst for deeper and further U.S. engagement and will accelerate the engagement process,” Delahunt said.

Delahunt said Congress is moving towards a new way to approach U.S. relations with Cuba.

“We expect a hearing of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the House of Representatives by Howard Berman where he will announce his support for legislation against the ban,” Delahunt said.

Delahunt attributes the slow pace to the Cold War mentality that still plagues Congress.

“I believe we are clearly heading towards a dramatically new relationship with Cuba,” Delahunt said. “We want to reconsider and normalize this relationship.”

Former Canadian Ambassador to Cuba Mark Entwistle said the U.S.-Cuba relationship has never been normal because of the overpowering trade relationship. When American businesses enter Cuba, they enter in a specific context that is loaded with layered history.

“American business leaders need to understand to pursue economic relations without touching on political terms because business in Cuba is highly politicized,” Entwistle said.

Though Delahunt labels himself as “cautiously optimistic” about dramatic policy change, Meacham does not see it in the near future as the Obama administration is facing many different issues at once.

“The challenges that the Obama administration is facing are pretty monumental,” Meacham said. “We have unemployment over 10 percent, health care, immigration and climate change.”

However, Meacham said once the issue is at the top of the agenda in the House, the Senate will follow.

“It is unlikely that the Senate will move towards reform in the short term, but once you get the House on board, the Senate will follow shortly hereafter,” Meacham said.

CAS senior Kelyn Rodriguez said she appreciated the panelists perspective, despite Kerry’s absence.
javascript:void(0)
“I like that they mentioned economics and that they were trying to be unbiased and objective,” she said. “It’s understandable that he was busy, but I’m grateful Delahunt had the decency to call.”

Democratic Representatives Sign Anti-Travel Letter

2009-11-09T00:25:00.007-05:00

Democratic Representatives who signed the letter and received donations from the hard line US-Cuba Democratcy PAC [2008 cycle, + = 2010 cycle to date,* = to "affiliate PAC"]

Ackerman, Gary (D-NY) $1,000+$1,000
Adler, John H (D-NJ) $2,500+$2,000
Altmire, Jason (D-PA) $8,000+$1,000
Andrews, Robert E (D-NJ)$7,000
Arcuri, Michael (D-NY) $5,000+$2,000
Baca, Joe (D-CA) $9,000+$2,500
Barrow, John (D-GA) $9,500+$1,000
Bean, Melissa (D-IL) $10,000+$1,000 *$2,500
Berkley, Shelley (D-NV) $5,000+$2,500
Boccieri, John A (D-OH) $2,000+$2,000
Boyd, Allen (D-FL) $1,000+$2,000 *$3,500
Braley, Bruce (D-IA) $8,000+$2,500
Carney, Chris (D-PA) $7,000
Chandler, Ben (D-KY) $5,000
Connolly, Gerry (D-VA) +$2,000
Cuellar, Henry (D-TX) $8,000
Donnelly, Joe (D-IN) $3,000+$1,000
Engel, Eliot L (D-NY) $7,500+$5,000
Foster, Bill (D-IL) $4,000+$1,000
Giffords, Gabrielle(D-AZ)$5,000+$1,000
Hare, Phil (D-IL) $9,000+$1,000 *$1,000
Hastings, Alcee L (D-FL)$4,000+$1,000
Higgins, Brian M (D-NY) $3,000
Hodes, Paul W (D-NH) $8,000
Kennedy, Patrick J(D-RI)$7,000
Kissell, Larry (D-NC) +$1,000
Klein, Ron (D-FL) $10,000
Kosmas, Suzanne (D-FL) +$4,000
Kratovil, Frank M (D-MD)+$1,000
Lipinski, Daniel (D-IL) +$1,000
Maffei, Dan (D-NY) $2,000+$1,000
Marshall, Jim (D-GA) $9,500
McIntyre, Mike (D-NC) $5,000
McMahon, Michael (D-NY) +$2,000
Meek, Kendrick B (D-FL) $5,000 *$4,000
Melancon, Charles (D-LA)$4,000
Miller, Brad (D-NC) $7,000+$1,000
Murphy, Patrick (D-PA) $10,000+$1,000
Murphy, Scott (D-NY)+ $1,000
Pallone, Frank (D-NJ) $4,500
Pascrell, Bill Jr (D-NJ)$2,000
Perlmutter, Edwin (D-CO)$3,000+$1,000
Rothman, Steven R (D-NJ)$1,000
Salazar, John (D-CO) $8,500
Schultz, Debbie W.(D-FL)$10,000*$10,000
Shuler, Heath (D-NC) $7,000
Sires, Albio (D-NJ) $10,000+$5,000
Skelton, Ike (D-MO) $2,000
Space, Zachary T (D-OH) $8,000+$1,000
Wexler, Robert (D-FL) $6,000
Wu, David (D-OR) $6,000+$1,000

Note: key organizer of the letter Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz "in the past two election cycles...received $22,000 from the committee, and members of the PAC's board of directors gave her another $29,000 in individual contributions, for a total of $51,000." http://www.miller-mccune.com/politics/cuba-libre-345?article_page=2

Democratic Representatives who signed the letter but did not receive PAC donations:

Grayson, Alan (D-FL)
Pierluisi, Pedro R. (Puerto Rico, non-voting)
Quigley, Mike (D-IL)

Democratic Representatives who received PAC donations and did not sign the letter (some because they are no longer Members of the House)

Berman, Howard L (D-CA) $5,000+$5,000
Boren, Dan (D-OK) $2,000
Bright, Bobby (D-AL) $1,000+$1,000
Brown, Corrine (D-FL) $5,000
Butterfield, G K (D-NC) $10,000
Cardoza, Dennis (D-CA) $1,000
Carmouche, Paul J (D-LA)$3,000
Carnahan, Russ (D-MO) $2,000+$1,000 *$1,000
Carson, Andre (D-IN) $8,000+$1,000
Castor, Kathy (D-FL) $2,000
Cazayoux, Donald (D-LA) $5,000
Childers, Travis W(D-MS)$1,000
Cleaver, Emanuel (D-MO) $1,000
Clyburn, James E (D-SC) $10,000 *$5,000
Dahlkemper, Kathleen (D-PA)+$2,000
Davis, Artur (D-AL) $5,000
Dingell, John D (D-MI) $1,000
Ellsworth, Brad (D-IN) $3,000
Etheridge, Bob (D-NC) $1,000
Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY)$9,000
Green, Gene (D-TX) $1,000+$1,000
Griffith, Parker (D-AL) +$1,000
Gutierrez, Luis V (D-IL)$1,000
Halvorson, Deborah (D-IL)$4,000+$1,000
Heinrich, Martin (D-NM) +$2,000
Hill, Baron (D-IN) $2,000
Holden, Tim (D-PA) $1,000
Hoyer, Steny H (D-MD) $6,000
Jones, Stephanie T (D-OH)$3,500
Kirkpatrick, Ann (D-AZ) $1,000+$3,000
Lantos, Tom (D-CA) $5,000
Lujan, Ben R (D-NM)+ $2,000
Mahoney, Tim (D-FL) $10,000
Maloney, Carolyn(D-NY) $1,000
Markey, Betsy (D-CO) +$1,000
Massa, Eric (D-NY) +$1,000
Michaud, Mike (D-ME) $1,000
Mollohan, Alan B (D-WV) $1,000
Murphy, Chris (D-CT) $2,000
Murtha, John P (D-PA) $1,000
Obey, David R (D-WI) $5,000
Ortiz, Solomon P (D-TX) $1,000
Payne, Donald M (D-NJ) $2,500
Peterson, John E (R-PA) $1,000
Reyes, Silvestre (D-TX) $1,000
Rodriguez, Ciro D (D-TX)$2,000
Ryan, Tim (D-OH) $2,000
Schauer, Mark (D-MI)+ $1,000
Schiff, Adam (D-CA) $6,000
Schrader, Kurt (D-OR) $1,000+$2,000
Sestak, Joseph A (D-PA) $1,000
Sherman, Brad (D-CA) $8,500
Stender, Linda D (D-NJ) $3,000
Sutton, Betty Sue (D-OH)$1,000
Wilson, Charlie (D-OH) $4,000+$1,000
Trauner, Gary (D-WY) $1,000
Walz, Timothy J (D-MN) $1,000
Teague, Harry (D-NM) +$1,000

Cuba Central on the Embargo Vote

2009-10-26T08:32:00.002-05:00

[On October 28th], the United Nations General Assembly is expected to vote on a resolution condemning the United States embargo against Cuba.

If past is prologue, it will pass resoundingly. The General Assembly has adopted similar measures in each of the last seventeen years; in 2008, by a margin of 185-3. But that was a condemnation of an embargo enforced, energetically and unapologetically, by the administration of George W. Bush. The vote this year takes place for the first time on President Obama's watch, and so has special significance.

The Secretary-General has prepared a public report that catalogues what UN members and UN organizations say about the embargo. That report can be downloaded here.

This document is a powerful reminder that the U.S. embargo is viewed internationally with great seriousness and in ways that are deeply damaging to U.S. interests and our image overseas.

Lest anyone think this policy is only provocative to nations in the non-aligned world, its opponents include Australia, Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, the European Union, India, Japan, Mexico, Pakistan, the Philippines, and Russia.

They are plain-spoken in their opposition. Australia reminds us it votes "consistently" against the embargo. Brazil says it is the "Cuban people who suffer the most from the blockade." China says the embargo "serves no purpose other than to keep tensions high between two neighboring countries and inflict tremendous hardship and suffering on the people of Cuba, especially women and children." Egypt and India condemn the extra-territorial reach of our sanctions, which Japan says run "counter to the provisions of international law." Mexico calls these measures coercive. Russia "rejects" the embargo. Nations across the planet have enacted laws making it illegal for their companies to comply.

Our policy is especially controversial in our own hemisphere, where the U.S. alone is without diplomatic relations with Cuba, and where forum after forum - including the Rio Group, the Ibero-American Summit, the Heads of State of Latin America and the Caribbean, and CARICOM -has rejected the embargo and called for its repeal.

Beyond our diplomatic interests, the report forces us to move beyond the stale, political debate in which the embargo is most often framed (where every problem on the island is blamed on either Cuba's system or U.S. policy) and to confront the significant injuries this policy inflicts on ordinary Cubans.

It reminds us:

The embargo stops Cuba from obtaining diagnostic equipment or replacement parts for equipment used in the detection of breast, colon, and prostate cancer.
The embargo stops Cuba from obtaining patented materials that are needed for pediatric cardiac surgery and the diagnosis of pediatric illnesses.

The embargo prevents Cuba from purchasing antiretroviral drugs for the treatment of HIV-AIDS from U.S. sources of the medication.

The embargo stops Cuba from obtaining needed supplies for the diagnosis of Downs' Syndrome.

Under the embargo, Cuba cannot buy construction materials from the nearby U.S. market to assist in its hurricane recovery.

While food sales are legal, regulatory impediments drive up the costs of commodities that Cuba wants to buy from U.S. suppliers, and forces them in many cases to turn to other more expensive and distant sources of nutrition for their people.

Because our market is closed to their goods, Cuba cannot sell products like coffee, honey, tobacco, live lobsters and other items that would provide jobs and opportunities for average Cubans.

This list, abbreviated for space, is actually much longer, more vivid and troubling, as the report documents case after case of how our embargo affects daily life in Cuba. And for what reason? Because it will someday force the Cuban government to dismantle its system? As a bargaining chip? These arguments have proven false and futile over the decades and what the UN has been trying to tell us since 1992 is that they should be abandoned along with a policy that has so outlived its usefulness.

And yet, it is now the Obama administration supporting and enforcing the embargo - still following Bush-era rules that thwart U.S. agriculture sales; still levying stiff penalties for violations of the regulations; still stopping prominent Cubans from visiting the United States; still refusing to use its executive authority to allow American artists, the faith community, academics, and other proponents of engagement and exchange to visit Cuba as representatives of our country and its ideals.

To his credit, President Obama has taken some useful steps to change U.S. policy toward Cuba. He repealed the cruel Bush administration rules on family travel that divided Cuban families. He joined efforts by the OAS to lift Cuba's suspension from that organization. He has opened a direct channel of negotiations with Cuba's government on matters that include migration, resuming direct mail service, and relaxing the restrictions that Cuban and U.S. diplomats face in doing their jobs in each of our nation's capitals.

This is a start, but more - much more - needs to be done. Not because the UN says so, but because our country needs to embrace the world not as we found it in 1959 - or in 2008 - but as it exists today. President Obama can do this. Our times demand that he do so.

From the Cuba Central Newsblast of October 23, 2009
Center for Democracy in the Americas

Obstacles to Normalizing Telecommunications

2009-10-21T10:49:00.000-05:00

Cuba: No deal with US telecoms

Cuba rebuffs key Obama initiative that would have opened the island to better cell phone and internet service.

By Nick Miroff

Published: October 18, 2009 17:11 ET
Updated: October 19, 2009 09:01 ET

HAVANA, Cuba — For years, U.S. mobile phone companies and internet providers have been banned from doing business with Cuba, further isolating one of the least-connected countries in the hemisphere.

So when the Obama administration loosened those restrictions earlier this year, it looked like a tech surge was in store for the communist-ruled island. But after months of silence, Cuba seems to be saying no thanks.

Other outstanding trade and legal grievances need to be resolved before American telecommunications companies are granted access, a Cuban telecom official said Saturday, in a statement that appeared to rebuff one of the Obama administration’s key Cuba policy initiatives.

The White House announced in April that it would provide exemptions from long-standing U.S. sanctions against Cuba’s communist government, so that companies like Verizon, Sprint and AT&T could bring better phone and internet service to the island to “promote the freer flow of information.”

But the Castro government exerts strict control over the island’s communication networks, and American companies would have to reach a deal with the government’s telecom monopoly, ETECSA.

Months passed without a response to Obama’s proposal. But during an official government newscast Saturday, ETECSA international operations director Vivian Iglesias said there were two major obstacles to such a partnership: some $160 million in frozen funds that the U.S. government seized from ETECSA in 2000, and trade restrictions imposed by the 1992 Cuban Democracy Act, which forces Cuba to pay U.S. companies through third countries, incurring additional transaction fees.

“It may seem like the Obama administration has expanded communication possibilities,” said Iglesias. “But we know that unless restrictions like the (Cuban Democracy Act) and others that have been tightened since 1992 don’t change, there can’t be any normal communication.”

Iglesias’ statements were a reminder that a firewall of mistrust remains between two countries split by 50 years of hostile relations and emotional politics.

Previous agreements between U.S. telecom companies and ETECSA went sour in the late 1990s, when U.S. legislators ordered ETECSA’s funds seized as payment to Cuban American families who won a wrongful death judgment against the Castro government after four pilots from a Cuban exile group were shot down in a 1996 dispute.

Iglesias said that money was “stolen” from ETECSA, and hasn’t been paid back.

“The causes that led to the theft of our funds are still in place,” she said. “If those restrictions don’t change, that prevents direct communication between the United States and Cuba.”

Prospects for Travel Legislation (Miami Herald spin)

2009-10-15T09:37:00.001-05:00

U.S.-Cuba travel picking up steam

Miami Herald Posted on Mon, Oct. 12, 2009
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/miami-dade/breaking-news/story/1279295.html

BY JUAN O. TAMAYO
El Nuevo Herald
A powerful campaign to allow all Americans to travel to Cuba is rumbling through Congress, with both backers and opponents predicting eventual victory and a Cuban-American senator promising a key vote against the effort.

Approval of the measures would have a profound impact on U.S.-Cuba relations, unleashing an estimated one million American tourists to visit the island and undermining White House control of policy toward Havana.

``There would be an explosion of contacts between Americans and Cubans . . . that would almost overshadow what the two governments are doing,'' said Phil Peters, a Cuba expert with the Lexington Institute think tank in suburban Washington.

Cuban officials have told recent U.S. visitors that while President Barack Obama's policy changes so far have been too timid to require a Havana reply, ending the U.S. travel ban would be significant enough to require some sort of Havana concession.

Many Cuba-watchers on Capitol Hill say the effort is likely to fail. But even opponents of the free-travel bills in the House and Senate admit the campaign for approval is powerful. ``I have never seen a stronger effort,'' said Mauricio Claver-Carone of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy political action committee.

Backing the change has been the U.S. travel industry -- Orbitz says it has 100,000 signatures on a petition -- and dozens of newspaper editorials, large agricultural companies, former Secretary of State George Shultz, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and groups that traditionally oppose U.S. sanctions on the island.

``Our goals should be to get rid of the travel ban in the next six months,'' Richardson said Friday during a speech to the National Democratic Network in Washington. ``This is a step in the right direction,'' Shultz declared last month.

Polls show 60-70 percent of all Americans favor lifting the travel restrictions, and one House bill championed by Massachusetts Democrat Bill Delahunt has gathered 180 sponsors -- 38 short of the 218 votes required for passage.

Obama ended all restrictions on Cuban-Americans' travel to the island on Sept. 3. But other U.S. citizens and residents can travel only under special permits for groups such as churches, academics and business -- not for tourism. That was allowed, however, from 1977 to 1982 under former President Jimmy Carter's efforts to normalize relations with Cuba.

Most of the public attention has been focused on the House bill backed by Delahunt and Rep. Sam Farr, D-Calif. Farr, noting that U.S agricultural sales to Cuba are allowed but not tourism, has repeated several variations of the line that ``We can send American potatoes to Cuba, but not American people.''

But a lesser-known version has a better chance of passing because it also eases restrictions on U.S. agricultural and medical sales to Cuba, in hopes of gathering support from those lobbies, said a Senate Republican staffer monitoring the progress of the travel bills.

The main Senate version of the measure -- with 25 co-sponsors from both parties at last count -- is being championed by Sens. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., Michael Enzi, R-Wyo. and Richard Lugar, R-Ind.

But backers of the changes say the bills have not moved forward through the congressional maze so far because of the lack of active support from the Obama administration and the Democratic leadership in both chambers.

``The Obama people are showing timidity. They are sitting on their hands,'' said a Senate aide whose Democratic boss favors lifting all travel restrictions. He asked for anonymity because he was not authorized to comment on the issue.

Administration officials say lifting all travel restrictions would be too drastic and perhaps chaotic, and the the president prefers a more measured warming of relations. They stop short of saying whether Obama would sign or veto the bill if passed by Congress.*

``At the end of the day this is a leadership issue,'' said the Senate Republican aide, who also asked for anonymity. ``Do the Democrats have the will to bring this up [for a vote] with all the other issues -- healthcare, Afghanistan, etc.''

Most of Washington's Cuba watchers agree the full Congress is probably going to pass some bills easing Cuba sanctions, most likely one re-defining the requirement that Havana pay ``cash in advance'' for U.S. food purchases. The change would allow Cuba to pay when the shipments reach Havana, not before they leave U.S. ports as now required.

But the future of the ``Free Travel to Cuba'' initiatives is far more uncertain, with most of those monitoring the struggle saying that some version will likely pass the House, but all will almost certainly die in the Senate.

Delahunt ``has a pretty impressive list of sponsors. That bill looks good in the House,'' said a former Bush administration Cuba expert. ``Delahunt will pass the House,'' added an Obama administration official. Both asked for anonymity so they could speak frankly about the topic.

But most supporters as well as opponents say the travel measures are unlikely to pass the Senate, where the Democrats have a smaller majority and the bills face stiff opposition from Bob Menendez, a powerful Cuban American Democrat from New Jersey and Florida's Bill Nelson, a Democrat, and George LeMieux, a Republican.

Menendez and Nelson have strongly opposed easing the ban on U.S. tourism. LeMieux, who replaced Sen. Mel Martinez, is expected to also oppose easing the travel restrictions.

``This is a battle of perceptions. The pro-travel groups are claiming they will win, in the hope of creating the sense of movement and victory,'' said Claver-Carone. ``But in the end, the Senate will be tough, if not impossible.''

Juan Tamayo can be reached at jtamayo@ElNuevoHerald.com.

-------------

* The Secretary of State said in Congressional testimony that the President will not veto legislation to end the embargo. It does not make sense that the President will veto the partial lifting represented by ending travel limits. Tamayo may also be grasping for straws in whom he chooses to quote about prospects for passage by the Senate. J McA

Sen. Dorgan on NY Philharmonic

2009-10-08T08:57:00.000-05:00

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - U.S. SENATE PROCEEDINGS - FLOOR SPEECH OF SENATOR BYRON DORGAN, DEMOCRAT OF NORTH DAKOTA

FREEDOM TO TRAVEL TO CUBA-- (Senate - October 05, 2009)

Mr. DORGAN . Mr. President, last Friday the New York Times had an article which caught my eye, and the headline was the following: ``October New York Philharmonic Trip to Cuba is Off.'' I want to talk for a moment about this. I was extraordinarily disappointed to read this because this is an issue of the freedom to travel by the American people, specifically, the freedom to travel to Cuba.
This country has had an embargo against the country of Cuba for a long while. Cuba is a Communist country. Fidel Castro has poked his finger in the eye of America for a long time, so we have had an embargo for a long time. Part of the way to injure the Castro regime, presumably, as a part of this embargo is to prevent the American people from traveling to Cuba. The American people can travel to Communist China, to Communist Vietnam, to North Korea, but the American people are considered taking a criminal act if they travel to Cuba. There are some exceptions; the U.S. Treasury Department gives licenses to travel for certain kinds of educational and cultural things, and for trade.

So the New York Philharmonic orchestra was going to Cuba, but had to cancel the trip. Daniel Wakin wrote about it in the New York Times last Friday October 1, 2009. The reason I wanted to mention this is because it is almost unbelievable what we are still doing with respect to our travel policy with Cuba.

Senator Enzi and I have a piece of legislation that removes all travel restrictions with respect to travel to Cuba. We have over 30 Senators who are cosponsors of that legislation, but while we are waiting to pass our legislation, we are going through this nonsense of having the Federal Government and the Treasury Department tell us who can and who cannot travel, restricting the liberty and the freedom of the American people. It is outrageous, in my judgment.
Trips like the one the New York Philharmonic planned to Havana are not unusual. These kinds of trips happen all of the time. In 1959, at the height of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, the New York Philharmonic played in Moscow. It is a reasonably good thing, in my judgment, to be able to extend our culture and the hand of friendship through music.

One of the reasons I was especially interested in this is that the New York Philharmonic visited North Korea last year, and I asked conductor Loren Maazel and Zarin Mehta, President of the Philharmonic's board, to come and speak to our caucus. They described to us their performances in North Korea. They said the applause went on and on, even after they left the stage. What a great way to exchange with another country, to extend cultural enlightenment and to share with other countries. Again, the New York Philharmonic orchestra played in North Korea last year, but cannot play in Cuba without a special license.

The New York Philharmonic is going to Communist Vietnam this month.
Yes, it is a Communist country. So, too, is North Korea, as is China, as is Russia. But the New York Philharmonic orchestra has no difficulty being able to play music in those countries because there are no travel restrictions with respect to those countries.

Let me describe, if I might, the absurdity of all of this. The Office of Foreign Assets Control is a little agency in the Treasury Department that is in charge of granting licenses that, under certain conditions, will allow you to travel to Cuba. The license they decided to allow the New York Philharmonic to go to Cuba and play their music did not include allowing the benefactors of the Philharmonic to travel with them and the Philharmonic decided that was unacceptable. Frankly, I understand why it is unacceptable for them. That doesn't make any sense to me.

The OFAC regulations says
Unless otherwise authorized, any person subject to U.S. jurisdiction who engages in any travel-related transaction in Cuba violates the regulations.

That is unbelievable to me. That has been around, I think, for 40 years, 50 years.
Let me give examples of some people who have traveled to Cuba who our Federal Government has chased and harassed. By the way, this little agency called OFAC, somewhere in the bowels of the U.S. Treasury Department, the Office of Foreign Assets Control, is supposed to be tracking terrorist money, protecting us from terrorists. Instead they have been busy chasing people who go to Cuba. In the previous administration, up to a quarter of their time was spent trying to track Americans who were under suspicion of taking a vacation in Cuba. It is pretty absurd, it seems to me.

This is Joan Slote. She was a senior citizen and bicyclist who was fined $7,630. Do you know why? Because she joined a Canadian bicycling group that took a bicycle tour of Cuba and, as a result of that, her government--under the previous administration--tracked her down, threatened to attach her Social Security checks, and fined her $7,630 for riding a bicycle in Cuba.

Here is a picture of a woman I have met named Joni Scott. Joni Scott's transgression? She is a very religious woman, a devout Christian. She went to Cuba to hand out free Bibles on the streets of Cuba and her government tried to track her down and fine her $10,000 for handing out free Bibles on the streets of Cuba because she violated the travel ban. The travel ban, that means restricting the liberty of the American people. We do not ban travel to other countries. We do not do it for communist China, for communist Russia, communist Vietnam--just for Cuba.

This is SGT Carlos Lazo. A number of years ago, Carlos Lazo went and fought in the country of Iraq, wearing America's uniform. He is a Cuban-American. He was in Iraq as a fighting soldier for this country. He won the Bronze Star for gallantry. He had two children in Cuba, one of whom was sick, and his government that he fought for and won the Bronze Star for, told him he was not able to travel to Cuba to see his own sick child. Hat shows how unbelievably wrong this policy is.

Let me describe what the policy is about traveling to other countries. The rules say:
All transactions ordinarily incident to travel to or from Iran ..... are permitted.

If you want to go to Iran, no problem; that is not an issue. You are welcome to go to Iran.

If you want to see Kim Jong-il in North Korea, it is not a problem. The rules say:
U.S. passports are valid for travel in North Korea and individuals do not need U.S. Government permission to travel there.

Here are the 10 Presidents we have had since we decided to punish the American people with a travel ban to Cuba--10 Presidents. You talk about failure--it is one thing just to fail; it is another thing to insist that failure is a good thing for 50 years. This Government of Cuba has lasted through 10 Presidents. What we have decided to do is, over all these years, to ban travel to Cuba by the American people.

You can go to Cuba in certain capacities. You can go in certain educational capacities, or cultural capacities, provided you get a license. I have been to Cuba. I have been to Havana. I have visited with government officials, I visited with all the dissidents in Cuba. Many of my colleagues here in Congress have undoubtedly traveled to Cuba. But we have a licensing requirement with respect to travel to Cuba.

We also had this trade embargo for all of these years. I was one who, some years ago, lifted that embargo slightly to be able to sell food and medicine into Cuba. I think it is fundamentally immoral to use food as a weapon. We had an embargo against selling food to Cuba. The Europeans were selling into Cuba, the Canadians were selling into Cuba; the American farmers were told you can't sell food into Cuba. As a result of my amendment, the amendment I offered with then Senator Ashcroft, that amendment opened just a bit the sale of food into Cuba and allowed medicine to go into Cuba as well, but that is the only thing that has happened in all of these years.

Senator Enzi and I have offered a bipartisan piece of legislation that would allow travel, allow the American people the freedom to travel in Cuba.
My colleagues in this Chamber talk a lot about freedom. What about the freedom of the American people to travel? Why is it we have decided to punish the Cuban regime by restricting Americans' freedoms?

I come back to the basic proposition. That is, one of the great music groups in the world, the New York Philharmonic, which has played in North Korea, in Russia, and is about to play in Vietnam, is told: Here are the circumstances and conditions in which you can play in Cuba. By the way, they are onerous. The New York Philharmonic found those circumstances and conditions unacceptable and I understand why.

I am writing to the Office of Assets Control to see if we could not get them to think straight a bit. It makes no sense at all to decide that this kind of exchange is unworthy. Does anybody really think that having the New York Philharmonic play beautiful music in the city of Havana, in the country of Cuba, is in any way going to threaten anybody? Wouldn't it perhaps do at least what it did for those who were able to experience that wonderful music in North Korea? I saw the photographs, I saw the video. I believe ``60 Minutes'' did a piece on it, that showed how unbelievably they were responded to by the North Korean people who heard them, who listened to the New York Philharmonic. Wouldn't that be the same with respect to Cuba?

Why on Earth should our government be interpreting this travel restriction in the way that is designed to try to restrict rather than expand these opportunities? I have seen how OFAC, over these years, tries to find ways to tighten, find ways to create opportunity to restrict travel. That makes no sense to me at all.
When I read this, this weekend, I thought what on Earth could they be thinking of? Where is the deep reservoir of common sense that you should expect from people who are confronted with this issue? When confronted with the issue of granting a license to the New York Philharmonic Orchestra to represent our country in doing concerts in Havana, why should OFAC be trying to find ways to make that too restrictive for the Philharmonic and its benefactors to travel to Cuba and do what they had intended to do?

This kind of opportunity to connect with other countries has a long history. I showed a picture of the New York Philharmonic, conducted by Leonard Bernstein, performing in the Great Hall in the Moscow Conservatory. Let me show that again. It raises the question about common sense. If we are able, in 1959, with all of the tensions with Moscow and the Soviet Union at that point, and we sent our New York Philharmonic Orchestra in an exchange and Leonard Bernstein conducted, and they, too, were greeted with long, sustained applause because people were so appreciative of them being in Moscow; if that has been the case--and it has been in every circumstance and last year especially it was with respect to the appearance in North Korea--if that is the case, why on Earth would our Government do anything other than encourage the New York Philharmonic to do the concert in Havana, instead of discourage it, instead of finding ways to tighten this down so the New York Philharmonic and their benefactors had decided they simply couldn't go under those conditions?

Common sense ought to apply on this issue of the liberty and the freedom of the American people to travel. There ought not be travel restrictions to Cuba at all. They ought to be gone and we ought to pass the Dorgan -Enzi bill that strikes the travel restrictions with respect to Cuba. We have not yet found a way to get it to the floor. When we do, I guarantee we will have sufficient votes on the floor of the Senate to offer the American people the freedom they should have had in the last 50 or 60 years, and that is freedom to travel. In this case that freedom has been taken from them and it is outrageous.

I mentioned Joan Slote. When I became involved in this issue of what this embargo costs our country, I was furious to find an elderly woman riding a bicycle in Cuba and then fined $7,300 by her government.

By the way, when she came back, her son had brain cancer so she wasn't home, she was attending to her son who had brain cancer down in California, and she didn't get the mailing to her house and then they threatened to take her Social Security away. Why? Because she was suspected of vacationing in Cuba, riding a bicycle with a Canadian bicycle group.

All of this I think is nuts and I hope at some point the New York Philharmonic will be given the license, with their benefactors, to go down and do the concert in Havana, Cuba; do the concert there. In the meantime, I hope the Office of Foreign Asset Control will take a look at this and make a new decision. They have the right to make a better decision. In my judgment they didn't make the right decision here. I hope they overturn that decision. I have written them a letter today asking them to do that. Let's use a little common sense here.

Following that, I hope Senator Enzi and I will get our legislation on the floor of the Senate and remove the travel restrictions that now impede the freedom of the American people to travel to Cuba.

The country of Cuba has been a thorn in our side for a long time; I understand that. But attempting to punish the leaders of Cuba by punishing the American people makes no sense at all. That is exactly what has happened since the early 1960s. My hope is that some day, despite the news last Friday that the New York Philharmonic has canceled this trip--my hope is some day very soon we will have a policy that doesn't have anybody canceling trips because they didn't get their license to travel. My hope is anybody can travel anywhere, representing the best of this country.

The New York Philharmonic is a wonderful cultural ambassador--to the Soviet Union, and North Korea, and Vietnam, all communist countries--and it can also be with Cuba. I hope that will happen soon.

House and Senate Cosponsors of Freedom to Travel Bills

2009-09-30T08:07:00.000-05:00

Cosponsors of HR 874, Freedom to Travel Bill

161 are listed with the date they signed on; unofficially an additional 20 Representatives are reported to have agreed to cosponsor

text of bill can be seen at

Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Alexander, Rodney [LA-5] - 5/4/2009
Rep Baird, Brian [WA-3] - 3/30/2009
Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Berry, Marion [AR-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Biggert, Judy [IL-13] - 3/30/2009
Rep Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. [GA-2] - 5/7/2009
Rep Bishop, Timothy H. [NY-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3] - 3/30/2009
Rep Boozman, John [AR-3] - 3/30/2009
Rep Boswell, Leonard L. [IA-3] - 3/30/2009
Rep Boucher, Rick [VA-9] - 5/7/2009
Rep Brady, Robert A. [PA-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Brown, Henry E., Jr. [SC-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Capps, Lois [CA-23] - 3/30/2009
Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-8] - 3/30/2009
Rep Chaffetz, Jason [UT-3] - 3/30/2009
Rep Clarke, Yvette D. [NY-11] - 3/30/2009
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Cleaver, Emanuel [MO-5] - 3/30/2009
Rep Clyburn, James E. [SC-6] - 5/20/2009
Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 3/30/2009
Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] - 3/30/2009
Rep Cooper, Jim [TN-5] - 3/30/2009
Rep Costa, Jim [CA-20] - 3/30/2009
Rep Costello, Jerry F. [IL-12] - 3/30/2009
Rep Courtney, Joe [CT-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-7] - 3/30/2009
Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] - 3/30/2009
Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] - 4/30/2009
Rep Davis, Lincoln [TN-4] - 3/30/2009
Rep Davis, Susan A. [CA-53] - 4/22/2009
Rep DeFazio, Peter A. [OR-4] - 3/30/2009
Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1] - 4/2/2009
Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] - 2/4/2009
Rep Dicks, Norman D. [WA-6] - 5/21/2009
Rep Doggett, Lloyd [TX-25] - 3/30/2009
Rep Doyle, Michael F. [PA-14] - 3/30/2009
Rep Driehaus, Steve [OH-1] - 5/13/2009
Rep Edwards, Donna F. [MD-4] - 2/4/2009
Rep Ehlers, Vernon J. [MI-3] - 3/30/2009
Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] - 3/30/2009
Rep Emerson, Jo Ann [MO-8] - 2/4/2009
Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-14] - 3/30/2009
Rep Etheridge, Bob [NC-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] - 2/4/2009
Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 3/30/2009
Rep Flake, Jeff [AZ-6] - 2/4/2009
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 3/30/2009
Rep Fudge, Marcia L. [OH-11] - 4/22/2009
Rep Gonzalez, Charles A. [TX-20] - 3/30/2009
Rep Gordon, Bart [TN-6] - 3/30/2009
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] - 3/30/2009
Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4] - 5/7/2009
Rep Hall, John J. [NY-19] - 7/9/2009
Rep Harman, Jane [CA-36] - 3/30/2009
Rep Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie [SD] - 5/7/2009
Rep Hinchey, Maurice D. [NY-22] - 3/30/2009
Rep Holden, Tim [PA-17] - 5/7/2009
Rep Holt, Rush D. [NJ-12] - 4/22/2009
Rep Honda, Michael M. [CA-15] - 3/30/2009
Rep Inslee, Jay [WA-1] - 5/7/2009
Rep Israel, Steve [NY-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 3/30/2009
Rep Johnson, Eddie Bernice [TX-30] - 3/30/2009
Rep Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [GA-4] - 3/30/2009
Rep Johnson, Timothy V. [IL-15] - 3/30/2009
Rep Kagen, Steve [WI-8] - 3/30/2009
Rep Kanjorski, Paul E. [PA-11] - 5/7/2009
Rep Kaptur, Marcy [OH-9] - 3/30/2009
Rep Kildee, Dale E. [MI-5] - 4/28/2009
Rep Kilpatrick, Carolyn C. [MI-13] - 3/30/2009
Rep Kilroy, Mary Jo [OH-15] - 3/30/2009
Rep Kind, Ron [WI-3] - 3/30/2009
Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] - 3/30/2009
Rep Langevin, James R. [RI-2] - 5/14/2009
Rep Larsen, Rick [WA-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Larson, John B. [CT-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 3/30/2009
Rep Levin, Sander M. [MI-12] - 5/20/2009
Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] - 4/30/2009
Rep Loebsack, David [IA-2] - 5/20/2009
Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] - 3/30/2009
Rep Lowey, Nita M. [NY-18] - 3/30/2009
Rep Lummis, Cynthia M. [WY] - 3/30/2009
Rep Lynch, Stephen F. [MA-9] - 3/30/2009
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] - 3/30/2009
Rep Markey, Edward J. [MA-7] - 3/30/2009
Rep Matheson, Jim [UT-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Matsui, Doris O. [CA-5] - 3/30/2009
Rep McCarthy, Carolyn [NY-4] - 3/30/2009
Rep McCollum, Betty [MN-4] - 3/30/2009
Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 3/30/2009
Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] - 2/4/2009
Rep Meeks, Gregory W. [NY-6] - 3/30/2009
Rep Michaud, Michael H. [ME-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Miller, George [CA-7] - 3/30/2009
Rep Mollohan, Alan B. [WV-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Moore, Dennis [KS-3] - 3/30/2009
Rep Moore, Gwen [WI-4] - 3/30/2009
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 3/30/2009
Rep Moran, Jerry [KS-1] - 2/4/2009
Rep Murtha, John P. [PA-12] - 5/7/2009
Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] - 3/30/2009
Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38] - 5/14/2009
Rep Neal, Richard E. [MA-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] - 3/30/2009
Rep Oberstar, James L. [MN-8] - 3/30/2009
Rep Olver, John W. [MA-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Ortiz, Solomon P. [TX-27] - 3/30/2009
Rep Pastor, Ed [AZ-4] - 3/30/2009
Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] - 2/4/2009
Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 3/30/2009
Rep Peterson, Collin C. [MN-7] - 3/30/2009
Rep Pingree, Chellie [ME-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Polis, Jared [CO-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Pomeroy, Earl [ND] - 4/30/2009
Rep Price, David E. [NC-4] - 3/30/2009
Rep Rahall, Nick J., II [WV-3] - 5/14/2009
Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] - 3/30/2009
Rep Richardson, Laura [CA-37] - 5/6/2009
Rep Ross, Mike [AR-4] - 3/30/2009
Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [CA-34] - 5/14/2009
Rep Ruppersberger, C. A. Dutch [MD-2] - 5/7/2009
Rep Rush, Bobby L. [IL-1] - 4/2/2009
Rep Ryan, Tim [OH-17] - 3/30/2009
Rep Sanchez, Linda T. [CA-39] - 4/30/2009
Rep Sanchez, Loretta [CA-47] - 3/30/2009
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 3/30/2009
Rep Schwartz, Allyson Y. [PA-13] - 3/30/2009
Rep Scott, David [GA-13] - 4/1/2009
Rep Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [VA-3] - 5/12/2009
Rep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16] - 3/30/2009
Rep Sestak, Joe [PA-7] - 7/30/2009
Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28] - 3/30/2009
Rep Smith, Adam [WA-9] - 3/30/2009
Rep Snyder, Vic [AR-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Speier, Jackie [CA-12] - 7/7/2009
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 3/30/2009
Rep Stupak, Bart [MI-1] - 5/21/2009
Rep Tanner, John S. [TN-8] - 3/30/2009
Rep Tauscher, Ellen O. [CA-10] - 3/30/2009
Rep Taylor, Gene [MS-4] - 5/7/2009
Rep Thompson, Bennie G. [MS-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Thompson, Mike [CA-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Tierney, John F. [MA-6] - 3/30/2009
Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] - 3/30/2009
Rep Tsongas, Niki [MA-5] - 5/12/2009
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 3/30/2009
Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. [NY-12] - 3/30/2009
Rep Walz, Timothy J. [MN-1] - 3/30/2009
Rep Waters, Maxine [CA-35] - 3/30/2009
Rep Watson, Diane E. [CA-33] - 3/30/2009
Rep Watt, Melvin L. [NC-12] - 5/7/2009
Rep Waxman, Henry A. [CA-30] - 3/30/2009
Rep Weiner, Anthony D. [NY-9] - 5/4/2009
Rep Welch, Peter [VT] - 3/30/2009
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] - 3/30/2009
Rep Yarmuth, John A. [KY-3] - 3/30/2009

Cosponsors of S 428 32 are listed

Sen Barrasso, John [WY] - 2/23/2009
Sen Baucus, Max [MT] - 3/2/2009
Sen Bingaman, Jeff [NM] - 3/10/2009
Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] - 3/10/2009
Sen Burris, Roland [IL] - 7/13/2009
Sen Cantwell, Maria [WA] - 3/30/2009
Sen Collins, Susan M. [ME] - 5/21/2009
Sen Conrad, Kent [ND] - 3/17/2009
Sen Crapo, Mike [ID] - 3/30/2009
Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] - 2/12/2009
Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] - 3/2/2009
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY] - 2/12/2009
Sen Feingold, Russell D. [WI] - 3/3/2009
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] - 2/26/2009
Sen Franken, Al [MN] - 9/14/2009
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 3/2/2009
Sen Johnson, Tim [SD] - 3/6/2009
Sen Klobuchar, Amy [MN] - 5/11/2009
Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [LA] - 3/30/2009
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] - 3/6/2009
Sen Levin, Carl [MI] - 7/21/2009
Sen Lincoln, Blanche L. [AR] - 4/30/2009
Sen Lugar, Richard G. [IN] - 2/12/2009
Sen McCaskill, Claire [MO] - 4/29/2009
Sen Murray, Patty [WA] - 5/21/2009
Sen Pryor, Mark L. [AR] - 4/21/2009
Sen Reed, Jack [RI] - 3/12/2009
Sen Sanders, Bernard [VT] - 3/12/2009
Sen Tester, Jon [MT] - 8/5/2009
Sen Udall, Tom [NM] - 4/29/2009
Sen Webb, Jim [VA] - 4/21/2009
Sen Wyden, Ron [OR] - 2/25/2009

Sen Bennet, Michael F. [CO] - 3/11/2009(withdrawn - 3/30/2009)

Rep. Farr Predicts Passage of Travel Legislation

2009-09-21T23:28:00.000-05:00

Overturning Cuba Travel Ban May Pass House This Year, Farr Says

By Fabiola Moura

Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Legislation to end a ban on Americans traveling to Cuba has enough support in the U.S. House of Representatives to win approval by year-end, said Representative Sam Farr, a California Democrat.

The bill to let U.S. citizens resume travel to the Caribbean island except in times of war or cases in which they face imminent danger has 181 votes in the House and needs 218 to pass, said Farr, a co-sponsor of the legislation. The plan is backed by travel groups such as the United States Tour Operators Association and the National Tour Association and human rights groups such as the Washington Office on Latin America and has been helped by President Barack Obama’s election, he said.

“It is believed we can get to this before the end of the year,” Farr, 68, said in an interview in New York. “We haven’t had a policy about Cuba. We’ve had policies about getting votes in Florida and Obama changed that by getting those votes.”

The U.S. ended restrictions on Sept. 3 on Cuban-Americans travel and money transfers to relatives in Cuba. The new rules also allow U.S. telecommunications companies to provide service in Cuba for mobile telephone, satellite radio and television. Exceptions to the 1962 trade embargo on communist Cuba include $500 million per year in agricultural exports, Farr said.

“If you are a potato, you can get to Cuba very easily,” he said. “But if you are a person, you can’t, and that is our problem.”

Pressure

Obama is under pressure from Latin American leaders to end the trade embargo to help improve relations in the region. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva will ask Obama to end the embargo during the United Nations General Assembly this week, spokesman Marcelo Baumbach said Sept. 17.

Obama announced in April he would lift travel limits for Cuban-Americans visiting family in Cuba. At the same time, Representatives Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Mario Diaz-Balart, both Florida Republicans, issued a statement that the president had made “unilateral concessions to the dictatorship” that would “embolden it to further isolate, imprison and brutalize pro- democracy activists.”

Cuba’s former President Fidel Castro, who handed power to his brother Raul Castro last year, called on Obama to completely lift the trade embargo.

White House officials have said there are no plans to lift the embargo. At the same time, the administration is undertaking a full review of policy toward Cuba with the goal of advancing “the cause of freedom” in the country less than 100 miles (160 kilometers) from the coast of Florida, Daniel Restrepo, a special assistant to Obama, said in April.

March Proposal

A group of House and Senate lawmakers proposed in March ending restrictions to allow all U.S. citizens and residents to travel to Cuba. Farr said the legislation, known as the “Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act,” also has enough votes to clear the Senate, where Senator Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat, and Republican Senator Michael Enzi of Wyoming introduced the legislation.

“There’s a lot more openness in the Congress,” Geoff Thale, program director in the Washington Office on Latin America, said in an interview in New York. “Support is building. The travel industry and business community are not just formally in support but actively engaged. That’s why I think we’re going to see a difference.”

Senator Robert Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat who is of Cuban descent and sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, has vowed to fight the easing of travel restrictions.

Philip Peters, a vice president and Cuba expert at the Lexington Institute, a public policy research group in Arlington, Virginia, said proponents of the bill may succeed in winning congressional approval as public opinion grows among Americans that U.S. rules on Cuba aren’t in line with much of the country’s foreign policy.

‘Good Shot’

“They’ve got a good shot,” Peters said in an interview. “Certainly right now they’re in striking distance and they’ve got plenty of time left in the session.”

Ending the travel ban may lead as many as 1 million Americans to visit the island every year, Lisa Simon, president of the National Tour Association, known as NTA, said in an interview. It would also help push forward talks on human rights issues, Thale said.

“We’ve had a policy for 50 years of isolating Cuba and it hasn’t done anything about the human rights situation,” Thale said. “I don’t think there is some magic solution. I don’t think ending the travel ban will cause Fidel to say let’s have elections, let’s release all the political prisoners tomorrow. What it will do is open the process of dialogue.”

Obama’s administration has been showing a “gradual relaxation and diplomatic opening” toward Cuba, Thale said. He cited the government’s decision to reinitiate talks on migration and direct mail, and also to put down the billboard operated by the U.S. government outside its special interests section in Havana, which he said often displayed anti-Cuba messages.

To contact the reporter on this story: Fabiola Moura in New York at fdemoura@bloomberg.netJoshua Goodman in Rio de Janeiro at jgoodman19@bloomberg.net;
Last Updated: September 21, 2009 16:47 EDT

******************

my comment

This useful article does not discuss the role of the White House in passage of legislation to end travel restrictions.

By implication, but not by explicit statement, the President will not follow the Bush policy of threatening to veto a travel bill. (Secretary Clinton did testify that they would not veto a bill to end the embargo.)

The question is whether House Committees with jurisdiction and key Senators will allow the legislation to proceed without a signal from President Obama that this is consistent with his foreign policy.

The signal could be verbal to the House and Senate leadership, or it could be by example. The President has complete authority to grant general licenses for non-tourist travel for educational, cultural, humanitarian, religious and other people-to-people purposes.

When he declines to use this authority and leaves in place a policy imposed by George Bush in 2004, he is sending exactly the opposite signal and missing an opportunity to ease the way to larger reform.

In Castro Country, Giving a Concert for Peace (Washington Post)

2009-09-21T14:41:00.000-05:00

Cuban Exiles Decry Event, but Leading Latin Music Acts Perform Before Hundreds of Thousands in Havana

By William Booth
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, September 21, 2009

HAVANA, Sept. 20 -- Rock-and-roll diplomacy came to the communist isle on a smoldering afternoon, as hundreds of thousands of Cubans filled the Plaza of the Revolution on Sunday and sang along to a dozen international musical acts led by the Colombian singer and peace activist Juanes.

The free "Peace without Borders" concert was criticized by hard-line Cuban exiles in Miami as a propaganda coup for the Castro brothers, and that it might have been. But for thousands of young Cubans, it was a rare treat to hear a lineup of global Latin music stars, such as Olga Tanon of Puerto Rico and Miguel Bosé of Spain.

Under the watchful gaze of a huge mural of Ernesto "Che" Guevara, and beneath the socialist slogan "Always Toward Victory!" on the side of the Ministry of Interior building, there was no trouble from the mostly young crowd. Many were dressed in white, in keeping with the peaceful vibe.

From the stage, framed by giant posters of a white dove, musicians offered hopeful but admittedly vague appeals for change, solidarity and, of course, peace. Bosé told the crowd that "the greatest dream we can live is to dream the dream of peace." He also announced that there were more than a million people in the square, though there were no official estimates.

Tanon shouted that she brought greetings from Miami -- home of many Cuban exiles who live in opposition to the Cuban government -- and no one in the crowd booed, but instead whistled and cheered.

The United States has pursued a policy of economic embargo and diplomatic freeze against Cuba for almost 50 years, hoping to topple the government, to no avail. Despite promises by President Obama, change in the U.S.-Cuba relationship has been slow in coming.

In an interview aired Sunday on the Spanish-language network Univision, Obama acknowledged that the concert would only go so far. "I certainly don't think it hurts U.S.-Cuban relations," he said. "I wouldn't overstate the degree that it helps."

The plaza is iconic as the scene of some of Fidel Castro's biggest rallies and longest speeches, though he has not been seen in public for almost three years, after intestinal surgery. Anti-Castro Cuban exiles in Miami have voiced heated opposition to the concert, saying it only served to support the government here, which would milk the event for publicity even as it imprisons hundreds of political dissidents.

Because of his participation, Juanes has received death threats. But some of the pressure on him eased when, earlier this month, 24 of the 75 Cuban opposition leaders arrested in a 2003 crackdown on dissent signed a letter saying the show must go on.

"We came to Cuba with love. We have overcome fear to be with you, and we hope that you too can overcome it," Juanes told the masses. "All the young people, from Miami in the United States and in all the cities, must understand the importance of turning hate into love."

More than 100 buses could be counted bringing young people to the concert. "This is the best concert to come to Cuba in, like, 50 years," said Yeilene Fernandez, a student at the University of Havana who was dancing with friends.

Sitting in his hotel room on the eighth floor of the Hotel Nacional the night before the show, Juanes was typing out messages for his Twitter followers. He was wearing a silver crucifix, jeans and a T-shirt. "It's important to do this. I know this in my heart," he said. "Our region, Latin America, is very complicated right now. We're all going our separate ways because of our ideologies. It's time to change our minds, to do something beyond politics, for young people."

Juanes had previously met with Obama administration officials, and being a 17-time Latin Grammy winner who has become a kind of roving diplomat in Latin America, he got to see Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. She gave her blessing to his participation in the concert.

"We asked what they thought, and they said, 'Go ahead.' She was very positive," he said. "Me, I am Colombian, so I didn't need to ask permission. But we did need permission for all our staff, and they said sure."

Juanes said he asked some artists to come, "but they were afraid. Latin artists, we live in Miami, and when you live in Miami, anything to do with Cuba is always a challenge. Some people in Miami are against anything to do with Cuba. Some are in the middle. And the young people, they definitely support cultural exchange."

Next up in that exchange: The New York Philharmonic is coming to play a series of concerts at the Teatro Amadeo Roldan in Havana at the end of October.

"I see an increase in these cultural exchanges, and I think it's healthy, it's a step in the right direction," said Bill Richardson, governor of New Mexico, in an interview. He traveled this month to Cuba to discuss trade issues with the government.

In Havana on Sunday, those who were not at the Plaza of the Revolution watched the concert on rickety old TV sets in airless living rooms** -- or sat in their front courtyards to catch the breeze and listened to the show on the radio.

The artists performed free and covered the cost of shipping stage and sound equipment from Miami for the mega-concert. The Cuban government provided logistical and technical support. Juanes insisted that the signal from the show is free to use, download or broadcast anywhere in the world.

Juanes performed his first "Peace without Borders" concert on the frontier between Colombia and Venezuela last year during a time of heightened animosity between the countries. He said he would like to perform a third peace concert at the border between El Paso and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. A vicious battle between street dealers and drug cartels, fighting among themselves and against federal troops, has left more than 1,600 people dead this year, making Juarez the most violent city in the world.

Juanes said: "I am from Colombia. I have no idea what it means to live in peace."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/20/AR2009092000739_pf.html

** The author has obviously not spent a lot of time in Cuban living rooms or watched many televisions there.

Former US Ambassador Sees Movement to End Embargo

2009-09-20T21:33:00.000-05:00

Ex-ambassador: Jacksonville should get ready for US-Cuban trade
Florida Times-Union - September 16

By David Bauerlein / david.bauerlein@jacksonville.com, (904) 359-4581

Jacksonville should prepare for a future boom in trade between the United States and Cuba because "change is in the air" regarding the decades-old embargo that has stifled interaction between the countries, a former U.S. ambassador to Bolivia said Tuesday.

V. Manuel Rocha, who is senior adviser on international business at Foley & Lardner LLP, said it's not realistic to predict how many more years the embargo will remain in place.

But he said there are changes occurring in both the U.S. and Cuba that favor the U.S. eventually lifting the embargo that dates back to the 1950s.

"There is a set of forces moving in a direction that should give you a sense that something is going to happen," Rocha said in a speech at Foley & Lardner's office in Jacksonville.

Rocha said it wouldn't necessarily be better for U.S. businesses if Cuba were to change its communist government. He said the current leadership of Cuba wants to ensure a "successor" form of government so future leaders maintain a connection with the revolution that brought the Communist Party to power.

He said that scenario would be comparable to how the U.S. has dealt with Communist Party-led China and Vietnam, whose top trading partners are the U.S.

He said the other alternative for Cuba would entail a tumultuous "transition" from the Communist Party to another form of government. He compared that possibility to the turmoil that occurred after the break-up of the Soviet Union.

"There are more McDonald's in 'successor' China than in 'transition' Russia because of the stability" in China, he said.

Cuba's top trading partner for exports is China, accounting for about 28 percent of Cuban products shipped abroad, according to the Central Intelligence Agency's World Factbook. Canada is second with about 25 percent of Cuba's exports followed by Spain at about 7 percent, Netherlands at 5 percent and Iran at 4 percent.

Cuba gets 32 percent of its imports from Venezuela, 11.8 percent from China, 10.6 percent from Spain, about 7 percent from Canada and 6.6 percent from the U.S. The imports from the U.S. are for certain goods exempted from the embargo.

Rocha said Jacksonville officials should be planning for more future trade with Cuba and identify what products the city wants to target for shipment through Jacksonville's port, and then make contact with those manufacturers. He said the cities that establish those relationships in advance will be able to capitalize on increased trade.

"You don't necessarily have to take big steps," he said.

Reports of Governor Richardson's Visit, Press Conference Video

2009-09-01T09:28:00.005-05:00

In Cuba, Richardson says US travel ban should end

By JAMES ANDERSON
Associated Press Writer

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said Wednesday that he's just a governor on a trade mission and carries no message from the U.S. government as he visits Cuba this week. But he does plan to report his impressions to President Barack Obama.

Richardson spoke outside Havana while visiting Ernest Hemingway's former home, where he donated a replica of a telephone used by Hemingway to curators on behalf of his state. He said all U.S. citizens should be able to visit such cultural gems.

"I think enhancing cultural and artistic and educational ties is a prelude to diplomatic and commercial ties. It always happens that way," Richardson told The As
ociated Press.

"I'm for enhanced tourism travel for Americans." Richardson said that travel should go beyond the so-called people-to-people educational and cultural contacts promoted by the Bill Clinton administration.

Richardson insisted he is not in Cuba on Washington's behalf and is not bringing any message from the U.S. government. But he is meeting with senior Cuban officials, including a scheduled encounter Thursday with Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez and a Monday meeting with Ricardo Alarcon, president of parliament.

So far, everyone has brought up the U.S. embargo and other aspects of U.S. policy, Richardson said, without elaborating.

"I'm not an envoy of the (Obama) administration. I'm carrying no message. I'm here as a governor seeking agricultural trade," he said.

"Obviously I do plan to submit my impressions to the administration after I conclude," he said. "I will do that as a citizen and as a governor. They're my impressions alone."
As a congressman, Richardson secured the release of three Cuban political prisoners during talks with then-President Fidel Castro in Havana in 1996. As U.N. ambassador in 1997, he held talks on terrorism with then-Foreign Minister Roberto Robaina.

Richardson supported Obama's declaration during last year's U.S. presidential campaign that he would be open to meeting current President Raul Castro without preconditions. The governor also has opposed lifting the U.S. embargo, while advocating negotiations with Cuba to promote human rights.

The Obama administration has relaxed restrictions on Cuban Americans' travel and money transfers to family on the island. Most U.S. citizens cannot visit — technically, the U.S. Treasury Department bars them from spending money in Cuba — in tandem with the U.S. embargo imposed in 1962 to weaken Cuba's Communist government.

The U.S. and Cuba also are resuming talks on migration and direct mail, but they have sparred over a U.S. suggestion that Havana release its political prisoners. Cuba insists that any dialogue have no preconditions.

Richardson and state Cabinet officials are promoting exports of New Mexico beef, corn, wheat, potatoes and apples. Despite the embargo, U.S. states can sell agricultural and certain other products to Cuba, though sales on credit are prohibited.

To promote cultural ties, New Mexico will inaugurate an exhibition of Cuban modern art next week.

http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=NDY1MzcyOA%3D%3D

****************

NM Gov. cheers US, Cuban openness to better ties

By WILL WEISSERT (AP) – 1 hour ago

HAVANA — The U.S. and Cuba need time to reverse nearly a half-century of bad blood, but both sides are more open to doing so than they have been in years, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said Friday.

A Democrat and former top U.S. diplomat who knows ex-President Fidel Castro personally, Richardson said that he would like to facilitate dialogue between the communist government and the Cuban-American exile community — but has no interest in being a special U.S. envoy tasked with repairing relations with Cuba.

"There is a good atmosphere. It's the best atmosphere I've seen for an improvement," Richardson told a news conference at the historic Hotel Nacional. "What is needed is concrete steps from both sides. It's very important that we build more confidence in each other before we tackle the bold, divisive issues."

Richardson did not see Fidel or his younger brother, current President Raul Castro, but met twice with Ricardo Alarcon, the head of Cuba's parliament, as well as officials in the Foreign Relations and Tourism Ministries before leaving the island Friday after a four-day visit.

Fidel Castro did send him a note containing a "positive message," however. "He just basically said 'Hello,'" said Richardson, who refused to comment further.

The governor said Washington and Havana aren't ready to discuss lifting the 47-year-old American trade embargo or the release of political prisoners on the island.

Instead, the U.S. government should better solidify President Barack Obama's decision to ease restrictions on Cuban-Americans who want to travel or send money to Cuba, allow more American business leaders, athletes, artists and academics to come to this country, let Cuban biotechnology products be sold on the U.S. market and permit Cubans to attend scientific and business conferences in the United States.

Cuba should allow its citizens to travel to the U.S. with fewer restrictions and fees, accept Washington's proposal to let diplomats from both countries travel more freely in each other's territories and open a dialogue with Cuban-Americans, Richardson said.

"I did raise these issues with Cuban officials. They are considering some steps," he said.
Richardson said the economic meltdown and the health care debate have distracted U.S. officials, but "the United States needs to pay more attention to the Cuban issue."
"On the Cuban side, I note a lack of flexibility in their positions," he said. "There needs to be reciprocity when one side takes action."

The Obama White House has loosened restrictions on family travel and remittances but suggested it would like to see Cuba respond with small political or economic reforms — calls Havana has ignored.

Richardson said a wild card could be Cuban-Americans, who are divided between support for the U.S. embargo and hopes that the relationship between both countries will improve. He said he "would be happy to broker" dialogue between the Cuban government and Cuban exiles in the U.S.

"This should not be a substitute for government-to-government talks," he said. "But I believe if there is going to be a solution to normalization of the relationship between Cuba and the United States, Cuban-Americans must play a role and will play a role."

The declared purpose of Richardson's visit was to promote trade for his state, but he said he would present a report about the situation in Cuba to Obama administration officials.
As a congressman, Richardson secured the 1996 release of three Cuban political prisoners during talks with Castro in Havana. As U.N. ambassador a year later, he held discussions about terrorism with then Cuban Foreign Minister Roberto Robaina.

Obama had tapped Richardson to be his commerce secretary but the governor withdrew his name from consideration amid an investigation into how lucrative New Mexico bond work went to one of his large political donors.

Richardson refused to confirm or comment on reports published Thursday that the U.S. Justice Department will not pursue criminal charges against him, saying only, "I'm not talking about that."

****************

Videos of Richardson press conference

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5272636n&tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea;cbsnewsMainColumnArea.0

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/08/29/cuba.us.relations/#cnnSTCVideo

*************

Hará recomendaciones a Obama, informa en La Habana el gobernador estadunidense

Discutió en Cuba plan de acciones recíprocas para normalizar vínculos, dice Bill Richardson

Gerardo Arreola
Corresponsal

La Habana, 28 de agosto. El gobernador de Nuevo México, Bill Richardson, informó hoy a la prensa que discutió aquí con autoridades cubanas un plan de acciones recíprocas para normalizar las relaciones entre Estados Unidos y Cuba y que reportará su viaje y hará recomendaciones al presidente Barack Obama.

Richardson concluyó una estancia de cinco días en la isla sin hablar con los hermanos Castro, pero dijo que apreció un ambiente muy bueno, el mejor que he visto en muchos años, para arreglar el conflicto de medio siglo y que su viaje fue muy productivo.

Muy cauto y buscando precisión en la mayoría de sus respuestas, el veterano negociador demócrata dijo que vino a Cuba como gobernador de Nuevo México, no como representante de la administración Obama.

Además, subrayó que no es necesario un enviado especial de Washington para Cuba y que no cree que él mismo vaya a tener un papel en el proceso. Es asunto del Departamento de Estado.

Richardson habló dos veces con Ricardo Alarcón, líder del Parlamento, experto en las relaciones con Estados Unidos e integrante del poderoso Buró Político del Partido Comunista.

Formalmente no fueron reuniones entre gobiernos, pero sí el contacto de mayor rango político que hayan tenido ambos países durante la gestión de Obama.

Richardson advirtió que cualquier solución tomará tiempo y será difícil: Cincuenta años de mala relación no se pueden resolver en un año. Pero agregó que Alarcón le dijo que los cubanos están considerando el plan.

El plan consiste en que, antes de entrar a temas de fondo, como el bloqueo económico y la base naval de Guantánamo, las dos naciones tendrían que dar pasos humanitarios: Estados Unidos debería poner en práctica las medidas anunciadas por Obama en abril pasado (como la liberación de viajes y las remesas de los cubanos emigrados), permitir los intercambios deportivos, culturales, científicos, académicos y de negocios, así como los viajes de los estadunidenses a la isla.

Cuba debería eliminar las restricciones burocráticas y las altas tarifas que frenan los viajes de sus ciudadanos a Estados Unidos, aceptar una propuesta de Washington para que tengan mayor movilidad los diplomáticos de ambos países e iniciar un diálogo informal con los cubanoestadunidenses.

Richardson evitó responder directamente a una pregunta sobre quiénes exactamente serían los interlocutores de La Habana entre la emigración cubana en Estados Unidos, pero reconoció que antes de venir a la isla se reunió con sus amigos de esa comunidad que están en la política.

Aceptó que con Alarcón habló de la propuesta cubana de intercambiar opositores presos en la isla por los cinco agentes cubanos encarcelados en Estados Unidos, pero que el énfasis estuvo en los citados pasos humanitarios.

Ahora el problema principal es que Estados Unidos tiene otras prioridades y tendría que prestar más atención a Cuba y América Latina, mientras que en la isla falta flexibilidad y debería haber más reciprocidad hacia las medidas que tome Washington, señaló el gobernador estadunidense.

Indicó que estaba muy satisfecho del alto nivel al que fue recibido aquí (un vicecanciller y otros funcionarios equivalentes, además de Alarcón).

Dijo que de antemano sabía que no hablaría con Raúl o Fidel Castro, pero que el ex mandatario le hizo llegar el jueves por la noche un mensaje personal.

http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2009/08/29/index.php?section=mundo&article=018n1mun&b=Aceptar

Cuban Actors Do Shakespeare in Alabama

2009-08-31T21:41:00.001-05:00

Diplomatic drama: Cuban actors in US perform Bard
August 5, 2009 by The Associated Press / JAY REEVES (Associated Press Writer)

TUSCALOOSA, Ala. (AP) — It's opening week for a new act in U.S.-Cuba relations: A Spanish-language version of Shakespeare's "A Midsummer Night's Dream" is beginning a three-day run at the University of Alabama, starring professional actors from Havana.

Anyone up for "Un Sueno de Una Noche de Verano"?

The Obama administration's decision to let 12 Cuban artists enter the United States for the production marks a midsummer milestone of sorts for greater U.S. openness toward the Communist-ruled island nation.

"This is beyond uncommon. No musician or performing group has been allowed in this country like this from Cuba since 2003," said Ned Sublette, a performer and composer from New York who has studied and written about Cuban music.

With nearly three weeks of rehearsals complete, the troupe of 10 Cuban actors and two managers are turning the Bard into a modern-day diplomat. They will perform Thursday through Saturday in a joint production with nine University of Alabama students and a Tuscaloosa-area actor.

The drama within the drama: the Cubans speak little English and the Americans, no Spanish. But together they are memorizing lines in Spanish to stage the 400-year-old romantic comedy about young lovers, fairies and an enchanted forest.

"None of the American actors speak Spanish," said the director, Seth Panitch, an assistant professor at the university who helped the Americans learn dialogue and even when to take their cues in a foreign language. "It's terrifying for the Americans."

Panitch compressed about 2½ hours of Shakespearean dialogue into 90 minutes of Spanish-language drama.

Alianne Portuondo Olivera, 23, said the communication gap hasn't been too wide. The Cuban actress portrays Hermia, who is loved by two different men.

"We can communicate with each other by physical actions and emotions," she said through a translator. "The American actors we are working with are always aware of the work of the Cubans, and the Cubans are always taking care of the Americans."

The play, to be staged in a small campus theater at $5 a ticket before a mostly English-speaking audience, comes amid what advocates of more U.S. openness toward Cuba see as a string of encouraging events.

Last week, American actors Bill Murray, Robert Duval and James Caan visited Cuba on a research trip, and U.S. has agreed to let the New York Philharmonic perform in Havana later this year under an exemption to travel restrictions to Cuba.

And last year, Panitch traveled to Cuba to direct another Shakespearean play, "The Merchant of Venice," under the university's Treasury Department license to conduct research with Cuba.

This year, Panitch sought to bring Cubans to Alabama for a production, not knowing whether a history of strained relations between the two countries would thwart his plans. Travel between the countries is tightly restricted.

The play was cast in January with actors Panitch knew from his work in Havana, and the Cuban government granted permission in late June for the actors and managers to travel.

Despite some tense moments, the U.S. government approved the visas in July, days before the Cubans were scheduled to leave for Alabama. "Getting them here was very difficult because there were so many days when we didn't think it would happen," Panitch said.

For now the Cubans are under a busy rehearsal schedule while living in a university dormitory. But they've managed to do a little sightseeing in Alabama, touring Birmingham, cruising a local river and sampling Southern barbecue.

Following their run in Alabama, the Cubans plan to return home to perform "A Midsummer Night's Dream" in Havana with Cuban actors filling the roles performed by the Americans in Tuscaloosa.

Advocates for greater cultural exchanges say there were a burst of them under Bill Clinton's presidency in the 1990s and for a few years into the George W. Bush administration.

Whether there will be more Cuban arts and cultural groups allowed to visit the U.S. is an open question.

In Washington, the Obama administration hasn't issued new policies on U.S.-Cuban cultural exchanges. But State Department spokesman Andy Laine said the government "continues to review our policy with Cuba."

"The president wants to ensure that we are doing all we can to support the Cuban people in fulfilling their desire to live in freedom," he said.

Cuban officials in Havana did not return messages seeking comment.

Louis Head, executive director of the Cuba Research and Analysis Group, is anxious for the next act: "What we're waiting to see is something more of a definitive policy change out of the Obama administration."

http://www.newsday.com/diplomatic-drama-cuban-actors-in-us-perform-bard-1.1350498