EEUU implanta nuevas medidas que facilitan los viajes a Cuba

NBC News.com

Decades of U.S. trade and travel restrictions on Cuba will come to an end on Friday, the government announced in the first tangible step towards restoring diplomatic ties between Washington and Havana.

New rules will allow Americans to travel to the country without a license - as long as they go for approved reasons - and use their U.S. credit or debit cards, the U.S. Departments of Commerce and Treasury said in a statement.

Cubans living in the U.S. will also have their quarterly remittances increased from $500 to $2,000 per quarter, allowing them to send home more money.

Officials said approved reasons for travel include business or family visits, and that tourism from the U.S. to Cuba was still prohibited by Congress.

Travel agents and airlines will be authorized to provide services without needing a specific permit under the new rules. That means U.S. airlines could soon be free to launch normal scheduled flights to Cuba.

"Today's announcement takes us one step closer to replacing out of date policies that were not working and puts in place a policy that helps promote political and economic freedom for the Cuban people," Treasury secretary Jacob Lew said in a news release.

"Cuba has real potential for economic growth and by increasing travel, commerce, communications, and private business development between the United States and Cuba, the United States can help the Cuban people determine their own future."

However, U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) called the new rules "a windfall for the Castro regime" and said the recent deal "is enriching a tyrant and his regime at the expense of U.S. national interests and the Cuban people."

RAÚL RIVERO: Metáfora de galera

El Nuevo Herald

Raul Rivero

"En movimiento espero"/ oleo sobre tela, 146x91cm/

Antuan delaguetto

Madrid – Están equivocados los rimbombantes aguafiestas que dentro y fuera de Cuba afirman que la oposición pacífica y los activistas de derechos humanos no han tenido ninguna participación en las negociaciones entre el régimen castrista y el gobierno de Barack Obama. Los cubanos que trabajan de frente a la dictadura todos los días aportaron a esa mesa de diálogos secretos una presencia capital: los presos políticos.

Es verdad que no se tuvo en cuenta la opinión de ninguno de los dirigentes de los grupos opositores, las Damas de Blanco, la incipiente sociedad civil o del exilio, pero en las conversaciones clandestinas sostenidas en Canadá entre los representantes de los dos gobiernos, los prisioneros regados por las 300 cárceles de Cuba fueron una cifra muda y antojadiza (53) que redondearía los acuerdos sobre el intercambio del subcontratista Alan Gross y los espías cubanos condenados en Estados Unidos.

Los nombres planos de los activistas de base hechos prisioneros en cualquier punto de San Antonio a Maisí comenzaron a aparecer después de las celebraciones por la firma del arreglo, poco a poco, como para que sus historias personales no empañaran el brillo de la gestión diplomática.

El documento suscrito por Obama y Raúl Castro muestra, en blanco y negro, el interés de uno por la liberación de un grupo de demócratas y la anuencia del otro a ceder a la petición como un buen veterano especializado en comerciar con la libertad de los ciudadanos que manda a encerrar porque no comparten sus ideas.

El asunto es que el socialismo tropical tiene una noción singular de la libertad. La mayoría de los prisioneros sacados de la cárcel en virtud del acuerdo salieron a la calle con el sello de liberados condicionales, otros con las llamadas licencias extrapenales y a un tercer grupo se les ha retenido toda su documentación, según la Unión Patriótica de Cuba (UNPACU), una organización a la que pertenecen 29 de los prisioneros enviados a sus casas.

Las autoridades, dice la denuncia, amenazaron con hacerlos volver a todos de regreso a prisión en caso de que realizaran actividades políticas.

Sí, es un desliz perverso de los cronistas sin agudeza y amargados que acuden a una prosa rebuscada para negar la impronta de la oposición en el proceso de acercamiento entre los dos países. Ahí están los presos políticos con las celdas de castigo, el hambre crónica y los sufrimientos en la experiencia de sus vidas.

Están en su papel secundario de la función, con su familia y sus amigos, bajo la vigilancia de la policía y con la certeza de que, como se dice en el lenguaje metafórico de la prisión, los carceleros les tienen guardadas sus cucharas.

Read more here: http://www.elnuevoherald.com/opinion-es/opin-col-blogs/opinion-sobre-cuba/article5705025.html#storylink=cpy

Charles Krauthammer: Obama’s Cuba strategy: Give them everything, hail breakthrough

www.jewishworldreview.com

National Post

Charles Krauthammer

There’s an old Cold War joke — pre-pantyhose — that to defeat communism we should empty the B-52 bombers of nuclear weapons and instead drop nylons over the Soviet Union. Flood the Russians with the soft consumer culture of capitalism, seduce them with Western contact and commerce, love bomb them into freedom.

We did win the Cold War, but differently. We contained, constrained, squeezed and eventually exhausted the Soviets into giving up. The dissidents inside subsequently told us how much they were sustained by our support for them and our implacable pressure on their oppressors.

The logic behind U.S. President Barack Obama’s Cuba normalization, assuming there is one, is the nylon strategy. Fifty years of containment didn’t bring democracy. So let’s try inundating them with American goods, visitors, culture, contact, commerce.

It’s not a crazy argument. But it does have its weaknesses. Normalization has not advanced democracy in China or Vietnam. Indeed, it hasn’t done so in Cuba. Except for the U.S., Cuba has had normal relations with the rest of the world for decades. Tourists, trade, investment from Canada, France, Britain, Spain, everywhere. An avalanche of nylons — and not an inch of movement in Cuba toward freedom.

In fact, one could argue that this influx of Western money has helped preserve the dictatorship, as just about all the financial transactions go through the government, which takes for itself before any trickle-down crumbs are allowed to reach the regime-indentured masses.

My view is that police-state control of every aspect of Cuban life is so thoroughly perfected that outside influences, whether confrontational or co-operative, only minimally affect the country’s domestic trajectory.

So why not just lift the embargo? After all, the unassailable strategic rationale for isolating Cuba — in the Soviets’ mortal global struggle with us, Cuba enlisted as a highly committed enemy beachhead 90 miles from American shores — evaporated with the collapse of the Soviet empire. A small island with no significant independent military capacities, Cuba became geopolitically irrelevant.

That’s been partially reversed in the last few years as Vladimir Putin has repositioned Russia as America’s leading geopolitical adversary and the Castros signed up for that coalition too. Cuba has reportedly agreed to reopen the Soviet-era Lourdes espionage facility, a massive listening post for intercepting communications. Havana and Moscow have also discussed the use of Cuban airfields for Russia’s nuclear-capable long-range bombers.

This in addition to Cuba’s usual hemispheric mischief, such as training and equipping the security and repression apparatus in Venezuela.

No mortal threat, I grant. And not enough to justify forever cutting off Cuba. But it does raise the question: With the U.S. embargo already in place and the Castros hungry to have it lifted, why give them trade, investment, hard currency, prestige and worldwide legitimacy — for nothing in return?

Obama brought back nothing on democratization, a staggering betrayal of Cuba’s human rights crusaders. No free speech. No free assembly. No independent political parties. No hint of free elections. Not even the kind of 1975 Helsinki Final Act that we got from the Soviets as part of detente, granting structure and review to human rights promises. These provided us with significant leverage in supporting the dissident movements in Eastern Europe that eventually brought down communist rule.

If Obama insisted on giving away the store, why not at least do it item by item? We relax part of the embargo in return for, say, Internet access. And tie further normalization to serial relaxations of police-state repression.

Oh, what hypocrisy, say the Obama acolytes. Did we not normalize relations with China and get no human rights quid pro quo?

True. But that was never a prospect. The entire purpose was geopolitical and the payoff was monumental: America walked away with the most significant anti-Soviet strategic realignment of the entire Cold War, formally breaking up the communist bloc and gaining China’s neutrality, and occasional support, in the half-century struggle to dismantle the Soviet empire.

From Cuba, Obama didn’t even get a token gesture. Not even a fig leaf such as, say, withdrawal of secret police support in Venezuela. Or extradition of American criminals now fugitive in Cuba, including a notorious cop killer. Did we even ask?

Obama seems to believe that the one-way deal was win-win. A famous victory — the Cuba issue is now behind us. A breakthrough.

Indeed it is. You know how to achieve a breakthrough in tough negotiations? Give everything away. Try it. You’ll have a deal by noon. Every time.

Obama and Cuba - American Thinker

americanthinker

By Eileen F. Toplansky 

As a direct result of Obama's intervention in Cuba, "a large group of prominent Havana dissidents -- activists, civil society advocates and independent journalists -- were arrested as they headed for a pro-free speech... event."

Among the arrested were writer Yoani Sanchez  [there is a mistake because yoani was not arrested at this moment -lg] and her husband Reinaldo Escobar. In 2012 Sanchez was arrested when she and other dissidents demanded information about blogger Yaremis Flores accused of making anti-Castro comments. In Sanchez's recent post of December 17, 2014, she speaks of "exhausted hopes" and the need to "redouble [their] guard against the enemy." She speaks of the "deceits of politics" as the United States under Barack Hussein Obama worked in concert with the communist Cuban government.

There was no "evidence of any agreement or compromise from the Cuban side" and no "public timeline ... which commits the Cuban government to a series of gestures in support of democratization and respect for differences." So instead of "the release of all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience; the end of political repression; the ratification of the United Nations covenants on Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights... in essence the beginning of the "dismantling of totalitarianism," the Cuban dictatorship has clamped down on the hopes and aspirations of the Cuban people -- thanks, in part, to the actions of the communist-in-chief, Obama.

Orlando Luis Pardo Lazo, Cuban dissident in exile, writes about the words that "have remained buried by the string of tyrants [.]"  He highlights the "historic malapropisms" that have resulted in the weapons and armies that "in short, impose violence for life on [Cuban] society." He accuses the AP and the New York Times for being "useful idiots."  According to Lazo, "...campaigns of the AP, in symbiosis with the Cuban government to demonize fundraising in support of pro-human rights projects on the Island" have hurt the Cuban people since "it is not common for... Cubans to do public fundraisers, as occurs in any democratic country of the world." Consequently, "Cuba's solvency was always handicapped by Castrosim. Only a poverty-stricken people is vulnerable to enslavement. At the beginning, it was accomplished through ideological class hatred." Therefore, Lazo maintains that "[d]espite the pathetic AP and the NYT, Cuban redemption still goes by this watchword: 'within the dictatorship, nothing; against the dictatorship, everything.'"

But this redemption is still a dream now that Obama has given his blessing to the tyrant to the south. In fact, "[e]veryone from the Pope to the American president decided what life should be for the Cubans. That is, ["e]veryone except the Cubans, decided on behalf of Cubans." 

With restrained anger and sadness, Pardo asks that "[t]he American President and His Holiness, and the General of the Army and all authorities of good faith in the world are invited not to decide but instead to accompany Cubans in this decision, in a historic meeting where the transit from totalitarianism towards an open society or another controlling regimen is defined."

In an open letter to Obama, Rosa Maria Paya Acevedo, a member of the Cuban Christian Liberation Movement, writes "that there is nothing new in treating as 'normal' the illegitimate government in Havana, which has never been elected by its citizens and has been practicing state murder with impunity. That strategy already has been done by all the other governments without positive consequences for democracy in [her] country."

It is only through the "guarantee of freedom of expression and association, the release of political prisoners and the right to own private enterprises, and free and plural elections" that real progress can be made. She exhorts Obama to "support the implementation of a plebiscite for free and pluralistic elections in Cuba; and support citizen participation in the democratic process [as it is] the only thing that will guarantee the end of totalitarianism in Cuba."

Ms. Acevedo and her family are now at risk for making these simple demands. 

Thus, President Obama has undermined the true spirit of freedom as evidenced by these courageous souls, has made a mockery of what America is supposed to represent, and has endangered the lives of these dissidents.  The "Human Cost of Raul Castro's Rule" will continue to increase, aided and abetted by this president's actions.

But given the communist and Marxist bent of the 44th President and his continual exaltation of dictatorship around the world, I, for one, am not surprised, just deeply saddened and ashamed that the leader of the free world continues to empower dictatorial regimes.  At home, Obama erodes our constitutional protections and tramples American rights while he continues to "enthrone communism" a system that only leads to misery for all peoples  The Cubans will remember and weep and the people of goodwill in America will remember and hold their heads in shame.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/01/obama_and_cuba.html#ixzz3NlYJxaoR

Hector Lombard Disappointed in Burkman Fight, Happy for US-Cuba Progress

MMAWeekly.com

Roberta Jacobson: No illusions about Cuba’s willingness to allow freedoms

State Department on Cuban Repression: Speak Softly, Send Mixed Messages and Carry No Stick

capitolhillcubans

In a tweet, Cuban democracy leader Ailer Maria Gonzalez, who was arrested yesterday as she sought to participate in the #YoTambienExijo performance, alluded to how "empowered" Castro's secret police seemed during the arrest, beating and interrogation of activists.

Ailer's remarks were aimed at President Obama and his allies, who argue that normalizing relations with -- and providing concessions to -- the Castro dictatorship will somehow "empower" Cuban civil society.

Yet, as both President Carter and Clinton learned (or failed to learn) before Obama -- it only "empowers" the Castro dictatorship.

Earning a particular chuckle in Havana was a statement released by the State Department (click here), which expressed "deep concern" about yesterday's wave of repression against Cuban dissidents.

(Curiously, we haven't seen any statements of condemnation from Obama's Cuba advisers and Castro darlings -- U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont and U.S. Rep James McGovern of Massachusetts -- or Obama's Republican U.S. Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona.)

Think about this -- throughout 2014, while Obama and Castro were playing footsie in Ottawa and Vatican city, political arrests in Cuba quadrupled to over 8,600.

Now it's abundantly clear why Castro felt so "empowered" to execute such record-breaking repression -- for there were no consequences to fear.

Even worse, when Cuba got caught red-handed trafficking 240 tons of heavy arms to North Korea in July 2013, Obama and Castro had already been seducing each other for over a month.

No wonder Castro got away scot-free with the most blatant violation of international sanctions -- anywhere in the world -- to date.

But here's the real kicker in the State Department's statement:

"We have always said we would continue to speak out about human rights, and as part of the process of normalization of diplomatic relations, the United States will continue to press the Cuban government to uphold its international obligations and to respect the rights of Cubans to peacefully assemble and express their ideas and opinions, just like their fellow members of civil society throughout the Americas are allowed to do."

That's cute -- except Assistant Secretary of State for the Western Hemisphere, Roberta Jacobson, has already given the Castro regime a blank-check on this also, which it's already cashing.

On the day after Obama's Cuba policy announcement, Jacobson stated:

"I do not necessarily think that we’re talking about direct human rights conditionality in the restoration of diplomatic relations part. That is a legal process, if you will, or a diplomatic process that will be fairly mechanical."

Repress away -- for there are no consequences.

Finally, as for "international obligations" and the rights "of civil society throughout the Americas" -- perhaps Obama should have thought about that before he acquiesced to suspending the "democracy clause" of the Summit of the Americas process for Castro to participate.

Obligations?  What obligations?

(Curiously, we haven't seen any statements of condemnation from Latin American leaders either.)

Castro truly feels even more "empowered" to state -- "democracia, para que?" ("democracy, for what?").

Bring out the military fatigues.

SHRINKING GITMO: Obama ships out 5 more prisoners, eyes camp closure

soon it will be a guantanamo beach & resort.

------------------------------- 

 

Read on foxnews >>

No Matter How You Spin It, Obama Betrayed Freedom-Loving Cubans

capitolhillcubans

By Guillermo Martinez in The Sun-Sentinel:

No matter how you spin it, Obama betrayed Cuban exiles

One thing is absolutely clear in my mind: I am delighted that Alan Gross is free and back in the United States with his family.

The American contractor jailed for the last five years for taking satellite equipment to the small Jewish community in Cuba did not deserve the punishment he got, for what he did is not a crime in a civilized world.

How his freedom came about is another story. They say he was released for humanitarian reasons. But attached to his freedom came many unsavory agreements.

The much-ballyhooed agreement for Cuba and the United States to re-establish diplomatic relations brings more questions than answers to mind.

For example:

Why now? Why President Barack Obama waits for the day after Congress ends its session to make the announcement of the new opening in relations with Cuba?

Why now when the price of oil is putting Venezuela and Russia in dire economic straits?

How much has Cuba really given to achieve this agreement? It has promised to listen respectfully to American demands in future negotiations — listen, nothing else.

Obama gave Cuba everything the island nation wanted, and in return got the release of a handful of political prisoners, a long-time intelligence agent that nobody knew anything about, and the promise it would listen to American demands — listen, nothing else.

It is obvious the answers to the questions raised explain clearly why the announcement came now, and give us an indication of what we can expect in the future.

President Obama waited until Congress finished its session so it would have time to create a lobby for his actions before the new Republican-dominated Congress convenes on Jan. 6. He wants to give the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is desperate to start selling products to Cuba, time to convince the Republican Congress it is in their best interest to open relations with Cuba.

Cuba accepted the deal now because Venezuela's economy is rapidly deteriorating and won't be able to continue providing cheap oil too much longer.

Raúl Castro is not as charismatic as Fidel, but he is a wise old man and he clearly understood that unless he allowed the U.S. to give him a helping hand, Cubans would be desperate for their basic needs.

It is important to note most of the dissidents in Cuba have criticized the new deal between Cuba and the United States. They know better than anyone else that Cuban security agents will not stop beating them up for demanding the right to free association and free speech. They cannot forget that less then a week ago, they were beaten for trying to gather on the day the United Nations celebrates Human Rights Day.

Now let's look at what comes next.

The U.S. Congress is going to have to approve the nomination of a new ambassador to Cuba. With all Cuban-American representatives and senators opposed to the new agreement, that will not be an easy task.

It is also going to be hard to get Congress to finance opening a new embassy in Havana and consulates throughout the island. It will closely study the new proposals to see if they violated the Helms-Burton law passed in 1996 under the Clinton Administration.

This reminds me that we have to talk about the relatives of the four Brothers to the Rescue members who were shot down by Cuban Migs in international waters over the Florida Straits. Brothers to the Rescue watched for rafts floating from Cuba so the U.S. Coast Guard could pick them up and prevent them from drowning.

To the relatives of Brothers to the Rescue, to the veterans of the Bay of Pigs, to the many Cubans who were infiltrated back into the island to fight the Castro regime, to the thousands of people who have been killed by the communists in Cuba, to the many tens of thousands of former political prisoners and to all decent Cubans, what President Obama has done is unacceptable. He has betrayed the exile community and the people of Cuba.

Why Isn't Obama Being Transparent About His Deal With Cuba's Regime?

capitolhillcubans

When President Obama first took office in 2009, he declared that "transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their government is doing."

Well, either Obama is not being transparent about his secret deal with Cuban dictator Raul Castro.

Or the deal is even worse than we thought.

In exchange for a myriad of concessions from the United States, the Castro regime was supposed to release 53 political prisoners.

Apparently, Obama was unaware that the Castro regime has been trading political prisoners for concessions for decades -- just ask Jimmy Carter -- and then re-arrests them (or new ones) later.

However, no negotiated political prisoner release has ever been surrounded with such silence and mystery -- or lack of "transparency" -- as the current 53.

As Reuters reported this morning:

"Cuba's most prominent dissidents say they have been kept in the dark by U.S. officials over a list of 53 political prisoners who will be released from jail as part of a deal to end decades of hostility between the United States and Cuba. For years, dissident leaders have told the United States which opponents of Cuba's communist government were being jailed or harassed, but they say they were not consulted when the list of prisoners to be freed was drawn up or even told who is on it. The lack of information has stoked concern and frustration among the dissidents, who worry that the secret list is flawed and that genuine political prisoners who should be on it will be left to languish."

According to Obama, the Castro regime also agreed to release a Cuban, U.S. intelligence asset, who is widely believed to be Rolando Sarraff Trujillo.

Sarraff Trujillo was exchanged for three Cuban spies imprisoned in the U.S., including one serving a life sentence for a conspiracy to kill Americans.

As if this 1-for-3 deal wasn't bad enough, there's still no information about Sarraff or his whereabouts.

As Reuters also reports, "his parents said they are desperate to hear from their son as they haven't spoken with him since before Obama's Dec. 17 announcement."

Meanwhile, former spy and double agent, Bill Gaede, who worked closely with Sarraff in the 1990s, has shed further doubts:

"The only reason people strongly suspected that the mysterious spy might be Rolando Sarraff Trujillo (a.k.a. Roly) is that his family can't find him. Cuban prison officials told them that their son had been transferred, but not to worry about him. He was in 'good hands'. Certainly, Roly fit most of the description made by Obama at his press conference announcing reestablishment of relations with Cuba: a Cuban intelligence officer locked up for 20 years for providing cryptographic information that led to the capture of the aforementioned spies. So who else could it be? And if in addition the Obama Administration 'carelessly leaks' the name through 'unidentified official' sources, we have the makings of what appears to be 'disinformation'. This speculation is reinforced by Roly's resume. It certainly meets the '20 years' part. It does not even come close to meeting the part about 'cryptography and the capturing of the Cuban spies'. There's a contradiction somewhere. Either the secret spy is not Roly or President Obama is lying through every corner of his mouth."

Needless to say, we believe the President of the United States over a former double-agent like Gaede.

But Obama's lack of transparency is not making it easy.

Political Cartoon: On Obama's Bad Cuba Deal

capitolhillcubans

Did Obama Lie to Cuban-Americans?

capitolhillcubans

By Russ Sloan in The Daily Commercial:

Lies and politics are close cousins in the White House

“Lying can never save us from another lie” is probably the most famous quote from Vaclav Havel, the first president of the Czech Republic. In politics we have often been subjected to political spin, half truths, exaggeration and downright lies. But when political lies consistently follow one after another, at what point can we believe anything that source says?

On May 23, 2008, then-candidate Barack Obama was speaking to the Cuban-American Foundation’s annual Cuban Independence Day luncheon, where he said the following: “My policy towards Cuba will be guided by one word, liberty. 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. This is my commitment.”

He stated that he would not begin to “normalize” relations with Cuba until all political prisoners are released. To all of the political prisoners still in Cuba, President Obama’s promise must ring very hollow today based on his decision to renew relations with the Castro brothers’ oppressive regime. To those of us who know what he said in 2008, it is just one more significant lie piled on a continuous stack of presidential lies.

One wonders how any politician today, knowing that there exists volumes of recorded utterances, can so blatantly ignore what they promised and now do the exact opposite. Apparently the president shares the beliefs of Jonathan Gruber, the MIT professor who scoffed that the American people were stupid as they drafted and passed Obamacare.

I ask myself, how many times can anyone lie before you recognize that this person is no longer trustworthy? The entire litany of President Obama’s lies would exceed my column space, but the important ones would be his 30-plus promises that you could keep your health care plan, doctor and save money, or his 20-plus utterances that he could not ignore a significant portion of our immigration laws since he was a president not an emperor.

Obama campaigned against the spending of George Bush, only to make Bush look like a miser. He said Bush was un-American for adding $4 trillion to our national debt over eight years, only to see his administration run up $7.4 trillion more debt during his six years. He states that he has issued fewer executive orders than previous presidents but does not mention that his numerous presidential proclamations virtually amount to the same thing. This was just a deliberate half truth. We’re making progress.

Throughout his administration, over 20 times, he has promised that Iran would not get nuclear weapons. Does anyone now believe that? Iran has played Secretary of State John Kerry and President Obama like novices in a high stakes poker game. It is one thing to disagree with the president based on an honest difference of opinion, but to constantly be inundated with lies is dumbfounding.

Vaclav Havel was correct, “Lying can never save us from another lie.” For the past six years, we have been subjected to a series of major lies that can all be fully documented by the president’s very own words.

Doce demandas para la movilización de amplios sectores sociales dentro de Cuba

Diario de Cuba

Juan Antonio Blanco

La artista Tania Bruguera ha convocado a realizar un audaz performance en la Plaza de la Revolución el próximo 30 de diciembre —"Yo también exijo"— para que los ciudadanos cubanos puedan acudir allí a expresar sus anhelos y exigencias. Es de agradecer esta iniciativa a la que me sumo por vía digital, consciente de que en nuestro mundo global toda acción local se expande en el ciberespacio.

Al hacerlo he estudiado y tomado en cuenta las demandas de amplios sectores de la sociedad cubana, así como de la disidencia, la oposición y el exilio. No hablo a nombre de nadie que no sea yo mismo y a partir de ahora estas exigencias pertenecen a cualquiera que desee apoyarlas. A quien las considere desmesuradas le recuerdo que son reclamos de derechos universales e inalienables por los que hay que luchar, no limosnas que respetuosamente se solicitan al poder que los viene pisoteando desde hace medio siglo.    

Como cubano veo la necesidad de abordar y contribuir a resolver la esencia interna del conflicto que el Estado cubano ha desarrollado contra los derechos de la nación  por más de medio siglo. El bilateral entre Cuba y Estados Unidos —en el que han participado otros actores externos como la URSS y Venezuela— no es otra cosa que la internacionalización de ese conflicto interno.

La normalización de relaciones entre La Habana y Washington no deja resueltas las causas de nuestro gran diferendo nacional. Con relación a esto último solo los cubanos podemos y tenemos derecho a definir nuestras perspectivas, demandas y prioridades. Tendremos que luchar para hacerlos realidad.

Entonces, en respuesta a la invitación de Tania Bruguera, hago constar que yo, como ciudadano cubano, también exijo el fin de la beligerancia del Estado contra la voluntad popular y que acepte la inevitabilidad de avanzar hacia la normalización de relaciones del Estado con la nación cubana. Para ello es imprescindible el levantamiento de las medidas gubernamentales de su bloqueo interno al ejercicio de derechos universales básicos y al libre desarrollo de la creatividad y prosperidad general de la sociedad cubana.

Este listado de demandas representa lo que a mi juicio son las condiciones mínimas necesarias para poder recuperar y ejercer la soberanía nacional. Constituye una posible hoja de ruta para poder llegar a elegir libremente a un nuevo gobierno. Una vez alcanzado ese momento fundacional, Estado y nación podrán enfrentar juntos la herencia que nos dejará el pasado y asumir el desafío de construir un nuevo país: moderno, libre, soberano, equitativo, plural, tecnológicamente avanzado y próspero. Ese proyecto, cuando sea factible, requerirá de una nueva hoja de ruta.

En el contexto actual creo necesario exigir de inmediato, entre otras medidas,  las siguientes:

1) Fin de la Ley Mordaza y de la criminalización de la libre expresión personal, intelectual o artística. Derogar de inmediato la Ley Mordaza, titulada Protección de la Independencia Nacional y la Economía de Cuba (Ley 88), así como cualquier otra ley o regulación que coarte el derecho de libre expresión. Ordenar el cese inmediato de todas las actividades policiacas y parapoliciales contra las personas, académicos, periodistas,  intelectuales y artistas  que ejercen su derecho a acceder  y diseminar información o a expresar pacíficamente —de forma privada o pública, individual o colectiva— su opinión sobre cualquier tema.

2) Fin de los actos de repudio. Paralizar y desautorizar públicamente de inmediato los llamados "actos de repudio" contra cualquier ciudadano o grupo de la sociedad civil que libremente haya expresado sus criterios políticos, sociales o económicos en público o privado.

3) Amnistías. Liberar de inmediato a los presos políticos —incluyendo a los que están bajo licencia extrapenal— y decretar también una amnistía general a favor de todo el exilio político para que todos puedan acceder con garantía suficiente de seguridad a la patria y, si lo desean, residir en ella nuevamente. Una vez concluida la reforma del Código Penal se procederá a decretar una amnistía general adicional para todas las personas que fueron encarceladas por acciones que de ahora en adelante se descriminalizarían.

4) Ratificación e implementación de pactos y convenios internacionales de derechos. Ratificar de inmediato y sin reservas los dos Pactos Internacionales de DDHH (Políticos y Civiles; Económicos, Sociales y Culturales) y suscribir el Protocolo Adicional del Pacto contra la Tortura permitiendo la constante supervisión de prisiones del Relator Especial, y comenzar una reforma sustantiva del sistema constitucional y jurídico (Código Penal y otros) para alinearlos con los principios de estos instrumentos internacionales.

5) Libre sindicalización y contratación laboral. Cumplimiento irrestricto e inmediato de los convenios de la Organización Internacional del Trabajo (OIT), de la que Cuba es miembro, sobre derechos laborales y sindicales. Debe cesar de inmediato el monopolio estatal de contratación de la fuerza de trabajo para servir a empresas y gobiernos extranjeros y de ese modo evitar que el Estado se apodere de la mayor parte de sus salarios y favorezca a los que desea privilegiar.

6) Libre acceso a internet. Autorizar de inmediato la conexión a internet a cualquier ciudadano en precios adecuados al nivel salarial del país y disponer también de inmediato el cese de toda persecución contra aquellas personas que acceden a internet o a estaciones de radio y TV extranjeras por medios propios.

7) Libertad de medios de comunicación. Decretar una nueva Ley de Medios que comience a regir de inmediato y ofrezca garantías a la libertad de expresión pública y privada, al derecho de acceder y diseminar información como individuos o como institución, y a la cesión de horarios de los medios de comunicación de TV y radio estatales a diferentes, iglesias, instituciones y grupos ciudadanos no gubernamentales.

8) Plebiscito sobre el actual sistema electoral. Se ha de celebrar un plebiscito antes de cualquier nueva elección del Poder Popular para reconocer el derecho soberano de la nación cubana de derogar el artículo 5 de la actual Constitución que otorga el poder supremo al Partido Comunista de Cuba y exigir en su lugar la celebración de elecciones libres, secretas, universales, plurales, directas e internacionalmente supervisadas para elegir al próximo gobierno. El nuevo parlamento que resulte electo se hará cargo de culminar la aprobación definitiva de la reforma constitucional y legal que se requiere en acatamiento de los Convenios y Pactos Internacionales ratificados.

9) Libertad de movimiento nacional e internacional de los cubanos. Decretar de inmediato la plena libertad de movimiento tanto para fijar residencia entre municipios y provincias como para entrar y salir de la Isla en favor de todos los ciudadanos cubanos, sin que ello se requiera de permisos estatales de ningún tipo. Reconocimiento de la doble ciudadanía a aquellos cubanos que así lo soliciten.

10) Igualdad de derechos económicos de todos los cubanos. Decretar una Ley para la Inversión, Producción, Comercio y Desarrollo Nacional que equipare los derechos de los cubanos donde quiera que tengan su residencia actual con los que se ofrecen hoy a los inversionistas extranjeros.  Entre esos derechos se ha de incluir la simplificación y agilización de trámites para registrar legalmente y operar una empresa privada nacional sea personal o cooperativa, el cese de la lista restrictiva de actividades autorizadas, la autorización a los nacionales para invertir y participar en cualquier área de la economía nacional, el levantamiento de las restricciones a los profesionales para ejercer sus especialidades de modo privado, el otorgamiento de privilegios y facilidades fiscales en la etapa de amortización de la inversión inicial y el derecho de contratación libre y directa de la mano de obra por empresas extranjeras y nacionales por igual.

11) Cese del monopolio de comercio y producción estatal. Tanto en la Ley para la Inversión Extranjera como en esta nueva Ley para la Inversión, Producción, Comercio y Desarrollo Nacional se introducirán cláusulas que reconozcan y den garantías a la propiedad privada y se complementará con un código mercantil y un sistema moderno de arbitraje y apelaciones. Dicha ley anularía el monopolio estatal sobre la producción y servicios en cualquier sector económico, así como sobre el ejercicio del comercio nacional y exterior, autorizando a partir de ese momento la participación en todas esas actividades de empresas privadas nacionales y extranjeras. Se derogarán de inmediato las últimas disposiciones de la Aduana para la importación de diferentes medios requeridos para el desarrollo personal y del sector privado.

12) Libertad de asociación.  Decretar una nueva Ley de Asociaciones que las libere del patronato estatal para ser registradas y no incluya clausulas discriminatorias por razones de raza, género, orientación sexual, creencias religiosas o políticas, así como que puedan tener sus propios medios de comunicación y se les permita ser autosustentables por iniciativas económicas propias, cotización de miembros o donaciones. La nueva Ley de Asociaciones debe reconocer también el derecho de libre sindicalización y las organizaciones de esa naturaleza que los trabajadores puedan querer darse a sí mismos.

La mayor parte de estas demandas son escuchadas a diario en la Isla. Muchas de ellas fueron formuladas por grupos disidentes u opositores en sus programas e iniciativas. Su materialización no reclama la unidad de todos en un solo partido u organización. Basta con que cada sector de la nación se empeñe proactivamente en alcanzar aquellas reivindicaciones que le son más cercanas para que se geste un movimiento general emancipador.

Cuando se asiente el polvo de las desmedidas expectativas surgidas al calor de los recientes acuerdos entre la Casa Blanca y el general presidente Raúl Castro, cristalizará  con mucha mayor nitidez una visión genuinamente realista y pragmática. Las ansias de libertad y progreso hay que asentarlas en las exigencias y movilización de los más amplios sectores sociales y no en las dádivas que la elite de poder esté dispuesta a conceder en algún congreso del PCC ni en las transacciones a las que aquella llegue con los actores externos del conflicto cubano. 

Los regalos de Obama

Diario de Cuba

Andrés Reynaldo

Si ayer los demócratas cubanos estaban solos hoy podemos conjeturar que vamos a seguir muy solos. Quizás por un buen rato. El restablecimiento de relaciones con EEUU puede haber asegurado la transición dinástica de la dictadura, que ya tiene posicionadas a su segunda y tercera generación en los puestos de mando de la política y la economía. "¡Ahora sí que ganamos la guerra!", exclamó Raúl Castro ante la Asamblea Nacional parafraseando a Fidel en otra lejana circunstancia. No tanto, Raúl, pero sí ganaste una importante batalla.

Por más de medio siglo, la renuencia de EEUU a aceptar la dictadura castrista marcó una posición condenatoria en la arena internacional. De esa raya en la arena se aferró la oposición interna y externa frente a las habituales  indiferencia de Europa y el compadrazgo de la mayoría de los gobiernos latinoamericanos. Un gesto político que servía de asidero moral. Esta vez, una ola (parece que es la ola del olvido) ha borrado la raya. En el momento de su decrepitud, los Castro reciben un segundo aire. Con las variantes propias de la época, Washington les ayudará a convertirse en los Somoza.

Corridas las cortinas, vemos el entramado. Más de año y medio de negociaciones conducidas desde la parte estadounidense por gente con muy poco conocimiento y mucho menos afecto por el pueblo cubano. En ese período Raúl definió el marco protector de sus intereses. Una ley del embudo sobre las inversiones extranjeras y la actividad privada que deja a la gente de a pie las desventuras del cuentapropismo y promete a la elite la vida loca del capitalismo salvaje. Todo lo demás es decorado.

El modelo raulista es de una represiva perfección cleptocrática. Sus iguales no están en las dictaduras colegiadas de China y Vietnam, ni siquiera en la mafiosa Rusia de Putin, sino en las dinastías postcomunistas de Africa: Angola , República del Congo, Guinea Ecuatorial, por citar. A diferencia de estas, cuenta en su fase de arranque con una amplia red de agentes de influencia, poderosos empresarios (algunos de ellos cubanoamericanos) y líderes congresionales en Estados Unidos. Cuenta, además, con el empuje de una exótica coalición: los grandes intereses de Washington y el ala izquierda del Partido Demócrata. Unos lavan sus crímenes en nombre del progreso y otros en nombre de la distensión.

Ninguneada por el presidente Barack Obama, la oposición interna gana, eso sí, el beneficio de la claridad total. Ya no puede llamarse a engaño. Todas las recetas que se le proponen apuntan a facilitarle tiempo, dinero y prestigio a la dictadura. Hasta la misma tesis de que Obama le ha hecho un regalo envenenado a Raúl es una invitación a cruzarse de brazos. El tren de los cambios pasará de largo por la estación del Estado de derecho. No veo a General Motors, a Caterpillar y al Chase amenazando con cerrar negocio por una pateadura a las Damas de Blanco.

En el exilio, la categoría de los celebrantes no permite dudas de estar viviendo un humillante y retrógrado punto de inflexión en nuestra historia, preñado de desmemoria, deshonor y codicia. Con todo, merecemos sufrir el ruidoso ascenso de esta comparsa de la esclavitud. Estamos enfermos del pusilánime prurito de ser tolerantes frente a un mal radical. Por eso les dimos un sagrado lugar en el debate y nos inhibimos de quebrar a sangre y fuego el diálogo con aquellos que cortan orejas y arrancan lenguas. Hemos sido así de mansos y obtusos que hoy son esos mercaderes de la reconciliación quienes se presentan ante el mundo como los legítimos representantes de una "diáspora" ansiosa de complacer a los verdugos de la nación.

A propósito de la visita papal que nuestra Iglesia Católica le regaló a Fidel y Raúl en marzo del 2012, el líder del Movimiento Cristiano Liberación (MCL), Oswaldo Payá Sardiñas, alertó sobre la inminencia del cambio fraude. Un cambio sin derechos para el pueblo, con la inserción de poderosos intereses que escamotean la democracia y la soberanía. Ah, y con el concepto de una "oposición leal", salido del taller de trucaje de la brigada de respuesta laica del cardenal Ortega. Cinco meses después, Payá fue asesinado. Triste hora para Cuba si al hablar de la decencia, la justicia y la libertad, el eco de los muertos se oye más alto que la voz de los vivos.

Kerry Speaks about Gross and Cuba

The Pope's Cuban Blunder

capitolhillcubans

By Nicholas G. Hahn in The New York Daily News:

Cuban dissident voices & Pope Francis’ deaf ears

The wives of imprisoned critics of the Castro regime deserved better

When Berta Soler met Pope Francis, it had been a long time coming.

Soler’s Ladies in White, a Catholic opposition movement comprised of relatives of jailed human rights activists in Cuba, had pleaded numerous times for a meeting with Pope Benedict XVI. He declined and visited the communist island in 2012 only to continue a policy of détente established by his predecessor, John Paul II.

But a short blessing by Pope Francis in March 2013 signaled a slight shift in direction — or that’s at least what Soler believed.

“We think a Latin American Pope is very good for us. Pope Francis knows a little better the problems that our peoples have, he comes from far down and he can help the people who are suffering,” Soler told the Italian newspaper La Stampa after receiving some papal encouragement.

If only Soler and her Ladies had known better. Last week, the Vatican confirmed that for more than 18 months, the Holy See had been working to restore diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba. The pontiff seems to have blessed the Cuban opposition with one hand, and the Castro brothers with the other.

Soler’s Ladies, Cuban exiles, and other dissident groups have long lobbied against new relations without any concessions from the communist regime. They aren’t as hopeful as others who say more U.S. trade with the Caribbean island may lead to more freedom.

The international aid worker Alan Gross’ release is perhaps the only Cuban concession — and thank goodness for that — but even so, it came as a small part of a lopsided prisoner swap.

“Democracy and freedom for the Cuban people aren’t going to be achieved by what Obama has given to the Cuban government,” Soler said in a post on her group’s website. In his announcement of re-establishing diplomatic relations, President Obama thanked Pope Francis for helping broker a Cold War-era thawing, saying his “moral example shows us the importance of pursuing the world as it should be, rather than simply settling for the world as it is.”

The President and the Pope may be settling for far less than they might think. Sen. Marco Rubio, a Catholic and son of parents who fled the communist paradise, denounced, warning that the move as “more than just putting U.S. national security at risk, President Obama is letting down the Cuban people, who still yearn to be free.” Rubio didn’t spare any words for his spiritual shepherd, who he politely encouraged to “take up the cause of freedom and democracy, which is critical for a free people — for a people to truly be free.”

The Argentine pontiff should know a thing or two about the church’s cause for freedom. When a military junta in his own country took power in a 1976 coup during what is called the “Dirty War,” Father Bergoglio was head of the Jesuits.

The future-Pope saw many of his priests and seminarians jailed and killed. Bergoglio is reported to have helped many flee the country and even met with the military dictatorship to save the lives of two imprisoned priests.

But those experiences may not have been on the pontiff's mind when he wrote personal letters to Obama and Castro or when he hosted delegates from Cuba at the Vatican.

While it might be fodder for sensational journalism, Rubio and other Catholics who make public policy shouldn’t have to correct their pontiff on foreign affairs. Clerics are spiritual leaders, not political ones. When prelates pretend to be diplomats, it dilutes their authority on issues of faith and morals.

Francis might have done one better by prodding the Castro brothers about their regime’s woeful human rights record. That would have been in a Pope’s wheelhouse.

And it would have been what Berta Soler deserved.

Hahn is the editor of RealClearReligion.org.

Obama’s One Hand Clap With Castro

capitolhillcubans

By Doug McIntyre in The Daily Beast:

Obama’s One Hand Clap With Castro

There was really only one good reason to maintain the embargo: Trade with Cuba strengthens the Castros. So what, exactly, are we getting in return for Obama’s radical step?

“No cerveza, no trabajo” is about all I’ve retained from Brother Victor Serna’s Spanish II class at St. Mary’s High School.

Of course it’s been over 40 years, and that’s a long time to remember anything. But truth be told, I never came close to mastering the language despite my excellent grades.

I did not deserve them.

While I accepted every A- and B+ as a gift from the school gods, Brother Victor Serna was forever chastising me for slacking off from my “usual” stellar A/A+ efforts.

Brother Victor had taught my brother, Jeff, the previous year with far greater success. After years at the head of a parochial school classroom, he could no longer distinguish one blond Irish Catholic kid from another. I coasted through Spanish II on Jeff’s stellar effort.

What I won’t ever forget were Brother Victor’s periodic anti-communist tirades. His face a brilliant crimson, neck veins bulging and spittle flying, he looked like America’s most famous Cuban, Ricky Ricardo, after Lucy had pissed him off and left him sputtering in his native tongue.

A Spaniard by birth, Victor Serna left home shy of his 14th birthday and entered the monastery to become a Marist brother. By 1943, he was missioned to Cienfuegos, Cuba.

In 1950, Serna earned his Ph.D. from the University of Havana, where he had befriended a classmate named Fidel Castro.

By 1961 Castro had seized power and Serna publicly criticized his old friend for his regime’s barbaric suppression of individual and religious rights. This courageous act earned him a late-night knock on the door with orders for Serna to vamos from Cuba. He had 24 hours to pack.

He never returned.

It’s fair to ask exactly what we got other than the return of Alan Gross. Right now it looks like the diplomatic equivalent of one hand clapping.

“I do not believe we can keep doing the same thing for over five decades and expect a different result,” said President Obama as he announced his intention to undo the policy of isolation followed by the previous 10 presidents.

The prison camp island nation known as Cuba erupted in celebration.

Closer to home, the reaction has been mixed.

With the midterm elections safely in the rearview mirror, Obama is on legacy patrol.

The Affordable Care Act is safely embedded, with repeal unlikely even with a freshly minted Republican Senate. His executive order granting work privileges and immunity from deportation for millions of undocumented immigrants may be headed to court, but not any time soon. Now he’s taking a radical new approach to the hemisphere’s only Stalinist government.

It’s hard to argue for the continuation of the U.S. embargo of Cuba. If the embargo were effective, the Castro brothers would have been doing Love Letters with the Duvaliers years ago. We trade with China and Vietnam, so why not Cuba, right?

Well, here’s one big reason to continue the embargo: Trade with Cuba strengthens the regime.

The Cuban government siphons off revenue from nearly every business transaction in the country. Until 2011, barbers were employees of the state. While cruise ship companies would like nothing more than to add Havana to their ports of call, the people of Cuba will still be paid a pittance. The average Cuban makes between $20 and $50 a month.

That’s not a typo.

On the upside, we’re likely to get better jazz, slick fielding middle infielders, and an army of great mechanics.

Granted, we’ve been waiting for half a century for the Cuban economy to collapse.

It hasn’t. Not even after its parent company, the Soviet Union, took a dive in 1991.

Obama has latched on to the failure of the embargo to topple the Castros as justification to shuffle the deck. But does he really want the Castos toppled? If so he has yet to say so publicly.

What he has said publicly is an apology for colonialism, something we are not guilty of in Cuba. The only other thing he has offered is vague boilerplate about a more “open” Cuba in the future after exposure to “American values.”

But the blunt truth is that nothing we do will free the Cuban people as long as they are subjugated by a thuggish government modeled on Stalin’s police state. Our secret weapon may be the hardening of Fidel’s and Raul’s arteries.

Poverty in the Caribbean worker’s paradise is not the result of America’s embargo. It’s the result of decades of draconian socialism.

While the president correctly points out that the United States is the only country with an embargo on Cuba, he misses the obvious point: If the Cubans are free to trade with the rest of the world, why aren’t they driving Subarus and Fiats?

Canada, Mexico, China, Japan, Germany, France, and every other nation on earth does business with Cuba, but the people there are still driving ’56 DeSotos, and many lack Internet access and nearly every other tool of the modern world. The reason? Fidel and Raul Castro.

Obama’s gambit is not irrational. Insanity, after all, is doing the same thing and expecting a different result, right? But the president’s new policy is naive.

For all his gifts, Obama has had one consistent glaring blind spot: He’s a terrible judge of tyrants. The Castros are the latest in a long line of despots he believed he could negotiate with.

From Vladimir Putin to Hosni Mubarak to Bashar al-Assad and the Kim du jour in North Korea, Obama seems the last person to recognize the monstrous evil these thugs represent.

It’s fair to ask exactly what we got in the president’s bargain with Cuba other than the return of Alan Gross. Right now it looks like the diplomatic equivalent of one hand clapping.

While the days of exploding cigars are happily behind us, the iron grip of an intolerant despot has not and is not likely to loosen under Obama any more than it did in the days of JFK.

WaPo: As a Cuban exile, I Feel Betrayed by President Obama

capitolhillcubans

By professor Carlos Eire in The Washington Post:

Talking with Castro

As a Cuban exile, I feel betrayed by President Obama

I am furious, in pain, and deeply offended by those who laud this betrayal of the Cuban people as a great moment in history.

My family and native land were destroyed by the brutal Castro regime. In 1959, as an 8-year-old, I listened to mobs shout “paredon!” (to the firing squad!). I watched televised executions, and was terrified by the incessant pressure to agree with a bearded dictator’s ideals.

As the months passed, relatives, friends, and neighbors began to disappear. Some of them emerged from prison with detailed accounts of the tortures they endured, but many never reappeared, their lives cut short by firing squads.

I also witnessed the government’s seizure of all private property – down to the ring on one’s finger – and the collapse of my country’s economy. I began to feel as if some monstrous force was trying to steal my mind and soul through incessant indoctrination.

By the age of 10, I was desperate to leave.

The next year, my parents sent me to the United States.  I am one of the lucky 14,000 unaccompanied children rescued by Operation Pedro Pan. Our plan to reunite within a few months was derailed by the policies of  the Castro regime, which intentionally prevented people like my parents from leaving Cuba. Although my mother did manage to escape three years later, my father remained stuck for the rest of his life. When he died, 14 years after my departure, the Castro regime prevented me from attending his funeral.

I am now a professor of history and religion at Yale University.

And I long for justice. Instead of seeing Raúl Castro shaking President Obama’s hand, I would like to see him, his brother, and all their henchmen in a court room, being tried for crimes against humanity. I also long for genuine freedom in Cuba. Instead of seeing his corrupt and abusive regime rewarded with favors from the United States, I long for the day when that regime is replaced by a genuine democracy with a free market economy.

The fact that I am a historian makes me see things differently, too. I earn my living by analyzing texts and documents, sifting evidence, and separating facts from lies and myths. I have been trained to read between the lines, and to discern the hidden meaning in all rhetoric.

While much attention has been paid to President Obama’s Cuba policy speech, hardly any has been paid to dictator Raúl Castro’s shorter speech, broadcast in Cuba at exactly the same time.

In his spiteful address, the unelected ruler of Cuba said that he would accept President Obama’s gesture of good will “without renouncing a single one of our principles.”

What, exactly, are those principles?

Like his brother Fidel, whose name he invoked, and like King Louis XIV of France, whose name he dared not mention, Raúl speaks of himself as the embodiment of the state he rules, as evidenced by his mention of “our principles,” which assumes that all Cubans share his mindset. Raúl claims that he is defending his nation’s “self-determination,” “sovereignty,” and “independence,” and also dares to boast that his total control of the Cuban economy should be admired as “social justice.”

In reality, he is defending is his role as absolute monarch.

Cubans have no freedom of speech or assembly. The press is tightly controlled, and there is no freedom to establish political parties or labor unions. Travel is strictly controlled, as is access to the Internet. There is no economic freedom and no elections. According to the Associated Press, at least 8,410 dissidents were detained in 2014.

These are the principles that Raúl Castro is unwilling to renounce, which have driven nearly 20 percent of Cuba’s population into exile.

Unfortunately, these are also the very principles that President Obama ratified as acceptable, which will govern Cuba for years to come.

Although President Obama did acknowledge the lack of “freedom and openness” in Cuba, and also hinted that Raúl Castro should  loosen his grip on the Cuban people, his rhetoric was as hollow as Raúl’s. He didn’t make any demands for immediate, genuine reforms in Cuba. Equally hollow was his reference to Cuba’s “civil society.” He made no mention of the constant abuse heaped on Cuba’s non-violent dissidents, or of the fact that the vast majority of them have pleaded with him to tighten rather than ease existing sanctions on the Castro regime.

But it was not just what was left unsaid that made his rhetoric hollow. Some of the “facts” cited in support of his policy changes were deliberate distortions of history that lay most of the blame for Cuba’s problems on the United States.

Among the most glaring of these falsehoods was the claim that “our sanctions on Cuba have denied Cubans access to technology that has empowered individuals around the globe.” The real culprit is not the embargo, but the Castro regime itself, which actively prevents Cubans from accessing the Internet. Cuba has been purchasing all sorts of cutting-edge technology from other countries for use by its government, its military, its spies, and its tourist industry.

If studied carefully, what President Obama’s artful speech reveals is a fixation on the failures of American foreign policy, and on his role as a righteous reformer. Moreover, the speech is riddled with false assumptions and wishful thinking.

Does President Obama really believe that somehow, magically, an influx of American diplomats, tourists, and dollars is going to force Raúl Castro and his military junta to give up their beloved repressive “principles”?

Dream on. President Obama knows all too well that the Castro regime has had diplomatic and economic relations with the rest of the world and hosted millions of tourists from democratic nations for many years. Such engagement has brought no freedom or prosperity to the Cuban people. He also knows that tourism has only served to create an apartheid state in which foreigners enjoy privileges that are denied to the natives.

President Obama’s disingenuous formulation of a new Cuba policy has been praised by many around the world, but will be challenged by the legislative branch of the government of these United States.

Thank God and the Constitution for that.

The American people and the Cuban people deserve a much better future and a much better interpretation of history than those offered to them in President Obama’s shameful speech.

Posibles consecuencias de la política de Obama con relación a Cuba

cubanalisis

Dr. Antonio Morales Pita

La reciente decisión del presidente Obama con respecto a las relaciones entre Cuba y los Estados Unidos puede tener dos consecuencias generales, es decir, el gobierno cubano procederá o no procederá a introducir cambios fundamentales en Cuba, ya sea en el campo económico, político o social.

El análisis se dificulta debido al alto nivel de asimetría de la información relacionada con las medidas que en realidad vaya a tomar el gobierno cubano. Nadie sabe cuáles son las verdaderas intenciones del presidente cubano por cuanto él tiene una situación ventajosa con respecto a los otros actores políticos participantes en el proceso. Pero esta situación se repite con respecto a la reacción que pueda asumir Obama ante las acciones futuras de los Castro.

Por lo tanto, existe una asimetría general de información entre los restantes actores políticos (o político-económicos), tales como el Papa Francisco, el gobierno canadiense, el Congreso de los Estados Unidos, el pueblo cubano, la disidencia cubana, y los cubanoamericanos. Adicionalmente, no se puede olvidar la influencia de la economía mundial, del cambio climatológico, incluyendo los desastres naturales, de los gobiernos latinoamericanos y, desde luego, de los acontecimientos imprevisibles como las variaciones en el precio del petróleo.

Existe una opinión bastante generalizada en los medios periodísticos en el sentido de que Obama ha dado mucho al gobierno cubano, mientras que el pueblo cubano y el gobierno norteamericano reciben muy poco beneficio de parte de Raúl Castro. La actitud del presidente norteamericano y la forma en que las transacciones han sido llevadas a cabo e informado al mundo podrían dar esa impresión, pero yo no estoy tan seguro de medir las consecuencias de la iniciativa de Obama en estos momentos.

Por ejemplo, si se analiza la influencia del papado católico sobre el gobierno cubano, se podrá apreciar que, como resultado de la visita de Juan Pablo II a Cuba a finales de la década de los noventa, el pueblo cubano recibió el permiso de celebrar las Pascuas por primera vez desde el 1961. El Papa fue capaz de vencer la impenetrable testarudez de Fidel Castro, quien cedió al “concederle” al pueblo cubano el derecho de creer en Dios.  El Papa Francisco ha sido fundamental en este difícil proceso de acercamiento entre los gobiernos de los Estados Unidos y Cuba, el cual de cierta forma fortalece el papel de la iglesia católica cubana. El lector coincidirá conmigo en que este Papa latinoamericano ejerce una influencia muy importante en el mundo.

Pasando a la esfera económica (en la cual el gobierno cubano sale ganando considerablemente), acceder al mercado cubano será conveniente para los hombres de negocio norteamericanos -tal como ha sucedido en China- y también para el pueblo cubano, que tendrá la posibilidad de ampliar su escaso nivel de consumo.

Debe tenerse en cuenta que las compañías norteamericanas han sido excluidas de la competencia con el resto de las empresas extranjeras en el mercado cubano.

Además, ¿cuál será la repercusión de este cambio en la política internacional de los Estados Unidos sobre sus relaciones con los gobiernos al sur del Río Grande? ¿Acaso no es conveniente para los Estados Unidos fortalecer su papel en una región que ha experimentado cambios políticos, que se ha sentido relegada a un segundo plano por los gobiernos norteamericanos y que ha creado tratados de libre comercio como Mercosur y el Alba para excluir a los Estados Unidos?

Recordemos que, después de la muerte de Mao, Nixon abrió a China las puertas de las Naciones Unidas y la inversión extranjera. Hoy en día China es el principal receptor de inversión extranjera en el mundo. Sin la ayuda financiera de los Estados Unidos, China no podría haberse convertido en una potencia mundial que ha jugado y juega un papel fundamental en el crecimiento del producto interno bruto mundial al tiempo que los países desarrollados (Japón, Europa, Canadá, Australia) han visto reducida su participación.

Uno de los principales argumentos que los gobiernos de Nixon y Clinton han esgrimido para justificar la ayuda a China era el mejoramiento de la democracia en la mayor dictadura del mundo. China continúa siendo una dictadura comunista, pero ¿es la misma antes y después de Den Xioping? En el 1989 el gobierno chino masacró en un día a más de tres millares de manifestantes protestando contra la inflación y el desempleo (razones económicas).

Desde finales de la primera década de este siglo ha crecido la oposición de los obreros chinos en los campos y ciudades del este y el oeste de China. Recientemente, Hong Kong experimentó protestas masivas ampliamente superiores a las de la Plaza Tiannamen.  Hasta ahora, que yo sepa, nadie ha sido asesinado. ¿Es lógico considerar que la iniciativa de Nixon hacia China no ha tenido repercusiones positivas en los Estados Unidos? ¿o que haya  sido un error de política internacional?

Un punto transcendental de divergencia en esta discusión multifactorial es si la decisión de Obama provocará cambios democráticos relevantes en Cuba. Tomando en cuenta mi experiencia de vivir en Cuba desde el 1959 hasta el 1996, así como mi conocimiento de la idiosincrasia cubana y como profesor de economía política internacional, he llegado a la conclusión de que la testarudez y la inflexibilidad entre dos oponentes políticos no conducen a la solución de conflictos. Debe existir algún tipo de compromiso para alcanzar algunos resultados que pueden tener lugar a corto, mediano o largo plazo.

Es un hecho indiscutible que la tensión entre los gobiernos de Cuba y los Estados Unidos no ha contribuido al derrocamiento de la dictadura de los Castro, a pesar de la Invasión de Bahía de Cochinos en el 1961, de la crisis de Octubre o Guerra de los Misiles en el 1962, la caída de la Unión Soviética en el 1991, el “período Especial” durante los noventa, el colapso de las industrias azucarera y alimenticia durante décadas, el deterioro de la economía venezolana, y los dos embargos (el externo del gobierno norteamericano, y el interno considerablemente peor establecido por las políticas caprichosas y anti-económicas de Fidel Castro). 

La economía cubana ha sido sistemáticamente destrozada por la incompetencia de sus líderes comunistas. El nivel de vida del pueblo cubano es extremadamente bajo. Mientras que la razón fundamental del derrocamiento de las dictaduras ha sido el deterioro de la economía, ¿cómo es posible que los dictadores cubanos se hayan mantenido en el poder por más de 55 años? Desde el 1959 uno de los pocos ministerios eficientes en Cuba ha sido el Ministerio del Interior (la KGB de Cuba).

¿Por qué la dictadura soviética colapsó bajo la influencia de condiciones económicas desastrosas? Un Sistema comunista solamente puede sobrevivir gracias a su carácter represivo, especialmente contra la prensa.

El comunismo ataca la necesidad eminentemente humana de progresar, de ser libre para tomar decisiones personales elementales, de viajar por el mundo, de expresar su criterio respetuosamente sin  poner en riesgo su integridad física;  por lo tanto, tiene que acudir a la represión contra todo tipo de rebeldía ante la privación de derechos humanos.

Mijail Gorbachov no permitió que el Ejercito Soviético invadiera a Polonia, Checoslovaquia, Hungría, o a ningún otro país miembro del bloque soviético.  Gorbachov permitió libertad de prensa, transparencia informativa, y propiedad privada dentro del  país. El quería reformar el comunismo, pero la eliminación de la represión precipitó su caída inevitable, por los enormes problemas socio-político-económicos heredados de la economía rígida y centralmente planificada de la economía durante más de setenta años.

En resumen, según muestra la historia, desde el 1959 hasta el presente, si la nueva política externa hacia el gobierno cubano no se hubiese tomado, no habría posibilidad de cambio en Cuba. Después de la decisión de Obama, visualizo un poco de luz al final del túnel.

---------

NOTA: La libre expresión de criterios respetuosamente expuestos es saludable y fomenta desarrollo de ideas.  Como profesor, aprendo de mis alumnos; como escritor, aprendo de mis lectores. Si alguien desea comunícame su opinión sobre este artículo, puede comunicarse conmigo a amoralespita@hotmail.com.

Síndrome del Neocastrismo: Cubanos esperan nueva vida para autos americanos

la esperanza que dimana del Síndrome del Neocastrismo, donde la resignacion, como apuntaba balzac, es un suicidio cotidiano. 

------------------------

AmericaTeVeCanal41