Against the grain
BY PETE VALE (Special for Granma International)
WHILE the U.S. Congress, business community and public, as well as
former President Jimmy Carter, press for an end to sanctions against
Cuba, President Bush announced a real plan of interference in the
internal affairs of the island, entitled “Initiative for a New Cuba,” which
intends to leave the blockade “immaculate” if Havana does not bow
down to his conditions.
Bush, at a fundraiser for the re-election campaign of his brother,
Florida Governor Jeb Bush, clarified that “complete normalization of
relations with Cuba, involving diplomatic recognition, open commerce
and a robust aid program,” can only come to fruition when the island
has a new government that is “totally democratic.”
His words pleased the ears of the far right of both the
Cuban-American community and Congress, on the edge of their
seats the night of a formal dinner, to the tune of $25,000 a plate in
campaign contributions for Jeb, who is looking towards re-election in
November. George also has his mind set on the presidential elections
in 2004.
The speech came straight out of the cold war archives, in a tone
which aimed to please an eager audience on May 20 in Florida, just
as Cuba celebrated its 100th birthday as a republic, born under U.S.
tutelage.
Caesar’s judgment had been passed down. If Cuba does not comply
with his “outline,” meaning “free elections” in an atmosphere of
political pluralism, among other points, Havana will continue to
remain in the cannon’s sights, even though a majority of Americans
support the idea of reestablishing bilateral relations. A recent CNN poll
asked: “Would you like to see better relations between Cuba and the
United States? 88% of survey participants answered “Yes.”
Nevertheless, White House sources expressed to The Washington
Post that sanctions against Cuba would be reinforced, stepping up
enforcement of travel restrictions, strengthening U.S. government
radio and TV propaganda transmissions to the island and promoting
aid to dissidents.
On an international scale, Washington plans to increase pressure on
European and Latin American nations, in particular Spain and Mexico,
to continue to help the United States in its policy of isolating the
Caribbean country.
The state of Florida is home to a large and wealthy Cuban exile
community and one of the five critical electoral states, known for
providing multi-million-dollar campaign contributions. Miami has
maintained a longstanding hard-line position against any softening of
U.S. policy towards Havana. As would be expected, the president’s
remarks were well received there.
According to The New York Times, Bush’s “stance has won him the
devotion of a large swath of the Cuban-American community,
without which he would not have won the state of Florida, and a
disputed presidency, in 2000.”
Indeed, a long line of U.S. presidents, post-1959, has had their hands
tied by Miami in foreign policy matters concerning Cuba.
Carter was the only one who even made an attempt at being an
exception to the rule. During his administration, the former U.S.
president was very critical of the blockade, allowing for the
establishment of interests sections in Havana and Washington, along
with the suspension of the travel ban. He was not re-elected for a
second term.
CARTER BREAKS THE ICE
With Cuban President Fidel Castro in the first row of the University of
Havana’s prestigious Aula Magna conference room, former President
Jimmy Carter called on “the most powerful nation” to lift economic
sanctions and ease travel restrictions: “I want the people of the
United States and Cuba to share more than a love of baseball and
wonderful music. I want us to be friends and respect each other.”
The current mobilization among U.S. legislators and the business
community to end the blockade has never been stronger. According
to The Washington Post, “Carter’s call for lifting U.S. sanctions and
public appeal by legislators has put the administration on the
defensive.”
If Florida was able to turn a popular victory by former vice president
and presidential candidate Al Gore into an electoral triumph for
George Bush in 2000, then Miami will be just as critical for his
re-election in 2004.
Maintaining the blockade against Cuba is the lynchpin, and by any
means necessary. The electoral map, however, is evolving beyond
Bush’s control.
CONGRESSIONAL SUPPORT FOR ENDING THE BLOCKADE
In the coming days after Carter’s arrival in Havana with his
delegation, some of the most influential U.S. newspapers published
commentaries well beyond newsworthy facts, analyzing the chasm
of differences between the Congress and the president surrounding
Cuba.
The New York Times commented: “A growing number of
Republicans are tired of having U.S. foreign policy hijacked by Florida.
One of these days, the Bush brothers will recognize that isolating
Cuba has neither served the interests of the United States nor Cuba,”
while The Washington Post affirmed that the president and the
Congress are moving in two distinctly separate directions.
The day after former President Carter’s speech in Havana, a
40-member congressional bloc, known as the Cuba Working Group,
issued an appeal for Bush to end the blockade and travel ban.
The Cuba Working Group is a new caucus, composed of 20
Republicans and 20 Democrats, representing conservatives as much
as liberals across the U.S. political spectrum. In effect, the caucus
symbolizes the demise of the type of ideological intransigence that
helped define U.S. policy during the cold war.
On May 15, the group issued a nine-point plan for easing U.S.
restrictions of the blockade: the normalization of exports for U.S.
food and medicine (Cuba is the only country forced to pay in cash);
an end to Radio and TV Martí transmissions, costing U.S. taxpayers
over $25 million a year; repeal the Torricelli and Helms-Burton Acts,
1992 and 1996 respectively, which further internationalized the
blockade; an end to limits on money sent by Cuban-Americans to
relatives in Cuba; and the creation of scholarships between the two
countries, fostering greater bilateral communication, among others.
“Our first goal is to end the travel ban and adopt a policy of
constructive engagement,” said Representative William D. Delahunt
(D-Mass) who, with Jeff Flake (R-Ariz), helped found the group.
Another member stated: “We merely represent the sentiment of
American voters.”
At a press conference, members of the caucus asked, why the
administration enforces tougher trade rules against Cuba than
against China or Iraq. The group remarked that Washington recently
sponsored a successful UN resolution permitting virtually unrestricted
trade in nonmilitary goods with Iraq. Moreover, noted the caucus,
the United States pursues free trade with a number of monarchies
and one-party states throughout Asia and the Middle East.
The Cuban Working Group is not alone. The influential Congressional
Black Caucus has declared its support for an end to the blockade,
while congressional majorities have voted to increase U.S. travel and
trade with the island.
FOOD-PRODUCING STATES AND THEIR LEGISLATORS: THE
SAME COIN
During Mr. Carter’s weeklong stay on the island, a U.S. container ship
docked in Havana harbor. The 526-foot vessel, chartered out of
Jacksonville, Florida, carried tons of frozen Michigan turkeys, along
with hundreds of thousands of eggs from the northeast, sold to Cuba
by a trading company out of the former president’s home state of
Georgia.
The Los Angeles Times commented that the coincidental timing of
this latest shipment of U.S. goods to the island underscores the
dynamic relationship between politics and economics that fuel the
movement within the legislature against the blockade. The daily
highlighted that as the U.S. Congress continues to gain momentum
on the political front, American economists and Cuban officials predict
an increase in exports to the Caribbean nation in the months to
come.
Although Cuba is forced to pay in cash and use only U.S.
transportation, among other restrictions, the U.S. Congress passed
the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act in October
of 2000, signed by then President Bill Clinton, allowing Havana to
purchase food and medicine from the United States, but prohibits
both public and private credit for those ends.
At a separate news conference during Mr. Carter’s visit, Pedro
Alvarez, president of Cuba’s food import firm, Alimport, said that the
550,000 tons of food imported from the United States, since the
signing of the first contract in November, represents 10% of Cuba’s
$1 billion USD annual import bill. He emphasized that Havana is both
looking to increase and expand purchases to include around 300 new
products.
Given the geographical proximity and market size, it is much more
economical for Cuba to buy from the United States than from other
trading partners. At the same time, Cuba’s attractive and largely
untapped market has proven to be a significant source of income for
U.S. food producing states. The industry is currently fighting its way
out of a protracted economic recession, which has worsened
considerably over the last year.
John Kavulich, president of the New York-based U.S.-Cuba Trade and
Economic Council, said that, the financial interests encourage
Congress to improve relations with Cuba.
During Mr. Carter’s visit, the Council issued a report indicating that
U.S. food imports to Cuba, including rice, wheat, eggs, corn, peas,
liver and turkey, originate from 27 states containing 344 of 538
electoral votes. In fact, 54% of the members of the Senate and 66%
of the House of Representatives come from those very states.
Food-producing states could very well pose an electoral
counterbalance to Florida in the next presidential elections.
Needless to say, this political revelation was not lost on the
president.
In an attempt to buy off lawmakers, Bush signed the Farm Bill,
granting massive subsidies to the agricultural sector, rather than let
producer states fend for themselves in a “free world market.” For
Bush, neoliberalism is also a paradigm of political convenience.
Demonizing Cuba through disinformation campaigns, buying off the
agricultural sector and ignoring the wishes of the U.S. Congress and
public constitute a last-ditch effort to salvage a 40-year-old failed
policy which nobody, except Miami, supports.
How much longer will Florida hold U.S. foreign policy hostage?
Upon hearing Bush’s response in Miami, to leave the blockade intact,
in direct opposition to Carter’s plea for a definitive change in U.S.
policy towards Havana, one visibly frustrated American journalist in
Havana asked: “Is it too late to sell Florida back to the Spaniards?”