What did you do when they came looking for the nonconformist?
My predisposition to respect differences has been put to the test with the “Letter in opposition to the current obstructions and prohibitions on social and cultural initiatives.” [English translation available here.] Coming to me by way of email, the letter brings together the disenchanted and urgent voices of a group of intellectuals and academics. Among them I discover some of the names which, with a certain naïveté in distant 2007, helped to build the myth of the “Raulista reforms.” At that time they spoke about measures—more aesthetic than systematic—that should be applied to implementation, adjustments and transformations. Two years later they seem tremendously alarmed by the direction the country has taken. With their articles they propped up the hypothesis that the Cuban process could reinvent itself, as if this absurdity in which we live were a script written by the majority and not a rigid guideline issued from a single office.
I, who remained silent for almost thirty years, have no right to judge those who have worn the mask of conformity, the passive face of those who don’t want any problems. I welcome any initiative that brings to light this river of criticism that has been diverted into the caves of our fear over several decades. So, I will offer my hand, without reproach, to those who assume the risk of expressing themselves, and in this way diminish their fear of moving from mechanical applause to open criticism.
The letter is notable for several gaps, notably in the list of facts that prove the “increase in bureaucratic-authoritarian control.” Missing from this account are the bitter events of last December 10th, the increase in the so-called repudiation rallies, the harassment of several opponents, and the use of physical violence against many of them. Their use of the term “counterrevolution” merits special attention, as the signatories adopt the degrading and exclusionary language that springs from the dais. It is surprising to see professors, economists and university graduates classifying—so complexly—their fellow-citizens. The society I sense in this document frightens me, a society where one can speak openly of Trotskyism, anarchy and socialism, but at the same time one that continues to gag social democrats, Christian democrats and liberals. If that is what is proposed, I am very sorry, but this is not the country where I want my grandchildren to grow up.
I do not think we will relive a “Pavonizaton” because in the end the hard-liner Luis Pavón* had no power to call to the streets a screaming, beating mob; nor the power to sentence anyone to thirty years imprisonment. The dark censors of those Five Grey Years lacked the authority to maintain a vigilance cordon around a house, to wiretap a telephone line, or to arrest—without taking to a police station—an independent journalist or a blogger. We are not living through a return of the cultural inquisitors, but rather the tightening of the screws of a dying system that has run out of arguments, the falling away of the final veil that has exposed the ugly face of authoritarianism.
The title is a reference to Niemöller’s words: “First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist; Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist; Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew; Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out.” To contextualize this idea I would like to ask the signers of the document if you will remain silent when they come looking for a “counterrevolutionary” or a “worm” or an “opponent”, if you will be among those who beat others in the repudiation rallies, or among those who defend the victim.
Translator’s note:
Luis Pavón Tamayo headed Cuba’s National Culture Council from 1971-1976, during which time he led a McCarthy-like effort targeting writers and artists, many of whom lost their jobs, their rights to publish or display their work, or were even sent into exile or to labor camps. In January of 2007 he appeared on Cuban television in a program where no mention was made of his past activities, infuriating many with his reemergence. The “Intellectual Debate” subsequently carried out through letters and emails, has been preserved on desdecuba.com’s website, and is now being translated as part of the Cooperative Translation Experiment, Translating Cuba, and will be made available in English, for the first time, in its entirety.
Enero 17th, 2010 at 04:20
gilos s
Enero 8th, 2010 at 04:17
I strongly recommend to Julio de la Yncera, hank, Yubano, Statue of Liberty, and other interested in the embargo, to read the fallowing article. The article makes solid points against lifting the embargo without meaningful changes in Cuba. The author lays out good reasons why lifting the embargo will benefit the Cuban dictatorship, no the Cuban people.
Lift the Cuba Embargo?
http://www.cubanet.org/CNews/y.....9_O_3.html
Enero 8th, 2010 at 04:15
I strongly recommend to Julio de la Yncera, hank, Yubano, Statue of Liberty, and other interested in the embargo, to read the fallowing article. The article makes solid points against lifting the embargo without meaningful changes in Cuba. The author lays out good reasons why lifting the embargo will benefit the Cuban dictatorship, no the Cuban people.
Lift the Cuba Embargo?
http://www.cubanet.org/CNews/y.....9_O_3.html
By Humberto (Bert) Corzo*
Miércoles, 8 de Abril de 2009
“It is necessary to impose financial, economic and material restrictions to dictatorships, so that they will not take roots for long years….Diplomatic and morals measures do not work against dictatorships, because these make fun of the Governments and the population”. Fidel Castro (Excerpt from the book “Fidel Castro and Human Rights”, Editora Política, Havana, Cuba, 1988)
In this article I analyze the arguments of lifting the Cuba embargo, which are more rhetorical than real, answering each one of the specific considerations of those that support the end of it.
“Fidel Castro and Human Rights”, book published by the “Editora Política” of the Cuban regime in 1988, states in the introduction that this reflected the philosophical thought of Fidel Castro. The book is without doubt an “I plead guilty”, where Castro affirms: “It is necessary to impose financial, economic and material restrictions to dictatorships, so that they will not take roots for long years….Diplomatic and morals measures do not work against dictatorships, because these make fun of the Governments and the population”. The international community must apply effective diplomatic and trade sanctions without more delays and subterfuges. What better justification of the embargo than his own words.
Economic Embargo Highlights
The Eisenhower administration imposed a partial trade embargo against Cuba on October 19, 1960, prohibiting U.S. exports, with the exclusion of food, medicines, medical supplies and allowing Cuban imports, including sugar. The full embargo (described by Castro’s regime as a “blockade”) was enacted by President Kennedy Executive Order on February 7, 1962, except for non-subsidized sale of food and medicine, in response to Castro’s regime expropation of the properties of United States citizens and corporations without compensation. Travel restricctions were imposed in February 8, 1963 after the Cuban Missile Crisis. President Jimmy Carter dropped the travel ban to Cuba on March 19, 1977, and in January 1, 1979, Cuban-Americans were permitted to travel to Cuba. The President Reagan Administration reestablishes the travel ban on April 19, 1982.
The Cuban Democracy Act, enacted October 23, 1992, during President George Bush administration, prohibits foreign-based subsidiaries of U.S. companies from trading with Cuba, nevertheless permits American companies and their subsidiaries the sale of medicines and medical equipment, and donations of food to Cuba. The Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act (Helms-Burton) was passed on March 12, 1966 in response to the crisis brought about by Cuban fighter jets which shot down two private planes, operated byBrothers to the Rescue, outside the Cuban aereal space. A section of the law allow to sue in U.S. those foreign companies who make use of property formerly owned by U.S. citizens confiscated by the Cuban government, and denies entry into the U.S. to representatives of such foreign companies. Since its enactment this section of the law hasn’t been enforced.
President Bill Clinton signed the “Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act” in October 2000, that allowed the sale of agricultural goods and medical products to Cuba. In 2004 President W. Bush administration policy tightened restrictions on sending cash remittances, gift parcels and Cuban-Americans travel to Cuba The congressional spending bill passed on March 10, 2009, under President Obama administration, reverse the restrictions on travel policy to Cuba imposed in 2004.
Effect of the Embargo
The United States Government has always exempted from the embargo medicine and humanitarian supplies to the Cuban people, as long as such aid is distributed by independent non-governmental organizations (NGO) such as the Catholic Church and international organizations such as Pastors for Peace.
Since 1992, the U.S. has approved 36 of 38 license requests for commercial sales of medicines and medical equipment to Cuba. During the period from 1993 to 1996, the U.S. has licensed over $150 million in humanitarian assistance, more than the total worldwide foreign aid received by Cuba in those years. This total does not include the millions of dollars in medicine and food sent to Cuba in the form of “care packages” from relatives living in the U.S. [1]
In the year 2000 the Department of Commerce approved the export to Cuba of approximately $550 million in medicines, medical equipment, cash remittances, gift parcels and food (cash remittances and gift parcels account for about 75% of the total amount).
The United States government’s embargo has had little effect on the Cuban economy, since it only represents 5 % of Cuba’s commerce with the rest of the world. The embargo only affects the American companies and their subsidiaries. The rest of the countries, 180 since the last count in 2007, are free to conduct business with Cuba and are doing so, as confirmed by imports surpassing $13.78 billions during 2007 [2]. In reality there is not such embargo since in the year 2000 the United States Congress lifted the prohibition of the sale of agricultural products and medicines to Cuba, thereby allowing Castro’s regime to buy everything it needs by paying in cash.
<b.“Cuba will not buy even an aspirin, nor a single grain of rice. A lot of restrictions have been placed (to the lifting of the prohibition of the sale of agricultural products and medicines included in the modification of the bill) which make it humiliating for the Country and also impossible to put into practice”, said Castro during the demonstration that took place on October 18, 2000 across from the U.S. Interests Section to protest the legislation approved by the U.S. Senate lifting the prohibition of the sale of agricultural products and medicines.
From December 2001 up to December 2008, the Castro’s regime had signed contracts for more than $3.2 billions with American companies for the purchases of their products.
The Foreign Trade Statistics of the U.S. Census Bureau [3], based on the shipment of goods data, has estimated the export of U.S. products to Cuba at $447.5 millions during 2007 and $717.9 millions in 2008. These figures include only the price of the goods. Cuba’s National Statistics Office placed the United States as Cuba’s fifth business partner at $581.8 million in 2007 (this figure include shipping and financial costs).[4]
How it is possible that the fifth business partner and biggest food supplier can keeps an embargo on Cuba? The lies of Castro’s agents mimic Joseph Goebbels propaganda technique, “A lie repeated a thousand times eventually becomes truth”, or this other one “The bigger the lie, the more people will be believe it”.
The remittance of the exile community in 2007 has been estimated in $1.00 billion and in $240 million the humanitarian assistance sends through NGO. The $1.00 billion send by the exiles to Cuba, added to the $240 million in humanitarian assistance, the $3.7 billions of the island exports, the $2.24 billions in tourism, and the $5.66 billions in professional services in health care, education and sports, joint ventures abroad, pharmaceutical and training of foreign students account for $12.84 billions revenues during 2007. The remittance and humanitarian assistance correspond to 9.7 % of Cuba annual gross revenues.
What the Castro’s tyranny really wants are loans and lines of credit guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury Department, since it doesn’t have hard currency to pay the interests on the lines of credit for the importation of merchandise. The European Union has suspended credits to Castro’s regime due to lack of payment of the $500 millions in loans. The US “bail-out” of Cuba through loans and lines of credit will not be pay back and the American taxpayers will be ones to pick up the debt, as it happens at the present time with the taxpayers of Spain, Venezuela, Argentina, Canada and other countries.
From 1961 to 1990, Cuba received an average of $4.0 billion dollars per year in subsidies from the Soviet Union. During those years the resources dedicated to the construction of houses and the infrastructure were minimal. Public transportation had not improved nor the rationing card suppressed. The standard of living of the population declined. The social and racial inequality kept growing day after day. The United Nations Development Program ranked Cuba in 2001 in the penultimate place of poverty among the countries of Latin America. All those thousands of million of dollars that arrived at the hands of Castro did not benefit the Cuban people at all. Simply they were used to reinforce the power of Fidel Castro, to pay the cost of the wars in Africa, the subversion against the democratic governments of Latin America, and the creation of the repressive apparatus of the Department of the Interior.
The infusion of loans by the United States would only replace the Soviet subsidy that Castro no longer receives, thereby delaying the transition of the Cuban people towards democracy and guaranteeing additional decades of oppression and misery. Castro’s tyranny looks forward to the day when the military apparatus and the massive repressive security service will be maintained at the expense of the United States government.
The effect of the embargo on Cuba has partially fulfilled its objectives. It prevented Castro from obtaining loans and lines of credit that would allow him to finance his permanence in power and avoiding the growth of the indebtedness of Cuba without benefit for the population. Presently the Cuban regime’s debt has risen to $22 billion with the countries of the old socialist campus, $29.7 billion with the European Union [5], plus other $8 billions to Japan, Venezuela, Argentina and other countries. This accounts for a staggering debt of $60 billions.
Since 1992 Castro hasn’t paid the external debt and therefore cannot obtain more credit from those countries. There is only one country that Castro’s brothers don’t have a debt with (except for the confiscation of American properties that is one of the main reasons for the establishment of the embargo), from which they could obtain credits, the United States.
If in the last eighteen years the infusion of thousands of millions of dollars from European Union, Latin America, Japan, Canada, etc. have not reached the hands of the Cuban people, nor the millions of tourists that have visited the Island have been able to influence a political and economic opening of Castro’s regime, who could maintain the illusion that tourism and trade with the United States can do it?
According to Castro’s own words, “There will not be change in Cuba with or without a blockade”, and in June 16, 2002, in a “no-alternative referendum”, petitioned a constitutional amendment declaring Cuba’s socialist system “untouchable” and “eternal”. The rubber-stamp National Assembly passed the constitutional amendment making the one-party socialist state “irrevocable”. As we can see the lifting of the embargo will not be the so1ution to the drama that the Cuban people go through.
Support for the Embargo
Among the dissidents of associations within Cuba that work for the advance of Human Rights and peaceful changes towards democracy and social justice, and support the embargo the following ones stand out:
Doctor Oscar Elías Biscet, president of the Lawton Foundation of Human Rights (FLDH), who served a prison sentence of three years for acts of protests in defense of human rights, was sentenced on April 10, 2003 to 25 years in prison for supposedly having violated law No. 88 with regard to Cuba’s protection of national independence and economy. In May 1999, after the reading of the document answering the declarations of senator Dodd [6], responding to one of the questions of the journalists said, “The embargo is one of the weapons in a nonviolent civic fight”. The reply of the FLDH to the statement of senator Dodd “The moment for lifting the sanctions against Cuba has arrived” was as follow “The lifting of the embargo must be conditioned on respect for human rights, the freeing of political prisoners, the acceptance of the multi-party system and free and democratic elections. This is a question of principles, not business.” The document finish with this statement: “We know that we can be jailed for up to 20 years under Law 88, but it is preferable to suffer and maintain our decorum than to embrace injustice because of cowardice.”
The economist Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello member of the “Grupo de Trabajo de la Disidencia Interna” (GTDI), has a long history of working for human rights and Cuba’s freedom. She was one of the authors of the document “The Homeland Belongs to All”, which caused her to spent 19 months in prison. Martha Beatriz, condemned to 20 years in prison for exercising her right to free speech and promotes the well being of the Cuban people, is the only woman sanctioned among the 75 opponents, intellectuals and independent journalists sentenced in summary proceedings carried out on April 2003. On 2002, she received the “Heinz R. Pagels Human Rights Award for Scientists”, given by the Academy of Science of New York.
In her excellent analysis of the Cuban economy published in Revista Hispano Cubana, No. 14 [7] she wrote “Before the demise of the URRS, in Cuba the embargo was not even talked about but now it has become a mater of live or death for the regime, since only the financial flux from the United States, opening the possibility of obtaining lines of credit, the American tourism and the increment of the remittances of relatives, will allow the regime to confront the desperate situation in which it has submerge the country. In an article on the Wall Street Journal [8] she says, “The State has failed to redistribute the resources in an equitable way and has created a very serious situation of inequality. Economic growth requires foreign investments, but the possibilities of important foreign investments are minimal due to the conditions created by the control of the state. When one understands the great impact with which the policy of the system has towards investments and commerce, it is very easy to see that the influence of the embargo in Cuba’s poverty is minimal”.
Speaking in Havana on November 2002 during the first session of Cuba’s National Assembly Castro dismissed any possibility of success to the opponents of the regime. He said: “There is no opposition to speak of because the dissidents are like fish in an empty fish tank; there is no oxygen left for the counterrevolution and there will be even less in the future”
Lifting the embargo
Cuban economy’s bankruptcy is the sole responsibility of Castro’s regime. Under this system the economy will continuous to deteriorate without any hope of improvement. The economy is closely linked to the social development and standard of living of the Cuban people, which make very difficult the improvement of those under the existing regime.
Cuba’s problems are not the result of the embargo; they are due to the corruption and ineffectiveness of a system that is against private property and free enterprise. These and no others are the real reasons of the problems.
Lifting the embargo and travel ban without meaningful changes in Cuba will:
1. Guarantee the continuation of the current totalitarian structures.
2. Strengthen state enterprises, since money will flow into businesses owned by the Cuban government.
3. Lead to greater repression and control since Castro and the leadership will fear that U.S. influence will subvert the revolution.
4. Delay instead of accelerate a transition to democracy on the island.
The necessary steps required to be taken by the Cuban government to lift the ban on trade and travel between the two countries shall be:
1. Opposition parties should have the freedom to organize, assemble, and speak, with equal access to all airwaves. Political prisoners must be released and allowed to participate.
2. Human rights organizations should be free to visit Cuba to ensure that the conditions for free elections are being created.
3. Eliminate the “tourist apartheid,” where large number of hotels, resorts, beaches and restaurants are off-limits to the average Cuban, and the “medical apartheid” in some hospital that are adequately equipped and do not lack anything, and which are reserved for the nomenclature, the party elite and foreigners who pay in dollars.
After all it was the United States and the European Union embargo, not investments, which helped end apartheid in South Africa.
References:
[1] “The U.S. Embargo and Health Care in Cuba: Myth Versus Reality”, U.S. Department of State, Office of the Spokesman, May 14, 1997- http://secretary.state.gov/www.....70514.html
[2] “Cuba says U.S. climbs to 5th leading trade partner”, REUTERS, August 14, 2008-
http://www.signonsandiego.com/.....trade.html
[3] U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Statistics, Trade in Goods with Cuba-
http://www.census.gov/foreign-......html#2007
[4] Cuba’s National Statistics Office, Anuario Estadístico de Cuba 2007, http://www.one.cu/
[5] “Paris Club of creditor discloses IOU list”, Fox News, November 26, 2008-http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Nov26/0,4670,EUParisClubDebtorList,00.html
[6] “A Stern Reply to Senator Dodd”, by Angel Pablo Polanco, Cooperative of Independent Journalists, Havana, May 14, 1999 - http://64.21.33.164/CNews/y99/may99/14e1.htm
[7] “TRES TRISTES TRIMESTRES”, Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello, Revista Hispano Cubana, No. 14. - http://www.revistahc.com/.
[8] “A Cuban Economist Calls For Less Official Meddling”, by Marta Beatriz Roque, Wall Street Journal, November 24, 2000. - http://www.lanuevacuba.com
*Humberto (Bert) Corzo was born in Cuba. In 1962 he graduated from University of Havana with a degree in Civil Engineering. Since coming to the United States in 1969, he established his residence in Los Angeles, California, where in 1972 he obtained the registration as a Professional Engineer. He has over forty five years of experience in the field of Structural Engineering. He is a Member of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Cuban-American Association of Civil Engineers.
Enero 2nd, 2010 at 09:45
Statue of liberty the policy that you are trying to defend here I always just to respect but my way of think change with the time , I am not a Marxist , may be I’m one of those dreamers that you talk about . The Cuban american relation need to be base in a dynamic interaction were the U.S been able to engage the Cuban government. The Cuban government has always used the relation with the U.S. as a way to repress the Cuban opposition .I remember the end of the 70 went the U.S allow tourist and family member to visit Cuba. That was a total change of the Cuban young a opening of the consent , and awakenings of the way the younger people think about the Castro’s regiment . More tourist will meant the Castro’s wont be able to control the Americans tourist some thing that he could do with the Canadian and European . More influence over the new generation change of way of think.
Enero 1st, 2010 at 18:26
Happy new year to you too Mushba!
Enero 1st, 2010 at 18:10
I will give my answer to Yubano on the following post
Enero 1st, 2010 at 17:24
Statue of Liberty,
Once again we cross swords.
But wait one minute my friend, we are on the same side. I hate Fidel, Raul and communism as much as you do. Do you hear me? Is there any way that I can be any more clear? It’s just that our perspectives are slightly different.
As far as I can tell, we only disagree on methods. Calling me names or labeling me a Marxist or a “dreamer” doesn’t help the cause – in fact, Marxism and that philosophy is as foreign to me as you could possible imagine. I am the epitome of a capitalist and proud of it.
Look, I am just as much a Cuban as you are, even though I happen to be second generation.
Here’s where I find fault with what you say, and this is by no means an attack on you, far from it. Citing an article from the Heritage Foundation is, to put it bluntly, not the best approach. The Heritage Foundation is one of the most right-wing conservative groups you could find. Not that there is anything wrong with that. But it plays right into the Fidelista’s hands. Don’t you see that?
What is required now is clever tactics, diplomacy matched with selective pressure that hurts where it matters. That means flexibility and the ability to alter our position. Why don’t we control the situation? Let’s control the situation and not let Castro control it. Let’s be smarter than them. Keeping the embargo in place is a stale, outmoded, failed policy. As soon as Fidel dies, do you expect one thing to be different? I don’t. Nothing will change when he dies. WE should control the change, NOT THEM. Let’s tip the balance in OUR favor. What does maintining the embargo achieve for us. More of the same. More of the same. Aren’t you tired of it?
Enero 1st, 2010 at 15:49
Yubano#43
I have no need to name names, the “Dreamers” have identified themselves.
There is syndrome imbedded in Cubans who “unfortunately” throughout the years received the Marxist indoctrination from grade school to College that it is the US to be blamed for the Embargo, but they don’t care to analyze the reason why it was imposed in the first place.
There are other non-Cubans contributors to this blog who with good intentions for our cause, are totally foreign to the whole scenario.
I don’t hide my way of thinking when expressing myself about the Embargo, therefore I could care less if after this post I get attacked one more time, to me is irrelevant.
I am going to cite The Heritage Foundation (as I don’t want to be called a plagiary) in some of my arguments as to why the Embargo had succeeded and why it should stay in place.
CUBA AND U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY
While it is true that Castro no longer has the ability to export violent communist revolution on a large scale throughout the Western Hemisphere, he has not renounced the use of violence to overthrow democratically elected governments. America’s leaders would do well to remember that one of the constant and enduring characteristics of Fidel Castro’s career has been his lifelong hatred of the United States and everything it stands for in the world.
If Castro is allowed to recapitalize his communist regime with billions of dollars in Western aid, he could easily threaten economic and democratic reforms throughout Latin America.
Even with the embargo lifted, Castro’s regime would likely remain very unfriendly to the U.S. and its interests. The benefits of taming Castro with aid and investments, which would be few in any event, it would be far outweighed by the long-range trouble caused by the willful perpetuation of an anti-American authoritarian regime in Cuba more or less indefinitely. The longer Castro’s regime survives, the more opportunities there will be for him to host and support any guerrilla or subversive movement that may arise in Latin America in the future.
“NO” TO LIFTING THE TRADE EMBARGO.
Opponents of the trade embargo insist that it has never worked. They argue that Castro has not being forced from power and that the United States is the only country in the world that still refuses to trade with Castro. Critics of the trade embargo also contend that it punishes the Cuban people unjustly and deprives U.S. companies of the opportunity to invest billions of dollars in Cuba at a time when the entire world is beating a path to Castro’s door. However, these arguments are not convincing. Consider the following points: In fact, the trade embargo has been effective. Arguing otherwise ignores history. Castro was able to resist the trade embargo only because he was receiving over $5 billion a year in subsidies from the Soviet Union. This money allowed Castro to finance the buildup of one of the world’s most repressive and murderous communist regimes while disguising the utter collapse of the Cuban economy caused by his failed Marxist revolution.
The embargo is having an effect. It is unrealistic to have expected the embargo to bring down the Castro regime so long as the Soviet Union existed. It is realistic now to expect a possible collapse of Castro’s regime now that the Soviet Union has disappeared. The reason for this is that Cuba’s expatriate community in the United States and in other countries.understand that Fidel Castro cannot be trusted and that any foreign investment in Cuba as long as Castro controls the island will merely be used to strengthen his communist regime and prolong his tyrannical repression of the Cuban people.
Castro is doing business with stolen property, and eventually foreign investors who forget the rule of law in their quest for profit will have to answer for their actions before a court of law in a free Cuban nation. Second, Cuba has only I I million inhabitants with a current per capita income of less than $10 a month in real prices. They have little hard cash with which to buy U.S. goods and services, and the island’s technologically obsolescent manufacturing facilities.
Castro’s reluctant experimentation with free food markets in recent months has been intended to ease popular frustrations by making more food available to Cuban consumers-food that Castro’s collectivized, command- economy policies have been incapable of producing for decades without billions of dollars in subsidies.
CONCLUSION
The trade embargo against Cuba is the most effective weapon in America’s foreign policy arsenal for dealing with Fidel Castro. It matters not if other countries think the embargo should be lifted and Castro re-admitted to the community of civilized nations. The U.S. has long conditioned the embargo’s removal on Castro’s compliance with the following basic demands:
Free and democratic elections must take place in Cuba. A free-market economy should be allowed to develop and the property and assets stolen from their rightful owners must be returned to these owners, or else compensation must be paid at fair market value. All political repression of dissidents must cease immediately, and all political prisoners must be freed from jail; and Castro must renounce his stated goal of promoting global violent revolution and step down from power, allowing the Cuban people to exercise their legitimate human rights to become a free people in a democratic society.
These are noble and principled demands. They are the philosophical platform on which the trade embargo against Cuba has stood for over four decades. The world has changed in those four decades, but today these principles have greater moral authority than ever before. America’s leaders should not allow to be fooled by Castro’s propaganda. The Cuban dictator may indeed be a toothless tiger without his Soviet patrons, but he has not changed his stripes at all. America’s leaders would do well to remember that old and tiring tigers can be unpredictably dangerous. Now is not the time to ease up on Castro and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Instead, Congress and the present Administration would be wise to increase the pressure against Castro and hasten the day when Cuba will be a free nation.
Enero 1st, 2010 at 13:48
My question, Yubano, is very simple. Give me one example of how the embargo has achieved any of its goals — just one over the course of 51 years. How much time do we give it? Of course I understand that the embargo is about sanctions, punitive measures and regime change, but I’ll ask the question again — What has it achieved and is it working?
Whether or not the policy has had bipartisan support for 51 years is utterly and completely irrelevant. That doesn’t make it right. I couldn’t care less if Democrats and Republicans agree on maintaining it. The point, Yubano, is that it is a failed policy. By which I mean, it has not worked, zilch — nada. When something doesn’t work, you change it so that it does work - you fix it.
I hate the bastards who rule Cuba just as much as you do. And I also have relatives on that godforsaken Island, none of whom I have had the pleasure of actually meeting. There are other ways of achieving what we all want.
For the sake of conversation, I’ll answer your questions as best I can, even though you won’t answer mine.
I can’t predict with certainty what the immediate effects of lifting the embargo would be or how it might play out. What I do know is that it would dramatically change the dynamic in a very real way. Have you read the Human Rights Watch Report on Cuba, all 120 some pages? Their approach is decidedly apolitical, but it makes sense. Lift the embargo, build a coalition and demand the immediate release of all political prisoners in six months — that’s how you force change. If they don’t, then use the coalition to impose real, meaningful sanctions that hurt the idiots at the top. Make them feel the heat with travel restrictions, frozen bank accounts and sanctions directed at them personally.
The US is isolated and alone in the world on this issue. No one agrees with maintaining the embargo. We have absolutely no leverage and it only serves to bolster the supporters of the criminals in Cuba.
Enero 1st, 2010 at 12:01
The purpose of the embargo Hank is to sanction the Cuban government. The US government took the position a long time ago to not do business with a communist regime that had expropriated the property of many US companies and citizens and that systematically violates the human rights of its citizens. The embargo was meant to isolate Cuba and yes to hopefully accelerate regime change. The policy has had bipartisan support for 51 years. It was not meant to convince the castros of anything. It is punitive. You don’t convince dictators of anything. They are not open for convincing. I support the embargo on moral grounds. The premise is simple I do not want to do business with a criminal government that represses and exploits its own citizens, that flouts international agreements and that is clearly in its death-throes. I don’t care if the regime uses the embargo to justify itself, it is crumbling nevertheless and I do not support anything that will give it one more breath of oxygen with which to sustain itself. I do not want to bail-out the Cuban government.
Let’s put the shoe on the other foot Hank. You tell me what lifting the embargo would accomplish? What is it that you think will happen? Do you think the influx of American tourists will precipitate change? What changes have the millions of Canadian, Europeans and other peoples from pluralistic societies visiting Cuba caused to happen? Do you want to extend credit to the Cuban government? Ask all the other credit extenders around the world if they want to keep “lending” money to Cuba. I understand the plight of the people in Cuba, I still have relatives there. Do you really think that taking actions that will sustain the Cuban government is the best thing we can do for our brothers in Cuba? The only answer for Cuba is regime change. Doing “business” with the Castros will not accelerate that change. The Castros will not change a thing about their repressive system, all they want from us is money and credit to sustain them in life support.
Enero 1st, 2010 at 11:03
Yubano,
What is the purpose of the embargo? Please tell me. Is it regime change? Is it to put “pressure” on the Castro dictatorship? Is it to try to convince those thugs that they should change their evil ways and throw open the doors of their prisons and let the political prisoners walk?
If so, then has it worked? Give me one example of how the embargo has worked to do any of these things. And if it hasn’t worked, then how is it in anyone’s interest to maintain it?
Enero 1st, 2010 at 10:08
Julio
Again I see you make the assertion that the Cuban people live in poverty because of the embargo. The Cuban people live in poverty because of the disastrous and ruinous policies of the Castro regime. This is a discredited arguement and yet you insist in pushing it. I don’t recall anyone crying about the embargo when the soviets were providing a $6 billion dollar a year subsidy. The Castros are solely responsible for the dire situation in Cuba. I can see making an arguement for doing away with the embargo and travel restrictions for political reasons, to put the pressure on the cuban regime, but not because it is the cause for Cuban poverty. This blame the US point view is the same cynical arguement the Castros have been making for 51 years while personally pocketing and wasting away all the resources of the country and the enourmous subsidies they have recieved.
Enero 1st, 2010 at 08:30
I could not help but recall what we call the Yuppie-Guppies of my society.Im referring to the wannabe Gora(white,or Western)upper class..their always going on,like the rest of us here about thing’s could be better if we were more like the West,if we did this, if we were ‘mod’.They are a breed of Ignoramous;proud & horribly annoying.They always have ideas are beneficial for them & them only,nothing to do with the rest of us.They are the people i fail to stand in any way
This was a beautifully written post,both by Yoani & the English translator…O &
<3 HAPPY NEW YEAR!!I pray this will be a better,safer & happier one for you all :)
Enero 1st, 2010 at 00:26
I guess I am also one of the dreamers. I don’t see how it works or has worked. Drop the embargo, drop all of it. Let it go for God’s sake.
Happy New Year everyone.
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 19:15
I guess I am one of the dreamers Statue is talking about.
I do believe we should drop the embargo and allow unrestricted travel.
There is more reasons every day to not follow such path as we have follow on the past.
Almost 50 years of embargo have archive only the poverty of the Cuban people and the regime is still on power.
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 16:48
Yubano #43
I agree with your assertion of how Cuba always reacts to improve relations with their enemy of the north, I have written extensively in the past about this subject, however there are dreamers contributors to this blog who still believe that it is worth to keep trying and bend to Cuba, expecting that one day they will change.
I have follow the path of Wayne Smith for a long period of time since he was the head of US interest in Cuba, this guy is always on the other side of the fence. I wonder how his stance affects people thinking as a visiting professor of Latin American studies at The Johns Hopkins University and a Senior Fellow at the Center for International Policy?
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 14:57
Coloca tu mano derecha sobre tu hombro izquierdo y tu mano izquierda sobre tu hombro derecho. Has recibido un abrazo a distancia. ¡Feliz Año 2010!
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 14:23
The New York Times article only confirms what those who pay close attention to Cuba/US relations have known for years, the Cuban regime is not interested in reproachment. The process of demonizing American President is repeated every 4 to 8 years regardless of party affiliation, race, religion or gender. As I read the article I felt a wave of nausea at the mention of Wayne Smith. Why is this guy consistently quoted in articles pertaining to Cuba/US relations? He is nothing but an American apologist for the Cuban regime. Regardless of what human rights violation or atrocity the Castros and their cronies commit Mr. Smith is always there urging us to make friends with the usurpers. This was Mr. Carter’s Cuba expert, enough said.
The regime is crumbling with no valid justifications for its repression other than pointing to the boogeyman to the north. Other than the fanatics and sycophants no one in Cuba is buying this tired story anymore. Without fundamental changes taking place in Cuba the US should not ease the pressure.
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 13:54
The Three Political Tenors! Raul, Fidel and Chavez, singing the same old song of “US plotting to topple our goverments”!
THE PRESS ASSOCIATION ARTICLE: Chavez warns foes against coup bid
“Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has warned his opponents against mounting a coup attempt.
Mr Chavez said in a televised speech that any action like the failed military rebellion against him in 2002 wouldn’t have a chance.
“If something like that occurs to you, our counterattack is going to be firm. I’m warning you,” Mr Chavez said.”
“He also repeated his near constant theme that Venezuela is facing threats from the US and neighbouring Colombia, and repeated his accusation that US military planes are using the nearby Dutch islands of Aruba and Curacao as hubs for intelligence operations.
The Dutch government has rejected those accusations, saying US soldiers do use civilian air fields on Curacao and Aruba but only for anti-drug trafficking efforts. Colombian and US officials have denied their militaries pose a threat to Venezuela.”
http://www.google.com/hostedne....._mVABzWScg
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 13:31
GREAT ARTICLE ABOUT THE CURRENT SITUATION WITH USA AND CUBA!
NY TIMES ARTICLE: In Cuba, Hopeful Tenor Toward Obama Is Ebbing
HAVANA — The Obama honeymoon here is over.
By MARC LACEY
Published: December 30, 2009
“But the tenor here has changed considerably, and Mr. Obama, whose election was broadly celebrated by Cuba’s racially diverse population, is now being portrayed by this nation’s leaders as an imperialistic, warmongering Cuba hater.”
“The two countries have postponed the talks they restarted at the beginning of the Obama administration to discuss migration, postal delivery and other issues, blaming each other for the delays. In the absence of talks, Mr. Obama’s carrot-and-stick approach of relaxing some Bush-era policies while continuing to denounce the Castro government on human rights has failed to engage — and perhaps has enraged — the Cuban leadership.”
“Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla also recently accused Mr. Obama of behaving like an “imperial chief” at the climate change talks in Copenhagen, displaying “arrogant” behavior aimed at quashing developing countries.
“It’s unfortunate,” Wayne S. Smith, a former American diplomat in Havana, said of the rising tensions. “There was and still is potential for the Obama administration to change relations with Cuba. These comments coming out of Havana don’t help.””
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12.....1cuba.html
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 13:12
Julio @#35
Always a good question, incisive & to the point thanks!
The regime will collapse, when well … depends on what we ALL do to reach that goal.
From history we know that no dictatorship lasts forever.
We also know that the people is the key for th end of a dictatorship.
There are choices to be made, decisions & planning.
We have to know what is needed, not what is wanted then how to make it happen.
I am not talking insurgency with violence & all the other things.
I am talking about a comun thought & a plan.
For example:
when Prince/King Fahisal finally assumed power at the begining of the 20th century, in the region today called middle east the arab people were not united, were (perhaps still are) very sectarian & tribal.
The union came from a commun goal, they reached & then what happened?
The “other” powers made decisions of nationl borders, of creation of countries and of wealth distribution & exploitation of natural resources (petrol)
The result of these decision is felt even today … in the middle east …
I am not saying this will happen in a tiny island like Cuba yet the effects of what is done will be heard & felt around the world, so there is a lot of work to be done in preparation.
The difference is beteen what we want and what we need, there is where all expectations fall.
The freedom we seek might be a lot easier to attain than the reversal & reconstruction of a country will be.
Nevertheless, when I think about something, no matter how long & hard … I can count on you to bring me to the real world … than you Julio!
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 12:42
I think Yubano asks a fair question in #36. In the second paragraph Yoani says she does welcome the initiative and doesn’t judge those who signed on to the letter:
“I, who remained silent for almost thirty years, have no right to judge those who have worn the mask of conformity, the passive face of those who don’t want any problems. I welcome any initiative that brings to light this river of criticism that has been diverted into the caves of our fear over several decades. So, I will offer my hand, without reproach, to those who assume the risk of expressing themselves, and in this way diminish their fear of moving from mechanical applause to open criticism.”
At the same time, the letter still uses the language of exclusion when it comes those labelled as belonging to “the real counter-revolution.” Yoani quite legitimately asks the signers if those Cubans who peacefully oppose the so-called revolution are excluded from the diversity of opinions that should be respected.
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 11:47
….Very good and accurate comment about Mr Pavon, I remember him in the seventees
making a speech harshly scolding those artists and intellectuals who listen to the
“Beatles” and have been contaminated with “idealogical diversionism”…..all enemies of the revolution……..
….He was more hated than admired then.
Happy new year for you and all the brave cuban bloggers who are making a huge difference in offering other view points than the official propaganda
Thanks very much , congrats….! JB
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 11:37
Yubano that is why she begins with
“My predisposition to respect differences has been put to the test with the “Letter in opposition to the current obstructions and prohibitions on social and cultural initiatives.”
I think is painful for her to not side with them. But she is very very clear here
“The society I sense in this document frightens me, a society where one can speak openly of Trotskyism, anarchy and socialism, but at the same time one that continues to gag social democrats, Christian democrats and liberals. If that is what is proposed, I am very sorry, but this is not the country where I want my grandchildren to grow up.”
any society that gives privileges to some and oppresses others is and will not be a free society. It will just be the same we have now.
Even the singners did not read well the quote they place. Specially the last part when he said
“Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out.”
that “me” in the quote can be any Cuban. So why include some and exclude others?
Who will be the arbiter to rule what is revolutionary and what is too far to be counter revolutionary?
How about allowing everyone to think and express freely? Why not?
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 11:20
While I agree with those who want an unfettered democracy for Cuba a democracy that respects everyone’s point of view without qualification, I am somewhat surprised at Yoani’s take on the letter. Granted the signers of the letter are not openly asking for a regime change but they are asking for change and that in itself is pretty remarkable. Many of the signers of the letter have been abettors, supporters and apologists for the regime. That they should sign a letter criticizing the government and asking for democratic reforms represents another blow to the crumbling armor of the illegitimate regime. The letter represents tangible proof of the erosion of support for the status quo within Cuba. Can we afford to reject this message because we don’t entirely agree with it or find it distasteful to agree with the signers? I think not. We need the dissidents, the bloggers and the Panfilos to speak out, and yes also those who in the past have not been on our side to speak out even if it is late in the game and even if their message is not entirely to our liking.
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 10:23
Albert
I think you are going to fast! :-)
“For example … the regime collapses … then what?”
That is the question?
How can we help the regime collapse?
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 10:18
Ocean, I think they may be interested in learning about what we have to say about them.
It may be the old human curiosity. They read this. Yes they do. Everything we write they read too. I will even dare say that the have participated in some blog post. Who they will be I can not tell but I did have some exchanges with people high in the Cuban regime at some other blog. The reason I know is because they had information that was not public domain and that later came out.
See they are old now and they may be worried about what the future will write about them. Once they are gone there is no more manipulation they will be able to do from the other side.
Muerto el perro se acabo la rabia.
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 09:38
Hank @#31
I think there is more than that to the idea.
Yes, good human beings give (even if not deserved)human qualities to a dictatorship.
While the dictatorships use the “end justifies the means” & in the order of things, a survivalist dictatorship like castro’s adapts & changes when their power is threatened
Yoani/others are important but in reality she/others are an easy solvable problem to the castros.
They do not care what other people/countries think or what their opinion is.
Their hold on power is what legitimizes them, anything else is just propaganda.
If push comes to shove, the castro regime will adapt like Russia & China have done.
Controlled freedom, some capitalist advances & there you go.
Dictatorships (& others)know this: the “panzista” position, I’ve have seen it at work in south america, africa & the former eastern block.
Give the people food, decent clothing & shelter & their will remain for the most part submisive.
Now:
I am not saying it is hopless: I say that the castro dicatorship is not stupid, nor it is going to give up without a hell of a fight.
We have to get rid of our blinders.
The bloggs by their mere existence do not offer protection to Yoani/others; we must realize that in a second, they can become bargaining chips for this regime at best.
Sometimes here, the conversation comes accross as if we are “jockeying” for the position of who is the better read or has the better opinion or the better thought.
I think (hope not to offend anyone) we stray from the purpose of our presence here; all the while the regime smiles because we can’t seem to get it together.
We rather discuss a fine point while we are satisfied with translating & talking, feeling “we are doing something”.
Yes, I know the translating work IS importan & IT IS valuable.
The point is: with such a fine collection of minds, all lovers of Cuba & freedom for Her … we should be able to come up with something more than just comments.
I confess my simple mind thinks in a pedestrial level, I have learned so much since I started reading from all of you …I thank you for it yet is there something more than contributions, translationg reading & participating in this & other blogss that we can do?
For example … the regime collapses … then what?
Anyway as I stated before, my intent is not to offend anyone in any way shape or form but if I did: please accept my sincere apology.
Happy New Year everyone!!!
Diciembre 31st, 2009 at 09:34
JULIO - HANK -THANK YOU for answering my question what you guys said it makes sense,im surprise they have not taken her laptop computer away from her.i guess will see what the future will bring and time will tell. DO YOU GUYS think the (regime) sees and reads this blog and see what peoples comments are and what people are saying.the spanish version of this blog people really strongly critizes fidel and raul i have seen some strong wording.
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 23:04
Ocean,
Your question is a good one. I have thought about it a lot.
I think the answer is that the dictators in Cuba are not quite sure how to deal with the blogger phenomenon. Not just Yoani, but others like her — many, many others, who are posting their thoughts and feelings on the Internet — they spring up every day.
The more we read their blogs and volunteer groups of translators do their translation work, the more their messages will be published in different languages, around the free world. As that happens, these people will be even more protected from reprisals.
But your question is more basic than that: Why not just arrest Joani and do away with her? Why not throw her into the gulag and make her disappear into some dark dungeon, which is what they do and have been doing to people in Cuba for the last 50 years.
The problem is that the outrage would be intolerable. Joani would become an international martyr and her house a site to visit. Not only that, others, in their millions would take her place.
So the Cuban dictators, the octogenarians who rule that place and who probably hate the “Internets,” really do not know what to do, because all they know is violence, murder, oppression and torture.
The dictators are trapped by their own intransigence and the more they fight it, the more ground they lose.
Their reality is based on the physical control of territory and people, but the Internet is completely different, something they cannot control – the Internet is a forum for ideas that people freely express, without fear. And that’s what scares the dictators. They cannot control this medium except by blocking it, which is what they try to do. But to no avail because the ingenuity of their own people will always circumvent these prohibitions. So the dictators are doomed.
That’s how I see it.
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 22:48
Ocean, this is a very good question.
I think it has to do with all the support we give her.
I think it also have to do with she is speaking out the truth.
and it will be too obvious if she is place in prison for manifesting her
opinions. Just think this. Her Spanish web site gets more hits than any media from Cuba! and that is just her Spanish site it does not count this one in English or the other languages or the other bloggers!
Yoani, they have tried to crucify using the granma article published by Ubieta and the infamous blog of Yohandry etc.
Using the power they have to produce regime supporters and to beat women and men who’s only crime is to speak their mind.
To be denied exit of your own country to receive well deserve prize. And should I say to be awarded with people that followed her every move.
Those are the real weapons of intimidation used by the regime to those that dare to oppose it.
It will be scandalous if they do dare to place any of them in prison. The international support for the bloggers will be so great that the have no idea what they will be dealing with. A total public relations nightmare.
Every step they did, to put pressure on them (the independent bloggers) has worked in reverse. The more pressure they put and the more tension they place the stronger they get!
They (The regime) do not know how to handle it. They think that the Cuban people can not read Yoani. Just like in the bible the Adam and Eve story. Yoani is that apple the wisdom apple. The temptation is too great even if Fidel Castro the GOD has warned us against her! :-)
Nothing is impossible for a totalitarian regime but I doubt they will dare do anything to them. Cuba right now is like a munition fort ready to explode. They have to be very very careful how they walk because it may blow out at any moment.
Even the economy is not with them and it has never been. That may become the trigger of disenchantment.
All we need is a little spark!
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 21:47
JULIO -one question if the government in habana knows who yoani is and they know what she does how is that she is getting away with this,do you think the regime sees what goes on and the comments people say in this blog,im sure the regime dont want to hear the things are said about them and other people to find out.im kind of surprise that yoani can have this blog.
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 21:24
Petition for the release of Cuba’s political prisoners:
http://www.peticioncuba.org/index.php?l=
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 20:59
hi
My name is chester i was born in cuba, in 1970, i was in prison for 21 years, i left the country when i was 21 year old.
A Cult leader always have sweet words, he always sound gentle n nice, almost everybody will think like him, but no everybody will see the real person behind does sweet words, but he get angry when he feel someone is getting closer to his true persona, he start using his slaves to attack , lies, insult to who ever try to get in the middle of the culd leader game.
A Cult leader dont like when his slaves trying to leave the camp, dont like when his slaves trying to listen to other words, when his slaves trying to speak out their own mind, a cult leader always offer free service to his slaves, so the slaves feel that they are getting something free, but someone have to pay because nothing is free. the cult leader offer free service by paying his slaves a penny for the hours the slaves work.
A Cult leader dont like free press, or free travel, everything have to be control by the cult leader.
Well now that u read the story of a cult leader, hope u can put the dot together and picture Cuba run by Fidel Castros.
You may ask who are fidel castro slaves. well very simple, anyone who agree with the sweet words of the cult leader..
Free the people of cuba!!!!
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 18:23
Se va formar.
Yoani HAPPY NEW YEAR , muchas cosas buena para ti.
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 18:20
When Fidel dies, the BACKBONE of the failed rebelution is DEAD and OVER. The systen should come apart at the seams. Everyone in and out of Cuba is ready for change. Oppresive forms of Government should be discouraged where ever on this planet, and everyone can help. The New YEAR brings us alot of new opportunities.
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOANI and ALL THOSE who make these blogs possible.
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 16:07
Marc Masferrer maintains this site about political prisoners in Cuba… it’s an incredible resource.
http://www.marcmasferrer.typepad.com/
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 14:10
Here is a link to a Wiki page about political prisoners around the world - including those in Cuba. Next to each of the names of the Cubans is the length of their individual sentences — in years. Many of the sentences span decades. How repugnant and vile. If anyone knows more about these individuals, please update their biographies on Wikipedia so that they are more than mere names on this disgusting list. Tell us about these people, who they are, their families and their humanity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_prisoner
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 13:13
Great interview with Gorki of Porno para Ricardo!
Cuban Punk Rocker Gorki Aguila on Music, Life and Getting Led Zeppelin Records in Cuba
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....r_embedded
Porno para Ricardo (English: Porn for Richard) is a Cuban punk rock band founded in 1998.
“Their lyrics are mostly about sex, mind-breaking, drugs, street life, contemporary Cuban society, and harsh criticism of the Cuban government. Nostalgia for the USSR-times; and pornography, are recurrent topics as well.
The band’s style is essentially oblivious and shallow; being fond of just having fun and playing on everything. Though, indeed, their songs sometimes result in serious and interesting works. Their lyrics are frequently very explicit.
Gorki Águila, the leader of the band, was arrested in August 2008 by the Cuban police with the charge of dangerousness, which allows them to detain people whom they think they are likely to commit crimes. The charge carries a penalty of up to four years in prison.[1]
He was eventually ordered to pay a $30 fine for the lesser offence of public disorder, after prosecutors dropped the more serious charge[2] following intense international pressure after broad media coverage. This is an unprecedented event in Cuban jurisprudence; the communist government is usually strict about punishment given to independent journalists[3] and other dissident voices.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porno_para_Ricardo
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 06:08
ciao from Italy!
Piero
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 05:03
… when I was cold … did you clothe me?
… when I was hungry … did you feed me?
This are part of sentences jesus used to answer a question … long ago …
Yes there may be many people that at the time “were not communists, jews, unionists … etc”
They seem not to care concerned only with their own lives & the fear for their own survival.
That is the past, the present still allows for redemtion or anything that will effect a change, the time inow is not for what “it was not done” but for what HAS to be done.
Of course there isn’t anything as clear as black & white, where would the compromises be? where would tolerance & understanding be? where would the lessons learned go?
However, make no mistake, forgivness is not forgetting, tolerance is not condoning, understanding is not acceptance, to be passive is not to be defeated.
The time is now, the long words, the long speches & learned points of view are however necessary and educating … useless unless there is a follow thru.
Diciembre 30th, 2009 at 00:56
Note to the Bloggers,
Please do not use all capital letters. Please, it really makes it hard to translate. Can someone please pass this along?
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 23:44
In reply to Chester below, Yoani has decided to leave the prison that is Castro’s Cuba and express herself as a free person. An increasing number of other Cubans living on the island are doing the same. To be nonconformists that those who signed the letter either dare not be, or lack the self-awareness to be.
Interesting that you describe Fidel Castro as a cult leader. In some respects, it is an accurate reflection of the ideological conformity he has succeeded in imposing. That’s why it’s hard to predict what will happen once the cult leader dies or is permanently incapacitated.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 22:29
THE WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE: Cuba gives US diplomat access to arrested American
“In Washington, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said the Obama administration remains “focused on the welfare of the detained U.S. citizen.”
Both declined to give any further details on the encounter, the detained man’s whereabouts or his condition, citing federal privacy laws. Neither government has identified him.
The State Department said previously that he was working as a subcontractor for the Maryland-based economic development organization Development Alternatives Inc.
Jim Boomgard, the company’s president and chief executive, said he was part of a new USAID program intended to “strengthen civil society in support of just and democratic governance in Cuba.” ”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....01459.html
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 21:31
Thanks Julio,
I was having a hard time understanding the blog with it’s context and details!
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 21:28
actually their quote is
“When they came looking for the Jews, I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew; When they came looking for the communists, I did not speak out—because I was not a communist; When they came looking for the trade unionists, I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist; Then they came looking for me—but there was no one left to speak out for me.” - Martin Niemöller
the quote that I put is Yoani’s paraphrase of that quote!
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 21:21
Many of the writers of Havana Times are signatories to the letter as can be seen on El Yuma’s blog
http://www.havanatimes.org/
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 21:20
Hi
My name is Chester i was born in Cuba in 1970, i was prison until 1991 when the cuban goverment grand me my freedom, i left cuba when i was 21 years old, you may ask how come he was in prison from the day he was born until the day he left the country.
I will tell you how, hope you can get the picture, here is go, when u commint a crime or you been accuse of a crime you get send to jail or prison until you are found inocent by a judge, who will grant you your freedom, then u can leave the prison and enjoy ur freedom with ur family and friend.
Well now that u got the picture of a prison, judge and freedom, you will understand why i was in prison from the day i was born, i never commit a crime in my country, but i was not able to leave and come as i please until the gorverment grant me my freedom to leave the prison”cuba” and leave the country to enjoy my freedom out of my country,
I ask why the Teacher. Doctor, Farmer, worker, can not leave the country i provide their services to other country, without been obligate to be part of the goverment party, because that is the only way u can come and go, when u are part of a few that the judge grant temporary freedom.
How ignoran are we the cuban that we dont see, the big cell we all living, why we dont remember the words of our fathers’s country Jose Marti, Maceo, Gomes, Agramonte, Free is who can speak, travel, and make his own choice.
I ask the Teacher. Doctor, Farmer, worker, to ask the goverment”judge” that u want to serve other country without having to be part of the party goverment, you want to see other lands, make ur own choice.
A person is well educate when that person make his or her own choice, travel, speak, listen and is always welcome to his house”land”
A Cult leader is a person that make all the choice for a group, and dont let his people to leave the camp where they live.
Is this sound like someone u know.? Fidel Castro.
Be Free fly like a bird” Freedom to all cuban and to all people in this planet.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 21:19
to understand what Yoani is saying is important to read the letter first.
There is a full translation in El Yuma’s blog
http://elyuma.blogspot.com/200.....ecent.html
The letter is complaining about the recent acts of repudiation organized by the regime and the expulsion of OMNI of the place they used to have etc. The things Yoani has publish in some of the latest post of how the regime is acting against dissent.
It is a good step but is only a half step because after saying all that then they do a step back and talk about counter revolutionaries.
So it is not an inclusive letter unfortunately is not one that free people should sign because it will exclude those of us that think different than the strict confines they propose.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 21:17
julio thanks a lot.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 21:05
Ocean
The tango that people in Cuba are allow to dance is very restricted without been considered counter-revolutionaries. As I was saying before all of them are under Castro’s spell of
“you’re either with me or against me.”
few have the courage that Yoani and other bloggers have shown with every word they write!
The letter in question is a letter where they are talking about a more democratic socialism but is still a type of society where people could be call counter-revolutionary.
Any classification or distinction is still the same system the same Woolf but this time disguised in a sheep clothing.
For some of them (the ones signing the letter) maybe this is as far as they are willing to go. Supporting dissent.
So what Yoani says in this post is very clear and equivalent to what we have been telling before in prior posts (Voltaire) or Noam Chomski see my comments on the prior post.
The signers of the letter seem to be ignoring the quote they have place on the top of it
“First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist; Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist; Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew; Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out.” To contextualize this idea I would like to ask the signers of the document if you will remain silent when they come looking for a “counterrevolutionary” or a “worm” or an “opponent”, if you will be among those who beat others in the repudiation rallies, or among those who defend the victim.
So what she is clearly saying is that she wants a freedom that includes everyone and that she will not sign such a letter that includes some and excludes others.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 20:42
John Two,
I think you have identified the key paragraph in the letter. And as Andy points out, it is a fine line they are drawing — very fine. But what is their choice? I think Julio will be telling us about this shortly…
You can either work within the confines of a very tightly controlled system or work outside of it — risking everything. So what do you do? One thing you can do is work within it to change it - from within. I don’t fault the signatories to the letter for adopting the rhetoric they have chosen. On the other hand, Yaoni is absolutely right for calling them out.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 20:28
JULIO QUE ES lo que esta pasando con la carta y yoani no entiendo . gracias.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 20:21
OK, ANYA! So we should take this “Frei Beto’s” information over more IMPORTANT AND WORLD RECOGNICED INSTITUTIONS AS THOSE BELOW? I DONT THINK SO! PLEASE REPOND!
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH REPORT (November 18, 2009)-New Castro, Same Cuba
“Dissidents are a small and significantly isolated segment of the population. However, their marginalization is evidence not of the lack of dissent in Cuba, but rather of the state’s ruthless efficiency in suppressing it. Fear permeates all aspects of dissidents’ lives. Some stop voicing their opinions and abandon their activities altogether; others continue to exercise their rights, but live in constant dread of being punished. Many more never express dissent to avoid reprisals. As human rights defender Rodolfo Bartelemí Coba told Human Rights Watch in March 2009, “We live 24 hours a day ready to be detained.” Ten days after making that statement, Bartelemí was arrested and taken to prison without trial, where he remains today.”
“The Cuban government has for years refused to recognize the legitimacy of independent human rights monitoring and has adamantly refused to allow international monitors, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross and international nongovernmental organizations like Human Rights Watch, to visit the island and investigate human rights conditions. In researching this report, Human Rights Watch made repeated written requests to the Raúl Castro government for meetings with authorities and formal authorization to conduct a fact-finding mission to the island. As in the past, the Cuban government did not respond to any of our requests.”
http://www.hrw.org/en/node/86549/section/2
Reporters Without Borders: Going online in Cuba - Internet under surveillance
http://www.rsf.org/Going-onlin…..ernet.html
Reporters Without Borders:Authorities block websites, detain 26th journalist
http://www.rsf.org/Authorities…..etain.html
Human Rights Watch: Cuba’s Repressive Machinery:
http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/…..-machinery
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 19:59
Andy and John for this people signing this letter it may be a big step and maybe the only step they can do without loosing face and be consider by the regime counter revolutionaries too. They are still under the influence of this dictum of Fidel Castro.
“you’re either with me or against me.”
I was surprise to find the signature of Erasmo Calzadilla and Irina Echarri from Havana times. Whose post I have read and seem to me more open on opinions that this letter portrait.
Erasmo himself have defended Yoani against granma’s Ubieta article.
Where would they draw lines?
When is one consider a counter revolutionary?
How about no drawing any lines at all where we can all debate and be accepted independent of the economical system that we support.
I am reminded of two poems by a Cuban poet
Dulce Maria Loynaz that I translated a while back for the wikipedia article on Dulce Maria.
I dream of classifying
I had dream of classifying
Good and Evil, the same way scientist
classify butterflies:
I had dream to pin Good and Evil
in the dark velvet
of the glass display case…
Under the white butterfly
a label that will read “The Good”.
under the black butterfly,
a label that will read “The Evil”.
But the white butterfly
was not the good, neither the black butterfly
was the evil… And between my two butterflies,
green, golden and infinite all the earth butterflies fly.
……………..
If you love me, love me whole
If you love me, love me whole
not by zones of light or shadow…
if you love me, love me black
and white, and gray and green and blond,
and mixed…
love me day,
love me night…
and in the morning with the open window!
If you love me, don’t break me in pieces:
love me whole… Or do not love me at all.
This poems where written long ago but she was very clear
Nothing can be black and white as in revolutionary and counter-revolutionary there is a full spectrum of color.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 19:57
“Articles
11/12/2009
Yoani Sanchez: between blogs and lies - The contradictions of Yoani
Frei Betto *
The world learned that, on 7 November last, the Cuban blogger Yoani Sanchez have been struck on the streets of Havana. According to her account, “threw me in a car pulled … a role that one of them took and took it to his mouth. I was struck to return the document. Inside the car was Orlando (her husband), a key asset for karate … They struck me in the kidneys and the head so that I return the paper … We started on the street … A woman came up: “What happened?” “A kidnapping,” I replied. (www.desdecuba. com / generaciony)
Three days after the incident on the streets of Havana, Yoani Sánchez received into his house the foreign press. Fernando Ravsberg, the BBC, noted that, despite all the torture described by it, “there were no bruises, marks or scars” (BBC World, 9/11/2009). This was confirmed by the images of CNN. The France Press reported that she “was not injured.”
In the BBC interview, Yoani Sánchez said that the marks and bruises had disappeared (in just 48 hours), except the buttocks, “which unfortunately can not show.” Now why, in the same day of the alleged kidnapping, it showed through his blog, lots of pictures, as he claimed to have in other parts of the body?
There was disclosed that the attack occurred in daylight, in front of a bus “full of people.” Foreign correspondents in Cuba have not found so far only one witness. And her husband refused to speak to the press.
The alleged attack on the Cuban blogger deserved more prominence in the media that a hundred murders, disappearances and acts of violence of the dictatorship of Honduras Roberto Micheletti, since June 27.
Yoani Sánchez was born in 1975, graduated in philology in 2000 and two years later, “before the disenchantment and economic strangulation of Cuba”, as mentioned in the blog, he moved to Switzerland with his son Teo. He worked in publishing and taught Spanish.
In 2004, he left the Swiss haven to return to Cuba, which it describes as “immense ideological prison walls. States that did it for family reasons. Anyone who reads the blog is terrified of hell Cuban described by her. Yet again.
Could not have secured a better future for the son in Switzerland? Why is returned against the wishes of the mother? “My mother refused to admit that his daughter no longer lived in Switzerland and chocolate milk (her blog, 14/08/2007).
In fact, the case of Yoani Sanchez is not alone. Many Cuban exiles return to the country after they were confronted with the difficulties of adapting to foreign prejudices against blacks and mulattos, the language barrier, lack of jobs. They know that despite the difficulties that the country is experiencing, in Cuba there will have food, shelter, education and free medical care and security because the crime rates there are negligible compared to the rest of Latin America.
What Yoani Sánchez does not show in your blog is that in Switzerland, begged the Cuban diplomats the right to return, they had not found stable work. And you know that in Cuba it can devote full time to blog, it is the rare countries in the world in which unemployed do not go hungry or live in the open …
The funny thing is that it never showed on his blog as street children who roam Havana, beggars played on the sidewalks, the poor families under the bridges … Neither she nor the foreign correspondents, and even the tourists who visit the island. Because there do not exist.
If there is such a lack of freedom in Cuba, as can Yoani Sánchez, inside, issue such great reviews? It is said that in Cuba everything is controlled, including access to the internet?
Detail: the niche Generación Y Sánchez is highly sophisticated, with entries for Facebook and Twitter. Receives 14 million visits per month and is available in 18 languages! Neither the Department of the USA has such a variety of languages. Who pays for translators abroad? Who is paying the high cost of flow of 14 million hits?
Yoani Sanchez has every right to criticize Cuba and the government of his country. But only the naive believe that this is a simple blogger. Nor is the victim of security or justice in Cuba. So he invented the story of aggression. Insists that his lies become reality.
The resistance to the blockade of Cuba USAmerican, the fall of the Soviet boycott of the Western media, uncomfortable, and very. Especially when you know that Cuban volunteers are more than 70 countries working mainly as doctors and teachers.
Capitalism, which excludes 4 million human beings of their basic benefits, it is not even capable of withstanding the fact that 11 million people in a poor country to live with dignity and feeling mirrored in the healthy and happy Buena Vista Social Club.
* Writer, adviser movements”.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 19:54
Articles
11/12/2009
Yoani Sanchez: between blogs and lies - The contradictions of Yoani
Frei Betto *
The world learned that, on 7 November last, the Cuban blogger Yoani Sanchez have been struck on the streets of Havana. According to her account, “threw me in a car pulled … a role that one of them took and took it to his mouth. I was struck to return the document. Inside the car was Orlando (her husband), a key asset for karate … They struck me in the kidneys and the head so that I return the paper … We started on the street … A woman came up: “What happened?” “A kidnapping,” I replied. (www.desdecuba. com / generaciony)
Three days after the incident on the streets of Havana, Yoani Sánchez received into his house the foreign press. Fernando Ravsberg, the BBC, noted that, despite all the torture described by it, “there were no bruises, marks or scars” (BBC World, 9/11/2009). This was confirmed by the images of CNN. The France Press reported that she “was not injured.”
In the BBC interview, Yoani Sánchez said that the marks and bruises had disappeared (in just 48 hours), except the buttocks, “which unfortunately can not show.” Now why, in the same day of the alleged kidnapping, it showed through his blog, lots of pictures, as he claimed to have in other parts of the body?
There was disclosed that the attack occurred in daylight, in front of a bus “full of people.” Foreign correspondents in Cuba have not found so far only one witness. And her husband refused to speak to the press.
The alleged attack on the Cuban blogger deserved more prominence in the media that a hundred murders, disappearances and acts of violence of the dictatorship of Honduras Roberto Micheletti, since June 27.
Yoani Sánchez was born in 1975, graduated in philology in 2000 and two years later, “before the disenchantment and economic strangulation of Cuba”, as mentioned in the blog, he moved to Switzerland with his son Teo. He worked in publishing and taught Spanish.
In 2004, he left the Swiss haven to return to Cuba, which it describes as “immense ideological prison walls. States that did it for family reasons. Anyone who reads the blog is terrified of hell Cuban described by her. Yet again.
Could not have secured a better future for the son in Switzerland? Why is returned against the wishes of the mother? “My mother refused to admit that his daughter no longer lived in Switzerland and chocolate milk (her blog, 14/08/2007).
In fact, the case of Yoani Sanchez is not alone. Many Cuban exiles return to the country after they were confronted with the difficulties of adapting to foreign prejudices against blacks and mulattos, the language barrier, lack of jobs. They know that despite the difficulties that the country is experiencing, in Cuba there will have food, shelter, education and free medical care and security because the crime rates there are negligible compared to the rest of Latin America.
What Yoani Sánchez does not show in your blog is that in Switzerland, begged the Cuban diplomats the right to return, they had not found stable work. And you know that in Cuba it can devote full time to blog, it is the rare countries in the world in which unemployed do not go hungry or live in the open …
The funny thing is that it never showed on his blog as street children who roam Havana, beggars played on the sidewalks, the poor families under the bridges … Neither she nor the foreign correspondents, and even the tourists who visit the island. Because there do not exist.
If there is such a lack of freedom in Cuba, as can Yoani Sánchez, inside, issue such great reviews? It is said that in Cuba everything is controlled, including access to the internet?
Detail: the niche Generación Y Sánchez is highly sophisticated, with entries for Facebook and Twitter. Receives 14 million visits per month and is available in 18 languages! Neither the Department of the USA has such a variety of languages. Who pays for translators abroad? Who is paying the high cost of flow of 14 million hits?
Yoani Sanchez has every right to criticize Cuba and the government of his country. But only the naive believe that this is a simple blogger. Nor is the victim of security or justice in Cuba. So he invented the story of aggression. Insists that his lies become reality.
The resistance to the blockade of Cuba USAmerican, the fall of the Soviet boycott of the Western media, uncomfortable, and very. Especially when you know that Cuban volunteers are more than 70 countries working mainly as doctors and teachers.
Capitalism, which excludes 4 million human beings of their basic benefits, it is not even capable of withstanding the fact that 11 million people in a poor country to live with dignity and feeling mirrored in the healthy and happy Buena Vista Social Club.
* Writer, adviser movements
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 19:34
John Two — Yes, it seems the writers/signers want to walk a thin line. Well who am I to take them to task for that. I am not there. Living their lives. But phrases such as “the unity of the revolutionary process” are pretty horrifying.
And how sad is it that there are nations of people taught to speak this way? Total crap speech meaning nothing.
Completely nothing. Where “The Revolutionary Process” = “Totalitarian Dictatorship”… all these words mean nothing.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 19:16
This is the paragraph of the letter that most leads me to share Yoani’s concern:
“The growing policy of conceiving of anyone who thinks or acts differently from what has been deemed “acceptable” as “dissidents,” “mercenaries,” or “counter-revolutionaries” has absolutely no impact on the real counter-revolution, whose image is only strengthened by this tendency to cede very little space for authentic socialist criticism under the tired justification “you’re either with me or against me.” When we refuse to respect a diversity of opinions we only succeed in weakening the unity of the revolutionary process.”
Is Yoani part of the “real counter-revolution” if she does not subscribe to the “unity of the revolutionary process”? If so, is Yoani excluded from those whose “diversity of opinions” should be respected?
The root problem in Cuba is not that the leadership of the Communist Party isn’t playing nice. The root problem is the hegemony that a small group of self-appointed individuals exercises over political, police and military power. A hegemony that uses all of the instruments of state power to silence, intimidate, harrass and/or imprison those who dare dissent.
Diciembre 29th, 2009 at 16:08
Exactly the same for me Yoani a Freedom that does not include all cubans will not be freedom at all!