Kudos to Australia's Green Party

According to The Irrawaddy News:

Australian Senator Criticizes Exports to Burma

A senator from the Australian Greens party has called on an Australian company to stop selling high-frequency radio sets to Burma's military junta, saying they are being used by the regime in its operations against ethnic minorities.

Sen. Scott Ludlam of Western Australia said radios sold by Barrett Communications are capable of frequency-hopping and encryption, making radio traffic impossible to intercept. He said this assists the Burmese military in its campaigns against ethnic armed groups and that the exports must be stopped.

"We don't believe there should be two-way trade between Australia and Burma at all … but there certainly shouldn't be two-way trade in sensitive military equipment such as this," he said in an interview with Radio Australia.

"The Burmese regime is a criminal regime, it's entirely illegitimate and it is very inappropriate for Australian companies to be doing business with that regime," he added.

Congressional Trips to Cuba

On Monday, Spanish parliamentarian Luis Yanez was prohibited from entering Cuba by the Castro regime.

The reason for this prohibition was his intention to meet with human rights activists while in Cuba.

However, Yanez is not the first Spanish parliamentarian to be denied entry to Cuba for wanting to meet with human rights activists.

In 2004, another Spanish parliamentarian, Jorge Moragas, was turned back at the airport in Havana (along with two Dutch parliamentarians). In 2005, two others were rejected. And in 2007, over a dozen leaders of a Catalonian political party were prohibited from entering Cuba to visit with the Ladies in White (an organization composed of the wives, mother and daughters of Cuban political prisoners).

There have also been various Eastern European parliamentarians that have consistently been denied entry or expelled from the island for the same reason.

Which raises the following question about trips to Cuba by Members of the U.S. Congress, and their staffs, that periodically travel to the island hosted by the Castro regime or NGO's that oppose U.S. policy:

Do they visit with human rights activists and pro-democracy leaders during these trips? Or is their scope limited to the "dog-and-pony" show approved by the Castro regime?

For example, we know that the regime repeatedly denies a visa to U.S. Reps. Chris Smith of New Jersey and Frank Wolf of Virginia, who every year request to visit with the families of political prisoners, pro-democracy leaders and human rights activists.

So what about those Members that do get visas?

It would be shameful if these trips -- as they appear -- are limited to visiting the Castro dictatorship and its cronies.

Perhaps all of the "vetoed" parliamentarians should ask U.S. Reps. Jeff Flake and Bill Delahunt how to "behave" in order to be allowed in.

Dictatorship Engagement 101

From the Wall Street Journal's Editorial Board:

A Cuban Education for Spain's Socialists

Havana once again makes clear that tyrants are just as intolerant of dissent abroad as they are at home.

On Monday, Spanish politician Luis Yáñez-Barnuevo García was expelled from Cuba hours after landing there on a tourist visa. The rebuff of the Socialist Member of the European Parliament has sent Madrid into waves of pique, summoning Cuba's ambassador and demanding an explanation. Strange, given Madrid's closeness to the Castro regime, that it should still require an education on the Communist dictatorship's modus operandi.

Along with many others in the Spanish political elite, Mr. Yáñez has pushed for stronger ties with Cuba. But unlike Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Ángel Moratinos -- who knew better than to meet with any families of political prisoners, independent journalists, or human-rights organizations when he traveled to Cuba in October -- Mr. Yáñez was reportedly planning to rendezvous with such dissident groups and has harshly criticized civil rights in Cuba. In fact, this is not the first time Mr. Yáñez has been denied entry to the island. Spanish daily El Mundo reports that Mr. Yáñez was refused a visa in July 2008, when he was invited to attend a meeting of the dissident group Arco Progresista.

The Spanish-Cuban fracas is really a case study in Dictatorship Engagement 101, and mirrors Barack Obama's own efforts to draw Cuba closer. Early in his presidency, Mr. Obama offered warm words of a new beginning with Havana. He also loosened travel restrictions and limits on cash remittances to the island. But Washington's failure to ditch funding for anti-Castro radio and TV broadcasts, as well as its continued support of Cuban democracy activists, has stopped the rapprochement in its tracks. Last month an American government subcontractor was arrested in Cuba and is still being held, reportedly after having distributed mobile phones and laptops to Cuban activists. At a meeting of Latin American leftists last month, Raúl Castro affirmed that the "confrontation between two historic forces is becoming more acute."

In other words, it doesn't much matter what Mr. Yáñez, or Mr. Obama, or any other left-of-center politician, has in common with the Castros, or with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or with Hugo Chávez. What matters is whether they ignore their mistreatment of their own people. As Havana has once again made clear this week, tyrants are just as intolerant of dissent abroad as they are at home.

A Ponzi Dictatorship?

As the Castro regime faces few options to economically and politically sustain its struggling dictatorship, a group of off-shore investors sees an opportunity to begin a series of debt-for-equity deals that would make them the new de facto masters of the island.

According to the Miami Herald,

"A group of foreign investors is seeking a U.S. government license to buy claims against Cuba for American-owned properties seized in the 1960s, and then swap them with Havana in a debt-for-equity exchange."

These investors have created a company, Clarinbridge, to acquire these claims. Clarinbridge, in turn, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Siboney Limited, which is based in the off-shore, tax-haven Isle of Man (located in the Irish Sea between the islands of Great Britain and Ireland).

Basically, Clarinbridge wants to acquire a sufficient number of U.S.-based claims in order to place itself in a bargaining position with the Castro regime. Thereafter, it could proceed to negotiate a stake in the island's monopolies hoping that upon the regime's eventual collapse (or per se, default), it would exert control over Castro's most lucrative business sectors.

This strategy is akin to the equity stakes built by Russia's technocrats-turned-oligarchs upon the collapse of communism in the USSR, except that Cuba's new oligarchs would be off-shore foreign investors.

So when do the Cuban people get to weigh-in on these issues?

If the Castro regime and Clarinbridge cut a deal in the short-term -- either too late or never.

Mr. Robinson's (Misinformed) Inconvenience

The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson has written an opinion editorial today criticizing the Obama Administration's inclusion of Cuba in the State Department's list of "state-sponsors of terrorism."

His criticism was sparked by the new rules requiring passengers traveling from the four remaining "state-sponsors of terrorism" nations -- Cuba, Syria, Sudan and Iran -- to undergo further screening when traveling to the U.S.

Nonetheless, Mr. Robinson's rationale is both contradictory and misinformed.

For example, he argues against Cuba's designation because,

"Cuba is not a failed state where swaths of territory lie beyond government control; rather, it is one of the most tightly locked-down societies in the world, a place where the idea of private citizens getting their hands on plastic explosives, or terrorist weapons of any kind, is simply laughable."

If that were the litmus test, then only Sudan would be remain on the list, as Syria and Iran are also "locked-down societies" without "swaths of territory beyond government control."

Furthermore, the list refers to "states" that support terrorism, that's why they are called "state-sponsors" of terrorism; not "citizen-sponsors." The Iranian and Cuban people, particularly the younger generations, are quite sympathetic to the U.S. -- it's the oppressive regimes in those countries that are anti-American.

Mr. Robinson then sarcastically remarks that,

"Cuba is on the list because the State Department still considers it -- along with Iran, Sudan and Syria -- to be a state sponsor of terrorism.

Really? Despite the fact that the U.S. Interests Section in Havana was one of the few American diplomatic posts in the world to remain open for normal business, with no apparent increased security, in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks?"

He apparently didn't read the following article last October:

"In the six months after the 9/11 attacks, up to 20 Cubans walked into U.S. embassies around the world and offered information on terrorism threats. Eventually, all were deemed to be Cuban intelligence agents and collaborators, purveying fabricated information.

A White House official complained bitterly and publicly in 2002 that Fidel Castro's agents had tried to send U.S. intelligence on 'wild goose' chases that could cost lives at a time when Washington was reeling from the worst terrorism attacks in history.

But now two former U.S. government experts on Cuba have told El Nuevo Herald that the post-9/11 "walk-ins" were part of a permanent Havana intelligence program -- both before and long after 9/11 -- that sends Cuban agents to U.S. embassies to mislead, misinform and identify U.S. spies, perhaps even to penetrate U.S. intelligence."

Surely, we feel for any time-related inconvenience that Mr. Robinson might encounter during his next trip back from Havana.

But that's no reason to overlook the facts.

Afro-Cubans Demand Civil Rights

Afro-Cuban pro-democracy activists have written a letter in support of the solidarity initiative launched last month by African-American academic, business and political leaders, calling for an end to the hostilities by the Castro regime against human and civil rights advocates in Cuba.

The following excerpt from the letter also addresses those that falsely accuse U.S. policy as the culprit of the Cuban people's deprivations and highlights the detrimental effects of leisure tourists and other foreigners that partake in the regime's propaganda:

"It's very likely that the majority of African-Americans are unaware of the humanitarian aid offered by the government of the United States and other institutions -- including by Cubans living in that country -- to Cuba pursuant to the devastation caused by three recent hurricanes that left the island in shambles. The "humane" government under which we Cubans have suffered for fifty years refused to accept this aid saying it was "blood money" and giving other excuses that we are used to. That aid would have benefited the entire population -- including Afro-Cubans -- and without any other condition than the wish to help a population in need of economic and democratic support. Today we can see the havoc wreaked by that decision, with the black population suffering most as a result.

To those that refute the struggle against racism that since the 1960's our brother-in-exile Carlos Moore has undertaken, we recommend that -- before accusing him -- they come and visit the island for no less than a three month stay. But not to stay in a hotel with a taxi at the door. If they really want to experience first-hand how black people live in Cuba, they should stay amongst us. In other words, in any neighborhood of Havana or of the provinces, to eat what a regular citizen eats, and then -- and only then -- pass judgment on the reality of black people in Cuba without any propaganda or official favoritism telling them what to do or say.

Those of us that sign this letter believe it was an act of courage and altruism for our African-American brothers and sisters to have expressed solidarity with our cause. The signatories of that important document are on the side of truth. Everything they exposed is the reality of the racial challenges and daily abuse directed against black people in Cuba."

Signatories:

Raúl Pérez Díaz, Internal Medicine Doctor
José Idelfonso Vélez, Coordinator of the National Movement for Racial Integration (MIR)
Hildelbrando Chaviano Montes, Attorney, Coordinator of the MIR
Eliozbel Garriga Cabreras, Delegate of the MIR for Pinar del Río
Esperanza Almeira Cordero, Executive Secretary of the MIR
Osvaldo Ricardo Díaz Sánchez, Delegate of the MIR for Villa Clara
Rafael Bueno, Member of the MIR
Aída Chaviano Montes, Activist of the MIR
Manuel Aguirre Lavarrere, Poet and Coordinator of the Afro-Cuba Cultural Movement
Leonardo Hernández Camejo, Activist of the MIR
Yolanda lázara Martínez Vargas, Vice-President of the Afro-Cuban Cultural Movement
Iris Tamara Pérez Aguilera, President of the Rosa Parks Feminist Movement
Heriberto Portilla, Activist of the MIR
Héctor Palacio Ruiz, Sociologist, Member of the MIR
Guillermo Fariñas, Activist of the MIR
Gisela Delgado Sablón, Activist of the MIR
Tania de la Torre Montesino, Activist of the MIR
Juan Goberna, Member of the Committee for Human Rights and National Reconciliation
Norberto Mesa, Member of the Black Brotherhood
Pedro Luís Sabat, Activist of the MIR
Giselle López Delegada, Member of the Afro-Cuban Cultural Movement
Rubén Carty Lowe, Independent Journalist
Rubén Gonzalez, Member of the Afro-Cuban Cultural Movement
Rosario Morales La Rosa, Activist of the MIR
Jorge Luis García Pérez (Antúnez), Cuban Political Prisoners Party

Quote of the Week

"With Obama's election, it's not that black Cubans became pro-U.S. or pro-Washington, but they said, 'A black man can become elected head of state in a country that we were always told was racist -- but here we are with [a majority] and we cannot come into power.'"
 
- Carlos Moore, Afro-Cuban scholar on the effect of U.S. President Barack Obama's election on the Cuban "street," Los Angeles Times, January 3rd, 2010

Spanish Socialist Dignitary Snubbed

Last month, the Castro regime prohibited at least five U.S.-based religious groups from entering the island to provide humanitarian aid to the Cuban people, as confirmed by the State Department to The Miami Herald.

Advocates of giving the Cuban dictatorship a "free pass" for its repression argued that this was surely due to the arrest of an American citizen for distributing information technology to the Cuban people.

Well, MSNBC is now reporting,

"Spain's Foreign Ministry summoned the Cuban ambassador Monday to explain why a Spanish politician was denied entry and held for a couple of hours before being sent back home.

It was unjustifiable that Luis Yanez, a Socialist who now holds a seat representing Spain at the European Parliament and has served under a previous Spanish government, was not allowed to enter Cuba, the ministry said in a statement."

So why has the Castro regime denied entry to this Spanish parliamentarian?

Please note that this parliamentarian belongs to the same Spanish Socialist Party that has done back-flips to politically and economically appease the regime.

Is it because he planned to visit with dissidents while in Cuba?

Perhaps.

Either way, it highlights the one constant in the Castro regime's behavior:

Only beach-going tourists (and politicians subject to the dictatorship's "dog-and-pony" visits) are guaranteed entry.

If you plan on engaging (or God-forbid, providing support to) the Cuban people, you need not apply.

Caribbean Jitters About Varadero

The Cayman Island's Net News recently published an editorial, "The return of Americans to Cuba," addressing the detrimental effects that U.S. tourism travel to Cuba will eventually have on most Caribbean nations.

Which raises to two questions for policymakers:

Does the U.S. want to critically damage the economies of Caribbean democracies in order to benefit the current owner (and main beneficiary) of Cuba's tourism industry, the Cuban military?

Shouldn't the wealth and income of U.S. tourists go to the Cuban people, when they are freely able to participate in the island's tourism industry, as opposed to financing their oppressors?

The Cayman Net News editorial sets the premise:

"[W]hether American tourists will return to Cuba will hinge on debate in Congress, where opponents say sanctions should not be lifted until Cuba frees political prisoners and undertakes democratic reforms to its one-party state. Whist this may not be an event that our own tourism industry will have to face in 2010, surely such a change in the established order of things is inevitable sooner or later.

There is no doubt that Cuba is the sleeping giant of our region and, compared to the Cayman Islands, has vast resources of raw materials, agricultural products and labor, all at greatly reduced cost in comparison to what is typical here.

Indeed, given the proximity and the historical family and other connections between Cuba and the Cayman Islands, Cuba is far more of a natural trading partner than some Central American countries that have been receiving attention in the past.

To our mind, Cuba therefore represents both an opportunity for increased trade and co-operation, as well as an eventual threat as a competitor for tourism dollars."

And concludes that:

"Clearly, we are not going to be able to compete with the initial novelty value of Cuba as a 'new' vacation destination for Americans but we should be planning for the inevitable and doing our best to profit from it instead of relying on the customary knee-jerk reaction.

The tourism sector in the Cayman Islands has been facing some significant challenges in recent years and will continue to do so in the years ahead. Another strong regional competitor in the shape of Cuba is not going to make life any easier for tourism stakeholders."

The Real "Cuban Mafia"

According to the Miami Herald:

"A multimillionaire Venezuelan businessman, currently jailed in Caracas on bank fraud charges, had been sent to Cuba by President Hugo Chávez to help the country recover from its economic slump and also to spur economic growth on the island after Fidel Castro dies, according to former employees.

In an initial show of his new responsibility, looking for a personal benefit from future business in Cuba, Ricardo Fernández Barruecos gave the Cuban government a gift of 28 BMW automobiles, his former security consultant Luis Castro said in a sworn statement."

Fraud, mafia-like cartels, blackmail and kickbacks. That's the Castro regime's economic policy.

Is this whom the U.S. wants to reward with billions of dollars worth of U.S. tourism, trade and financing?

Five Decades of Forced Labor

According to Dominican Today:

"A total of 96 illegal Dominican boatpeople who set out on November 13, 2008, for Puerto Rico, are being forced to work in sugarcane plantations in Cuba, family members said.

According to Eriko Cuba, spokesman for the migrants' relatives, the group left on a "yola" from the coast of the northeastern town of Samana but was forced to land in Cuba due to rough weather while crossing the Mona Passage, which separates the Dominican Republic from Puerto Rico.

Eriko said that on Tuesday Wellington Mayobanex Aquino Suarez –one of the illegal migrants– telephoned police in the Dominican town of Villa Riva, where most of the group is from, so officers could inform their relatives of their situation."

We hope that these Dominican migrants may soon be released and reunited with their families.

Similarly, we hope that Cuba's 11.5 million people may also be freed from the five decades of forced labor that they've been subjected to in Castro's gulag.

A Bargain for the Kim's and Castro's

According to the New York Times:

"North Korea called on Friday for an end to 'the hostile relationship' with the United States, issuing a New Year's message that highlighted the reclusive country's attempt to readjust the focus of six-party nuclear disarmament talks."

Of course, North Korea only did so "while calling for efforts to boost foreign trade." Actually, most of its New Year's message was focused on its beleaguered totalitarian economy.

Sound familiar?

"If the American government really wants to advance relations with Cuba, I recommend they leave behind the conditions of internal governance that they are trying to impose on us," Raul Castro told his National Assembly in December.

Castro made this statement within days of a senior regime official pitching U.S. tourism industry executives (hosted by the U.S. Tour Operators Association) for business in Washington, D.C.

Basically, North Korea's Kim Jong-Il and Cuba's Raul Castro want the U.S. to unconditionally recognize and finance their totalitarian, nepotistic, illegitimate, repressive regimes, so that they can continue terrorizing their populations and fomenting their destabilizing regional agendas without repercussions.

That's quite a bargain for the Kim and Castro families, but at too great a cost for the North Korean and Cuban people, not to mention for U.S. interests.

The (Self-Appointed) King is Dead

According to the AP:

A panel of Afro-Cuban priests are predicting a year of social and political unrest, struggles for power, treachery and coups d'etat, and they say the world will see the death of an inordinate number of political leaders in 2010.

In the forecast announced Saturday, they recommended older leaders move aside and make room for the young, a politically delicate statement in a country that has been led by brothers Fidel and Raul Castro for more than half a century.

''The older generations should pass their experience on to young people because times change, and the younger generation is better prepared,'' said Victor Bentancourt, one of the island's leading Santeria priests, or babalawos. ''Time is growing short'' for such a change.

They said the year could be summed up with the saying: ''The King is dead; long live the King'' the traditional shout announcing a monarchical succession.

EDITOR'S NOTE: May Olofi help us.

Confounded by Pope John Paul II

This may not be the most appropriate post during the Christmas season.

However, the Vatican's L'Osservatore Romano newspaper recently published an interview with Cardinal Roberto Tucci, who was in charge of Pope John Paul II's numerous (and historic) trips around the world.

Amongst his anecdotes, Tucci recalls a trip to Chile in 1987, where Pope John Paul II became infuriated with former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. The Pope had been an ardent critic of Pinochet and did not want to appear in public with him. Yet Pinochet tricked him into appearing together on the balcony of the Presidential Palace in Santiago.

Pope John Paul II's rejection of the Pinochet dictatorship, not to mention his opposition to the Communist regimes of Eastern Europe, is nothing less than admirable.

However, our Cuba-centric focus leads us to ask:

Was Pinochet more of a dictator than Fidel Castro?

No.

Did Pinochet execute more people than Fidel Castro?

No.

Did Pinochet repress religion more than Fidel Castro?

Quite the contrary.

So then, why was the Pope so willing to appear publicly with Fidel Castro during his 1998 visit to Cuba? Was he just older and less confrontational by that time? Or did Fidel trick him also?

Confounding indeed, for a dictator is a dictator.

Relegated to the Dustbin of Despots

From the Editorial Board of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

Cuba's paranoia

Get caught spreading pro-democracy materials or even humanitarian aid in Cuba and chances are you'll sample the Castros' hospitality behind bars.

The communist island dictatorship that employs one of the most aggressive intelligence networks in the world remains committed against even the lowest level of outside interference -- and is as paranoid as ever.

"If you work for a human rights organization, it's naive to think they don't know who you are," says one expert on Havana's autocracy.

Earlier this month Cuban authorities arrested an American subcontractor for a Maryland economic development firm. Reportedly he was distributing cell phones and laptops in Cuba. President Raul Castro insists the American was supplying opposition groups with satellite communication equipment and accuses the Obama administration of maintaining hostile policies.

Although Raul says he's open to a "respectful dialogue" with the U.S., bitter brother Fidel remains ever critical of the Obama administration.

So much for Washington "recasting" its relationship with Cuba, in part by attempting to soften a 47-year trade embargo. For all its ill-advised efforts the U.S. has done nothing to change a narrow mind-set whose priority remains iron-fisted control.

Nothing will change in Cuba until the brothers Castro are relegated to history's dustbin of despots.

Kudos to the MH Editorial Board

From The Miami Herald's Editorial Board:

Cuba's vitriol

OUR OPINION: After 51 years, Cuba's leadership sticks to dictatorial script

As Cubans end 51 years of living under the Castro brothers' rule, the regime continues to crack down on bloggers, artists, dissidents and others who dare question the communist dictatorship.

Sometimes it can seem that little will ever change. But it's clear that a new generation of Cubans raised on the government's anti-U.S. propaganda aren't buying it.

It's clear, too, that efforts in Congress to drop the U.S. travel ban on Cuba have stalled, and for good reason. Even those who have tried to work with Fidel and Raúl Castro to improve U.S.-Cuba relations are questioning the Cuban regime's true intentions.

The latest to do so is four-star retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, former White House drug czar and SouthCom commander who has called for lifting the travel ban. He cancelled a Jan. 3-6 trip to the island after Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Ródriguez went on the attack, calling President Obama an "imperial and arrogant liar.''

The general noted that "this type of shallow and vitriolic 1960's public diplomacy makes Cuban leadership appear to be non-serious, polemical amateurs. President Obama is the most thoughtful and non-ideological U.S. chief executive that the Cubans have seen in 50 years. . . . [Rodriguez's] speech probably slammed the window shut on U.S. congressional and administration leaders being willing to support bringing Cuba back into the community of nations.''

Gen. McCaffrey also pointed out that Raúl Castro "mentioned Cuba's recent `war games' to prepare for U.S. invasion. What a laughable assertion of an external U.S. military threat.''

That old Castro script would be laughable, too, if it hadn't caused so much suffering on both sides of the Florida Straits. The general deserves praise for calling it like it is.