Tourism Apartheid and Complicit Foreigners

In today's Huffington Post, Cuban blogger Yoani Sanchez discovers that Castro's tourism apartheid persists and that it doesn't bother foreign visitors one bit:

We arrived at the dock half an hour early. The sun-burnt tourists began to board the boat. [My husband] and I reached the spectacular corner from where we took photos of that bay as big as an ocean. The dream lasted barely five minutes. When the captain heard us talking he asked if we were Cubans. He shortly informed us that we had to go ashore, "boat rides are prohibited for nationals at every marina in the country." Rage, anger, the shame of carrying a blue passport makes us guilty -- in advance -- in the eyes of the law of our own nation. A feeling of deception on comparing the official discourse of a supposed opening with the reality of exclusion and stigma. We wanted to cause a scene and cling to the railing, to compel them to remove us by force, but what would it have served? My husband dusted off his French and told the group of Europeans what was happening. They looked surprised, whispered among themselves. None of them disembarked -- in solidarity with the excluded -- from that coastal tour of our island; none of them found it intolerable to enjoy something that is forbidden to us, its natives.

Smoke-and-Mirror Reforms

Excerpt from Jose Cardenas' "Cuba's Smoke-and-Mirror Reforms" in Foreign Policy:

[S]weep away the hype and all you see are daunting hurdles as to how this [property sales] announcement will change in any way the regime's suffocating control of the Cuban population. The new order restricts people to "ownership" of one permanent residence and one vacation home (as if the average Cuban is in any position to own a second home); all transactions must be approved by the State; no explanation is given on how you grant titles to homes that either have been confiscated from their rightful owners, have been swapped multiple times in the underground economy, or which house multiple families because of the severe shortage of available housing; the construction industry remains state-controlled; and the regime itself admits this order reflects no backsliding on the preeminence of the State in controlling the country's economic and political systems.

Beyond these challenges, however, is the fundamental fact that you cannot conjure private property rights, let alone the free trade in property, out of thin air. Those rights exist only where they are rooted in a credible, impartial, and transparent legal superstructure that can protect one's property, settle disputes, and guarantee transactions against the predations of the State. Anything less is a rigged game where the State is the dealer.

This is how the State Department's annual Human Rights Report characterizes Cuba's judicial system: "While the constitution recognizes the independence of the judiciary, the judiciary is subordinate to the imperatives of the socialist state. The National Assembly appoints all judges and can remove them at any time. Through the National Assembly, the state exerted near-total influence over the courts and their rulings... Civil courts, like all courts in the country, lack an independent or impartial judiciary as well as effective procedural guarantees."

Translation: Cubans' ability to "own" property, trade, or leverage their property to build capital will continue to exist at the sufferance of the State. And what the State giveth, the State can taketh away. The bottom line is that, ultimately, all Cubans will really own is a piece of paper that says they own something.

The Foreign Oil Spill Liability Act

From The Hill:

Four members of the House — including two who were born in Cuba — proposed legislation last week that would hold foreign offshore oil drilling operations accountable for all damages related to oil spills that affect U.S. waters.

The Foreign Oil Spill Liability Act, H.R. 3393, is a reaction to news that Cuba is looking to drill for oil in waters that are 90 miles off the Florida coast, which bill sponsors fear could lead to spills that harm the coast. The bill is sponsored by Rep. David Rivera (R-Fla.), and co-sponsored by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) and Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) and Albio Sires (D-N.J.). Both Ros-Lehtinen and Sires were born in Cuba.

"This bill seeks accountability from responsible foreign parties, in the event of an oil spill that affects American waters and shores, by ensuring that they pay for all cleanup and compensation costs," Rivera said. "While the responsible party is held liable for American-sourced oil spills, there is a much lower level of responsibility for foreign-sourced spills.

"American taxpayers and state governments should not be footing the bill for cleanup and compensation costs from a foreign oil spill," he added.

Rivera says that under current law, the cost of cleaning up foreign oil spills that affect the U.S. is paid for out of the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. Money that goes into that fund comes from taxes on oil companies, transfers from other pollution funds, interest earned on existing funds, and cost recovery money and penalties paid by parties responsible for a spill.

Under the bill, oil spills originating in countries designated as state sponsors of terrorism are subject to triple the liability and penalty amounts, which also seems aimed at Cuba.

"The Castro regime, that has as much regard for environmental safety as it does for human rights, seeks to drill for oil less than 90 miles off the coast of Florida, posing a direct threat to our state's environment and economy," Rivera said. "While the White House and the U.S. Department of the Interior help facilitate this drilling, in possible violation of the embargo, I am sponsoring this important piece of legislation to ensure that Florida taxpayers are not made to pay for an environmental disaster caused by a terrorist regime."

Aside from Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria as also designated as state sponsors of terrorism.

Whose Side is the State Department On?

In January 2011, the State Department unilaterally expanded non-humanitarian travel and remittances to Cuba, despite an American hostage being held by the Castro regime.

This has resulted in trips featuring salsa dancing, cigar factory tours, baseball games and even visits with the Castro regime's neighborhood repression committees (CDR's, Committee for the Defense of the Revolution).

Just prior to that, the Justice Department -- at the behest of the State Department -- intervened on behalf of the Castro regime and its business partners against a U.S. citizen who was trying to collect a 2001 judgment awarded to her by a U.S. court in a suit against the Castro regime.

And now, the State Department has similarly intervened in a suit by former American hostages against the Iranian regime.

Here's an excerpt from former American hostage Moorehead Kennedy's recent editorial in Politico:

Congress has passed various statutes, allowing US nationals, victimized by terrorism, to obtain compensation for injuries. Literally hundreds have pursued claims in U.S. courts and received compensation for terrorism sponsored by Iran, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, Cuba, Sudan, North Korea and Libya.

The Tehran embassy hostages also sought to pursue similar claims in U.S. Courts. In August 2001, we obtained a judgment against Iran — which had refused to appear to defend their indefensible conduct. But the State Department intervened to protect Iran’s interests, asserting that dismissal was necessary to protect U.S. national security interests and uphold the waiver of claims in the Algiers Accords.

Though Congress later enacted numerous statutes (some specifying that the State Department’s position did not reflect the official views of the U.S. government, while others confirmed our right to pursue our claims), the court ultimately granted the department’s motion.

In the next 10 years, all our appeals, and other efforts to obtain justice and compensation, have been defeated by the State Department. At the same time, the department has aggressively protected the rights of all U.S. corporations and banks to seek compensation from Iran. Indeed each claim has been adjudicated, and literally billions of dollars awarded, through these channels and paid by Iran.

The signal that Iran has drawn from this is clear – the U.S. cares about protecting interests of its corporations — but has no real interest in protecting its diplomats, no matter the State Department’s lip service about to the importance of diplomatic immunity and the sacrosanct status of our embassies.

The Repression Rundown

A rundown of last week's repression against pro-democracy activists compiled by the Coalition of Cuban-American Women:

Alcides Rivera Rodriguez and Rolando Ferrer Espinosa, two activists on a hunger strike since September 28, 2011, protesting the Cuban regime’s violence against peaceful activists in the island; both admitted respectively, on October 27 and 28, 2011, to the Provincial Hospital Arnaldo Milian in the central city of Santa Clara, were forced out of the medical center by special police forces that had militarized the building.

Ferrer Espinosa, was hoisted away on Monday, October 31st to his home in spite of the fact that he was on supplemental oxygen, was shaking due to a high fever, is weak after losing more than 30 lbs. of body weight, and has severe respiratory ailments as well as metabolic acidosis. On November 2, Alcides Rivera, who was diagnosed with bronchial pneumonia and has lost almost 60 lbs, was also forcibly taken out of the hospital. Both Alcides and Rolando declared that they will continue their hunger strike.

On the afternoon of October 31, when Rolando Ferrer was taken out of the hospital by State Security agents, a group of human rights defenders who had gone to the hospital in solidarity with both hunger strikers, were violently arrested: Idania Yanes Contreras, Damaris Moya Portieles, Olga Lilia González Barroso, Alexey Sotolongo Díaz, Enrique Martínez Marín, Orlando Alfonso Martínez, Jorge Ramírez Calderón, René Fernández Quiroga, José Lino Ascencio López, Jorge Alberto Liriano Linares, Yasmín Conledo Riverón, Yusmani Rafael Álvarez Esmori, Yanisbel Valido Pérez, and Víctor Castillo Ortega.

The activist, Julio Columbie, who was taking care of Ferrer Espinosa’s in the hospital room was beaten and taken away in a brutal manner. Alcides Rivera Vázquez, son of Alcides Rivera and Zuleika Cepero Méndez, wife of Rolando Ferrer were also taken into custody.

Jorge Luis García Pérez “Antúnez” and his wife, Iris Tamara Pérez Aguilera, of the National Civic Resistance Front were beaten and dragged out of the intensive care unit where they were accompanying Alcides Rivera, as other patients screamed at the agents to stop the mistreatment.

After all pro-democracy activists were taken to the Unidad Provincial de Operaciones (UPO), they were dispersed to different municipalities in the province of Villa Clara and released by November 3rd. Alberto Reyes Morán, Michele Oliva López and Ramón Arboláez Abreu were subjected to short term detention when they appeared at (UPO) to inquire about the wellbeing of their fellow human rights activists. Also, as they were on their way to the Arnaldo Milian Hospital, Jorge Vázquez Chaviano, Nosbel Jomarca Deubides, Maidelis González Almeida and Yosmel Martínez Corcho were taken down from a bus in the outskirts of the city of Sagua la Grande and remained detained
for a few hours.

On November 1, 2011, when activist Guillermo Fariñas tried to see Alcides Rivera at the hospital, he was brutally arrested and released on Thursday, November 3.

The particular case of the human rights defender and member of the Central Opposition Coalition, Idania Llanes Contreras, wife of Alcides Rivera, is alarming. On Wednesday, following the brutal beating on October 31, and still under custody,Idania developed a high fever and painful joints, began to shiver, to vomit and had a profuse vaginal bleeding. A physician at the detention center who saw her told her she might have dengue, that "there was a lot of dengue going around." Once released she required medical assistance at a hospital and following laboratory tests, a doctor told Idania she had an “unkown virus”. Idania was arrested and held in the same prison cell with the activists Yanisbel Valido and Damaris Portieles.

Testimony given by Idania Llanes describing their arrest:

"I was attacked by three policewomen who dealt three blows to my head as I was being dragged by my hair into a vehicle, they were beating me all over my body, specially on my abdomen…I didn’t realize that they had caused a stab wound to my left hand and scratches on my back with a metallic object. We discovered wounds in our bodies caused by sharp instruments. Damaris was thrown to the ground and hit her head so hard she almost passed out. Yanisbel was choked to the point that her face was red, so red…"

In Havana, this Sunday, November 7, 2011, though forty Ladies in White atended mass in the Church of Santa Rita and were able to march through Fifth Avenue with the image of Laura Pollan, at least six women were threatened by the political police to prevent their participation in the mass and the peaceful march. Among them were: Magaly Norvis Otero, Sandra Guerra, Elizabeth Kawooya and Dignora Figueredo.

Also this Sunday in Santiago de Cuba, a priest, several nuns and parishoners interceded on behalf of seven Ladies in White so that the police would not subject them to acts of repudiation and attacks. The women who were taken away by a car provided by nuns at the Cathedral of Santiago de Cuba were: Belkis Cantillo Ramírez, Aimee Garcés Leiva, Mari Blanca Ávila Expósito, Oria Casanova Moreno, Adriana Núñez Pascual, Tania Bandera González, and Tania Montoya.

El Sexto's Moral Axiom

Last month, famed Cuban artist Danilo Maldonado, known as "El Sexto," was confronted by a group of unknown men, hooded and forcibly thrown into a white Russian Lada.

El Sexto, known for his critical graffiti art, was taken to Castro's state security headquarters (Villa Marista), where he was arbitrarily held and threatened for over a week before being released.

Anticipating his eventual arrest, El Sexto had left a note (see below), which read:

“To conquer me you need weapons, police, jails; to conquer you I only need spray paint and this paper.”

As the Ladies in White and other brave pro-democracy activists brave the Castro regime's repressive forces this Sunday, it's important to remember this moral axiom.

The Truth About Castro's Home Sales

Note the Central Bank caveat.

By Yoani Sanchez in Huffington Post:

The Paseo del Prado has been unsettled for the last couple of days, and not just because of the hustlers hustling and the hookers trolling for tourists. The uproar comes from the new Decree-Law No. 288 which establishes rules for the buying and selling of housing. A long-awaited measure that finally sees the light of day in the Official Gazette, to the relief of many and concern of others.

In the spontaneous housing exchange that exists on this pedestrian promenade bordered by bronze lions, the curious ask about the details of a measure undoubtedly more flexible, but still insufficient. They want to know if the property title that they have in their hands grants them, starting now, full rights to assign, inherit or sell their houses. In a nation that has lived for decades with a frozen real estate market, they find it hard to believe that everything will be as easy as some speculate, or as legal as the Ministry of Justice assures us.

One of the principal fears on the street now is concern about how the Central Bank will rule on the legitimacy of money used to buy real estate. Because for every transaction of this type, the cash must first be deposited in an account and the distrustful clients of our banking system fear that it could end up being confiscated if the state decides it didn't come from "clean" sources.

But to every risk people will respond with some kind of trick, so I imagine that from now on the funds declared and placed in the bank will be a half or a third of the real cost of the house. The rest will pass from one hand to another, from one pocket to another. For too long we have behaved like outlaws in this area, so one shouldn't expect that starting now everything will be done according to the 16 pages of the new decree.

There is also the possibility of a migratory stampede, because "the act of owners transferring their housing, before permanently leaving the country, is legal under the act." Thousands of Cubans have been waiting for this signal, like runners crouched at the starting line waiting for the gun to go off. The high costs of immigration procedures will be covered by the sale of homes that will be offered for sale in the real estate market. A house, for forty years an anchor, will become a set of wings.

It's notable, of course, that the new measure includes the tenuous twine that pulls the piñata out of reach, already evidenced in the decree about the sale of cars. The wedge of the pie reserved only for those ideologically most-trusted owners was expressed this time in Point 110. It states, "the Executive Committee of the Council of Ministers and its President will be able to decide, with respect to housing located in determined areas of the country." We will see the map of the Island riddled with patches where the requirements to buy and sell will not be written anywhere.

The so-called "frozen zones" will grow and the social differences -- so often denied -- will flourish, particularly that deep abyss that separates those trusted who are with money from those citizens with resources not sanctified by power.

The Truth About Castro's Car Sales

From The New York Times:

[L]ike several of Mr. Castro’s other changes, the new law created a pocket of economic liberty in a market that remains tightly controlled. Cubans can purchase and own more than one used vehicle, and they will no longer lose their car if they emigrate.

However, the right to buy a new car is still limited to a narrow group of Cubans who earn some foreign currency, including doctors, artists, musicians, members of airline flight crews and the handful of Cubans who work at the American naval base at Guantánamo Bay.

“There’s no logic to these rules,” said Leopoldo, a taxi driver who works the road between Havana and Güira de Melena, about 20 miles away, in a shiny 1985 Tatra. He asked that his full name not be used because he feared angering the authorities.

“But there’s no logic to anything in this country,” Leopoldo added [...]

Previously, Cubans could only legally trade cars that predate the 1959 revolution, hence the iconic American cars that still cruise the island’s roads. But those are only a small fraction of the nation’s used cars.

Islanders bought and sold cars on the sly, but it was a risky business that put off people like Mr. González and made buyers wary of paying large sums for a vehicle they would not legally own.

Emilio Morales, president of the Miami-based Havana Consulting Group, said the new rules — like earlier decisions to let Cubans own cellphones and computers or work in the private sector — simply legalized what many Cubans were already doing illicitly and would neither increase Cuba’s antiquated stock of vehicles nor alleviate the country’s crushing transportation problem. The move was intended to placate people, not stimulate the economy, Mr. Morales said.

“This is one of their political pressure valves,” he said.

The AP's "Cynical" Havana Bureau

Yesterday, the AP's Havana bureau released the following insulting headline and story:

"Cuba reforms convincing island's cynics"

It implies that Cubans weary of Castro's 52-year dictatorship and its so-called "reforms" are "cynics."

After all -- why should Cubans be so distrusting of Castro's brutal regime, which has been lying, stealing, torturing, imprisoning and murdering its own people for over five decades?

Does the AP feel the same about Syrians that are incredulous of the "reforms" of dictator Bashir al-Assad?

Or did it feel the same about Libyans that were incredulous about "reformist" Saif al-Gaddafi?

After all, Syrians and Libyans have been allowed to buy and sell property for decades.

The only "cynics" here are the AP's Havana bureau, which 52-years later still give the Cuban dictatorship the benefit of the doubt.

With "Reformers" Like These...

"Reformist" dictators seem to be the latest (repulsive) fad.

From the U.K.'s Telegraph:

Syria's President Assad: 'I live a normal life - it's why I'm popular'

Three thousand demonstrators have died fighting his rule, but - in an exclusive interview - Bashar al-Assad, president of Syria, tells Andrew Gilligan he will not go the way of Gaddafi

When you go to see an Arab ruler, you expect vast, over-the-top palaces, battalions of guards, ring after ring of security checks and massive, deadening protocol. You expect to wait hours in return for a few stilted minutes in a gilded reception room, surrounded by officials, flunkies and state TV cameras. You expect a monologue, not a conversation. Bashar al-Assad, the president of Syria, was quite different.

The young woman who arranged the meeting picked me up in her own car. We drove for 10 minutes, then turned along what looked like a little-used side road through the bushes. There was no visible security, not even a gate, just a man dressed like a janitor, standing by a hut. We drove straight up to a single-storey building the size of a largeish suburban bungalow. The president was waiting in the hall to meet us.

We sat, just the three of us, on leather sofas in Assad’s small study. The president was wearing jeans. It was Friday, the main protest day in Syria: the first Friday since the death of Colonel Gaddafi had sunk in. But the man at the centre of it all, the man they wanted to destroy, looked pretty relaxed.

He thought the protests were diminishing. After they started, in March, “we didn’t go down the road of stubborn government. Six days after [the protests began] I commenced reform. People were sceptical that the reforms were an opiate for the people, but when we started announcing the reforms, the problems started decreasing... This is when the tide started to turn. This is when people started supporting the government... [but] being in the middle is very difficult when you have this strong polarisation.”

The problems were not mainly political, he thought. “It’s about the whole of society, the development of society. Different problems have erupted as one crisis. We adopted liberal economics. To open your economy without preparing yourself, you open up gaps between the social strata. If you do not get the right economic model, you cannot get past the problem.”

For Assad’s critics – who have expanded steadily over the last seven months to include not just the protesters, but Britain, France, the US, the United Nations and now the Arab League – these statements are simply delusional. “He has been talking about reform ever since he came to office [in 2000], and nothing serious ever happens,” said one of the protest leaders from the key opposition city of Homs. “Killing people is not an act of reform. We aren’t calling for economic or even political reform under Assad, but for the departure of this bloodstained president and free elections.”

The opposition appears, after a dip, to have been energised by Gaddafi’s demise. The death toll on Friday, they say, of 40, was the highest since April. Three thousand demonstrators have been killed by Assad’s security forces since March, according to the UN, a figure that includes 187 children. Yesterday, it was reported, the Syrian army was shelling civilian areas of Homs [...]

Assad lives in a relatively small house in a normal – albeit guarded – street. He believes that his modest lifestyle is another component of his appeal. “There is a legitimacy according to elections and there is popular legitimacy,” he said. “If you do not have popular legitimacy, whether you are elected or not you will be removed – look at all the coups we had.

“The first component of popular legitimacy is your personal life. It is very important how you live. I live a normal life. I drive my own car, we have neighbours, I take my kids to school. That’s why I am popular. It is very important to live this way – that is the Syrian style.”

Don't Miss Voices From Mariel

It will be screening this weekend in Alexandria, VA:

Quote of the Week

"The fact is that more than the power to purchase cars or houses, Cubans need freedom, free elections, respect for individual freedoms... [Castro's economic changes] do not bring freedom nor democracy to a people, and certainly not to a country under an iron tyranny for 52 years."

-- Regis Iglesias Ramirez, former Cuban political prisoner jailed during the 2003 Black Spring and recently banished to Spain, The Miami Herald, 11/3/11

Working Towards a Cuban Spring

By James K. Glassman in Forbes:

In March 2003, the Cuban regime rounded up 75 journalists, librarians and human peaceful dissidents and quickly hustled them off to prison for lengthy terms on bizarre, trumped-up charges.

For example, Normando Hernandez, who had been writing articles on CubaNet since 1999, was found guilty of reporting on the health, education and judicial systems and sentenced to 25 years in prison. Jose Luis Garcia Paneque, a surgeon who was hounded from his profession for his political beliefs, was sentenced to 24 years, with 17 months of it in isolation. Ill with pneumonia and a cyst on his kidney, his weight dropped to 90 pounds. Regis Iglesias, a poet, received an 18-year sentence.

All of the 75 Cubans were released by 2010, a few months after an international outcry over the death of imprisoned dissident Orlando Zapata Tamayo. But the releases did not come until many of those jailed in the spring of 2003 — including Hernandez, Paneque and Iglesias — had spent more than seven years in prison, in terrible conditions for alleged crimes that amounted to nothing more than the exercise of “the most elementary of human rights, especially as regards freedom of expression and political association,” as the European Union put it, in a statement denouncing the prosecutions.

For these three and many of the others, however, the privations did not end with release from prison. They were exiled to Spain, where they were denied basic liberties customarily accorded political refugees. In a column in the Wall Street Journal on June 13 of this year, Mary Anastasia O’Grady criticized the Spanish government for “assisting the Cuban dictatorship to disguise the deportation as ‘liberation.’”

Among the readers of the column was former President George W. Bush. The three ex-prisoners learned of his interest, and, on Tuesday, they flew to Dallas to tell their stories to a packed assembly at an event sponsored by the Bush Institute.

The Cubans were accompanied by Jose Maria Aznar, former president of Spain, and Antonio Lopez-Isturiz White, secretary general of the European People’s Party, the pan-European center-right organization that has been looking out for the welfare of the exiles as the Spanish government has shirked its responsibility.

The sad fact is that much of the world is either consciously ignoring or is blissfully unaware of the brutality and repression being exercised by the Cuba regime against citizens simply asking basic freedoms. While global attention has focused on the Arab Spring and the liberation of Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, a Caribbean island has remained for more than 60 years in the grip of a family that has destroyed its economy and stripped its people of the most fundamental rights.

What’s the answer for Cuba? Start with an intensification of international pressure on the regime. Certainly, the attitude of the Spanish government will change later this month if, as expected, the Socialist government so friendly to the Castros is defeated.

But international pressure won’t increase unless the world hears the stories of brave Cubans like Dr. Paneque, who told the rapt audience in Dallas about the hell of solitary confinement in a tiny cell. He said that his life would never be the same. You could see the emotional scars.

The Castro brothers probably expected that the experience of prison would chasten or silence the released dissidents – those in Spain or the United States or still in Cuba. But it has not. Hernandez, Paneque and Iglesias remain defiant. They’re telling tales of one of the most repressive governments in the world. “We must seek the truth,” said President Aznar on Tuesday, “and make known the lies of the regime.”

Change in Cuba also requires that freedom-loving Americans – especially high officials — to lend their moral support. Aznar reminded the audience that freedom “will never come from appeasement and complacency.”

When President Bush was in office, he vigorously and publicly put the weight of his office behind hundreds of dissidents and freedom advocates.

He met with Dr. Paneque’s wife and daughter in the Oval Office during the dissident’s fourth year in prison and then, six months later, in the East Room of the White House for a “day of Solidarity with the Cuban People.” The President even helped Paneque’s wife get a better job in Texas so she could be at home with her daughter at night. He mentioned Paneque three times in speeches, including an address to the Cuban people a few days before he left office in 2009.

President Bush also mentioned the jailed Normando Hernandez in three speeches, and Hernandez’s mother joined Mrs. Bush in the First Lady’s box for the 2008 State of the Union address. We know from interviews with other dissidents that word of this kind of support seeps into prisons and gives freedom advocates the courage to struggle on.

Finally, the United States and other nations need to be steadfast in their policies. Any change in relations with Cuba must be predicated on free elections. Freedom won’t come to the nation until the current regime leaves power and the Cuban people themselves are able to choose their leaders.

Perhaps nature will have to run its course, but I hope not. There are non-violent ways to bring freedom to Cuba, and they all come down to helping courageous Cubans like Hernandez, Paneque and Iglesias succeed.

James K. Glassman is the founding executive director of the George W. Bush Institute and a former Undersecretary of State for Public Affairs and Public Diplomacy.

Political Prisoners Visit Capitol Hill

From today's visit to Capitol Hill by former Cuban political prisoners (of the Black Spring of 2003) Normando Hernández González, Regis Iglesias Ramírez and José Luís García Paneque:

Iran's Credit Line to Castro

On a day of over-reported stories (Castro's home sales announcement), here's a dangerously under-reported story.

From Tehran Times:

Iran has allocated a credit line for reconstruction of Cuba’s energy system, the Cuban vice president of the National Institute of Water Resources said.

Abel Salas made the announcement in a meeting with the Iran’s deputy energy minister in Tehran on Wednesday, ISNA news agency reported.

Salas expressed hope that a portion of the 500-million euro credit line would be used to reconstruct the Cuban energy system.

Housing Hype Before Disappointment

Last month, the Castro regime's "legalization" of car purchases was announced with great fanfare.

Then, the details of the new regulations revealed that privileges were reserved for Castro's officials and those that work in the regime's "strategic sectors" (e.g. tourism and the police).

Here we go again.

This morning, the AP reported:

"Cuban state media says the government is allowing citizens to buy and sell real estate property for the first time since the early days of the revolution."

They are referring to an article that appeared in Castro's newspaper, Granma, this morning.

(Note to those that like to refer to Cuban "laws" as if they resulted from some legitimate and transparent process: they're based on Castro's whim and distribution in the state media.)

This news will be distributed internationally with great hype and fanfare as more evidence of Castro's "reforms."

Then, the details and implementation will be revealed -- fraught with disappointing caveats and special privileges.

Meanwhile, the month of October 2011 continued the Castro regime's record-setting trend of political arrests and repression.

Yet, Castro's "announcement" will provide weeks (if not months) of distractions from the repressive realities on the ground.

Fariñas Remains Imprisoned

From EFE:

Cuban government opponent Guillermo Fariñas was detained in the central city of Santa Clara while trying to visit a hunger-striking dissident at a hospital, his family and pro-democracy activists said.

"Guillermo went to pay a visit to Alcides (Rivera) at the hospital and they don't want anyone there. The (hospital guards) didn't let him in. They immobilized him, beat him and called the police, who took him to a (police unit)," Fariñas' mother, Alicia Hernandez, told Efe Tuesday.

She said she learned of her son's arrest thanks to an "eyewitness."

Another 18 dissidents who went to the Arnaldo Milian Castro Provincial Hospital Monday to check on Rivera's health were not allowed inside the facility and were detained, although apparently some were released Tuesday, Hernandez said.

Rivera went on hunger strike on Sept. 28 to demand an end to government repression of dissent, activist Elizardo Sanchez, spokesman for the illegal but tolerated Cuban Commission on Human Rights and National Reconciliation, said.

Testimony on Cuban Oil Exploration

From today's hearing in the U.S. House of Representative's Committee on Natural Resources:

Testimony on “North American Offshore Energy: Mexico and Canada Boundary Treaties and New Drilling by Cuba and Bahamas”

Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It's truly a privilege to be here with all of you today.

My name is Mauricio Claver-Carone and I'm the Executive Director of Cuba Democracy Advocates, a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to the promotion of human rights, democracy and the rule of law in Cuba.

I have held this position for seven years and throughout this time, I have been closely monitoring the plans, developments and geo-political motivations behind the Cuban regime's efforts to pursue offshore oil exploration.

However, it's important to note that despite the broad media attention given to the Cuban regime’s most recent plans, which we are discussing here today, its efforts to conduct offshore oil exploration date back almost 20 years. And ultimately -- all of them have been unsuccessful.

Please allow me to begin with some broader observations.

Cuba is a totalitarian dictatorship. It is the sole remaining dictatorship in the Western Hemisphere. Therefore, it should not be viewed through the same lens as its democratic neighbors, the Bahamas and Mexico -- nor should it be treated in the same manner.

The Bahamas and Mexico are allies of the United States. We share a relationship of trust and cooperation with these two friendly nations. Meanwhile, the Cuban regime remains under U.S. sanctions, which Congress codified into law under the 1996 Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, due to three fundamental reasons: 1. the brutal violations of the Cuban people's human, civil, political and economic rights. 2. its hostile anti-American policies. 3. the illegal expropriation of properties belonging to U.S. nationals.

Moreover, Cuba remains one of four countries designated by the U.S. Government as a state-sponsor of terrorism based on its harboring of fugitives (including the murderers of U.S. law enforcement officials); its unwillingness to cooperate with U.S. anti-terrorism efforts; its intelligence gathering and sharing with other rogue regimes; and its support for foreign terrorist organizations. The other three countries on the state-sponsors of terrorism list are Iran, Sudan and Syria.

Considering the background of Cuba's regime, a strong case can be made that it is not in our national interest to lift sanctions and assist yet another anti-American dictatorship -- and state-sponsor of terrorism -- in its ambitions for oil exploration. To do so would not ease domestic fuel costs or enhance energy independence here at home, which should be the goals of U.S. energy policy. To the contrary, it would add to the extortionate practices that other oil-producing dictatorships have exploited for the last half-a-century.

Furthermore, considering that this same Cuban regime has already expropriated U.S. oil assets in the past (Esso and Texaco), it would send a dangerous message to other hostile governments that -- in this region alone (e.g. Hugo Chavez in Venezuela) -- would like to do the same.

Now, allow me to focus on some of the specifics of the Cuban regime's offshore exploration plans, which unfortunately tend to get overlooked.

Despite the Cuban regime’s highly publicized efforts over the last 20 years, there have been no commercially viable discoveries or extraction of oil in waters off Cuba's shores. Moreover, there is currently no drilling taking place in waters off Cuba's shores.

The Cuban regime first began using offshore-drilling rights to extract political concessions from various nations of the world soon after the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, which ended that country’s hefty subsidies to Cuba.

According to recently declassified documents by the Brazilian Foreign Ministry, in 1993 the Cuban regime first offered the government of then President Itamar Franco the "most promising" blocks for oil exploration to Brazil's national oil company, Petrobras, in exchange for their shunning of Cuban dissidents on the island and cancelling a meeting with Cuban exiles at the Brazilian Embassy in Washington, D.C. The Brazilian government complied with both, only to exit from Cuba empty-handed years later.

The Cuban regime found a new “partner” when Hugo Chavez rose to the presidency of oil-rich Venezuela in 1998. With the backing of Chavez and Venezuela’s state-oil company PdVSA, the Cuban regime resumed its diplomatic offensive signing highly publicized oil-leases with Spain's Repsol, Norway's Statoil, Russia's Gazprom, India's ONGC Videsh, Malaysia's Petronas, Canada's Sherritt, Angola's Sonangol, Vietnam's PetroVietnam and China's CNPC .

Only one company, however, has actually conducted any exploratory drilling -- Spain's Repsol in 2004. It found some oil, but not in any commercially viable quantities. It then pulled out of Cuba.

Similarly, after much initial fanfare, Canada's Sherritt and Brazil's Petrobras -- perhaps the most credible and respected of the region’s oil companies outside the United States -- publicly abandoned their efforts in 2008 and 2011, respectively, stating that Cuba offshore drilling was "not commercially viable" and citing "poor prospects."

Much of this can be attributed to U.S. sanctions, which dramatically drive up costs of production. The Cuban regime has itself admitted that U.S. sanctions make it commercially impractical to produce oil in its territorial waters. Keep in mind that even the largest neighboring foreign oil companies, Mexico's Pemex and Venezuela's PdVSA, refine the majority of their oil in the U.S. and then repatriate it, for they lack the domestic infrastructure to process their own heavy crude and the U.S.’s geographical proximity enhances profitability. As long as U.S. trade sanctions against Cuba’s regime are in place, producing and refining any oil found in Cuban waters in the United States isn’t an option.

That leads to a question: If off-shore drilling in Cuban waters is not commercially viable for the most respectable regional oil companies, which are located relatively close to Cuba and have the most experience in dealing with Cubans, is such drilling really viable for the Angolans, Malaysians or the Chinese? The answer is no.

Initially, we learned this in 2006, when the Cuban regime seemingly had convinced public policymakers in Washington -- including many here in Congress -- that the Chinese were ready to drill off Cuba's shores. The threat never materialized, but it served the Cuban regime’s political interests. As Reuters reported from Cuba at the time: “Havana is eager to see American oil companies join forces with the anti-embargo lobby led by U.S. farmers who have been selling food to Cuba for four years."

Last year's oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico by BP and the justifiable public outrage that ensued has given the Cuban regime a new and strategic opportunity to use the threat of offshore drilling as a means of forcing the U.S. to unilaterally ease sanctions. Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez has confirmed this on various occasions and relayed as much to former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who recently traveled to Havana in an unsuccessful effort to secure the release of American hostage Alan Gross; Gross has been held for nearly two years in a Cuban prison for helping the island’s Jewish community connect to the Internet.

In a flashback to 2004, Spain's Repsol is back in Cuba preparing to drill another exploratory well early next year. This time, the Cuban regime is “threatening” that if Repsol is pressured into abandoning drilling, India’s ONGC Videsh or Malaysia’s Petronas will step forward.

Curiously, this peculiar corporate trio was granted extensive oil-rights last year by Hugo Chavez to develop a block with 235 billion barrels of reserves in Venezuela’s oil-rich Orinoco belt. Reserves in that one Venezuelan block alone are believed to be 50 times greater than the best estimates in all of Cuba’s territorial waters. Some geo-political foul play can surely be deduced from the particularity and timing of this arrangement.

Despite the fact that Repsol still faces exploratory hurdles (and gargantuan production costs if oil is ever found), the United States is erring on the side of caution and licensing specialty oil spill mitigation firms to respond quickly in the case of an accident. This is also not a new phenomenon. The U.S. has been licensing such firms since at least 2001. Moreover, current U.S. law provides all of the necessary flexibility to do so.

While such precautions are necessary, efforts should also be made to prevent the Cuban regime from engaging in offshore exploration altogether. The anti-American nature of the Cuban regime will simply not provide the necessary safeguards regardless of the level of U.S. engagement on this issue. Thus, there is currently legislation filed with this goal in mind, including H.R. 2047, the Caribbean Coral Reef Protection Act, which targets U.S. visas and loans to the Cuban regime's foreign business partners, and H.R. 373, which amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to deny U.S. leases to foreign companies that engage in oil exploration with countries under U.S. sanctions, such as Iran and Cuba. Precaution might bring us temporary peace of mind, but prevention would better serve our long-term national interests.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Again, I truly appreciate the invitation and the opportunity to speak before you and the committee. I will be pleased to respond to any questions.

Famed Dissident Arrested and Beaten

Cuban pro-democracy leader Guillermo Farinas was brutally beaten and arrested yesterday, as he tried to visit with two fellow dissidents on a hunger strike in the central city of Santa Clara.

Farinas was awarded the European Union's 2010 Sakharov Human Rights prize, pursuant to a 135-day hunger strike for the release of Cuban political prisoners.

He was trying to visit with Rolando Ferrer Espinosa and Alcides Rivera Rodríguez, who have been on a hunger strike for more than 32-days seeking an end to the Castro regime's violence against pro-democracy activists.

Is Repsol Violating the Trading With the Enemy Act?

November 1, 2011

The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We are extremely concerned over what seems to be a lack of a coordinated effort by the Administration to prevent a State Sponsor of Terrorism, just 90 miles from our shores, from engaging in risky deep sea oil drilling projects that will harm U.S. interests as well as extend another economic lifeline to the Cuban regime.

Spain’s state-owned energy company, Repsol, has entered into an agreement with the Cuban regime to drill off Cuba’s coast. A Chinese-built deep water oil rig will be used for this project – the Scarabeo 9. Despite the fact that the oil rig has not reached Cuban territorial waters, or the Western Hemisphere for that matter, the Department of Interior has been actively providing assistance, guidance, and technical advice to Repsol. This is inconsistent with numerous U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives with regards to Cuba.

The Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) as implemented by 31 C.F.R. § 515.201, prohibits certain transactions involving property in which Cuba or a Cuban national has any interest whatsoever, directly or indirectly. The support that the Department of Interior is providing to Repsol appears to be in contravention of TWEA, as such assistance will result in a financial windfall to the Cuban regime. It may also facilitate processes that could lead to an environmental disaster off U.S. shores and the greater Caribbean.

The Director of the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement for the Department of Interior at a recent Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing, indicated that Interior, in coordination with the U.S. Coast Guard, will conduct an examination of the rig just before it enters Cuban waters. However, in conjunction with this examination, we request that the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) also be involved and conduct its own review and inspection to ensure that no U.S. laws or regulations are being violated, including the TWEA and the Export Administration Act (EAA).

We are concerned by reports that the Scarabeo 9 may have been designed specifically to avoid U.S. economic sanctions against Cuba. While the EAA and the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) generally prohibit virtually all exports and reexports of U.S. – origin goods, software and technology to Cuba, we need clarity on how the Administration is applying the sanctions and EAR to foreign produced items incorporating 10 percent or less controlled U.S. content.

According to press reports, the Scarabeo 9 includes a U.S. origin blowout preventer and may contain other controlled, U.S. origin items, and possible advanced computer software that may be in violation of EAR section 734.4, the de minimis U.S. content rule regarding technology found on this structure. What information or assurances has the Administration sought or received from Repsol to ensure that the oil rig complies with existing U.S. sanctions against Cuba?

Recently, your Administration announced a settlement with a Texas company, Flowserve, for alleged violations stemming from transactions that included, among others, the exports of pumps, valves, and related component parts and supplies from the United States indirectly to Iran. According to the Federal Register notice, several of Flowserve’s foreign affiliates engaged in transactions involving property in which Cuba or a Cuban national had an interest. The company has agreed to remit $2.5 million to BIS to settle apparent violations of the EAR arising from the same course of conduct. We would appreciate additional information about this matter to learn what U.S. oil drilling or related technologies may have made their way to Cuba and if any of this technology could be used for the Scarabeo 9 project.

The Export Administration Regulations clearly state that the only items allowed to be exported to Cuba are donations of medical equipment, agricultural exports, and telecommunications equipment. Thus, even if the de minimis rule does not apply, the broader prohibitions against exports to Cuba must still be enforced.

We are concerned that sensitive U.S. technology can fall in the hands of a regime that supports terrorism and as such, this Committee would appreciate a response to the matters raised in this letter as soon as possible.

Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.

U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL)
U.S. Rep. Albio Sires (D-NJ)
U.S. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL)
U.S. Rep. David Rivera (R-FL)

Standoff in Santa Clara

Over 15 Cuban pro-democracy activists have been brutally beaten and arrested outside of a Santa Clara hospital, where the lives of two hunger strikers hang in the balance.

Last week, Rolando Ferrer Espinosa and Alcides Rivera Rodríguez were taken to a hospital in the central city of Santa Clara, pursuant to more than 30 days on a hunger strike demanding an end to the Castro regime's violence against peaceful protesters.

Pro-democracy activists have been camped out in front of the hospital, day and night, concerned for the well-being of the hunger strikers.

Amongst those arrested were Rivera Rodriguez's own wife, Idania Yánez Contreras, as well as Jorge Luis García Pérez (Antúnez), Yris Pérez Aguilera, Damaris Moya Portieles, Julio Columbié Batista and Yanisbel Valido.

Below (from left to right) Yris, Antunez and Idania: