|
|
Print this out in Word format (fifteen pages):
http://www.walterlippmann.com/2009-cuban-report-to-un-on-us-blockade.doc
1. Introduction
The economic, commercial and financial embargo
imposed by the United States
against Cuba 50 years ago is the most elevated expression of a cruel and
inhuman policy, lacking in legality and legitimacy and deliberately
designed to create hunger, illnesses and desperation within the Cuban
populace. Nothing has changed through ten successive US governments
other than a tightening of this policy. Nothing essential has changed
either since the new US government was inaugurated in January 2009.
With the absolute compliance with Resolution 63/7, adopted by the UN
General Assembly on October 29, 2008, in a vote of 185 nations in favour
and only 3 opposed, the government of the United States, far from
lifting the economic, commercial and financial embargo it had imposed on
the Republic of Cuba, has maintained in effect the laws, regulations and
practices that sustain it. It has continued to reinforce the political,
administrative and repressive mechanisms for it’s more efficacious and
deliberate implementation.
The present US government has continued to rigorously apply the embargo
against Cuba. It has made no declarations, not to mention taken any
steps, directed towards the removal of the complex maze of laws and
administrative regulations that make up the legal bases and the
regulations of the embargo. Neither have the foundations upon which
that policy has been erected been modified. This can be demonstrated by
the laws and regulations described below.
Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA).
It was enacted as a war measure in 1917 in order to
restrict trade with nations considered to be hostile. Subsequently, its
application was expanded to authorize the president to regulate
ownership transactions that involved any of its nationals in a foreign
country, both in time of war as “during any period of national emergency
declared by the president”. The first regulations of the embargo
against Cuba in 1962 are based on this act.
Foreign Aid Act.
By means of this act, enacted in 19671, the United States Congress
authorized the president of that country to establish and maintain “a
total embargo on trade between the United States and Cuba”. It also
prohibited the granting of any aid to the government of Cuba.
Export Administration Act
(EAA).
Adopted in 1979 as the result of the review of controls over
exports. It authorized the president to control, en general, the export
and re-export of goods and technology and, in particular, to restrict
those exports that would contribute to the military potential of any
country, detrimental to US national security.
Cuban Democracy Act
(CDA).
More widely known as the
Torricelli Act, it was signed into law by President
Bush (father) in October 1992. With it, the US government reinforced
economic measures against Cuba and provided normative support to the
extra-territorial dimensionof the embargo. It prohibited companies that
were subsidiaries of US companies in third countries from carrying out
transactions with Cuba or Cuban nationals and the entry into US
territory, during a term of 180 days, of vessels from third countries
that had put into Cuban ports, just to name a few of the restrictions.
Cuban Liberty and Solidarity
Act.Known as the
Helms-Burton Act,
it was approved by President Clinton in March 1996. It sought to
discourage foreign investment and to internationalize the Cuban
embargo. It codified the regulations of the embargo, limited the
presidential prerogatives to suspend this policy and broadened its
extra-territorial scope. It refused entry into the United States of
executives of foreign companies (and their families) who had invested in
“confiscated” property in Cuba and established the possibility of taking
them to trial in US courts.
Export Administration Act
(EAA).
Adopted in 1979 as the result of the review of controls over exports.
It authorized the president to control, in general, the export and
re-export of goods and technology and, in particular, to restrict those
exports that would contribute to the military potential of any country
detrimental to US national security.
Export Administration
Regulations (EAR).
Among these, there is the prohibition on exports from the US to Cuba,
other than exceptions that are specified in the regulation itself or
those that are authorized by licences issued by the US Bureau of
Industry and Security of the Department of Commerce. Said regulations
are protected by the Trading with the Enemy Act and the Export
Administration Act.
The extent of legislation and regulations mentioned above demonstrates,
moreover, that there has never been such a wide-ranging and brutal
embargo against a people like the one the US is maintaining against
Cuba. On the one hand, this classifies as
genocide by virtue of
Section c of Article II of the
Geneva Convention of 1948 on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
and, on the other hand, as an
act of economic war, according to the stipulations of
the
declaration regarding Maritime War adopted by the
1909 London Naval Conference.
The embargo against Cuba is not a bilateral issue between our country
and the United States. The repeated extra-territorial application of US
laws and the persecution against the legitimate interests of companies
and citizens of third countries significantly have repercussions on the
sovereignty of many other States.
Protected by this policy, sanctions continue to be applied on US and
European companies that do business with Cuba. Persons who are ill in
Cuba cannot in many instances benefit from new diagnostics, technologies
or drugs, even though their lives depend on it because independently of
the fact that these were products or were available in a third country,
the embargo laws forbid that Cuba acquires even just one single
component or program that comes from the United States.
According to very conservative figures, the direct harm inflicted on
Cuba as a result of the embargo, until December 2008,
surpasses 96 billion dollars,
a figure that would reach
36 thousand 221 million dollars,
if the calculation were to be made using today’s value of the
US dollar. It is not difficult to imagine the progress Cuba would have
been able to achieve and how much progress has been denied it if it
hadn’t been for these 50 years of being submitted to this brutal
economic war.
In open defiance of the growing demands both inside and outside the US
that this policy be eliminated, the new American government has
reiterated gain and again its intention to maintain the embargo against
Cuba. US Vice President Joseph Biden declared:
“The US will maintain the embargo as a
tool to apply pressure on Cuba”.
In the chapters of this report, the real scope of the
measures regarding Cuba adopted by the new US administration are
sketched out and the repercussions of the embargo on Cuba between March
of 2008 and April of 2009 are recorded.
Declarations made in the
framework of the Summit of Progressive Leaders in Chile, March
28, 2009.
2. The New US Administration.
Measures Adopted.
The media and diplomatic offensive unleashed by the US
government could erroneously lead one to the belief that the embargo
against Cuba has started to be dismantled. However, nothing is further
from the truth, as we shall demonstrate:
What measures have been adopted by the White House?
Elimination of restrictions on family visits –to the limit of third
degree of consanguinity – for Cuban residents in the United States.
Elimination of restrictions on Cuban-Americans sending remittances to
relatives in Cuba with the limit of up to the third degree of
consanguinity and excluding “members of the government of Cuba” and
“members of the Communist Party of Cuba”.
Widening the range of articles that may be sent in packages as gifts.
Granting of licences so that American companies can broaden certain
telecommunications operations with Cuba.
These measures, if they indeed make good in part for a serious
injustice, by returning to Cuban residents in the US their right to
visit family in Cuba –have been taken away from them by the George W.
Bush government – they are insufficient and have a very limited scope
since they go no further than the intention of returning to the
situation family relations existed in the year 2004 when the economic
embargo was already fully in effect and being applied.
Likewise, even though the limitations on frequency and duration of
visits mentioned above are taken away, that a broader concept of family
members who may be visited be restored even with restrictions, and that
the limit on daily expenditures be increased for the visitors, the
prohibition on Cuban residents in the US who do not have family in Cuba
travelling to Cuba still remains.
The measures referred to also do not at all look after the restitution
of the constitutional right of American citizens to travel freely to
Cuba, the only country in the world that they are forbidden from
visiting.
As for the eventual granting of licences so that American companies can
broaden certain telecommunications operations with Cuba, we must
emphasize that this measure is not a new one. The Torricelli Act
established a legal framework that allows, since 1962,
telecommunications services to be provided to Cuba. However, from that
same era, the different administrations limited that possibility to
telephone communications and they even restricted the type of service
that the American companies were able to provide. None of the recently
announced measures indicates that those limitations or restrictions are
going to be modified. Until the present moment, its nature is
essentially a media gimmick. There has been absolutely no announcement
about the regulations that ought to accompany the measure.
3. Repercussions of the Embargo
on the Most Sensitive Social Sectors
With the purpose of defeating the Cuban people through hunger and
illnesses, the public health
and food sectors have continued being prioritized
objectives of the embargo policy.
Public Health
Between May 2008 and April 2009 repercussions on the
public health sector
add up to 25 million dollars.
The economic damages are basically due to the need of
acquiring products and equipment in markets that are further away, using
intermediaries for such purposes and the subsequent increase in the
prices that such procedures bring with them.
Prohibition or the not granting of visas to Cuban scientists and health
specialists so that they can take part in numerous scientific congresses
and events in the US constitutes an obstacle for professional up-dating,
the confrontation of techniques being used in treatment of different
conditions and the exchange of experiences that under different
conditions could be beneficial for both countries.
The damage caused Cuba by the embargo is particularly cruel in this
area, not only for its economic effects, but in particular because of
the suffering this creates for patients and their families and for the
direct incidence on the health of the Cuban population.
Some examples that demonstrate the damages caused in the area of health
during the reference period are:
Since 2003, el National Genetic
Medicine Centre has been trying to acquire Analyzer
Equipment for genes with the capacity for automatic sequencing and
fragment analysis, something that is essential for the study of the
origin of high incidence diseases in the population and which are among
the prime causes of death: breast, colon and prostate cancers; arterial
hypertension; asthma; diabetes mellitus; mental disorders, etc. Cuba
has not been able to acquire this equipment yet since it is exclusively
manufactured by companies under a US patent, such as the company Applied
Biosystem (ABI).
The Cardiology and
Cardiovascular Surgery Institute, via Empresa Alimport,
requested the American company Cook Vascular Inc. holding the sole
patent, for the purchase of equipment for the extraction of permanent
electrodes. The use of this equipment is essential for patients with
septic complications in an implanted permanent electrode or in any other
malfunction of the electrode. If this procedure cannot be carried out,
an open thorax operation must be performed, implying a serious risk for
the life of the patient. This company did not respond to the Cuban
request.
Empresa MEDICUBA,
via Empresa Alimport, made a request to buy vascular prostheses from
BARD, forceps for endomiocardiac biopsias from CORDIS and implements for
inflation to be used with balloon catheters from BOSTON SCIENTIFIC. Only
a negative reply was received from the Bard Company along with
notification that they could not provide Cuba with a quote on the
product requested because of the embargo law. The other companies did
not even reply to the requests, for fear of eventual consequences from
the embargo policy.
Sistema Integrado de Urgencias
Médicas (SIUM) was affected by the US government
prohibition, not allowing the Pastors for Peace Caravan to donate three
Ford ambulances to Cuba; their second-hand value on the market is around
24,000 dollars each. As a result, the ambulances could not arrive in
our country.
The health of Cuban children has also been negatively affected by the
brutal embargo policy:
Children’s hospitals face serious obstacles when it comes to acquiring
materials suitable for small children, such as better quality and more
durable vesicular, digestive and tracheal probes, Huber needles for
tracheotomies and lumbar injections, most of which come from the US.
Cuban children suffering from lymphoblastic leukemia cannot use Erwinia
L-asparaginasa, a medicine commercially known as Elspar, since the US
pharmaceutical company Merck and Co. refuses to sell this product to
Cuba.
The William Soler Pediatric
Cardio-centre cannot acquire devices such as catheters,
coils, guides and stents that are used to diagnose and treat children
with complex congenital cardiopathies via catheterization. The US
companies NUMED, AGA and BOSTON SCIENTIFIC are not permitted to sell
these products to Cuba. The list of children to have open-heart surgery
last year increased by 8 new cases:
1.-Osdenis Díaz, 30 months old, P. del Río, HC 684805
2.-Leinier Ramírez Pérez, 9 months old, Camagüey, HC 686901
3.- Leidy Reyes Blanco, 2 years old, Camagüey, HC 684376
4.- José Luis Sanamé, 13 years old, Ciego de Ávila, HC 687071
5.- Yusmary Rodríguez Márquez, 12 years old, C. Habana, HC 686546
6.- Pedro P. Valle Ros, 5 years old, Matanzas, HC 685014
7.- Osniel Pérez Espinosa, 5 years old, C. Habana, HC 679922
8.- Roilán Martínez Pérez, 3 years old, Pinar del Río, HC 685449
All of these children do not have much hope of receiving the immediate
health care they require as a result of the cruel impact of the embargo.
The following cases are examples of the
extra-territorial
effect of the embargo on the
health sector.
The Cuban company GCATE S.A.,
specializes in the purchase of technological equipment for the health
sector; it has faced serious difficulties with the Dutch company Philips
Medical since after a series of equipment was bought and installed, the
Dutch company refused to provide spare parts and this forces us to buy
them through third countries; this increases the price and makes
maintenance an even more difficult task. The justification for this
discriminatory treatment is said to be the regulations of the embargo on
Cuba.
HITACHI, which
is not a US company, refuses to sell Cuba an electronic microscope, of
the kind used in pathological anatomy.
It is alleged that the embargo is to blame for this.
This situation obliges us to look elsewhere for alternatives and that
makes the final price of the product much more expensive.
TOSHIBA, which
is not a US company either,
because of the embargo restrictions, refuses to sell
Cuba high technology equipment such as the gamma chamber, used to do
studies with radioactive isotopes in nuclear medicine, magnetic
resonance and high precision ultra-sound. As a result, health services
for the Cuban population have been affected.
Food
Besides facing up to the adverse consequences of the global crisis in
areas such as food, energy, the economy and finances, Cuba had to
overcome the restrictions imposed by the embargo policy, with the
purpose of being able to meet the food needs of its population.
Even though US sales of food to Cuba have been allowed since 2000, they
are governed by the application of strict measures of supervision and a
complicated and bureaucratic process of granting licences, in each case,
by numerous American institutions. Despite the announcement by the new
American government last March 11 in regards to the issuing of general
licences for the export of food, the reality of the situation is that
the United States government continues putting up obstacles for Cuba’s
purchases and there has been no action in sight directed towards
carrying out these sales according to the norms, channels and regular
practices of international trade.
In 2008, because of additional costs coming from the obstacles to
transactions with the United States,
ALIMPORT suffered
losses of 154.9 million
dollars. With those resources and in the same American
market, at those year’s average prices, Cuba could have bought 339,000
tons of wheat, or 615,000 tons of corn, or 126,760 tons of chicken for
the tables of the more than 11 million Cubans included in the “Canasta
Básica” (basic shopping-basket) programme.
In the period between April 2008 and March 2009, the agro-food sector,
so sensitive for the food security of the country, suffered losses on
account of the embargo to the tune of
121.8 million dollars.
The following examples
will illustrate this situation:
As a result of the
embargo, Cuba must put into refrigerated storage around 3.79 million
eggs on a monthly average in order to ensure stable delivery to the
population and avoid sudden shortages that could affect the supply of
raw materials of the fodder that comes from the United States. The
refrigeration costs for this purpose represent an expenditure of
5.2 million dollars per
year.
In the fishing industry,
during the period in question, losses amounted to
5.4 million dollars for
the payment of greater tariffs in the markets to which the goods were
going, as well as the increase in the cost of transportation, types of
exchange and the increased risk in the transportation of the goods as a
result of having to make longer trips.
Some examples showing the effect of the
extra-territorial
dimensionof the embargo in the foods sector:
Joint Enterprise CORACAN S.A.
(Cuban-Canadian capital), established for the production and
commercialization of instant foods, has suffered economic losses of more
than 146,000 dollars as a consequence of the embargo affecting its
relations with companies located in third countries.
Some examples:
In December 2008,
the Canadian company SENSIENT FLAVORS, supplier of raw
materials for powdered orange flavouring, communicated that the head
office in Indianapolis, Ohio, U.S.A. was forbidding them to sell
supplies to Cuba.
The Canadian Sethness Products
Company informed the directors of CORACAN that they
could not continue supplying the powdered caramel colouring as per
instructions from the head office in Chicago in the US. Without being
able to count on a supply of these raw materials the CORACASN soft-drink
factory had to stop production for 15 days; in addition, they had to
look for a new supplier and face the corresponding price increase.
Joint Enterprise Los Portales
(Cuban-French capital), established for the production of water and
soft-drinks, signed a contract with the American subsidiary LATAPACK-BALL,
located in Brazil, in order to supply cans and aluminium lids, quoted an
FOB price 25% less than the world market price. In February 2009, this
company verbally informed the directors of the company that it was not
authorized to supply Cuba with those containers, even through the
intermediation of the Nestlé Group. This agreement would have allowed a
reduction of 4.4 million dollars in importing costs for the Cuban-French
company.
In March 2009, LACTALIS USA,
US branch of the French giant Lactalis, producer of cheeses and dairy
products, was sanctioned by the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the
US Treasury Department (OFAC) with a fine of
20,950 dollars because
they had not fulfilled the embargo regulations of “making electronic
financial transfers in which Cuba, or a Cuban citizen with interest,
between February 2004 and March 2007”.
This was the first penalty imposed by
the OFAC since President Obama’s arrival in the White House.
Others Sectors of Social Impact
The sectors of education and culture have been heavily impacted
by the embargo during these 50 years.
Education
The embargo has negative repercussions on all levels of schooling. In
spite of the efforts being made by the Cuban government to ensure
quality education for all, the effects of the embargo translate into
daily shortages that affect the learning process, research and
scientific work in general.
Some examples follow:
During the period
between May 2008 and April 2009, the total cost of products imported for
the sector ran to a value of approximately 40 million dollars. Of this
sum, 8.7% went towards paying freight charges in the cases of products
coming in from the Asian markets. If Cuba would have been able to make
these purchases in the American market it would have only had to use
3.9% of the same value to pay for freight charges. The additional cost
totals 1.39 million dollars which might have been used to buy 40 million
pencils, a million boxes of Plasticine for primary schools and nurseries
and 550,000 boxes of wax crayons.
Cuban teachers and professors have no access to an up-to-date
bibliography of US writers or research centres since the publishing
houses of that country and the branches in other countries refuse to
sell them to Cuba. The acquisition of these materials in distant
markets adds high costs for freight charges.
It is impossible for Cuba to acquire a group of psycho-educational
instruments corresponding to the WPPISI, WAIS and GRACE techniques that
are used to determine levels of intellectual, emotional and motor
development in children, adolescents and young people with special
education needs, due to the fact that said instruments come from the
United States.
In the period of time which we are analyzing, the
higher education sector
has suffered losses totalling
3.8 million dollars
affecting production and services, income other than for goods and
services, lack of access to American technology, cancelled academic
programmes, bank transfers and projects that could not be carried out.
Access to the Internet, an essential tool for universities, is limited
due to the fact that the American government prohibits Cuban access to
undersea cables and the technologies that would allow the broad band to
be available to a significant extent in the country.
The educational sector
has not escaped the effects of the
extra-territorial dimensionof the embargo.
The School of Economy at the University of Havana needs to renovate
three elevators. To do so it needs to acquire GAL and ECI parts from
Canada. During 2008, negotiations went on with a Canadian firm that
sent an offer for the amount of 11,318 dollars. However, after signing
the contract and opening a letter of credit, the purchase could not go
through because 100% of the components originate in the USA and the
manufacturer refused to make the sale to Cuba because of the embargo.
The operation was carried out later with another supplier, at a cost of
200% more than the earlier offer.
Culture
Application of the embargo policy on the cultural area has deprived both
countries of cultural exchanges that have been intense throughout
history. The embargo has prevented our peoples from enjoying the best
of artistic, literary and cultural expressions that both the nations
have to offer.
Some of the main
effects produced during the period:
In May of this
year, the famous Cuban singer-songwriter Silvio Rodríguez was refused a
US Visa after he received a special invitation to take part in the
concert for the 90th birthday of the famous American musician Pete
Seeger.
ARTEX was
seriously harmed in its record selling rights. The embargo prevents the
proper promotion and distribution of musical talent, significantly
decreases sales prices and limits the enjoyment of Cuban music. In the
period between May 2008 and April 2009, we estimate losses close to
130,000 dollars
for sales that could not take place.
The Instituto Cubano del Libro
(Cuban Book Institute) (ICL) was affected in
commercialization of Cuban literature due to the impossibility of being
able to cash cheques or receive transfers in dollars from foreign
publishing houses with which they sign contracts. The NORMA Publishers
of Puerto Rico have not been able to make the corresponding payments for
contracted works by the authors Nicolás Guillén, Dora Alonso, David
Chericián and Roberto Fernández Retamar.
Activities of the Fondo de
Bienes Culturales (Cultural Assets Fund) have been
particularly affected by the lack of raw materials and the essential
materials needed to develop the visual and applied arts. As in other
areas, Cuba is forced to acquire materials and media originating in the
US at prices incomparably higher in markets that are further away in
Europe and Asia. During the period we are analyzing, losses for this
concept are estimated to total
636,990 dollars.
The Instituto Cubano de Arte e
Industria Cinematográficos (Cuban Institute of Cinema Art and Industry)
(ICAIC) faces significant limitations in distribution,
exhibition, restoration and preservation of its film heritage as the
result of the impossibility of acquiring equipment, technology, spare
parts and materials that are vital to the development of these
activities. It is practically impossible to buy these media outside of
the US; and media that can be obtained, via third parties, are much more
expensive.
Sports
Cuban sports
also offer numerous examples where we can see the application of the
embargo.
It has been impossible for Cuba to buy liquid chromatography equipment
which goes along with Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) that nowadays is
essential for anti-doping control since the American government forbids
American companies and their subsidiaries in third countries from
supplying Cuba. Likewise, the authorities in Washington refuse the
right to acquire reactives and referencial substances for work in the
anti-doping laboratory.
Conservative calculations on losses for equipment that is unable to be
used because of lack of spare parts that cannot be bought in the US
indicate a total of 781,000
dollars.
Transportation
Despite the enormous efforts made by the Cuban government to encourage
the sector of transportation and to repair roads for the benefit of the
population, the embargo continues to hold up the country’s development
plans. During the period between March 2008 and April 2009, this sector
was affected to a total of 357
million 802 thousand dollars.
Last March, the American ASTEC
Industries Inc. refused a request sent in by a Cuban
body for the acquisition of equipment for the rehabilitation of flexible
pavements. The answer was based on the criteria that because of the
existence of the embargo regulations, they could not begin any
discussion on the subject.
Last March 20, General Cable
Inc., a company selling electrical materials, indicated
that it could not establish commercial relations with Cuba because it
had not been informed about any change in the trade relations between
Cuba and the United States. With that, they backed up their answer
saying that “(…) unfortunately, due to the international laws
established by the US State Department, it is not allowed to establish
commercial relations with Cuba at this time”.
Naval repairs have also been affected by the embargo. Purchases of
materials and the products needed to develop this activity have become
20% more expensive since they now have to be bought in Europe, and this
represents 5.52 million
dollars.
The network of national roads has 2,886.3 kilometres in average and poor
condition. To be repaired, we need 327.9 million dollars and 600.0
million dollars to construct the remaining sections of the National
Highway. However, Cuba cannot accede to the funding authorized by the
World Bank, such as the Inter-American Development Bank, for this kind
of infra-structure, bearing in mind that these bodies are controlled by
the US. According to the body’s Web-site, just between November 2007
and April 2009, the Inter-American Development Bank authorized funds for
infrastructure projects in Latin American and Caribbean countries for a
total of 750 million 930 thousand dollars.
Empresa Alimport is in charge of processing purchases of foods and
medical products from American companies.
4. Opposition to The Genocidal
Policy of The Embargo Against Cuba.
In the last few months, international attention to the subject of
bilateral relations between the US and Cuba has increased. Clearly the
demand that the embargo against Cuba be eliminated and that the policy
of hostility cease against a small country is stronger and firmer than
ever before.
Last October 29, for the seventeenth consecutive time, the UN General
Assembly adopted, with the overwhelming majority of member states the
resolution “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial
embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba” (63/7),
with the highest vote that this resolution has reached in that UN body.
The General Assembly, with the favourable vote of 185 of its members,
categorically reiterated the call to discontinue this illegal and
genocidal policy being imposed by the government of the United States on
the people of Cuba. That backing by the international community is
consistent with its rejection of the application of economic, commercial
and financial measures with extra-territorial effects and that are
contrary to international law and to the principles of the UN Charter.
Many voices in the world were raised in favour of ceasing this inhuman
policy. During the period this report is dealing with, numerous
statements were made calling for the end of this policy.
Among these, the most
outstanding are:
On
May 16, 2008, the
declaration of the V Latin America and Caribbean-European Union Summit
held in Lima Peru was adopted. In one of its paragraphs the Heads of
State and Government in both regions agreed to the following: “(…) We
firmly reject all the coercive measures, of a unilateral dimension and
extra-territorial effect that are contrary to International Law and the
norms generally accepted for free trade. We coincide in the fact that
this kind of practice represents a serious threat to resolution
A/RES/62/3 of the UNGA, we reaffirm our well-known positions about the
application of the extra-territorial regulations of the Helms-Burton
Act.”
On October 3, 2008,
the Heads of State or Government of the group of African, Caribbean and
Pacific states (ACP), meeting at their 6th Summit Conference held in
Ghana, approved the Declaration of Accra in which it “condemned the use
of coercive unilateral measures such as illegal sanctions adopted
against certain developing countries with the purpose of preventing said
countries from exercising their right to determine their political,
economic and social system and they reject the application of laws and
unilateral and extra-territorial measures contrary to international law,
such as the Helms-Burton Act.”
On December 8, 2008,
the Heads of State or Government of Cuba and of states making up CARICOM,
meeting on the occasion of the Third Cuba-CARICOM Summit, adopted a
declaration where it states that
“an end should be put
to the economic, commercial and financial embargo against the Republic
of Cuba and (where it) urges the government of the United States to
listen to the overwhelming call from the immense majority of the members
of the United Nations, and to immediately lift the unjust economic,
commercial and financial embargo imposed against the Republic of Cuba
and the ceasing of the application of the measures adopted on May 6,
2004”.
On December 17, 2008,
the Heads of State or Government of the countries of Latin America and
the Caribbean, meeting in Brazil, on the occasion of the First Latin
American and Caribbean Summit on Integration and Development, adopted a
Special Declaration on the necessity of ending the economic embargo
against Cuba in which they rejected “most
energetically the application of laws and measures contrary to
International Law such as the Helms-Burton Act”;
“they urged the government of the
United States to end their application “ and “to comply with
stipulations in 17 successive resolutions approved in the UN General
Assembly and to end the economic, commercial and financial embargo which
it maintains against Cuba”.
The ALBA countries (the
Bolivarian Alternative for the Peoples of Our America) have repeatedly
and categorically rejected the embargo imposed against Cuba by the
United States. At their summit meeting held in Cumaná, Venezuela on
April 17, 2009, the Heads of State or Government of the ALBA member
countries reiterated their condemnation of the economic, commercial and
financial embargo of the US against Cuba and they decided to reiterate “the
declaration that all the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean
adopted on December 16, 2008, on the necessity to end the economic,
commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States government
on Cuba, including
application of the so-called Helms-Burton Act”.
The Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Non-Aligned Movement, on the
occasion of the Ministerial Meeting of the Movement Coordination Bureau
held in Havana, April 27-30, 2009, “reiterated
once again their call on the government of the United States to end the
economic, commercial and financial embargo against Cuba that, besides
being unilateral and contrary to the UN Charter, international law, as
well as the good neighbour principle, causes great material losses and
economic damage to the people of Cuba”. Moreover: “once
again they urged strict compliance with resolutions
47/19, 48/16, 49/9, 50/10, 51/17,
52/10, 53/4, 54/21, 55/20, 56/9, 57/11, 58/7, 59/11, 60/12, 61/11, 62/3
and 63/7 of the United Nations General Assembly”; “they expressed their
profound concern for the growing extra-territorial dimension of the
embargo against Cuba”; and “they rejected the reinforcement of measures
adopted by the US government in order to toughen the embargo, as well as
all the other measures applied by the US government against the people
of Cuba”.
In the declaration of the VI
Extraordinary ALBA Summit – Peoples’ Trade Treaty (ALBA-TCP) held in
Maracay, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela on
June 24, 2009, the
Heads of State or Government of the member countries “ratified their
absolute condemnation of the economic, commercial and financial embargo
of the United States against Cuba and they reiterated their call for
this to be eliminated, immediately and unconditionally.”
Opposition to the embargo is also growing significantly in the very
United States.
On May 8, 2008,
the Committee for Tourism and Trips of the Alabama House of
Representatives approved a resolution in which they requested President
Bush, the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Congress to lift the
restrictions on trips to Cuba, especially from the state of Alabama.
On May 27, 2008,
The Washington Post
published an article “The Crazy Embargo against Cuba” by Eugene
Robinson, in which he described the policy towards our country as
“incredibly stupid (…) childish, irresponsible and counter-productive.””
From September 23 to 25, 2008,
Zogby International and Inter-American Dialogue carried
out a survey of 2,700 US voters about different subjects that affect
Latin America. Regarding Cuba, the survey found out that around 60% of
the people surveyed were in favour of the US revising its policy towards
Cuba and allowing trade between US companies and that country. Also, 68%
supported the idea that all Americans should be able to travel to Cuba.
On October 17, 2008,
the US magazine Science
published an editorial, signed by the Secretary of International
Relations of the Academy of Sciences of Cuba and his peer in the
National Academy of Sciences in the US in which they advocate the
lifting of the restrictions to a bilateral academia exchange.
On October 24, 2008,
the representative of the Canadian medical-pharmaceutical
company Cari Med Canada Trading Inc., Alberto Rodríguez, during his
participation at the VIII Central American and Caribbean Congress for
Anaesthesiology, Reanimation and Pain in Havana expressed that “the
permits issued by the US Departments of Commerce and the Treasury in
order to sell products to Cuba are extremely restricted, with a very
high degree of detail”. According to his declarations, some completely
absurd information is requested of the applicants. Likewise, he
described that act of putting up obstacles for Cuban access to medical
equipment and devices needed to save human lives as “criminal, genocidal
and barbarian”.
On December 4, 2008, a group of
trade, travel and agriculture-related organizations and associations
sent a letter to President Obama entitled “Re-examining US policy
towards Cuba”; in the letter they requested him to go further than his
campaign promises and carry out a broader review of American policy. The
letter was signed by the authorized representatives of 12 organizations,
among them the US Agriculture Federation, the American Society of Travel
Agents, the US Chamber of Commerce, the National Foreign Trade Council
and USA Engage. That same day, the US Travel agent association, ASTA,
asked the president-elect, Barack Obama, to eliminate all travel
restrictions to Cuba.
In November 2008, the Group of Studies on Cuba (GEC) and
the Brookings Institution, funded a survey carried out by the
International University of Florida (FIU) during the three weeks
following the presidential election, with the aim of measuring the
opinions of Cuban-Americans about US policy towards Cuba.
The survey revealed that, on the subject of remittances, 65% of the
surveyed people were in favour of a return to the pre-2003 conditions;
66% supported re-establishing trips for Cuba-Americans, while 67% showed
that they were in favour of the elimination of the restrictions imposed
on American citizens. 79% considered that the embargo was not working
and 55% were opposed to the idea that it continues to be applied. 65%
favoured re-establishing diplomatic relations between the US and Cuba
and 79% were of the opinion that both governments ought to establish a
direct dialogue on subjects of mutual interest.
On February 23, 2009,
the document titled “Changing the policy towards Cuba in the
national interest of the United States” was released, drawn up by the
office of Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) and circulated in the Senate
plenary and, in particular, to the members of the Foreign Relations
Committee.
After acknowledging the failure of the US policy towards Cuba, the
report presents a series of recommendations. Among these, the
outstanding ones are: replace the conditionality of the US approach by a
a rapprochement or progressive commitment; lift the restrictions on
trips and remittances for Cuba-Americans; and, review the Torricelli and
Helms-Burton Acts, along with the reports of the Commission for Aid to a
Free Cuba. Moreover, it proposed to re-establish bilateral
conversations, establish cooperation strategies in the area of migration
and the war on drugs and to make more flexible the measures being
applied in the economic area.
On February 23, fourteen congressmen signed a letter to President Obama
in which they supported “free trade between Cuba and the US”, arguing
for the economic advantages that could result for both nations.
As it can be appreciated, in a growing spectrum of US public opinion,
the perception of the need for a basic change in government policy
regarding Cuba is broadened; the lifting of the economic, commercial and
financial embargo would constitute an essential variable.
Conclusions
The conduct of the United States government since
October 2008 – when Resolution 63/7 was adopted – until May 2009,
confirms that that country has not taken one step to put an end to the
economic, trade and financial embargo it imposes on the Republic of
Cuba. Quite the opposite; it has flagrantly not complied with
stipulations made by the General Assembly since reports were made about
numerous actions reinforcing the embargo policy.
The direct economic repercussions on the Cuban people due to the
application of the economic, trade and financial embargo by the US
against Cuba until December 2008, calculated on a conservative basis,
totals 96 billion dollars,
a figure that would reach
236,221 million dollars
if calculations were made using the current rate of Exchange on the US
dollar. That figure does not include direct repercussions on the
economic and social goals of the country inflicted by sabotage and
terrorist acts that are encouraged, organized and financed from the
United States.
The economic, trade and financial embargo, imposed by the government of
the United States against Cuba, continues being the prime obstacle to
the economic and social growth of the country, as well as for its
recovery after the passage of three devastating hurricanes that affected
it in 2008.
The embargo violates International Law. It is contrary to the purposes
and principles of the United Nations Charter. It constitutes a
transgression on the right to peace, development and security of a
sovereign state. In its essence and its aims, it is an act of
unilateral aggression and a permanent threat against the stability of a
country. It constitutes a flagrant, massive and systematic violation of
the rights of an entire people. It is also in violation of the
constitutional rights of the American people since it denies them the
freedom to travel to Cuba. Moreover, it violates the sovereign rights
of many other states because of its extra-territorial nature.
In spite of the intense and growing complaints by the international
community to the new US government to effectuate a change of policy
towards Cuba, the lifting of the embargo and the normalization of
bilateral relations, the government of President Obama has maintained
the embargo policy intact.
Besides being illegal, the embargo is morally unsustainable. There is
no like unilateral system of punishments in existence being carried out
against any other country in the world for such an extended period of
time. Therefore, the United States must lift the embargo, with no more
delays or excuses.
|
|
|