REBELION

Obama vs. Cuba: Money and Counterrevolution
by Esteban Morales,
January 23, 2011

A CubaNews translation by Mary Todd.
Edited by Walter Lippmann.

The United States has spent billions of dollars to destabilize Cuba and overthrow the revolution. It has done this for more than 50 years and will keep on doing it, even though it hasn't achieved its goal. Obama will have to do something in this regard, and we should be prepared for potential policy adjustments that may further complicate Cuba's already complex situation.1

I don't share the thesis that the most important action the Obama administration will take to support a so-called "change of regime in Cuba" will be directly related only to the possibility of reducing or changing priorities regarding the money that is given to the counterrevolution in Cuba. I think that it is more a matter of seeking political efficiency than the simple administration of money.

Money in itself means nothing if it isn't used to implement a political strategy.


President Dwight D. Eisenhower used up enormous resources trying to frustrate the triumph of the Cuban Revolution right from the start. He continued using them after 1959 to try to keep the revolutionary forces from taking and consolidating political power. The United States has persistently financed the internal counterrevolution, nursing every counterrevolutionary who appeared, either in or outside Cuba, and all of the (WALTER-I'm leaving out "todos los bandidos" = "all of the bandits," because we always translate "bandidos" as "counterrevolutionaries," and that has already been said) failed mercenaries, who went through the money like greased lightning, (WALTER-It said "que después gastaban el dinero a manos llenas" = "who then wasted the money with full hands") always promising to return to Cuba and save it from Communism.

That first U.S. President in the United States' confrontation of Cuba from 1959 on prepared an invasion that he left to his successor as an inheritance-which also failed. A little later, trying to recover the "offensive," John F. Kennedy prepared an invasion with the U.S. Armed Forces in what was called Operation Mongoose-which failed, as well. (WALTER-This is confusing; in the Spanish, it sounds as if what Eisenhower left Kennedy and Operation Mongoose were two different things. Were they? If not, this paragraph has to be rewritten)

Finally, after all the setbacks dealt the U.S. policy, the idea of creating, in the United States, an alternative society to revolutionary Cuba took hold. Thus, a parody of Cuban-American nationality-whose political leaders still dream of returning and controlling Cuba-was created in Miami.

Then, starting in the '80s, the counterrevolution changed its style-though always, whenever possible, using the classical tools of state terrorism. The Cuban-American National Foundation showed its true colors as just another terrorist organization. Mercenaries exactly like the ones used during the '60s were recruited-this time in Central America, as well-and have been tried for crimes against Cuba.2

All this has cost the U.S. ruling elite-and, above all, the taxpayers-an enormous amount of money, making it the most expensive, least profitable (WALTER-It said "empresa tan costosa y poco rentable" = "so expensive and little profitable business") enterprise in the history of any empire.

Neither Hitler's Germany, with its war of conquest and extermination; nor England, with its conquest and maintenance of its empire; nor Spain, with its colonization of the Americas, spent so much. Or got so little. In its campaign against Cuba, the United States has, I'm sure, spent much more and hasn't been able to balance its books. (WALTER-It said "sin haber podido aun equilibrar las cuentas" = "without having been able yet to balance the accounts") Naturally, Cuba has lost a lot, too, but that is another story. It has managed to preserve its political independence and sovereignty-which is the most important thing.

The United States made the money (which all empires spend) in the most profitable way (WALTER-It said "lo hicieron" = "they made it"; I'm guessing that the subject is the United States) but has wasted it designing one counterrevolutionary plan (WALTER-I added the "plan" because, in the next paragraph, it talks about ONE counterrevolution) after another against Cuba. This has turned into a lucrative business more than anything else.

No other counterrevolution in the history of the world has been or is as generous to those taking part in it as is the one that the U.S. administrations have promoted against Cuba for more than 50 years. Will the United States continue to throw money into the project to change the regime in Cuba? I think it will, but it seems that Obama has decided to do some new things. I think this for the following reasons:

- The first thing Obama did after taking office was to make changes in the design of the policy Bush had followed. (WALTER-OJO: both Hitler, 3 paragraphs back, and Bush are misspelled in the Spanish) He lifted the restrictions on remittances and travel to Cuba, ended the restrictions on who could be considered relatives, increased the expenses of Cuban-Americans going as tourists to Cuba (WALTER-It said "incremento los gastos de dinero" = "increased the money expenses"; just what does this mean? Increased the cost of the flights? Put a tax on travelers? Made them pay to use the airport? I think it means what follows, so I'm rewriting this, moving "ended the restrictions on who could be considered relatives" up) by increasing the cost and content (WALTER-How about taking out "and content"?) Of the packages, lifted the ban on business trips, allowed people living in Cuba to receive inheritances and took other measures to ease the direct suffering that the blockade causes ordinary citizens. All of these measures are aimed at promoting family ties (WALTER-It said "acercamiento" = "the action of drawing near") and at improving the image Cubans have of the United States.3

- He gave money to the counterrevolution. As has always occurred, most of it remained in the United States, and those who received the money here live off it rather than use it to foment counterrevolution, even though this may not seem very profitable.4

- In Cuba, it created a large group of parasites. They aren't even mercenaries, because mercenaries risk their lives for money. Here in Cuba, they live very comfortably without working-"having their cake and eating it, too," with free medicine, health care and education in Cuba and money from the U.S. Interests Section.5

- Some have even sought to get on the payroll at the U.S. Interests Section, to receive salaries for their services.6

- These counterrevolutionaries haven't even managed to present a united front. Each has his own little group-sometimes just the members of his immediate family. They don't engage in reasoning or present any programs. But they certainly mobilize efficiently when it comes time to argue about how much each of them should get of the ca$h their master sends.7

Can we let ourselves be fooled in Cuba, thinking that the main strike will come from that direction? (WALTER-It said "por ahí" = "from there"; I don't know what he's referring to; "from that direction"? "from the United States"?) I don't think so. I think that it is just the "classic play" of internal support, that has to be kept active (WALTER-This doesn't sound right, either; how about "I think that it is simply a matter of keeping the internal support active,") even when, as now, cablegrams report that it (WALTER-It said "les" = "them"; the only thing I can see it might refer to is "internal support," which is singular; or do you think it refers to the counterrevolutionaries mentioned at the beginning of the preceding paragraph? This thing is VERY badly written) isn't considered very effective. The new thing about the counterrevolution that Obama has redesigned is that it doesn't come by that means. Rather, (WALTER-It said "por esa vía" = "by that means"; WHAT means???? How about taking out "it doesn't come by that means. Rather," ?) It comes from (WALTER-It said "bajo" = "under"; I don't understand this, either) a combination of factors that may include the following:

" taking advantage of Cuba's present complex economic situation;8

" using the internal tensions that the updating of the Cuban economic model may bring;

" using the mercantile pressures that Obama is trying to bring to bear on civilian Cuban society with the lifting of restrictions on remittances, trips, packages and family contacts and with other recent measures;9

" extending the pressures of the blockade, trying to further complicate the situation of the Cuban Government's international economic relations;10 and

" moving within the "harsh reality" (WALTER-It said "dureza" = "hardness"; I have no idea what he means) of current (WALTER-I added "current") domestic economic policy in Cuba, (WALTER-It said "propia de un discurso político cubano interno" = "proper to an internal Cuban political speech / reasoning / power"; "political" makes no sense here, as the problem is economic, so I'm making that "policy") that must be more realistic and recognize existing difficulties, even though it also tends to cause concern among ordinary citizens regarding their future.

We should not let ourselves be fooled by the self-critical (WALTER-It said "autocrítico" = "self-critical," but I think the "self" should be taken out, because the author is referring to criticism of the dissidents here-not Obama's criticism of his administration's failure to achieve anything) analysis that the Obama Administration has made and is putting forward (WALTER-That's what it said, but "spreading" or "expressing" would make more sense) through the head of the Interests Section, that brings out the incompetence of the domestic dissidents whom the United States has created.

I think that this criticism (WALTER-It said "lo anterior" = "the foregoing") was expressed in an attempt to strengthen the dissidents, making them compete for money against other sectors of civilian society which the U.S. authorities think might be more useful in their plans for internal destabilization.11 This is really nothing more than a change in political priorities-in methods, perhaps-within the same scheme of destabilization that has been in effect since Barack Obama became President.12

The Obama Administration is well aware of the fact that, to overthrow the Cuban Revolution from within, it must mobilize (WALTER-It said "mover" = "move") all of its political tools and forces.

No true revolution-which is what the Cuban Revolution is-can be dealt a mortal blow (WALTER-It said "dañarla, de manera definitiva"; "definitiva" made me think of "dealt a mortal blow"; without the "definitiva," it could mean "seriously damaged") without help from within. Fidel Castro said this on November 17, 2005, when he clearly indicated that it was we Cubans who had to avoid destroying the Revolution. And Obama, with his current policy of "internal subversion," isn't going to fail to take advantage of any chance to subvert the political regime in Cuba.

Notes: 1 Cuba is not a priority in U.S. policy, especially now, when the United States is bogged down in one of the most complex situations it has had to face in the last 50 years and when Cuba's prestige in Latin America (WALTER-It said "hemisférico" = "hemispheric") is greater than ever before. But this doesn't mean that the present administration isn't trying to take advantage of the special internal situation in Cuba in order to continue with its policy of trying to bring about "a change in regime."

2 The Salvadoran Francisco Antonio Chávez Abarca, a cohort of the criminal Luis Posada Carriles, has just been sentenced to 30 years in prison.

3 Those who follow Obama ideologically in his position regarding Cuba, supporters of "internal peaceful subversion," considered George W. Bush (WALTER-I added the "W.") to have had a stupid policy on Cuba. A badly handled policy of blockade, separating family members on both sides, limiting as much as possible material assistance to relatives in Cuba, excessively aggressive statements and a policy of total estrangement (WALTER-It said "alejamiento" = "estrangement," "distancing," "alienation") served to limit the United States' (WALTER-It didn't say whose influence) over Cuba. For his part, Obama respects (WALTER-It said "respecto" = "I respect"; if the tilde is missing, it would be "respected"; this is very difficult to translate, because the Spanish isn't very good) civilian Cuban society-but not the Government. He has set about dismantling that design (WALTER-This is what it said, but I don't know what he's referring to) and is doing it. (Author's note.)

4 Wayne Smith has confirmed the illegal and even imprudent nature of sending money to Cuban dissidents. Radio Havana Cuba, May 21, 2008. Such actions are not considered legal anywhere in the world, so the Cuban Government would be entirely within its rights if it jailed citizens who entered into such transactions.

5 Nor can it be said that these who "live well" are at all ashamed. Vladimiro (WALTER-This should probably be "Vladimir") Roca and Rene (WALTER-This should probably be "René") Gómez consider that the United States' economic support isn't anything they have to hide or for which they should feel ashamed. Nuevo Herald, May 21, 2008.

6 See: Jonathan D. Farrar, "The U.S. Role of the Opposition in Cuba" (WALTER-This is what it said, but it doesn't sound right to me; "in the Opposition" would be more logical, or "and the Role of," as footnote 7 has it) (Exclusive Q a With USAID, October 25, 2010). (WALTER-Again, this is what it said, but what does "Q a With" mean?)

7 In a confidential memo sent to the State Department on April 15, 2008, and entitled "Estados Unidos y el papel de la oposición en Cuba" (The United States and the Role of the Opposition in Cuba), (WALTER-I'm sure this was originally in English, but I don't have the original title to copy; can you find the original title in English? Also, check it against what appears in footnote 6) Jonathan (WALTER-The author said this was his name in footnote 6) D. Farrar, head of the United States Interests Office in Havana, declared that the dissidents had no role, because the opposition groups were dominated by individuals with powerful egos that kept them from working together. He went on to say that the dissident movement in Cuba was growing old and was completely divorced from the reality of ordinary Cubans, so its message was of no interest to the young people. Op. Cit.

8 Now more than ever before, improving the economy, making it grow and stabilizing it is Cuba's key (WALTER-It said "variable"; I'm leaving that out) to survival in the face of the United States' ongoing, unstoppable efforts to subvert it. (WALTER-The following "sentence" had no verb in the Spanish) Attempts of U.S. policy against Cuba, many of which are still undecipherable. It is absolutely necessary to keep on ___ (WALTER-It said "profundizando" = "deepening"; if they simply left out the "en" it could mean "delving deeper into") what Obama may continue to do against Cuba to destabilize it. Obama has already been and may continue to be creative in his policy against Cuba. George W. (WALTER-I added the "W.") Bush ordered a series of punitive measures and froze political relations. (WALTER-It said "la política" = "politics") Obama favors continuing to try new initiatives to improve what may be called his "subversion trap." (Author's note.)

9 Obama has lifted the restrictions that Bush had imposed against Cuba-limiting the amount of remittances, trips, the size and contents of packages, how much visitors could spend, the number of flights, (WALTER-It said "la ampliación de los vuelos" = "the expansion of flights") consideration of families, (WALTER-Whatever that means!) Etc. More recently, it became (WALTER-It said "será" = "it will be") possible to receive inheritances, using the same mechanism used in sending remittances. The U.S. administrations had always limited the benefits granted to Cubans living in Cuba. (WALTER-It said "cubanos de este lado" = "Cubans on this side") When some benefits were granted, (WALTER-It said "Cuando lo hicieron" = "When they did it") George W. Bush (WALTER-I added the "W.") eliminated those advantages or reduced them to almost nothing. Why has Obama decided to renew those advantages at their maximum expression now, unless it is because he hopes to obtain solid political benefits by doing so? Doubtless, Obama seeks political influence within civilian Cuban society. Therefore, he has divided the blockade in two parts, (WALTER-It said "que tienden a enfrentarse" = "which tend to confront each other"; I don't understand what he's trying to say, so how about leaving this part out? Moreover, he says this more clearly at the end of this sentence) with very different treatment for civilian society and for the Government-as if he were trying to pit them against each other.

10 People who go on unauthorized trips continue to be harassed, and fines for currency exchange violations involving the dollar, a ban on credit for purchases and other measures that have limited cultural and academic exchanges also remain in effect.

11 The administration considers (WALTER-It said "Según, ahora considera la administración, los actuales disidentes, son. . ." = "According to, / depending on, the administration now considers, the current dissidents, they [and who in the world are "they"?] are very. . . ." I'm leaving "Según" and the comma after "disidentes" out) that the present dissidents are very old, lack initiative, are unable to draw in young people and are only concerned about getting money.

It is to be expected that such criticism will trigger reactions among the dissidents aimed at increasing the effectiveness of counterrevolutionary activities; enlarging the sphere of movement; (WALTER-That's what it says; movement by whom or by what? How about "enlarging their sphere of action"?) And seeking to influence other sectors of civilian society, which they don't reach now.

12 For more information, see "Obama es solo el presidente: ¿Y la política hacia Cuba?" (Obama Is Just the President: What about the Policy on Cuba?), WEB-UNEAC, October 2010.

Rebelión has published this article with the author's permission through a license of Creative Commons, respecting his right to publish it in other sources.

http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=120915
   
    Obama contra Cuba: Dinero y contrarrevolución

Esteban Morales Rebelión
23-01-2011

Estados Unidos ha gastado miles de millones de dólares para desestabilizar a Cuba y derrotar a la revolución. Lo ha hecho durante más de 50 años y lo continuará haciendo, aunque no haya logrado, finalmente, el resultado esperado. Algo tendrán que hacer al respecto y deberemos estar preparados, para potenciales ajustes de política, por parte de Obama, que pueden complicarnos, aun más, la ya compleja situación que atraviesa el pais. 1

No comparto la tesis de que la acción más importante de la administración de Obama, para apoyar la búsqueda del llamado “cambio de régimen en Cuba”, tenga directamente que ver solo con la posibilidad de reducir o cambiar las prioridades del dinero que se entrega a la contrarrevolución en la isla. Pienso que se trata más de búsqueda de eficiencia política que de simple manejo del dinero.

El dinero, en si mismo, no significa nada, sino esta puesto en función del despliegue de una estrategia política.

El presidente D. Eisenhower, gastó cuantiosos recursos para frustrar el triunfo de la revolución cubana desde la cuna. Siguió gastándolos, a partir de 1959, para evitar la consolidación de la toma del poder político por parte de las fuerzas revolucionarias. Financio a la contrarrevolución interna con insistencia, amamantando a todos los contrarrevolucionarios que se les ofrecieron, dentro y fuera de Cuba y a todos los bandidos y mercenarios fracasados, que después gastaban el dinero a manos llenas, prometiendo siempre volver a Cuba para rescatarla del comunismo.

Este primer presidente, en nuestra cuenta del enfrentamiento con posterioridad a 1959, preparó una invasión que, dejó como herencia y que también fracasó. Poco después J.F. Kennedy, tratando de cobrarse la “ofensa”, se enroló en la preparación de una invasión con las fuerzas armadas norteamericanas y en la llamada “Operación Mangosta”, que tampoco lograron sus objetivos.

Finalmente, después de todos los descalabros sufridos por la política norteamericana, se fue abriendo paso la idea de la creación en Estados Unidos de una sociedad alternativa a la Cuba revolucionaria, haciendo surgir en Miami, una parodia de nacionalidad cubano-americana, cuyos líderes políticos sueñan aun con volver a controlar la Isla.

La contrarrevolución, entonces, a partir de los ochenta, cambió el estilo, pero sin dejar de utilizar, siempre que se presenta la oportunidad, los clásicos instrumentos del terrorismo de estado. La propia llamada Fundación Cubano-Americana, mostró su verdadero rostro como una organizaron terrorista más. De modo que por estos tiempos, mercenarios reclutados, ahora también en Centroamérica, han sido juzgados por crímenes contra Cuba, que no se diferencian para nada de los ya utilizados durante los años sesenta. 2

Todo lo anterior ha costado tanto dinero a las elites gobernantes norteamericanas y sobre todo al contribuyente, que no es posible recordar, empresa tan costosa y poco rentable en la historia de ningún imperio.

Ni la Alemania de Hithler, con su guerra de conquista y exterminio o Inglaterra con la conquista y el sostenimiento de su imperio; ni España, en su colonización de América, gastaron tanto. Amen de que no ganaron poco. Sin embargo, Estados Unidos ha gastado en su campaña contra Cuba, estoy seguro, mucho más, sin haber podido aun equilibrar las cuentas. Por supuesto, que Cuba ha perdido mucho también, pero no se trata de eso ahora .Porque ha logrado conservar su independencia política y la soberanía que, es en definitiva, lo más importante.

Pero el dinero, que todos los imperios gastaron, lo hicieron de manera más rentable. Estados Unidos, sin embargo, lo ha desperdiciado en diseñar y rediseñar una contrarrevolución contra Cuba, que más que nada, ha devenido en un lucrativo negocio.

Ninguna contrarrevolución ha sido y continua siendo tan generosa con sus participantes, como la que las administraciones norteamericanas, por mas de 50 años, han pretendido desplegar exitosamente contra Cuba. ¿Continuará Estados Unidos, como antes, gastando dinero para cambiar al régimen en Cuba? Creo que si, pero me parece que la presidencia de Obama se ha propuesto hacer algunas cosas nuevas. Pienso que por las razones siguientes:

- Lo primero que hizo Obama, desde que tomo la presidencia, fue hacer cambios en diseño de política seguido por Busch: levanto las restricciones a las remesas, los viajes, incremento los gastos de dinero de los turistas cubano-americanos a Cuba, elimino las restricciones sobre a quienes considerar familia, amplió el costo y contenido de los paquetes, permitió los viajes comerciales y otras medidas, tendentes a suavizar el modo en que directamente, el ciudadano común sufre el bloqueo y otras, como permitir la recepción de herencias. Medidas todas dirigidas a al acercamiento familiar y a presentar la mejor cara ante la sociedad civil cubana. 3

- Dar dinero a la contrarrevolución, para que en Estados Unidos se quede, como siempre ha ocurrido, la mejor tajada; y para que los que reciben el dinero de este lado, mas que hacer contrarrevolución, lo que hagan es vivir de ella, aunque ello que no parezca muy rentable. 4

- De l lado de Cuba, lo más que tenemos, es un nutrido grupo de parásitos. En realidad, no son ni siquiera mercenarios, porque los mercenarios se juegan la vida por dinero. Los que tenemos acá en Cuba, lo que hacen es vivir bastante holgadamente sin trabajar. Como si fuera poco, “disfrutando de los beneficios de ambos lados”, medicina, salud y educación gratuita en Cuba y dinero, proveniente de la Oficina de Intereses. 5

- Algunos, ya hasta han presentado nóminas, a la Oficina de Intereses, para cobrar salarios por sus servicios. 6

- Estos contrarrevolucionarios, aun no han sido capaces ni de cohesionarse. Cada uno tiene su grupito, a veces este es simplemente familiar. No tienen discurso ni programa. Pero eso sí, muestran un eficiente nivel de movilización a la hora de disputarse cuanto les toca a cada uno, de la “ma$cada” que les envía el amo. 7

¿Podemos dejarnos engañar en Cuba, pensando que el golpe principal viene por ahí? Creo que no. Pienso que esa es solo la “jugada clásica “, de apoyo interno, que hay que mantener activa, aun y cuando, como ahora, según cables divulgados no se les considere muy efectivos. Lo nuevo de la contrarrevolución rediseñada por Obama, no viene por esa vía. Viene bajo una combinación factores que podrían ser los siguientes:

*

Un a provechamiento de la compleja situación económica que Cuba está atravesando. 8 *

Utiliza ción de las tensiones internas que pueden traer aparejadas las actualizaciones del modelo económico cubano. *

Utiliza ción de las presiones mercantilizadas, que Obama pretende ejercer sobre la sociedad civil cubana, con el levantamiento de las restricciones a las remesas, los viajes, los paquetes, los contactos familiares y otras medidas recientes. 9

*

Ampliación de las presiones del bloqueo, que pretenden hacer al gobierno cubano cada día más difícil la situación en sus relaciones económicas externas. 10

*

Aprovechar la cisrcuntancia, de m overse dentro de la “dureza” propia de un discurso político cubano interno, que teniendo que ser necesariamente mas realista y reconocedor de las dificultades existentes, aunque tiende también a preocupar al ciudadano común en cuanto a su futuro.

Pero no debemos dejarnos engañar por un análisis autocritico, que ahora la administración de Obama esgrime, por medio del propio Jefe de la Oficina de Intereses, que persigue poner de manifiesto las incapacidades de la disidencia interna que Estados Unidos ha generado.

Pienso que lo anterior solo se hace, con la idea de tratar de fortalecerlos, poniéndolos a competir internamente, por el dinero, contra otros sectores de la sociedad civil, que Estados Unidos considera pueden ser más útiles a sus planes de desestabilización interna. 11 Tratándose en realidad solo de un cambio de prioridades políticas, de métodos tal vez, pero dentro del mismo esquema de desestabilización, que ha quedado diseñado, desde que Barack Obama tomo la presidencia. 12

La administración de Obama esta plenamente consciente de que para derrotar a la revolución, tiene que tratar de mover todas sus fuerzas e instrumentos políticos para hacerlo desde adentro.

Ninguna revolución verdadera y la cubana lo es, será posible dañarla, de manera definitiva, solo desde afuera. Fidel castro lo ha declarado, cuando lo dijo, el 17 de noviembre del 2005, indicando claramente que somos los propios cubanos, los que tenemos que evitar destruir a la revolución. Y Obama, con su política actual, de “subversión interna”, no va a despreciar la más mínima oportunidad para lograr subvertir el régimen político en Cuba.

Notas: 1 Cuba continúa sin ser una prioridad de la política norteamericana, mas ahora, cuando Estados Unidos atraviesa una de las situaciones más complejas de los últimos 50 años. Y cuando Cuba cuenta con una situación de prestigio hemisférico como nunca antes. Pero ello no significa que la actual administración, no trate de aprovechar el momento interno especial en que la Isla se encuentra, para seguir con su política de “cambio de régimen”.

2 Un compinche del criminal, Luís Posada carriles, el salvadoreño Francisco Antonio Chávez Abarca, acaba de ser condenado a 30 años de prisión.

3 Los que siguen ideologicamente a Obama en su politica hacia Cuba, partidarios de la “subversión pacifica interna”, consideraban a G.Bush como un estupido en su politica hacia Cuba.Un apolitica de bloqueo mal manejada, separando a las familias de ambos lados; limitnando al maximo la ayuda material a los familiares en Cuba, un discurso excesivamente agresivo y una politica de total alejamiento, servian para limitar la influencia sobre Cuba.Obama, por su parte, respecto a la sociedad civil cubana, no asi en su politica contra el gobierno, se ha propuesto desmontar ese diseño y ya viene haciendolo.( Nota del Autor ).

4 Wayne Smith, ha confirmado el carácter ilegal e incluso imprudente de mandar dinero a los disidentes cubanos. Radio Habana Cuba, mayo 21, 2008. En ningún lugar del mundo es permitida esta acción como legal, por lo cual, el gobierno cubano, estaría en todo su derecho de enviar a la cárcel al ciudadano que aceptase esa transacción.

5 Tampoco es posible contar con que estos “vive bien “ se averguencen.Vladimiro Roca y Rene Gómez, consideran que el apoyo económico de Estados Unidos, no es cosa que haya que ocultar o de lo que tengan que avergonzarse .Nuevo Herald, mayo 21, 2008.

6 Ver: Jonathan D.Farrar, “The U.S. Role of the Oposition in Cuba” (Exclusive Q a With USAID, 25 oct, 2010).

7 D.Farrar, actual jefe de la Oficina de Intereses de Estados Unidos en La Habana, en un memorando confidencial del 15 de abril del 2008, titulado “Estados Unidos y el papel de la oposición en Cuba”, dirigido al Departamento de Estado, declara, que el papel de la disidencia es nulo porque los grupos opositores se encuentran dominados por individuos con fuertes egos que le impide trabajar juntos. Continúa diciendo, que el movimiento disidente en Cuba envejece y que esta completamente desconectado de la realidad de los cubanos ordinarios, así como que su mensaje no interesa al segmento de la juventud.Op.cit.

8 Mejorar la economía, haciéndola crecer y estabilizándola, es hoy, más que nunca, la variable clave para que Cuba pueda sobrevivir ante los intentos permanentes e indetenibles de Estados Unidos por subvertirla .Intentos de la política norteamericana contra Cuba, , de los que no pocos son todavía indescifrables. Es indispensable continuar profundizando que puede Obama continuar haciendo contra Cuba para desestabilizarla. Obama ya ha sido creativo en la política contra Cuba y puede continuar siéndolo. G.Bush tomo una serie de medidas punitivas y congelo la política, Obama es partidario de continuar desplegando iniciativas para perfeccionar la que pudiéramos llamar, “trampa de la subversión”. (Nota del Autor).

9 Obama ha levantado las restricciones que Bush había adoptado contra Cuba, en cuanto a reducción de las remesas, los viajes, el tamaño y contenido de los paquetes, los gastos de los visitantes, la ampliación de los vuelos, la consideración de familia, etc. Más recientemente, será posible recibir herencias, utilizando el mecanismo de las remesas. Todas las administraciones norteamericanas habían sido siempre muy limitadas en otorgar beneficios a los cubanos d e este lado. Cuando lo hicieron, G.Bush elimino esas ventajas o las redujo al mínimo., ¿Por que ahora Obama decide rehacer esas ventajas, a su máxima expresión, sino es porque espera obtener fuertes resultados políticos de ello? Sin dudas, Obama persigue objetivos de influencia política dentro de la sociedad civil cubana. Por eso ha seccionado el bloqueo en dos partes, que tienden a enfrentarse por tratamientos muy diferenciados a la sociedad civil y gobierno. Como si buscara contraponerlos a ambos.

10 Se mantiene la persecución a los viajes sin licencias, multas por violaciones del intercambio con el dólar, imposibilidad de créditos para las compras, y otras medidas que han limitado el intercambio cultural y académico...

11 Según, ahora considera la administración, los actuales disidentes, son muy viejos, faltos de iniciativas e incapaces de acercarse a los jóvenes, así como demasiado preocupados solo por recibir dinero.

Es de esperar que tales críticas, traigan reacciones de la disidencia, dirigidas a incrementar la efectividad de la actividad contrarrevolucionaria, ampliar el campo de movimiento y buscar influencia dentro de otros sectores de la sociedad civil, a los que ahora no llegan.

12 Para ampliar ver: Obama es solo el presidente: ¿Y la política hacia Cuba? WEB-UNEAC.Octubre, 2010.

Rebelión ha publicado este artículo con el permiso del autor mediante una licencia de Creative Commons, respetando su libertad para publicarlo en otras fuentes.