Mambi Watch

What Embargo? [Part 2]

2012-02-17T17:29:00.004-05:00

Over the decades, countless arguments have been made for keeping the US embargo (e.g. Soviet threat, property nationalization, approaching success, violation of human rights). In Miami, no two defenders will have the same defense. And, asking "What embargo?" is not only an effective excuse from again defending a half-century of sanctions, but it also expresses widespread exhaustion and disappointment with the effectiveness of current policy. But, despite its accepted failure, embargo defenders still view the embargo as the fine line that protects the Cuban exile identity, the necessary line that divides friend and enemy.

EXILE NEWS BUBBLE

I was listening to Nancy Perez Crespo on WWFE (670 AM) last week. She appeared shocked to see that Diario Las Americas, whose editors are hard-liners on Cuba policy, published an EFE article on the 50th Anniversary of the embargo which she thought was intolerable. She barely got halfway through reading the article on-air because she refused to accept the article's contention that economic reforms have been implemented in Cuba. "What reforms?," she asked. Maybe not the reforms that Perez Crespo had in mind. But, it seems, even to suggest any change in the cruelty of your enemy is unacceptable. God forbid the enemy does change and produces the need for a new strategy.

Upon the 50th anniversary, embargo defenders in Miami had to remind themselves why they should remain committed. One example came from Jesus Marzo Fernandez, former Cuban official who defected in 1996, and now a local "expert" on the Cuban economy (appearing countless times on Spanish-language TV and radio). Last week, Fernandez outlined chronologically why the US embargo was justified. Fernandez begins: "1960 - During this year 473 citizens were executed by firing squad, unprecedented in Cuban history." Interestingly, his chronology ends on October 24, 1960 when supposedly all American companies in Cuba have been nationalized. In fact, most of the dates in the timeline have to do with Cuban intervention and nationalization of foreign companies during the 60s, and therefore we can assume that Fernandez, like others in Miami, believe the embargo is justified because of these nationalizations (without fair compensation).

But, as usual, the timeline is incorrect and misleading.

There's no mention that both Washington and Havana did attempt to negotiate for fair compensation of future nationalized properties during 1959. But, the U.S. eventually rejected the compensation offer of 20-year bonds. (Of course, there were huge disagreements over what was "fair" compensation, such as the case of United Fruit properties which Cuba estimated at around $6 million, but the company wanted around $38 million!) By the time 1960 came around, negotiation attempts were replaced with escalating threats. And, as mentioned in the previous post, throughout the 60s the Eisenhower administration already had plans to overthrow the Cuban government with a covert war.

This is the context missing from Marzo Fernandez's chronology defending the embargo. In addition, his timeline has errors. According to Fernandez, on Jan. 3, 1960 "all phosphorous plants are confiscated." I assume he means sulphur plants, which the biggest one (Moa Bay Mining Co.) was intervened upon (not confiscated) in March 1960.

Also, Fernandez doesn't mention the accurate date the U.S. embargo began on (Oct. 19, 1960), and instead makes the chronology look like the embargo followed a long series of Cuban nationalizations. On the contrary, the Cuban government confiscated over 100 American companies in reaction to the Eisenhower embargo. (Interestingly, Moa Bay Mining Co. was not yet confiscated.)

WHO'S SIDE ARE YOU ON?

Over the years, I've heard countless excuses on why the U.S. embargo towards Cuba should be kept. None make much sense to me, but that's because the embargo means something deeper than rational thinking. It's more about exile identity and its corresponding narrative of combating an eternal enemy. Recently, Jaime Suchlicki made it very clear (and revealing his militant side) in a recent op-ed for El Nuevo Herald, arguing that "[a]ll forms of struggle for liberty are legitimate. The last recourse of a defenseless and oppressed people is violence. Cuba is on that road. Let us hope the last sacrifice is coming soon."

Preserving the line between friend and enemy is something that draws hard-liners and militants together. And those voices are also our political leaders. As Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen once said on Radio Mambi: "[it's] not very difficult Ninoska. The intellectuals want to make it like - Oh, this is so difficult, you have to look at this as very complex. No, no, no. There are friends and there are enemies. Who's side are you on?"

In this world of eternal battle, who knows when intolerance, ignorance or violence may fall on either side.

What Embargo? [Part 1]

2012-02-10T19:40:00.009-05:00

That's an often repeated line from callers and guests on Radio Mambi. The denial seems to be premised on the US being one of Cuba's top trading partners since 2000 when Congress allowed exceptions for agricultural exports (with several restrictions which you can look up here). In 2007, the US became Cuba's fifth-largest trading partner with approx. $582 million in agricultural sales (and approx. $710 million in 2008). In 2010, sales in food products dropped to approx. $410 million (seventh-largest trade partner with Cuba).

Of course the embargo exists (just ask the US-Cuba Democracy PAC), but, in Miami, hard-liners towards Cuba have grown incredibly frustrated defending the policy. The easiest way out of an argument is to say: "What embargo?" And, even the most adamant defenders of the policy know they don't have much to stand on. Let's take a look.

THE EMBARGO BEGAN IN 1960

Lot of articles were written this week about the US embargo towards Cuba, and its 50th year in operation. But, the embargo actually began in 1960 under the Eisenhower administration when US exports were cut. You can see from the picture above (courtesy of The Miami News on Google Archives), the top headline is from 1960, and the bottom one is the Kennedy administration's ban on imports from Cuba in 1962 (good chronology of US sanctions on Cuba here [PDF]). This is an important distinction because the Eisenhower administration made the goals of economic sanctions against Cuba very clear. Last year, historian Robert S. McElvaine wrote this in his op-ed to the L.A. Times:

"Noting in a 1960 memorandum that 'the majority of Cubans support Castro,' Lester D. Mallory, deputy assistant secretary of State for inter-American affairs, argued that 'the only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship.' The objective, he wrote, was 'to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.'"

And, it was throughout the 60s that the US was secretly planning a covert war against Cuba. You can check this great chronology from the National Security Archive to get an idea of how extensive American plans were to overthrow the Cuban government (also good is "The Castro Obsession" by Don Bohning).

EMBARGO DEFENDERS

The above context is important, especially when you hear today about how "moral" it is to keep the US embargo. While it certainly won't topple the Cuban government today, the embargo is perceived in Cuba as a policy of aggression, as it was in 1960 and 1962.

So, last Tuesday our four Cuban-American representatives in Congress came out with their defense of the US embargo. According to Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, "the embargo is a moral stance against the brutal dictatorship. Over the last 50 years, the embargo has served as a constant form of solidarity with the Cuban people."

What Rep. Ros-Lehtinen really means when she says "moral stance" is to say that the embargo is a symbol of our confrontation against Cuba. A message that should be interpreted by the Cuban government as "we are enemies, not friends." (Nevermind the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights suggesting " it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations.") Also, the embargo is not a "form of solidarity" with the people of Cuba. The majority of Cubans oppose the embargo (a 1994 poll inside Cuba found widespread opposition, and a 2006 poll showed Cubans highly favoring the US as an ideal trading partner.) Anyway, our foreign policy should not ignore the majority voice of Americans that oppose the US embargo.

Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart and Albio Sires make similar comments defending the embargo, but Rep. David Rivera seems to describe the need for expanding sanctions on Cuba because of their "Chavista and Mullah" allies. If we follow this logic, the US should expand their embargo to the rest of the western hemisphere.

Speaking of irrationality, let's not forget the other intransigents in Miami.

Wilman Villar Mendoza (1980-2012)

2012-01-20T16:16:00.001-05:00

Amnesty International

Human Rights Watch

"Villar Mendoza was charged with 'contempt' (desacato) and sentenced to four years in prison in a hearing that lasted less than an hour, his wife told Human Rights Watch. While she was allowed to attend the trial, dissidents who tried to enter the courtroom were denied access. Villar Mendoza was not given the opportunity to speak in his defense, nor was he represented by a defense lawyer, she said. His wife said he initiated his hunger strike to protest his unjust trial and imprisonment."

[Video of demonstration that landed Villar in jail, courtesy of Directorio Cubano Democratico]

Newt Gingrich Interview on Radio Mambi [Updated]

2012-01-14T14:20:00.009-05:00

Republican Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich arrived in South Florida last Thursday just in time for an evening fundraiser in Coral Gables. The following day, Gingrich visited Little Havana where he pledged a hard-line policy towards Cuba in a written letter to Miami's most intransigent Cuban exile organization, Unidad Cubana. While Unidad Cubana seemed very pleased by Gingrich's promise, they were probably even more pleased that a Presidential candidate had actually endorsed such an extremist policy. The letter, undoubtedly written in Miami and not by Gingrich, has now raised policy expectations by the most hard-line in Little Havana.

ENTER DAVID RIVERA

Thursday's fundraiser was held at the luxurious Biltmore Hotel where Gingrich met up with Rep. David Rivera (FL-25) who, surprising some, is strongly endorsing and accompanied Gingrich while in Miami. Rep. Rivera was recently named one of the "most wanted corrupt politicians in Washington," and, according to Politico's Alex Isenstadt, accepting Rivera's endorsement shows Gingrich in a "scramble to put an organization in place" before the Florida primary. But, in Miami, Rivera is untouchable.

For years, David Rivera has been consistent with his hard-line policy towards Cuba (e.g. supporting 2006's Florida academic travel ban to terror-sponsoring nations like Cuba [now heading to the Supreme Court], proposing legislation to reform the Cuban adjustment act in order to punish Cubans in Miami who dare return to their homeland, and welcoming alleged criminals to Miami like Luis Posada Carriles). And, this is why Rivera still has many strong supporters in Miami, namely Cuban exile political leaders and other supporters of a "free Cuba."

ENTER LITTLE HAVANA

Perhaps knowing that Newt Gingrich was "scrambling" for support in South Florida, hard-liners in Miami most likely saw an opportunity to raise the political stakes and asked Gingrich to accept their extremist positions on Cuba in exchange for the coveted Cuban-American vote.

Disguised as a letter written by Gingrich himself, the four points outlined describe traditional and recent frustrations from hard-line exiles in Miami. Keeping the U.S. embargo towards Cuba is standard, while full implementation of Helms-Burton has been a long-time grievance in Miami, but frustrated due to international pressure on Washington. Seeking criminal indictments of Fidel and Raul Castro was proposed by Rivera earlier this year, but has been part of the Cuban American National Foundation's policy recommendations for years, and a local project headed by Cuban exile militant Santiago Alvarez at least since 2010. And, reversing the Obama administration's relaxed travel restrictions for Cubans would be a tremendous relief for hard-liners who find it outrageously immoral to see Cubans traveling back and/or sending remittances to Cuba. (In reality, the new Obama travel policies are very popular in Miami, but hard-liners don't care.)

ENTER RADIO MAMBI

Before the interview on Friday morning, Newt Gingrich and David Rivera held a press conference inside the Univision Radio offices (Univision 23 report). Surrounded by the press, and various members of the hard-line Cuban exile community, Gingrich officially presented his so-called Cuba policy letter to Unidad Cubana, Miami's most intransigent Cuban exile organization. At the table, Gingrich sat next to Armando Perez-Roura, chairman of Unidad Cubana and programming director of Radio Mambi. Also nearby were members of Vigilia Mambisa, such as Laura Vianello and Miguel Saavedra.

Once ready inside the studio of Radio Mambi, Perez-Roura began by expressing his pleasure with the Gingrich pledge to fulfill the initiatives outlined in the letter. But, besides the outlined policy, Gingrich hardly had any other original ideas. Following his answer regarding Cuba travel restrictions, Gingrich added his idea of a "very aggressive public relations policy" which would include a "daily report" about human rights abuses and other violations by the Cuban government. The purpose of course would be to convince the world about the evil nature of the Cuban regime. But, I seriously doubt any country would use these reports to change their long-established relationships with Cuba.

When asked what he would do about the Alan P. Gross case, Gingrich gave no practical solution and instead suggested something similar to his "public relations policy" from before. Then, as if related in some way, Gingrich proposed implementing a "much more effective program" of intelligence and counter-intelligence "against pro-castro infiltrators." Of course, this is a nod to espionage cases like Ana Belen Montes and the Myers. But, with the U.S spending about $80 billion (!) on intelligence services, I'm confident that those agencies are doing just fine without Gingrich proposing a "more effective program" for them.

EXIT MIAMI

After leaving Miami, Gingrich's Cuba policy certainly lifted spirits and expectations, like that of Manuel Malgor. Besides being a member of AMCVA, Malgor is also active in other local political organizations that focus on Cuba, and he "couldn't find a single defect in what [Gingrich] said" concerning Cuba.

Armando Perez-Roura has told listeners that he now expects to receive a similar pledge from Mitt Romney upon his next visit to Little Havana. It will be very interesting to see how Romney's advisors can top the letter to Unidad Cubana. As a reminder, Perez-Roura has translated Gingrich's letter for the recent publication of Libre Magazine. (It is the only Spanish version since the Gingrich campaign forgot to translate it for their Spanish-language website.)

Little Havana is certainly looking forward to seeing Mitt Romney's Cuba policy.

[Newt Gingrich Interview on Radio Mambi]

Newt Gingrich Interview on Radio Mambi by Mambi Watch

Panama Ratifies Sentence Against Posada

2012-01-14T12:36:00.010-05:00

I first heard this on Radio Mambi during today's noon news program. According to Spanish news agency EFE, the Second Appellate Court in Panama has ratified sentences imposed against Luis Posada Carriles and five other accomplices from 2004. The sentences stem from charges of "threatening public security and falsifying documents" after their arrest in Panama in 2000. This recent ruling paves the way to formally extradite Luis Posada Carriles to Panama. Armando Perez-Roura read the report on Radio Mambi and indicated forthcoming updates on mobilizing the community against the ruling.

Luis Posada was arrested in Panama in 2000 for what looked like another attempt to assassinate Fidel Castro. Posada and five others were found guilty on several charges. In April 2004, Posada was sentenced to eight years in prison for "threatening public security and falsifying documents." But, in August 2004, Posada was pardoned (along with his accomplices) by then-President Mireya Moscoso as she left office. The government of Cuba responded by cutting diplomatic ties with Panama.

The president that followed, Martin Torrijos, sought improved relations with Cuba (he traveled to Havana in 2005 to re-establish diplomatic ties) and his administration also attempted to rectify what it thought were corrupt practices during the Moscoso administration (recent Wikileaks cables described several complaints of bribery to the U.S. embassy).

In 2008, the pardons by Mireya Moscoso were targeted. Those who collaborated with pardoning Luis Posada Carriles were charged for abusing their authority, and in July 2008 Panama's Supreme Court overturned 182 pardons* granted by Moscoso, including Posada's.

This confirmation of Posada's sentence from 2004 opens the door for his possible extradition to Panama. Currently, Venezuela also has an extradition order for Posada related to his alleged involvement in the 1976 bombing of a Cuban civilian airplane, and other investigations related to torture as a Venezuelan intelligence officer. If granted, Panama would become the second country with an extradition order for Posada related to an act of terrorism.

According to the EFE report, Julio Berrios was identified as representing the plaintiffs in this case that confirmed Posada's sentence, and Rogelio Cruz was Posada's lawyer. (In case you didn't know, Berrios is one of Manuel Noriega's lawyers in Panama after Noriega's recent extradition from France.) And, according to Prensa Latina, Berrios will be joined by a grassroots organization called ULIP (Union de Lucha Integral del Pueblo) to file for an extradition order.

*[Wikileaks: Details of Pardon Revocation for Posada and 181 Others]

Archdiocese of Miami's Pilgrimage to Cuba

2012-01-13T00:00:00.006-05:00

Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski will be making a pilgrimage to Cuba for Pope Benedict XVI's trip to the island scheduled for late March, the Archdiocese said in a statement Thursday.

Benedict's trip, scheduled for March 26-28, will be the first by a pope since John Paul II's visit in 1998. It comes as Cuban Catholics celebrate the 400th anniversary of the discovery of the statue of the Virgin of Charity, patroness of Cuba.

[Video and story courtesy of NBC 6 Miami]

[Excerpt from the official statement by Archbishop Thomas Wenski from the Archdiocese of Miami]

"Why are we going? The Cuban bishops have said: 'The Cuban people are one – wherever they are'. The Pope is traveling to Cuba to honor Cuba’s patron saint, Our Lady of Charity, during the jubilee year of the 400th anniversary of her presence on the island nation. We travel in solidarity with the Church in Cuba – and in response to their invitation to share with them this historic event."

"Cuba's Economic Revival"

2011-12-27T21:52:00.001-05:00

So, will Cuba's economic reforms have the desired effect? And will it have any effect on US policies towards Cuba?

Inside Story Americas discusses with guests: Peter Kornbluh, the director of the Cuba Documentation Project at the National Security Archive; Philip Brenner, a professor of US foreign policy at American University; and Philip Peters, the vice president of the Lexington Institute think tank.

Herman Cain on Radio Mambi

2011-11-18T20:47:00.005-05:00

Armando Perez-Roura, programming director of Radio Mambi, has boasted in the past about the impressive list of Republicans that have appeared on the air with him. He's taken on former Presidential candidates Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney and Sen. John McCain during their last campaigns. But, it seems this week Perez-Roura didn't have time for Herman Cain.

Armando Perez-Roura has made it clear that he chooses his guests very carefully (thus the absence of Democrats on Radio Mambi). Earlier this week, Perez-Roura discussed the Republican Presidential candidates with attorney Armando Lacasa and said he didn't care that Mitt Romney was not as "conservative" as Herman Cain, but Romney stood the best chance at winning the Presidency and that is all that mattered. Cain stood no chance according to Perez-Roura.

Cain arrived to South Florida this past Wednesday making several stops, including the traditional one at Versailles Restaurant in Little Havana (video). According to Marc Caputo of the Miami Herald, Cain didn't seem to have an outlined policy towards Cuba. His only policy remarks about Cuba were basically summed up as "freedom for Cuba now" and "put more pressure on Castro." Questions regarding current US-Cuba policy were ignored. As a result, the Miami Herald posted a video on YouTube revealing the hypocrisy of Cain's criticism against Pres. Obama's "foggy" foreign policy.

At Versailles Restaurant Cain was greeted by several supporters including Cuban exile hard-liners like Luis Conte Agüero and members of Vigilia Mambisa. According to a report by the Spanish news agency EFE, Miguel Saavedra, leader of Vigilia Mambisa, had a complaint about all the past Presidential candidates who have visited Versailles talking about Cuba:

"They have said more or less the same thing, but have done nothing later."

Meaning that no President so far has supported an actual military blockade or invasion of Cuba, like Armando Perez-Roura suggested to Presidential candidate John McCain in 2007. Nevertheless, in video taken by EFE of the gathering at Versailles, members of Vigilia Mambisa still showed their support for Herman Cain by holding up "Cain 2012" signs.

Interestingly, both the written and video report by EFE state that Cain proposed cooperation with Cuban exile leaders to formulate his U.S.-Cuba policy. This is not reported elsewhere, but it makes perfect sense given his apparent ignorance on the issue. (Back in 2007, Mitt Romney made similar remarks about his Cuba policy being influenced by Cuban exiles like Armando Perez-Roura.)

It seems that right before his Versailles stop Herman Cain was a few blocks west at the Radio Mambi radio station. There he was greeted by Armando Perez-Roura, but was not there to be interviewed by him. Instead, Lourdes D'Kendall (Bertot), host of "En Mi Opinion" (In My Opinion) which discusses more local politics, was assigned the duty. D'Kendall describes herself as a "conservative" and has spent past shows explaining how strongly she feels about being a "conservative." An interview with Cain seemed natural, but, strangely, they didn't talk about Cuba.

According to a report by Radio Mambi, posted on their Univision webpage (and based on the above EFE report), Cain and D'Kendall mostly talked about Cain's economic policy and his recent flub concerning a foreign policy question on Libya. (The Cuba policy comment in the Radio Mambi report is actually a quote from his Versailles speech.) The audio provided of the interview also does not include any comments about Cuba.

It's possible that Armando Perez-Roura didn't interview Herman Cain because his sidekick, Ninoska Perez-Castellon, has been on vacation this whole week. But, Perez-Roura could have also denied Cain an interview because he sees Cain as a poor Republican candidate, unqualified to be on his interview list like Thompson, Romney or McCain. Perez-Roura simply doesn't boast about Radio Mambi's impressive guests, he also prides himself at being influential. A king-maker perhaps. But, among the winners. Just like he sees freedom for Cuba right around the corner.

[Photo by Chuny Montaner/Univision, Herman Cain arrives at Radio Mambi with food from Versailles Restaurant and welcomed by programming director Armando Perez-Roura standing behind him.]

"The Murder of Laura Pollán" (Part 3)

2011-10-28T13:05:00.006-04:00

Yesterday, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart appeared on Radio Mambi with Ninoska Perez-Castellon. He was there to talk about the recent passage of H.R. 674, but also made comments about the death of Laura Pollán. Rep. Diaz-Balart said that despite not having any evidence to prove that Pollán was murdered by the Cuban government, he still believed that she was. Lately, this has been the position of many in Miami. And, it makes for good propaganda*.

Just like Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, Nancy Perez Crespo, radio show host on WWFE 670AM, made the same claim. Earlier this week on her 2pm show, Perez Crespo (photo above, lower right) acknowledged that she had no hard facts to prove that Laura Pollán was murdered, and had to rely on certain assumptions. She began to explain to listeners how Cuba is a closed society with a government-controlled press which makes it hard to find reliable and credible sources. And, she added that sometimes exiles in Miami have to rely on anonymous sources for news in order to protect those sources from government retaliation. What a bad excuse.

First, in the case of Laura Pollán, all sources of information concerning her death and allegations of dissidents being injected with a toxic substances have come from named sources. There are no anonymous sources in this case. Second, the use of anonymous sources by exiles in Miami is rare. Over the past few years, independent news sources from Cuba have become part of our online world, where it is very hard to keep anonymity for long (just ask me).

Nevertheless, despite the lack of evidence and neglect for the burden of proof, many still insist that Laura Pollán was murdered. If you attended last Friday's act of remembrance for Laura Pollán in Coral Gables you heard repeated claims (video) that Pollán was "killed" (by Sylvia Iriondo, President of M.A.R por Cuba), or "strangled by a murderous hand" (by Cary Roque, ex-political prisoner), or chanting of "murderers." Also this week, Rep. David Rivera (FL-25) of South Florida spoke about the "ruthless murder by the Castro dictatorship" of Laura Pollán on the House floor (video). (He got the date wrong saying "last Friday," but facts seem trivial at this point.)

So why do hard-liners persist on this claim?

After decades insisting (and investing into the narrative) that the Cuban government is a ruthless and evil force on the planet, after blaming tragic acts solely on the Cuban government, after years and years of propaganda, what explanation is one likely to accept? But, more precisely, what explanation is acceptable in the exile community? One that is simple and identifies the evil perpetrator, or a more complicated one that describes the complexity of a half-century conflict? For someone who identifies oneself as an "exile," there seems to be little room for a complicated story about why one has struggled for so many years "in exile."

[Video of Sylvia Iriondo's speech at act of remembrance for Laura Pollán in Coral Gables.]
[*Definition and characteristics of propaganda are described by Jay Black.]

[Part One]
[Part Two]

"The Murder of Laura Pollán" (Part 2)

2011-10-20T15:59:00.013-04:00

Because Laura Pollán's death was reported late Friday evening (some believing deliberately so), it wasn't until Monday when Pollán's murder theory was presented. Roberto Rodriguez Tejera and Helen Aguirre Ferre probably heard Armando Perez Roura (Univision Radio colleague) on Radio Mambi Saturday make the bold and baseless claim that Laura Pollán was murdered, and surely they wanted to make the same claim. But, Rodriguez and Ferre are not militants like Perez Roura, and neither is their audience on WQBA 1140AM, so they knew that they had to present some kind of evidence.

CONFIRMATION BIAS*

"... a phenomenon wherein decision makers have been shown to actively seek out and assign more weight to evidence that confirms their hypothesis, and ignore or underweigh evidence that could disconfirm their hypothesis."

So, on Monday at 4pm on WQBA the show "Prohibido Callarse" (Silence is Prohibited) started by announcing a "special program" examining the death of Laura Pollán (You can listen to an excerpt here courtesy of Univision.com). Rodriguez and Ferre had three guests from Cuba on the phone: Carlos Rios Otero (independent journalist for Cubanet), Mercedes Fresneda Castillo (dissident), and Sara Martha Fonseca Quevedo (dissident). Rios Otero mainly spoke as a witness to dissident accounts of ailments following confrontations with Cuban officials during political demonstrations. Both female dissidents, who march alongside the Ladies in White, gave personal testimony to ailments they suffered after confrontations with Cuban officials. Both claimed that during a past confrontation they felt a prick or pierce on their body which they attributed to a toxic injection.

Both ladies also mentioned 2 other female dissidents who have described a variety of ailments following a pricking sensation during past demonstrations: Caridad Caballero Batista and Mayra Morejon Hernandez. Also, Rios Otero reported that dissident Rita Maria Montes de Oca was currently hospitalized due to ailments suffered following a possible toxic injection.

After these testimonies, without any kind of scrutiny or interrogation of them, Roberto Rodriguez Tejera claims "proof" of toxic injections against dissidents by Cuban officials, and therefore "everything seems to indicate" that Laura Pollán was also the victim of a toxic injection before her sudden death.

FACTS

Unfortunately, the whole show was an example of journalistic laziness, manipulation, and lack of ethics. Rodriguez and Ferre's story is actually borrowed (without credit) from a blogger named Angelica Mora. During the time Laura Pollán was hospitalized with a serious respiratory illness, and right before her death, Mora began a two-part post [1 and 2] provoking the possibility that Pollán was secretly injected with a virus. Carlos Rios Otero, Mercedes Fresneda Castillo, Sara Martha Fonseca, Rita Maria Montes de Oca and Mayra Morejon Hernandez all appear in Mora's story.

Also the supposed pricking and ailment stories may be months or years old. Rodriguez or Ferre commit a serious lapse of journalistic ethics by not establishing a timeline of events. In the Univision clip, Mercedes Fresneda mentions getting a blood test after suffering some ailments, but never mentions the date. According to this recently uploaded interview, Mayra Morejon Hernandez was with Fresneda when she claimed to be pricked and her blood tested. It was in 2009. Sara Martha Fonseca mentions she was injected during a march with the Ladies in White, but she's not asked for a date. Fonseca has been marching with the Ladies in White as far back as March 2010 (check bio here).

Carlos Rios Otero is mentioned in the Angelica Mora story because last month he wrote a story called "Toxic Injections" for Cubanet. In the story, Otero writes that "according to reports... many dissidents [during political repression by Cuban officials] have been given injections that have provoked toxic reactions." The reactions are made up of various forms of physical ailments. But, no names of dissidents are given, and no other sources are provided, just "reports" and speculation. On WQBA Otero claimed to have conducted various interviews with dissidents, and the testimony was mostly the same: various ailments followed by alleged injections during a protest. Also, the various ailments suffered are always different from the other, and never the same symptoms.

Finally, the only testimony that seems strongest comes from Mercedes Fresneda. She claims that she received a blood test (in 2009) in response to her ailments and alleged injection. The results of the test showed a high level of lead in her blood. When Roberto Rodriguez Tejera heard this testimony he gasped.

Fortunately, next week is National Lead Poisoning Prevention Week and it should provide the team at WQBA and the show "Prohibido Callarse" (looking at you Roberto and Helen) an opportunity to learn more about lead poisoning, and give us a better clue about why Mercedes Fresneda may have high levels of lead in her body.

According to some basic information about lead poisoning (a "major environmental health problem" in the US), adults are vulnerable to this hazard for various reasons, such as exposure to dust from common renovation activities, especially on home structures older than 1978.

So, quite simply, Rodriguez and Ferre may have highly exaggerated their claims of "proof." And, their theory where "everything seems to indicate" that Pollán was injected by a toxic substance is still merely an allegation no different than Armando Perez Roura's.

Unfortunately for Miami, the (propaganda) damage seems to have been done.

[*Excellent link about confirmation bias.]

[Part One]
[Part Three]

"The Murder of Laura Pollán" (Part 1)

2011-10-19T23:24:00.008-04:00

If you've been listening to Spanish-language radio in Miami lately, then you might be thinking that Laura Pollán was secretly murdered by the Cuban government. Local Spanish media outlets have waged a strong campaign to convince listeners that this conspiracy is true. But, upon review, the little (if any) facts produced are not convincing. Nevertheless, it seems hard-liners won't be bothered by facts at this point and are only looking for more self-confirmation of who the real murderous enemy is: the Cuban government.

For the past few days, local Spanish news outlets have been making the case that Laura Pollán was indeed infected/murdered by some form of lethal (or near lethal) injection made through a needle, scratch or bite. The Cuban government's motive of course was that Pollán was developing into a powerful enemy of the state. And, since the assumption in Miami is that the Cuban government is only motivated by evil intentions, then it seems logical that Pollán was most likely murdered.

MIAMI PROPAGANDA

As I mentioned in my previous post, the allegation that Laura Pollán was infected with a near lethal virus was being spread by local Spanish news stations since last week. The sources of those allegations were mainly coming from Cuban exiles in Miami. Operating on the assumption of communism's unrelenting evil, the only explanation for Pollán's sudden illness must've been a conspiracy from the common enemy: the Cuban government.

After Pollán's death, it all made more sense allegedly. The gut reaction was that she was "murdered." At least that's how Radio Mambi's Armando Perez Roura (upper right photo above) put it the day after the tragic news broke. But Perez Roura, like other Cuban exile militants, have a war mindset. That is, when it comes to Cuba, they are more likely to view strange and difficult events as part of the battle against the Cuban government. They may have good reasons to be cautious, but looking for facts and evidence are not the priority. Instead, a gut instinct to confront the known enemy is activated.

Before you knew it, the murder allegation soon developed into a theory. Local Spanish radio station WQBA 1140AM (owned by Univision Radio) began their Monday broadcast with a "special program" aimed to convince listeners that Pollán was most likely murdered. Roberto Rodriguez Tejera (former news director of Radio Marti, left on large photo above) and Helen Aguirre Ferre (opinion page editor of Diario Las Americas, right on large photo above), hosts of the 4pm show "Prohibido Callarse" (Silence is Prohibited), introduced witnesses, testimonies, conjectures and coincidences. At the end of the show, they were convinced that no other alternative explanation existed for Laura Pollán's death.

But, their supposedly strongest piece of evidence, an official blood test, doesn't withstand a simple test of proof. Yet, inside Miami's Cuban exile community it is good propaganda.

[Part Two]
[Part Three]

Laura Pollán (1948 - 2011)

2011-10-15T14:22:00.006-04:00

Tragic news came from Cuba yesterday with the announcement that Ladies in White leader Laura Pollán died in a Havana hospital from cardiac arrest. Since October 7 Pollán was being treated at the Calixto Garcia hospital for a serious respiratory illness.

According to interviews by BBC Mundo reporter Fernando Ravsberg, Pollán contracted the Human respiratory syncytial virus (RVS). Recent reports indicate that Pollán's family has cremated her body, while her husband Hector Maseda thanked the doctors who "tried to save my wife's life until the last minute." Berta Soler, another member of the Ladies in White, also made positive comments about the medical treatment Pollán received saying the doctors "are fulfilling their oath to save lives, without concern over ideology."

Meanwhile in Miami, Radio Mambi's Armando Perez Roura (programming director) announced "the murder of Laura Pollán" at the top of today's noon news program "El Grande del Mediodia." Perez Roura, who traditionally introduces the top news stories, made the baseless claim which seems to be resonating inside the Cuban exile community.

(For days now local Spanish news has been spreading the allegation that Laura Pollán may have been deliberately infected with RVS in a Cuban government conspiracy. Fausto Malave for Telemundo51 spread the allegation using interviews with Silvia Iriondo from M.A.R. por Cuba and Janisset Rivero from Directorio Democratico Cubano. Rolando Napoles from AmericaTeVe spread the allegation using interviews with Dr. Julio Cesar Alfonso of local organization Solidaridad Sin Fronteras.)

Last night, upon hearing the tragic news, militant group Vigilia Mambisa made their way to Little Havana's Versailles restaurant where they made a small demonstration. But, they were mainly there to make the 11pm news, where local news stations instinctively flock to when Cuba is the headline. Florida Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen knew the drill, so there she was at Versailles along with Reina Luisa Tamayo, mother of another Cuban dissident who last year died in a Cuban hospital. Telemundo51 reported live from Versailles as the crowd (except Rep. Ros-Lehtinen) chanted "murderers" and "terrorists."

Telemundo51 reporter Adriana Delgado includes interviews with the members of Vigilia Mambisa alleging that Laura Pollán's death was part of a Cuban government conspiracy. Delgado also interviewed Reina Luisa Tamayo who likewise alleges that Pollán was murdered, just like she alleges her son Orlando Zapata Tamayo was murdered. Delgado then interviewed Rep. Ros-Lehtinen who immediately went into how she was "concerned" over the Obama administration's Cuba policy, clearly exploiting this tragic event for political purposes.

None of this surprises me. The most hard-line members of the Cuban exile community never miss an opportunity to take advantage of a tragic (or near tragic) event coming from Cuba. And, that's because they know well that a hard-line position can only be maintained through shocking examples like Pollán's death. Even better if the death or serious injury is linked to the Cuban government. And, when it comes to Cuba, the local news easily makes itself available to the hard-line.

Don't expect to hear in Miami the positive descriptions made by Pollán's husband, or Berta Soler quoted above concerning the treatment Pollán received. It just doesn't fit the Miami narrative against Cuba.

[Along the Malecon blog has video of Laura Pollán before her illness.]

Hitler in Havana (1966)

2011-06-03T19:59:00.009-04:00

I was looking through old Miami Herald articles of the 60's and stumbled upon this ad from December 10, 1966. [Ad from the Miami News courtesy of Google News Archives.] I laughed when I saw it because it highlighted how little anti-communist propaganda against the Cuban government has changed. At least locally.

Thanks to YouTube, this television program titled "Hitler in Havana" can be viewed in its entirety. The title and first few minutes summarizes the video nicely: "in the midst of Havana today another Hitler rages!" This and many other points in the video I've heard repeated in Miami often. According to the ad, the video was produced by the Information Council of the Americas, founded by Edward S. Butler. The video is also available on DVD.

[Portion from the ad]

You've read bold headlines! Now see secret scenes smuggled direct from Castro's Cuba. See explosions rivalling [sic] the Riechstag fire! Castro's G-2 Gestapo in action! Concentration camps in the center of Cuba! Red stormtroops rioting throughout the Americas. Brutal executions at the firing squad wall. See pathos, poverty, sabotage, riots, all filmed from life, as it was actually happening, hidden in the heart of Castro's Cuba.

Produced by INCA
(c) 1966, Information Council of the Americas

Entire program will be repeated with Spanish translation by Alberto Gandero
Sunday, Dec. 11
10:30 - 11:30 A.M.

Cason, Rivera and Luis Posada Carriles

2011-06-03T17:39:00.011-04:00

Last month, Humbert Fontova found out that Luis Posada Carriles, main suspect in the 1976 bombing of a civilian airliner and reputed terrorist, was publicly honored in Miami by Congressman David Rivera (FL-25) and Coral Gables Mayor James (Jim) Cason. It seems that Fontova (in his usual sarcastic manner) was disappointed that The Miami Herald didn't report on the event. Well, I'm so happy to oblige Mr. Fontova with the details.

Back in April, Luis Conte Agüero was elated to hear that Luis Posada Carriles, whom he considers a "Mambi," was acquitted of several charges of U.S. immigration fraud. So, Conte Agüero, one of Posada's strongest public supporters in Miami, arranged to celebrate the event at the Big Five Club on May 14th where the Cuban Orthodox People's Party was already scheduled to meet. Conte Agüero is the president of that organization.

According to Sergio Galán Pino for Libre Magazine (screenshot of article here), the meeting indeed took place, recognizing Posada as a "Hero of Liberty" and was attended by Rep. David Rivera and Mayor James Cason. Rep. Rivera is a long-time member of the Cuban Orthodox People's Party, and Mayor Cason was an honored guest of the organization in 2009. At that 2009 meeting, Mayor Cason told the Orthodox members that "the enmity of Fidel and Raul [Castro] with us [the United States] is real, it is genuine, they need an enemy to exist, we are that enemy and will always be."

Mayor Cason since 2009 has attended several meetings with other hard-line Cuban exile organizations, and campaigning discreetly among them. Due to this support by Cuban exiles, Cason became Mayor of Coral Gables last April. Mayor Cason was most likely celebrating his Mayoral victory at the May 14th meeting with the Orthodox Party.

[Photo by Libre Magazine - May 24, 2011, left to right: Luis Conte Agüero, Luis Posada Carriles, David Rivera, James Cason.]

Julio Robaina Promises To Be Hard-line

2011-05-16T15:46:00.009-04:00

So, I was listening to Radio Mambi this morning (someone's got to do it), and heard something very interesting. A caller identifying himself as a member of an organization of Brigade 2506 veterans called in to publicly support the Mayoral candidacy of Julio Robaina. The caller said that of all the current candidates Robaina has "the toughest stance" on cultural exchanges with Cuba, and Robaina promised to keep that hard-line "wherever he is."

Next Tuesday Miami-Dade county voters will elect a new Mayor in special elections. Among the top candidates stands former Hialeah Mayor Julio Robaina. Over the past few years, Robaina has certainly presented himself as a hard-liner on U.S.-Cuba policy, such as preventing a Cuban music concert from taking place in Hialeah, to supporting anti-Castro militants like Luis Posada Carriles. These credentials will most likely help Robaina capture plenty of voters next Tuesday. But, the consequences of having another hard-line Mayor in Miami could prevent the city from becoming a culturally diverse center for the arts, perhaps increasing the potential for Cuba-related conflicts like many seen in the past.

The caller this morning to Radio Mambi stated that Julio Robaina made a "promise" to several hard-line/militant Cuba exile organizations to remain "tough" on cultural exchanges with Cuban artists. Unfortunately, I was unable to record the entire comments made by the caller, and therefore the comments are a bit vague, but the last few comments are interesting nonetheless (the "promise" quote is based only on my own recollections of the caller's comments.)

[Audio]

The caller states that Robaina's position on cultural exchanges is the "toughest" of all the current Mayoral candidates. I am assuming that the caller is Manuel L. Malgor, president of the American Missile Crisis Veterans Association, and a leading organizer of a local campaign to stop the Cuban cultural exchanges in Miami [here's an example of their work]. That campaign has successfully resulted in recent anti-cultural exchange resolutions in the City of Miami and Hialeah, yet no specific laws prohibiting Cuban artists from performing in Miami. The caller specifically mentions these resolutions in the audio clip.

The other interesting bit of information provided in the audio reveals that Julio Robaina has adopted a hard-line stance on Cuba because "an uncle of his was jailed for 18 years in Cuba." Most likely, this memory of injustice has influenced Julio Robaina in becoming a hard-liner, just like many other hard-liners with similar stories of injustice. But, it does not justify a government representative adopting political positions that satisfy individual interests that conflict with the interest of the greater community. In this case, encouraging cultural exchanges between Miami and the people of any other region has greater social benefits than maintaining a hard-line position.

But, the hard-line/militant position believes there are no benefits to cultural exchanges with Cuba. According to a copy of a letter sent to the City of Miami, anti-cultural exchange activists believe that "under the pretence of cultural exchange, that same [Cuban] regime is sending communist agents to infiltrate and provoke the Cuban Exile Community." The (sometimes paranoid) belief that the exile community is being targeted for provocation and infiltration is often used, most recently to stop a legitimate public campaign supporting the Cuban Five in Miami. But, Julio Robaina has adopted this position towards cultural exchanges with Cuba, recently telling El Nuevo Herald: "We don't want our people [the Cuban exile community] to continue being instigated with those kind of shows... that is why we are asking Congress to approve a law that will put an end to this matter [of Cuban cultural exchanges]." Last February, Robaina (then-Mayor of Hialeah) and the Hialeah City Council approved a resolution "urging the members of Congress to introduce legislation opposing cultural exchanges between Cuba and the United States so long as the Cuban government continues its violation of basic freedoms and human rights." [From City Council Agenda - February 8, 2011]

Once again, when it comes to Cuba, hard-liners and militants do as they please while continuing to ignore what the rest of the population think. There is no evidence of a majority of Miami residents opposing cultural exchanges with Cuba.

Back in 2000, Florida International University's Cuba poll found that 54.7% of Cubans in Miami supported Cuban artists performing locally, while 45.3% opposed (85.4% of all Miami residents supported these cultural exchanges). A more recent poll of Cuban-Americans in 2009 [PDF] showed that 52% favored cultural exchanges versus 32% opposed.

So, you might be perplexed about why Robaina is ignoring these majority opinions. Well, aside from Robaina's personal reasons concerning his uncle, Robaina is just being loyal to small but well-organized anti-Castro organizations that consistently vote come election day. The same loyalty helped James Cason win the Coral Gables mayoral election recently (Cason had been campaigning discreetly among Cuban exiles since 2009). Yet, despite all the criticism Cuban exile hard-liners and militants get from the local community, when election day arrives they know how to get their voters out.

But, in the end, democracy is only rhetoric, while elitism seems to rule in Miami.

- [Miami New Times - Julio Robaina campaign gave $350 to Luis Posada Carriles' defense fund.]
- [Julio Robaina accepts award from a local hard-line organization, Mario and Lincoln Diaz-Balart attending.]

Controversy Over Death of Juan Wilfredo Soto [Updated]

2011-05-08T23:10:00.010-04:00

Cuban dissident Juan Wilfredo Soto Garcia (left) was buried this Sunday, but there is controversy over what lead to his death. Some believe it was the result after being "savagely beaten" by Cuban state security agents, while others attribute his death to unrelated health complications that occurred after his arrest.

Juan Wilfredo was arrested during a protest last Thursday in Santa Clara where, according to some witnesses, he was beaten by security agents. One witness, dissident Guillermo Fariñas, told Radio/TV Marti that Juan Wilfredo was "savagely beaten" while in handcuffs. Supposedly, Juan Wilfredo was then taken to a hospital where he stayed until his death Sunday morning. But, events that happened after his arrest have produced conflicting reports.

According to this report on the El Nuevo Herald website, but attributed to an AFP copy, Juan Wilfredo "was taken by the [state security] agents" to the hospital after his arrest. The original AFP story doesn't include this specific information about how Juan Wilfredo arrived at the hospital. Other news outlets (such as CNN and BBC) have also assumed that Juan Wilfredo was so badly beaten that he was sent to the hospital after the protest due to injuries, and therefore have not reported that Juan Wilfredo was actually taken to the hospital for other reasons.

According this Radio/TV Marti report, Juan Wilfredo was arrested by state agents on Thursday and then "taken home instead of being taken to a jail cell." That information comes from Cuban dissident Idania Yanez Contreras. But, Idania is much more specific in her audio comments linked to the report. She says that Juan Wilfredo was arrested, taken to the hospital by the police because of his already known poor health, and then released home.

Marc Frank for Reuters similarly reports that Juan Wilfredo "was quickly released [by state security agents] but then checked into the Arnaldo Milian Hospital," but Frank doesn't specify by whom. According to Idania, after being taken home Juan Wilfredo's family, concerned over his worsening health, checked him into the hospital on Saturday. Juan Wilfredo was complaining of pain around his kidneys.

Several reports have mentioned Juan Wilfredo's already poor health, stricken with diabetes and hypertension, but Radio/TV Marti also includes "renal insufficiency" among his ailments. According to Marc Frank, "various bloggers close to the government quoted Dr. Ruben Aneiro Medina of the hospital as saying [Juan Wilfredo] Soto died of pancreatitis and kidney failure and there were no signs of physical violence."

But, Radio/TV Marti insists that Juan Wilfredo was a "victim of respiratory failure, caused by the beating ... of police agents." And, several Cuban dissidents have taken a similar position in blaming the Cuban security agents, or the Castro's themselves.

In local news, Telemundo51 has produced a report that constructs a more sinister plot against Juan Wilfredo Soto. According to Telemundo, Juan Wilfredo was already targeted by the Cuban government since July of last year (!) when he was threatened by a security agent who told him: "look out for the consequences that can happen to you." The threat came after Juan Wilfredo showed his solidarity with another Cuban dissident on a hunger strike.

At the conclusion of the Telemundo report, online comments posted on their website are reproduced for viewers alleging that the Cuban government was behind the death of Juan Wilfredo Soto. Undoubtedly, this conspiratorial allegation of murder will be repeated by the most militant in Miami for the next few days.

[Also note that no reports so far have interviewed the family of Juan Wilfredo Soto, and instead have relied on Cuban dissidents.]

- [UPDATE: The family of Juan Wilfredo Soto said that when they took him to the hospital he never mentioned the police beating, nor show signs of having been beaten.]

- [Amnesty International: "The Cuban authorities need to immediately establish an independent inquiry into the causes of Juan Wilfredo Soto's death. If he ultimately died as a result of a police beating in Park Vidal, those responsible must face justice."]

Hialeah Leaders Support Posada

2011-04-07T18:17:00.006-04:00

Above shows Hialeah Mayor Julio Robaina and Hialeah Council President Carlos Hernandez expressing their affection for Luis Posada Carriles, a man accused of being a terrorist and a self-admitted unrepentant militant. In South Florida, support for Posada means you either justify his violent tactics in a global war against communism/evil/hate (which the Cuban government represents), or you, as an anti-communist, feel profound respect for someone who has sacrificed his/her life for anti-communism (in this case freedom for Cuba).

But, these are false choices. The violence or cause that Luis Posada Carriles represents is the most extreme form among other methods. Showing public support for Posada, especially as a community leader, serves to advocate these extreme forms of politics while ignoring more moderate ones.

While Robaina and Hernandez have the right to support whatever cause or agent they want in that cause, both Hialeah leaders should be aware that many other Cuban-Americans are not militants, or anti-communists.

As leaders of that community, will they listen to those voices?

-----

- Hialeah Mayor Robaina is currently running for Mayor of Miami-Dade County, while Council Pres. Hernandez is expected to become the interim Hialeah mayor and potential candidate for the seat.

- Recorded from radio program "Esquina de Pepe" hosted by Jose 'Pepe' Yedra on WWFE 670 AM, February 18, 2011. Jose 'Pepe' Yedra is broadcasting live from the Big Five club in West Miami where a fund-raising event is taking place supporting Luis Posada Carriles.

Carter Press Conference in Havana

2011-03-31T10:45:00.007-04:00

Here's the full press conference Jimmy Carter held on Wednesday before leaving Cuba, it also includes Carter's 20-minute interview with Cuban television . It's courtesy of TVCubana.tv who provides a large collection of television programs from Cuba. The press conference is translated into Spanish, but you can hear a little of Carter's English comments.

[In English, edited video of some comments from Carter at the press conference.]

I will write later about Carter's comments at this press conference, and how the local media presented his 3-day visit.

Carter in Cuba: Day One

2011-03-29T17:35:00.008-04:00

It's been interesting to read the optimistic speculation about Jimmy Carter's visit to Cuba. On the first day, many reports indicated the possibility of Carter's intervention in the case of Alan P. Gross, the jailed USAID contractor, and others saw Carter as a promising interlocutor between Washington and Havana. Meanwhile in Miami, the hard-liners went on the offensive to attack Carter and paint a negative image of the visit.

ARRIVING IN HAVANA

On Monday, Jimmy Carter again arrived in Havana at the invitation of the Cuban government. Back in May 2002 Carter first arrived at the invitation of Fidel Castro, this year by his brother Raul. Carter landed at Jose Marti International Airport with his wife Rosalynn, his former National Security Advisor for Latin American Affairs, Robert Pastor, and directors of the Carter Center. They were greeted by Cuba's Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez, including Jonathan Farrar, chief of the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, among others.

Jimmy Carter and his guests soon made their way to the Patronato Jewish center and Temple Beth Shalom where they were greeted by Adela Dworin, president of the temple, and other members of the Jewish community (video of tour). (Dworin later told reporters that they did not discuss the Gross case or any politics at all.) Later, Carter and his guests met with Cardinal Jaime Ortega of the Catholic Archdiocese in Havana. (Reports say they met behind closed doors for about an hour where Carter expressed his satisfaction with Ortega's role in the release of Cuban political prisoners.)

Several early reports seemed to indicate that Carter arrived with the intent to return to the U.S. with Alan P. Gross, but later in the day reports (such as Jeff Franks') revealed that Cuban officials would not allow it. Nevertheless, CBS News (Portia Siegelbaum) speculated that Carter was working in the background to gain access to Gross, and CNN (Shasta Darlington) confirmed that Carter met with Secretary Hillary Clinton before his trip perhaps sharing her concerns over the case.

IN THE MIDDLE

There were many articles that expressed optimism about the Carter visit to Cuba. The Miami Herald published an article by Matthew Brady from Freedom House suggesting that "Carter’s visit could kick-start U.S.-Cuba relations through a relatively moderate interlocutor." Brady argues well that the time is right.

Other commentators, like Cuban professor Esteban Morales and Lilia Lopez from the Havana Note blog, see Jimmy Carter as a someone influential enough to provide a "realistic" (Morales) assessment of Cuba with "fresh eyes" (Lopez) directly to President Barack Obama.

It should be noted too that Jimmy Carter is traveling with Robert Pastor, another optimist who is confident that the Obama administration could improve U.S.-Cuba relations with an envoy between Washington and Havana.

ATTACKING CARTER

Meanwhile in Miami, some hard-liners have taken an ambivalent stand, and others are just being offensive. It seems most militants/hard-liners oppose the trip because it "legitimizes" the Cuban government they see as totally immoral or dangerous. But, seeing that the media is mostly optimistic about the visit, the strategy seems to be to attack Carter's character, or to misrepresent the intent of the visit.

On Monday, Radio Mambi's Ninoska Perez-Castellon tried her tired tactic of presenting the subject (Carter) as a fool. She began reading from Jimmy Carter's 2002 Cuba Trip Report, but it soon became apparent that she wasn't prepared to thoroughly challenged the well-detailed and highly-informative report. Perez-Castellon had obviously not read the report before and ended up skipping several paragraphs of important information (including the paragraph that mentioned the Varela Project) and telling listeners that Carter was just repeating Cuban propaganda and lies.

(The attacks continued today too. Armando Perez-Roura's daily radio editorial described Carter today as an "ultra-leftist-pacifist" and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart called in to Perez-Castellon's radio show and called Carter an "extremist" and "anti-semite.")

In the evening, the Spanish-language political talk show Maria Elvira Live (on MegaTV) invited CANF President Jose "Pepe" Hernandez and ICCAS analyst Jose Azel to talk about the Carter visit (video). Both didn't say if they supported or opposed the visit, but instead focused on speculating about Jimmy Carter's possible intentions in Cuba. Of course, they ignored Carter's stated reasons for going to Cuba because both believe that improving relations is virtually impossible with the current Cuban government. Hernandez argued that Cuba was using Carter to improve its international image, and Azel agreed adding that the Cuban government had nothing to offer the U.S. in a negotiation anyway (and therefore there's no reason to improve relations).

(It should be noted that CANF took a stronger position against Carter's 2002 Cuba visit. CANF, through Joe Garcia, first opposed the Carter visit saying that Carter should only go to demand the removal of Fidel Castro: "However, if his purpose is to better U.S.-Cuban relations with the 43-year-old dictatorship, his time would be better spent elsewhere.")

In the evening news, Telemund051 also attempted to misrepresent Carter's visit (video). Telemundo put their best reporter on the job: Fausto Malave. In typical fashion, Malave mocks the importance and the reason for Carter's visit, barely mentioning Carter's stated purpose. And, instead, attempts to portray the visit as showing little concern for internal political repression and the case of Alan P. Gross. Of course, Malave interviews one person, Janisset Rivero, of the hard-line Directorio Democratico Cubano who erroneously equates the voice of Cuban dissidents with the voice of the entire Cuban people.

Univision23 also does a poor job reporting on the visit. In this report (video), Carter's stated purpose is never mentioned. Instead, the report focuses on the Gross case, and includes Alfredo Duran and James Cason making comments about the Gross case. Fortunately, the report includes comments from Cuban dissident Oswaldo Paya saying: "Jimmy Carter is a person that inspires us with confidence... and someone you can expect good from."

It's interesting to see how hard-line commentators in Miami have ignored Carter's personal views about U.S.-Cuba relations. (His views actually coincide with the larger intellectual community and the majority of Americans.) He made them very clear before he first visited Cuba in 2002. Instead, most Spanish-language pundits have tried to portray Carter as possibly having mysterious goals, or being a naive fool while in Cuba. Only in Miami.

[Below, Jimmy Carter in March 2002]

"I think the best way to bring about democratic changes in Cuba is obviously to have maximum commerce and trade and visitation by Americans and others who know freedom, and to let the Cuban people know the advantages of freedom. That's the best way to bring about change. And not to punish the Cuban people themselves by imposing an embargo on them, which makes Castro seem to be a hero, because he's defending his own people against the abusive Americans."

[Reps. Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen tried to block Carter's 2002 Cuba visit by writing to the President: "We write to request that you deny permission for Mr. Carter to visit the Cuban dictator. While U.S. law authorizes the granting of licenses by the Treasury Department to U.S. officials and members of Congress to visit Cuba on official business for the U.S. government, it does not do so for former presidents seeking to appease anti-American dictators.'']

The Hand of Fidel

2011-01-19T21:22:00.009-05:00

Last week, the trial of Luis Posada Carriles began and I was not surprised to read about how Posada's lawyers wanted to turn the trial around against the Cuban government. I found it typical because one thing I've noticed from my focus on militants and hard-liners in Miami is the constant blaming of the Cuban government for involvement in almost all things that go wrong. It's something that they themselves joke about, but also something that seriously borders on paranoia. In the world of militancy and the hard-line, one is naturally in constant vigilance against the enemy's possible interference in all matters. In the case of Miami, the hand of Fidel Castro and the Cuban government is constantly plotting against Cuban exiles. And, the Posada trial is yet another example of "The Hand of Fidel."

Last week, Arturo Hernandez (above), one of Posada's lawyers, demanded he be allowed to argue in court about "the Cuban government's motive to fabricate" evidence against Posada. (Some evidence collected inside Cuba will be presented in court.) Hernandez argued that this motive originates from the fact that "[i]n a long life of 83 years, [Posada] has made some very powerful enemies. None more powerful than Fidel Castro and his regime." The demand was soon dismissed by the judge as irrelevant. And, prosecutors agreed saying: "This is not the History Channel . . . The regime in Cuba is not the defendant in this case... This is not for The Miami Herald.'' (Ouch.)

[Reality is the FBI alone has gathered enough evidence to criminally charge Posada. Evidence collected from Cuba represents cooperation from two countries that should have better bi-lateral relations.]

No doubt Posada's defense was upset by the decision, but so was Alberto de la Cruz at the Babalu blog. De la Cruz called the trial a "kangaroo court trial" where the judge "has in effect banned the truth from the trial" and the prosecution has "partner[ed] up with a brutal and murderous totalitarian regime." And, no one would have noticed this gross and outrageous blunder of a post from the boys at Babalu if the Miami Herald had not published it this past Sunday.

It seems that the Miami Herald did eventually live up to the expectations of the prosecution at the Posada trial. And there's more, because the Herald managed to squeeze the Babalu commentary (which had the highest word count) in between two other comments by distinguished scholars (Julia Sweig and Peter Kornbluh) and a renowned journalist (Stephen Kinzer). Which means that, despite all the pathetic criticism the Herald gets from Babalu, the Herald has no problems disguising that obscene blog blundering as serious commentary.

That's Miami for you. Some still see Luis Posada Carriles as a hero that fought against modern-day evil, and thus worthy of some kind of defense. But, Posada's violent life and corporal sacrifice also represent something greater: self-confirming evidence proving the existence of the "Hand of Fidel," which is a threat to Cuban exiles and can only be fought with equal intensity.

- Video above of Arturo Hernandez (from local program "A Mano Limpia"), in his own words (@3:35):

"The important thing is that there can be no truthful testimony while those individuals [in Cuba] are in the hands of a dictatorship like that of Fidel Castro and Raul Castro. In other words, its not a question of whether philosophically thinking a person who cooperates is gonna tell the truth or not. No. There is no truth there [in Cuba]. The only thing that exists there is the will of the dictator."

[Related articles]
- Cuban Exile on Trial by Julia Sweig and Peter Kornbluh
- Trial of the Terrorist Who Almost Killed Me by Stephen Kinzer

In Defense of the Cuban Five [Updated Links]

2011-01-14T05:02:00.013-05:00

It was the little billboard that couldn't. It survived only a day until enough people threatened to boycott the owners arguing that it was an offense to the community. Suddenly it was gone. I myself was surprised that this billboard was actually up in Miami, knowing well that this city, when it comes to news about Cuba, lives in an almost impenetrable bubble. You can't deny it. The very mention of the Cuban Five in Miami evokes comparisons to the worst criminals, like Hitler or Al-Qaeda. The result of course is a city that dares not confront such taboo subjects, and its citizens, without much choice, acquiesce to a propaganda message repeated in the local media.

But, Mambi Watch believes people have the right to choose their political causes, and be given the right to defend their causes in public and in the media. Unfortunately, when it comes to the Cuban Five, this right is hardly observed.

THE BILLBOARD OF DISCORD

The story of the billboard, dubbed the "Billboard of Discord" by America TeVe show "A Mano Limpia," is simple to summarize: A local Miami group called Alianza Martiana (Marti Alliance) rented space on a billboard to promote the cause of the Cuban Five. They paid a month's rent to Clear Channel Outdoors and the company placed the ad on a billboard near the Alianza Martiana offices on Tuesday. By Wednesday afternoon it was gone because members of Vigilia Mambisa threatened to boycott the property owners where the billboard is located. The property owners, fearing a boycott from several other Cuban exile organizations called Clear Channel Outdoors and asked for the ad's removal. According to reports, the removal was negotiated just a few hours after the complaint. An official from Clear Channel responded publicly that "it was determined the material does not fit with our norms [of processing], and has been removed." The property owners fully supported the decision.

But, the billboard incident is just the tip of the iceberg. A review of how this story was reported in the media reveals how difficult it is in general to promote the cause of the Cuban Five, while the cause AGAINST the Cuban Five is constantly promoted.

Locally, none of the English-language news stations gave the billboard story any attention, which is typical. Local news in English concerning Cuba is far less frequent than in Spanish media, as if they avoid it. Univision23 and AmericaTeVe, on the other hand, kept audiences well updated on the "Billboard of Discord." But, neither one presented the cause of the Cuba Five, meaning they didn't even mention the main reasons why their supporters believe they should be free. In other words, there seems to be a deliberate attempt to silence the cause of the Cuban Five. But, in every report there was time given to speakers opposed to the Cuba Five, be it someone calling them assassins or convicted criminals. Not very balanced.

ENTER MAX LESNIK

Speaking on behalf of Alianza Martiana was Max Lesnik who was given time on both Univision23 and AmericaTeVe to explain why his organization placed the Cuban Five ad (and to respond to its removal), but not to elaborate on the cause to free the Cuba Five. On Wednesday, Lesnik appeared on AmericaTeVe's 8pm talk program "A Mano Limpia" to speak at length about the billboard incident. The program began with an interview with Miguel Saavedra, leader of Vigilia Mambisa, to explain how he negotiated the removal of the Cuban Five ad. Lesnik then appeared on the show alongside an opponent of the Cuban Five, but the discussion focused on the ad's offense to the community (because the Cuban Five are undoubtedly assassins), and soon framed as Miami-vs-Cuba (asking Lesnik to help place a billboard in Cuba favoring a cause by Cuban exiles). The details over the cause supporting the Cuban Five were ignored.

Max Lesnik then appeared Thursday on the radio on WQBA (1140AM) with Bernadette Pardo. In this interview, again Lesnick had to explain the reasons behind the ad, but within the first few minutes the interview took a predictable turn: the Cuban Five were compared to Osama bin Laden. Obviously, the discussion is framed as an issue of respect towards the community, and not about the cause of the Cuban Five. The details of the case were never discussed.

OTHER EXAMPLES

So, do the Cuban Five ever get a break? Not in Miami. Last September, several American actors and artists sent a letter to President Obama requesting a review of the case of the Cuban Five. Soon, the letter was also signed by non-American artists and actors, such as Colombian singer Juanes. The local Spanish media jumped at the chance to attack Juanes.

The letter campaign was ill-described as a "political campaign of the Cuban government" by AmericaTeVe reporter Juan Manuel Cao. The news reporting was an obvious attempt to cast doubt on Juanes' honest intentions concerning his Peace concert in Cuba the previous year, while reporter Gina Romero wonders why Juanes hasn't signed a letter in favor of Cuban political prisoners. (Not surprisingly Capitol Hill Cubans had the same concern.)

The AmericaTeVe program "A Mano Limpia" followed the same attack on Juanes with a full program, including Gina Romero and other opponents of the Cuban Five. And, never a mention of the details over the cause of the Cuban Five.

Finally, when Amnesty International (AI) came out in support of the Cuban Five with a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, the same thing happened. Aside from the usual silence from the local media, America TeVe program "A Mano Limpia" came out ready to challenge the AI letter. Host Oscar Haza gathered three local attorneys to argue against the Cuban Five and the AI letter which Haza described as part of a "fierce international campaign" by the Cuban government.

FREE THE CUBAN FIVE

If any honest person takes the time to review the case of the Cuban Five, just like Amnesty International did, they may reach the conclusion that this MIGHT be a case of injustice. Or perhaps not. But, they should be given that chance to decide for themselves.

The cause of the Cuban Five has not been given fair treatment in Miami (or no treatment at all), and therefore people have not been given the opportunity to form an opinion over the case. In addition, some in Miami feel that even discussing the subject of the Cuban Five is an attack against the community. This is nothing but paranoia.

The case of the Cuban Five is a legitimate political cause that has been supported by many people internationally, and deserves to be defended. Even if you do not totally agree with it (like myself because I oppose espionage on principle), it does have the right to be heard. Especially in the media which is responsible for giving everyone with a cause a voice.

Media Sources Reviewed:
- Univision23 news reports
- America Teve news report 1 and 2
- Radio Mambi news report
- El Nuevo Herald report
- Cafe Fuerte report

Additional Resources supporting the Cuban Five:
- Amnesty International's "The Case of the Cuban Five" (October 2010)
- National Committee to Free the Cuban Five
- International Committee for the Freedom of the Cuban Five
- Sting of the Wasp: The Cuban Five Connection

"The Price of Blood"

2011-01-11T19:42:00.009-05:00

The video above features a speech by Luis Conte Aguero, President of the Cuban Orthodox People's Party in Miami, visiting members of the Junta Patriotica Cubana (JPC) in Pomona, California on October 9, 2010.

Luis Conte Aguero, is an eloquent speaker, a local television show host and a militant. Even though he is asking the JPC to support the non-violent civil disobedience of Cuban dissidents, he can't help but also emphasize the important of "the price of blood."

[Excerpt beginning at 8:35]

"Pacifism... Pacifist enemy, very well. Whoever wants that practice, its convenient... But, complimentary to it we cannot renounce the strategy of war... Today, no one says war, as if war was unnecessary. War is an instrument of history. And, it can be constructive. And, no one can accuse me of being cruel, or much less satanic. No. But, one has to pay the price of blood. [Pay with] the blood of the enemy and one's own if you want to truly cultivate the tree of liberty so that it grows and blossoms."

[Rep. David Rivera and Florida State Rep. Erik Fresen are both members of the Cuban Orthodox People's Party.]

Why Support Posada?

2011-01-11T17:01:00.016-05:00

So, maybe some of you might be baffled why Luis Posada Carriles, a person with such a violent history, gets so much support around Miami. Every supporter may have their own personal reason, but the general explanation seems to be that Posada is a symbolic hero of "la causa" (the collective exile mission to defeat the Castro government by any means). But, support for Posada should not be confused with support for violence (despite some Cuban exile leaders who continue to believe in the effective use of violence). Rather, aside from the militant politics he promotes, Posada also represents a politics of force without democracy: this is the hard-line.

I recently posted some reasons why the hard-line is a non-democratic idea, and it is this contempt for the public that it shares with militancy. Those who feel that violence is an effective use of force generally have no regard for public opinion. I'll present some examples. The photo above shows a gathering of Cuban exile groups at the Presidio Politico Historico Cubano, a center in Little Havana that documents past and current abuse of political prisoners inside Cuba. This gathering took place on October 2006 [PDF, Page 14] to protest the detention of Luis Posada Carriles while he awaited criminal immigration charges.

In the photo is Rodolfo Frometa (center, black beard), leader of the recently defunct group F4 Commandos (the website is down and the office has been put for rent). Frometa made it very clear to listeners of Radio Mambi that violence was necessary to bring change to Cuba. Frometa, of course, rarely appeared before any other media outlets in Miami because of the anticipated public rejection. Frometa, without the F4 Commandos, was last seen publicly among the marchers at last year's march supporting the (non-violent) Ladies in White in Little Havana.

Also, in the photo is Miguel Saavedra (center, red tie), leader of Vigilia Mambisa. Back in 2007, Saavedra and other members of Vigilia Mambisa physically attacked a small group of protesters in Little Havana after the small group held up a sign calling Luis Posada Carriles a terrorist. Saavedra is also a member of the militant group Unidad Cubana, and in 2009 was found to be an unpopular figure after a poll found a majority of Cubans (74%) in Miami opposed his protests.

Ernesto Diaz Rodriguez (center, blue shirt), secretary general of Alpha 66, also appears in the photo. Diaz was arrested in 1968 inside Cuba while attempting to "set up a base" and "infiltrate guerrillas." Diaz was released in 1991 after serving 22 years of a 40-year sentence. Alpha 66 long ago gave up its violent campaign, but now advocates the use of "sabotage" inside Cuba by dissidents. (I once heard him suggest on Radio Mambi the burning of Cuban government vehicles.)

Enrique Encinosa (front, dark glasses), also a strong defender of Posada's and news editor at Radio Mambi, was featured in a documentary defending the bombing campaign of Cuban hotels. Encinosa says: "I personally think its an acceptable method. Its a way of damaging the tourist economy. The message that one tries to get across is that Cuba is not a healthy place for tourists. So, if Cuba is not a healthy place for tourist because there's a few windows being blown out of hotels, that's fine."

The individuals and groups above represent a political idea which includes a strong disdain for the public. They don't care if you detest their use of force because for many years they have ignored the public and done as they pleased. Not just because of "la causa," but also because the public (or their representatives) never really tried to stop them. And, neither were any alternatives considered.

2011-01-10T20:29:00.004-05:00

Important links:
- Summary of Luis Posada Case by Peter Kornbluh and relevant documents.
- Center for Democracy in the Americas press conference on Posada Case.
- The Posada Files by Ann Louise Bardach

Posada's Supporters in Miami

2011-01-10T15:52:00.022-05:00

Luis Posada Carriles' trial over criminal immigration charges started today. Laura Wides-Munoz for the AP provides an interesting report and interview with Posada revealing deep concern at the possibility of being jailed. "If I go to jail, my life ends in jail," says Posada.

Posada was arrested by U.S. immigration officials back in May 2005. It wasn't until January 2007 that Posada was charged with making false statements on his naturalization application and interview. But, in May 2007 Posada was exonerated of these charges because the federal judge believed Posada was the victim of entrapment during the naturalization process. That ruling was later overturned in August of 2008 by a federal appeals court, and after much delay Posada is finally back in court.

[Check a list of important court documents at the Along the Malecon blog.]

Since his release in 2007, Posada has been very active throughout Miami. The main mission of course was to collect funds for his legal expenses, thus public appearances seemed obligatory. Through the years, Posada has met with several important leaders in the Cuba exile community as shown in the collection of photos above.

- Rep. David Rivera (top left) - Newly elected, Rep. Rivera showed his support for Luis Posada Carriles on December 30, 2010 at a public solidarity event [video] in front of the Versailles Restaurant. Rep. Rivera is a member of the hardline/militant organization called the Cuban Orthodox People's Party (Partido del Pueblo Cubano Ortodoxo) which is headed by Cuban exile militant Luis Conte Aguero. Conte Aguero was the main speaker at the Posada solidarity event, and is a fervent Posada supporter. Rep. Rivera showed up at the event, not just to regurgitate platitudes, but to show his solidarity with Cuba exile militancy. Also at the event were Antonio Esquivel, president of the Cuban exile organization Junta Patriotica Cubana, representing the organization's support for Posada and Nelis Rojas Morales, one of the main organizers of Posada's legal fund.

- Mayor Julio Robaina (bottom left) - Hialeah Mayor Julio Robaina allowed the City of Hialeah to present artwork by Luis Posada Carriles at the Walker Community Center on November 15, 2007 (check this schedule). In the photo, Posada stands in front of the Mayor with human rights activist Armando Valladares in the back. The photo was taken during an exhibition of Valladares' artwork on September 14, 2007. (Photos of both events can be found on the City of Hialeah website here.) Mayor Robaina is hoping to become the next Mayor of Miami-Dade County in 2012.

Others in the photo include, Sylvia Iriondo (bottom middle) and Bertha Antúnez Pernet (top right). Both women work prominently with the Cuban Democratic Directorate, a hard-line human rights organization in Miami that has received money from USAID. Both Iriondo and Antúnez travel overseas to promote a hard-line policy towards Cuba while documenting the political repression inside the island. Antunez is also the sister of Jorge Luis Garcia Perez, Cuban dissident whose recorded editorials now appear regularly on Radio Mambi.

Finally, there's Alex Hanna (bottom right), the traffic ticket attorney whose face appears on many billboards and bus benches around Miami. In the photo above he appears next to Posada receiving artwork by Posada during a meeting of the Cuban Orthodox People's Party where Hanna is also a member. Hanna seems to be a very successful attorney who also sponsors many programs on local station America TeVe, which regularly features hard-liners in Miami.

The photos above, mostly collected from the archives of Libre magazine, while only a few, represent the strong support for Posada in Miami. Previous posts related to Luis Posada Carriles also show local support by some Cuban exiles.

[Correction: Radio/TV Marti has reported on the start of the Luis Posada Carriles trial. They include news from EFE news agency reporting that Luis Posada was met with protesters calling him an "assassin" as he left his hotel. The report interviews a supporter of Posada saying that Posada was "verbally attacked" by the ANSWER Coalition. The Nuevo Accion blog reports that the protesters "tried to physically attack" Posada "inside the hotel," but were thwarted by Posada supporters. Nuevo Accion has a consistent record of misinformation.]

[Watch the ANSWER Coalition peacefully demonstrate before the Posada trial.]

Do You Favor Democracy?

2011-01-07T01:10:00.007-05:00

So, as a new Congress convenes I'm getting ready to keep a good eye on our South Florida representatives, and the ambitious Senator Marco Rubio. And, boy! I thought the hard-line could not get any tougher. Now, here comes David Rivera and Marco Rubio, two known hard-liners on U.S. policy towards Cuba, and Rep. Ros-Lehtinen heading the House Foreign Affairs Committee and appointing other hard-liners as Subcommittee Chairmen. Yikes!

And, maybe some of you are wondering why being a hard-liner* is a cause of concern. Well, the answer is simple: hard-liners tend to ignore the opinion of others, namely their own constituents. Put more bluntly, they don't believe in democracy. Why am I so convinced? A quick review of public opinion concerning U.S. policy towards Cuba is a good start.

Over several years, Gallup polling has documented a strong and consistent American opinion that differs greatly with hard-liners' policy for Cuba. For several years, surveyed Americans have strongly favored (with an average of 59% since 2000) re-establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba if it was a key issue up for a referendum.

Ending the U.S. embargo towards Cuba has also seen strong approval in some polling. A recent online survey by Widmeyer Communications showed a majority of Americans supporting the end of the embargo by 47%, with 22% in opposition and 31% unsure. These results are similar to those reached by Gallup, and several other surveys.

So what about South Florida's opinion on the embargo? A 2008 survey from Florida International University's Institute for Public Opinion Research (IPOR) found a slight majority of Cuban-Americans favoring the end of the embargo, but a 2000 survey (also by IPOR) had already shown that 60% of Miami non-Cubans opposed continuing the embargo.

Of course, the local media continues to present the issue of public opinion concerning Cuba as divided. Last March, the Miami Herald (Juan O. Tamayo) reported on a BBC World News/Harris Interactive online poll showing "no clamor for change in U.S. Cuba policy." The online poll seemed to show support for the embargo (40% in favor, 36% opposed), but the questionnaire used Likert scaling (agree-disagree) on the statement "The embargo towards Cuba should remain in effect." The measurement was clearly vulnerable to bias because it implied one policy option.

Interestingly, after the Herald published this report (the only ones who reported on this poll according to a NewsBank search), another survey was conducted as a direct response. That survey was from the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE). The NAE conducts a monthly survey of its Board of Directors, and last March they found that 63% of evangelical leaders opposed the U.S. embargo towards Cuba. According to the NAE:

"The embargo’s impact on the poor, its failure to influence the leadership in Cuba toward greater openness and respect for human rights, and the potential benefit the lift would have on the spread of the gospel are the primary reasons evangelical leaders support the embargo’s end."

This survey by the NAE, who represent "40,000 local churches" was not reported by the Herald. In fact, according to NewsBank, it got no coverage at all.

So, when I read about South Florida hard-liners being proud over their tough stance on Cuba by supporting the embargo, all I can conclude is that they don't believe in democracy. And, all their talk about the "civilized world" seems like a joke.

And, I haven't even gotten to the part about Cuban dissident opposition to the embargo and travel restrictions!

[*A good definition of "hard-line" comes from George Mason University professor Colin Dueck.]

Suffer the Prisoners

2011-01-06T01:06:00.005-05:00

My previous post was about last year's release of Cuban political prisoners and the possibility that they were coerced into leaving Cuba as a condition for their release. That was back in July and much has happened since. Currently, 41 of 52 Cuban "Prisoners of Conscience" (listed by Amnesty International) arrested in the Black Spring of 2003 have been released. Forty of them now reside outside of Cuba. Only one was released inside Cuba. Eleven remain jailed.

I had argued that it was likely that the 52 political prisoners were coerced into leaving Cuba based on their public statements once arriving in Spain and a BBC Mundo report from inside the island. More recently, one of the released prisoners in Spain (Omar Rodríguez Saludes) recounted how he was approached to negotiate his release, only to further support the fact that prisoners were indeed coerced.

Now, some might say that this issue is almost irrelevant given that the released prisoners are now living alongside their families (over 130 family members were allowed to leave Cuba to join the released political prisoners) and in far better conditions than a rat and roach infested Cuban jail. But, this is about principle and respect for human rights.

According to Saludes, he was contacted in jail by Monsignor Jaime Ortega Alamino, archbishop of Havana, on July 8th, 2010 and told that Saludes was on a list of prisoners that would "shortly travel to Spain with their family members." All Saludes had to do was accept or refuse. In my opinion this is scandalous because Saludes was never given another reasonable option, only self-imposed exile. Furthermore, the possibility of being release inside Cuba by November was never suggested, nor taken seriously after all once the deadline passed.

Being subject to exile is a violation of Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And, people incarcerated should never be forced to make such a decision, no matter how terrible their conditions. In the case of political prisoners, it only adds to their tragedy.

As for the 11 remaining political prisoners in Cuba that were supposed to be released last November, their families are hoping that the next few months will bring good news. In the meantime, the Cuban government is planning the release of other prisoners from jails (not on the list of "Prisoners of Conscience") perhaps hoping that some of the 11 will change their minds and choose self-imposed exile.

[Most recently released Cuban prisoner Egberto Ángel Escobedo Morales (not a "Prisoner of Conscience") celebrated his release by joining the Ladies in White this past Sunday. He is also a member of the dissident group Cuba Independent and Democratic (CID). Last June, Egberto was reported to be in grave health conditions, the local media (Telemundo51) described him as "following the path of Orlando Zapata."]

[I want to also reiterate that self-imposed or coerced exile is not "forced exile." The latter commonly suggests the use of physical force, which was not the case here.]

Now... Where Was I?

2011-01-06T00:48:00.003-05:00

First, my apologies to interested readers of Mambi Watch. I know you're out there and I thank you for your acknowledgment and/or support. I know some blogs have removed me from their blogrolls, but I hope to post regularly again and earn back my space on their lists.

I sorta never really went away. I've been waiting to return to blogging here again, reading the other Cuba blogs (e.g. The Cuban Triangle, Along the Malecon, the Herald's Cuban Colada, even the Babalu blog) and dying to get back to posting interesting stuff about militants and hard-liners in Miami. (And, 2011 is looking to be a busy year for hard-liners.) So, where did I last leave off...

"We are Refugees"

2010-07-16T00:00:00.012-04:00

There's plenty of news to unpack about the released Cuban prisoners in Spain so let's get to it. First, there's one important matter to settle: were the released Cuban political prisoners given the option to stay in Cuba or were they coerced to emigrate to Spain?

The last few days of reports indicate that the Cuban political prisoners were likely coerced into becoming political refugees in Spain. Initial reports had indicated that the option to leave Cuba was "a proposal" (words of Cardinal Jaime Ortega) and that political prisoners "could go to Spain if they wish" (words of Miguel Angel Moratinos). What seems to be left out is the fact that political prisoners were given two cruel options: leave Cuba immediately or stay in prison and suffer until who knows when.

[The Cuba Triangle also has a good analysis on this matter, with a different conclusion.]

A recent report from Fernando Ravsberg (BBC Mundo) inside Cuba asks the important question: What happens to the dissidents who want to stay? The answer for the moment is we don't know yet. More than five prisoners have rejected the proposal to leave Cuba. In the meantime, Ravsberg gives us a picture into how some of the released political prisoners were contacted. According to the wife of one liberated prisoner, Cardinal Ortega personally called all political prisoners "and demand[ed] an answer at the very moment."

Ravsberg's interview with another wife of a political prisoner fills in the rest. "On the 2nd of July I told [Cardinal Ortega] that my husband would not accept leaving Cuba. I was given no reply, he just looked at me and said nothing."

Now in Spain, the released political prisoners are making important revelations about Cuban prison conditions, and how they desire to return to Cuba and continue their struggle to free all political prisoners. These are not the comments of men who were given a choice to leave "if they wish."

One former prisoner spoke of "subhuman facilities. You didn't have light, nor drinking water. You didn't know who was in the neighboring cell. You were isolated from everything." The effects of such isolation are apparent in one of the released prisoners, Antonio Villareal, who seems to refuse to leave his room at the Spanish hostel. "They have psychologically destroyed him," his friends say. Today, the former political prisoners spoke about how their "cells were rat- and roach-infested and that disease was rampant." Some prisoners were clearly physically deteriorated from disease, such as Jose Luis Garcia Paneque. Another prisoner released inside Cuba last month, Ariel Sigler, was seen in worse conditions due to polyneuropathy, [edit] possibly caused by horrible prison conditions.

But, in the end, these former political prisoners want to eventually return to Cuba and help free all political prisoners who continue suffering inside Cuban jails. They also desire economic, social and political changes inside Cuba. But, they are not militants. They are not calling for all Cubans to march in the streets and protest or rebel.

"These liberations [of political prisoners] do not mean an improvement of human rights in Cuba. It's a first step to restart the dialogue between Cuba and the European Union."

(Don't expect to hear that "dialogue" word in Miami. This evening I didn't hear it reported in the evening news reports by Univision23 or Telemnudo51.)

(Also, these cases, in my opinion, are not forced exile. Manuel Zelaya [June 2009] being forced out by soldiers in his pajamas and flown to Costa Rica [in violation of the Honduran constitution, Article 102] is forced exile.)

[Photo of Julio Cesar Galvez by Reuters]

Olga Guillot (1922 - 2010)

2010-07-12T20:14:00.010-04:00

It is a sad day for all Cubans. This afternoon it was reported that Olga Guillot, considered one of the most famous Cuban singers alongside Celia Cruz, died of a heart attack today at the age of 87.

Listening to the reports in the local Spanish media it's obvious that many in the Cuban exile community are deeply saddened by this loss. But, along with her musical talents, many are remembering Guillot for her politics. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen says: "There will never be another Olga Guillot. Her patriotism, love for her homeland, talented voice and caring heart will be missed." And, Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart remembers that "above all, Olga Guillot was a Cuban patriot." Several callers to Radio Mambi today made the same references to Guillot's patriotism.

Guillot was intransigent when it came to Cuba, and many in Miami loved her for that. According to El Nuevo Herald, a friend said Guillot's house in Cuba was repossessed in 1960, and soon thereafter she decided to leave and she never went back.

I've always read more about Guillot's politics than her music here in Miami. (This is the result of the coordinated anti-Castro propaganda that thrives in the local Spanish media.) When the "Peace without Borders" concert was about to take place in Cuba last year (dubbed the "Concert of Discord" by the local Spanish media), Olga Guillot was given an increased amount of airtime on TV and radio because she opposed the concert. (After the concert, a poll of Cuban-Americans showed a majority with favorable views of the concert.)

When the concert was over, she was asked in an interview about it. Guillot said that she was not impressed by the presentations and described the whole thing as "bien pobre" (very poor or poorly done). Guillot expressed the reasons for her political intransigence: she would never return as long as "the [Castro] regime" was in power. And, when asked what she thought of Cucu Diamantes, a young Cuban-American artist who traveled to Cuba to perform at the "Peace Without Borders" concert, she replied that Diamantes "has no character, and if she does then she is 'una infiltrada' (an infiltrator or spy)... here there are many people, many people who have been against the Cuba exile community because we are against that concert."

When asked what Guillot would do if she ever ran into any of the artists, such as Juanes or Olga Tañon, from the concert in Cuba, she replied: "Nothing. I am not going to see them as persons, or people. To me they are already strangers."

But, despite being mostly intransigent about Cuba, Guillot was also someone who could see beyond Cuban politics. In April 2009 it was reported that Olga Guillot and Omara Portuondo (another famous Cuban artist and supporter of the Cuban government) "embraced after 48 years separated spiritually and territorially."

The power of music can bring people together, if only for a while. Even the most intransigent.

--- Olga Guillot, in her own words ---

"God knows that we all want to [celebrate] in a free Cuba. But, since it will not happen, at least here [in exile] we can give each other greetings, the fraternal embrace of us all [Cubans] so we can feel alive. And we are loyal to our homeland, loyal to our traditions and to our roots because that is the only thing we should not forget.

"When they hear us say 'la Cuba mia' [that Cuba of mine] its because that Cuba of mine was so beautiful and so different to that Cuba of ours that suffers so much. And, one of the things that makes me sad is knowing that Cuba has not been lost, but kidnapped. Our island was kidnapped.

"I carry inside me and in my heart a map, [shaped like an alligator], I love that alligator, a beautiful alligator, I love her, Cuba, always Cuba.

[Photo courtesy of Guije.com]

Cuba Will Free 52 Political Prisoners [Updated]

2010-07-08T02:34:00.006-04:00

The news yesterday came as a big surprise to almost everyone including Guillermo Fariñas, the hunger striker who in February initially demanded the release of 26 political prisoners reportedly ill. Now, according to Radio Marti, Fariñas will stop his hunger strike once "10 to 12 prisoners" are reported free. But, once Cuban dissident Laura Pollan (photo) heard the news of this possible mass liberation (which includes her husband), she called Fariñas and told him: "Trust a little bit... Stop the hunger strike. You are more valuable alive than dead."

Just like those moments of joy when an expert negotiator successfully gains the release of hostages, yesterday may soon be celebrated as a big political victory for Spain's minister of foreign affairs Miguel Angel Moratinos and Cuba's catholic leader Jaime Ortega for their negotiated release of Amnesty International's Cuban "prisoners of conscience." But, just like a hostage situation, more difficult problems lie in the background that prisoner exchanges cannot solve. The militant or hard-liner would say that the problem is simply solved through force or coercion, while others may propose less rigid alternatives. Spain's Miguel Angel Moratinos has chosen dialogue, and has scored big. Here in Miami we should expect a devastating blow to militancy.

So what does Cuba gain from releasing 52 political prisoners who have been unfairly incarcerated since 2003?

Well, we cannot say for certain what details were discussed between Moratinos, Ortega and Raul Castro that led to this possible mass liberation, but there are some hints. The most obvious being the potential end of the European Union's "common position" towards Cuba which Moratinos has vowed to permanently lift. Yesterday, Moratinos made it clear that the "common position" is no longer justified, mainly because before traveling to Cuba Moratinos made a deal with other EU members: "They told me that if the problem of [Cuban political] prisoners was solved the Common Position would be lifted." The EU will be reviewing the "common position" in September after Moratinos delayed the vote from June expecting promising results from the ongoing negotiations. Lifting or revising the "common position" will allow Cuba to extend economic cooperation with EU nations at a time when it desperately needs it.

Thus, focus on the economy is the other possible reason Raul Castro has negotiated this prisoner release. As Cuba expert Jorge I. Dominguez explained last month at a conference that discussed the Cuban economy, finding a solution (albeit short-term) to international condemnation of Cuba's human rights violations was important to achieve a greater goal: "President Raul Castro's desire to focus on problems--such as the economy with its declining growth rate--that are central to his office and remove others that distract from this."

And finally, this is another ideological victory for supporters of increasing dialogue with the Cuban government, especially once all 52 political prisoners are finally freed.[Reports indicate that prisoners are not being forced into exile as a condition for their release, but are free to choose emigration to Spain.] History has shown that the Cuban government has repeatedly sought out favorable partners to negotiate with and address certain problems, such as political prisoners. Mass liberation of Cuban prisoners occurred in the 70s and 90s with different types of negotiating partners, and the potential exists today. But, negotiating the release of prisoners ignores the central problem: historically fraught U.S.-Cuba relations.

The U.S. must eventually accept other political alternatives to using force or coercion against the Cuban government. Negotiation and dialogue are alternatives that may yield good results. So why wait any longer?

[Press Release by the Cuban Catholic Church on the release of political prisoners.]

[Recent list of Amnesty International's Cuban "Prisoners of Conscience," the list includes Ariel Sigler and Darsi Ferrer who were recently freed from prison. Rolando Jimenez Posada is the only prisoner not scheduled to be released.]

[Update: Guillermo Fariñas has ended his hunger strike Thursday, July 8, according to Yoani Sanchez, and other reports from Cuba's dissidents.]

[Photo by Reuters]

Fariñas versus Radio Mambi [Updated]

2010-06-11T18:09:00.014-04:00

An interesting interview/debate occurred this afternoon on Radio Mambi. Guillermo Fariñas, the Cuban dissident currently on a hunger strike (which has already passed 100 days) was interviewed by Ninoska Perez-Castellon today on Radio Mambi, and basically told to explain his recent actions in support of H.R. 4645.

Anya Landua French on The Havana Note blog has some details about what happened, and how some hard-line/militant exiles are surprised by the recent letter by Cuban dissidents in support of this bill.

Click here to hear audio of the Radio Mambi interview with Guillermo Fariñas.

[Excerpt of debate below]

Ninoska: You [Fariñas] have signed a letter supporting the bill [H.R. 4645] to reform [U.S] travel restrictions and promote trade. And this bill is supported by organizations whose only interests... are commercial and not the welfare of the Cuban people. I don't know if you all are aware of that.

Fariñas: We are aware of that Ninoska.

Ninoska: Then you are in agreement that credits be allowed to the [Cuban] regime.

Fariñas: The letter that I signed spoke nothing about credits.

[...]

Ninoska: Yes it does. You didn't see it, but...

Fariñas: The letter I signed says nothing about credits.

Ninoska: Well, the letter where your signature appears supports the bill that is asking it be given...

Fariñas: Supports the bill, but it says nothing about credits.

Ninoska: But Fariñas I'm trying to explain that this letter doesn't say it, but this bill in Congress is seeking to give credits to the Cuban government. [And] that is what the letter says.

[More related posts at the Cuban Triangle here and here.]

Cuban Dissidents Support H.R. 4645 [Updated]

2010-06-10T03:21:00.006-04:00

Haven't seen this reported on Radio Marti yet.

Seventy-four Cuban dissidents have signed a letter in support of H.R. 4646, the Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act. This bill was also supported by the Conference of Catholic Bishops [PDF of letter] and Human Rights Watch back in March.

The Havana Note and El Yuma blog have all the details. Ted Henken of El Yuma blog describes some of the names that stand out:

"The bloggers associated with DesdeCuba/VocesCubanas.com Juan Juan Almeida, Claudia Cadelo, Dimas Castellanos, Miriam Celaya, Martha Cortizas, Reinaldo Escobar, Eugenio Leal, Pablo Pacheco, and Yoani Sánchez; the well-known government critics and opposition figures Elizardo Sánchez Santa Cruz, Manuel Cuesta Morúa, Héctor Palacios, Oscar Espinosa Chepe, Miriam Leiva, Guillermo Fariñas, and Félix Bonne Carcassés; leaders of Convivencia (the new on-line project of the original Vitral group) Karina Gálvez, Virgilio Toledo, and Dagoberto Valdés; and the Santiago priest José Conrado."

---[Update]---

Radio Marti has provided not one but TWO reports concerning this letter of support by Cuban dissidents. The first one mentions the letter and some of its more popular signatories, and includes an interview with signatory Dagoberto Valdez, the director of the wonderful online magazine Convivencia (Co-Existence).

The second report is about the Center for Democracy in the Americas (CDA) and their support of the letter. The report includes an interview with Sarah Stephens, executive director of the CDA.

Hooray for Radio Marti! Though they should report more often about how Cubans in general oppose US policy towards Cuba.

One Last Chance

2010-06-09T20:18:00.008-04:00

The Spanish presidency at the Council of the European Union ends this month, and before they leave they want one last chance to change the EU's "common position" towards Cuba. But, it won't be easy, especially when you still have South Florida's favorite Congressmen, Rep. Mario and Lincoln Diaz-Balart, ready to thwart any policy changes towards Cuba.

Of course, there are several factors that will result in any possible change to the EU's policy towards Cuba, some of which were outlined last June. But, the Spanish government is hoping that other European nations will take notice of recent events inside Cuba, namely the Cuban government's negotiations with the Catholic Church to alleviate the harsh conditions of a few political prisoners. Spain's minister of foreign affairs, Miguel Angel Moratinos, believes that the "common position" is not working and that increased dialogue between Cuba and European nations would yield better results to achieve changes inside Cuba. As an example, Moratinos highlights the decrease in the number of political prisoners since Spain's new policy of dialogue with Cuba. (In 2008, the release and exile of four Cuban political prisoners was attributed to talks between Cuban and Spanish diplomats.)

But, this past Saturday the debate over EU policy towards Cuba got a bit nasty.

The EU and the U.S. held their regular bi-annual meeting of the Transatlantic Legislators' Dialogue (TLD) over in Madrid. It was a three-day conference where European and American legislators could discuss important global issues and achieve the goals of "strengthening cooperation" (at least that's part of what the TLD mission entails). Miguel Angel Moratinos was present for Saturday's session on foreign policy which was titled "Reducing Tensions in Distinct Geographic Areas." One of those areas was Cuba, and tensions at the event increased.

Reports are not very clear, but during this meeting Reps. Mario and Lincoln Diaz-Balart made statements in opposition to changing EU policy towards Cuba. According to Lincoln, the statements were directed towards the EU representatives and not at Moratinos. But within the statements was a direct reference to Miguel Angel Moratinos and at some point Mario directs a question to Moratinos asking him a question related to Cuba.

At this point it seems that Moratinos interpreted the protest by the Daiz-Balarts as a personal attack and responded back loudly. Reports indicate that Moratinos described Mario as "ignorant" and later, after the session, continued to insult him. Lincoln's version of the story, which he also repeated for Radio Marti, says that Moratinos spoke with an "insolent and offensive tone." But, today on Radio Mambi, Lincoln told Ninoska Perez-Castellon that Moratinos was so angry he was shaking.

If I were Moratinos I would also have little patience with Reps. Mario and Lincoln Diaz-Balart.

When it comes to Cuba, both Diaz-Balarts are only capable of protest and not dialogue. It is very clear from Lincoln's version of the story that both Diaz-Balart brothers came only to protest Moratinos and not have a dialogue. Promoting dialogue and cooperation with the EU is the ultimate goal of the TLD meetings, and the Diaz-Balart brothers chose to ignore those ideals.

The offensive language by Moratinos towards U.S. Congressmen is unfortunate, but a typical response (familiar in Miami) when one meets an "intransigent" on Cuba policy. This incident should only remind us again that our political decorum should rise above insults and impatience.

--- [Addendum]---

On Thursday, Miguel Angel Moratinos is planning to meet with Cuba's foreign minister Bruno Rodriguez. After that meeting Moratinos will join Spanish president Zapatero at the Vatican where both Spanish diplomats will meet with Pope Benedict XXVI to discuss the human rights situation in Cuba, among other topics. These talks are in preparation for next week's EU decisions to possibly change the "common position" towards Cuba.

Callous

2010-06-03T01:12:00.006-04:00

I won't get into the details over Monday's violent confrontation between the Free Gaza Movement flotilla and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). But, I will say that there is a larger context to consider in this case, and it is very likely that the Israeli government violated international law when they intercepted the flotilla.

But, despite the growing global condemnation against the Israeli government, here in Miami some Cuban exiles militants are quickly coming to the defense of the IDF raid. On Wednesday, Radio Mambi's Ninoska Perez Castellon dedicated her entire hour-long show in defense of the IDF raid, and even the Babalu blog has dedicated some posts in support of the raid. For years hardline Cuban exiles have looked at Jewish political intransigence as an inspirational model, even going so far to equate Cuba's internal situation as genocidal.

But, sometimes the level of apologetics for their ideological allies becomes absurd and callous.

On Tuesday, the Nuevo Accion blog, a news and tabloid website about Cuba wrote a post that revealed outright contempt for their readers. They presented recent photos of an injured and bloodied American student Emily Henochowicz. Emily was hit in the eye with a tear gas canister during a demonstration in Jerusalem in support of the Free Gaza flotilla and was photographed bleeding severely from her left eye.

But, according to Nuevo Accion (directed by Aldo Rosado Tuero, above) if you look closely at the photographs "it is not blood, but instead red paint... and what she is holding is a handkerchief completely soaked with red paint."

Of course, don't expect Nuevo Accion to provide any convincing evidence for their callous accusation. Instead, Nuevo Accion expects you to believe that the mainstream media is conspiring against the Israeli government.

If there is one consistent characteristic of militant ideology, it is their constant perception of conspiracy by an overwhelming enemy, regardless of any contrary evidence.

[More information on Emily Henochowicz's condition.]

Film Review: Oscar's Cuba

2010-06-01T21:29:00.009-04:00

Last month I went to the Tower Theater in Little Havana and saw the documentary Oscar's Cuba directed by Jordan Allott and John Gyovai. In sum, it was a decent hour-long introduction to a few of Cuba's old and new dissidents, with Oscar Elias Biscet (now serving a 25-year sentence since 2002) as its central figure. But, the project clearly suffers from the fact that independent film-making inside Cuba is difficult (due to its politically repressive climate) and therefore had to be shot clandestinely, and the obvious fact that its central character is behind bars and was unable to directly participate with the filming. As a result, the documentary is not really about Oscar Elias Biscet, but instead about the general hardships of Cuba's internal dissidents which Oscar's story seems to symbolize.

But why Oscar?

This is a question I immediately asked myself after noticing that the documentary spent a considerable amount of time NOT talking about Oscar Elias Biscet. Instead, the film included interviews with several other Cuban dissidents not related to Oscar's story, such as young dissidents Yoani Sanchez, Claudia Caudelo, Gorki Aguilar, and older ones like Armando Valladares and Oswaldo Paya. And, the film dedicated time to Cuba's 2003 Black Spring and the Ladies in White movement, both events not related to Oscar Elias Biscet. In fact, given the attention other dissidents received, the film could have easily been titled "Yoani's Cuba" or "Oswaldo's Cuba."

But, after some research, it soon became apparent why Oscar Elias Biscet became the central figure: Biscet is a pro-life activist that compares abortion to genocide. And this is also the main reason why many other people, namely "conservatives," support Oscar Elias Biscet.

Jordan Allott, the film's co-director and executive producer, has mentioned repeatedly in interviews and speeches that he became aware of Cuba's internal dissidents through the pro-life activism of Oscar Elias Biscet. Jordan Allott and his twin brother Daniel (associate producer of Oscar's Cuba) are both pro-life activists themselves. Jordan and Daniel make faith-inspired documentaries for In Altum Productions, while Daniel also works for the non-profit organization American Values, which mainly writes articles for "conservative" magazines and declares that "from any perspective abortion is wrong."

As a result, fund-raising and promotion for Oscar's Cuba has mainly occurred within "conservative" circles, such as writing articles for the American Spectator and networking with hardline Cuban exiles, such as Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart. In fact, after a successful fund-raising event in Miami last year, Jordan Allott was able to include interviews from three of the most hardline, pro-embargo activists in the U.S.: former Cuban political prisoner Armando Valladares, former Interest Section chief James Cason, and Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey. Just like Allott, Rep. Smith is a big supporter of Oscar Elias Biscet, and is also pro-life.

Therefore, the film presents a very specific, hardline perspective about Cuba's internal political repression: that the Cuban government strictly represses dissent without restraint on its brutality or sympathy for its victims or families.

But, the truth is more complex than that. Over the years, Cuba has dealt with political prisoners very differently, sometimes negotiating their release with Cuban exiles, or with other foreign governments. And, as we can see now, the Cuban government is also open to negotiating prisoners with the American government, or even their prison conditions with the Catholic Church in Cuba. This long history is not mentioned in the Allott documentary.

Instead, when I left the Tower Theater after the film had finished I felt depressed. Oscar's Cuba left the impression that there was virtually little hope for Cuba's political prisoners. And, the few internal dissidents mentioned in the film also revealed how little influence they have inside Cuba's repressive system.

But, the documentary's official website gives us some suggestions on how to help Cuba's political prisoners. Let's review those suggestions:

1) Spread the word and hold a screening of Oscar's Cuba - In my opinion this would not be much help because the film is depressing without a larger context, and it would be difficult to place Cuba's political prisoners over greater world concerns, such as global poverty and international tensions.

2) Get political - This section of the website suggests writing letters to the U.S. and Cuban governments, and human rights organizations. This is better than the first suggestion, but the U.S. government holds zero influence in these matters due to its hardline position on Cuba. The Cuban government itself is unlikely to make any changes because the general Cuban population is not concerned over its political prisoners. And, human rights organizations are also generally ignored by the Cuban government.

3) Pray - It couldn't hurt, but its already been over 7 years (!) for those political prisoners arrested in the Black Spring.

The awful truth is that our hands (in the U.S.) are tied. The fate of Cuba's political prisoners depends on changes inside Cuba, and the hope that someone will effectively transmit how prisoners and their families suffer to the ears of the Cuban government.

--- [Addendum] ---

There's a great short documentary about Cuba dissident Oswaldo Paya called Dissident: Oswaldo Paya and the Varela Project [Video: Part 1 and 2]. It packs so much in just 10 minutes. It was directed by Heidi Ewing and Produced by Rachel Grady, the same team that has since made other wonderful documentaries.

Throwing Money at the Problem [Updated]

2010-04-02T00:36:00.008-04:00

As usual, the Cuban Triangle by Phil Peters provides essential information about Cuba and U.S. policy towards Cuba, and two recent posts made me think about how expensive U.S. policy towards Cuba can be, and without any measure of its effectiveness.

In this post, Peters notices that the 20th(!) anniversary of TV Marti, the U.S.-funded television station that transmits a variety of programs to Cuba (and which seems to lack an audience), passed last week without anyone else noticing. Surprised? (I myself couldn't find any mention of it on their website, or in the archives.) "But the program chugs on, about $10 million per year, a monument to the idea that in this corner of U.S. foreign policy, intentions can count for more than results," concludes Peters.

[Radio and TV Marti's estimated budget last year was $34.8 million, this year the Office of Cuba Broadcasting has requested $32.4 million [PDF, Broadcasting Board of Governors 2010 budget requests]

And in an earlier post, Peters notes how USAID, the government-funded agency that provides "foreign assistance" to a host of countries, has proposed $20 million for "civil society initiatives" inside Cuba. Peters links to a copy of the budget plan [PDF] and it seems that $1.7 million will be directed towards Cuba's political prisoners and their families, such as the Ladies in White. (One can immediately imagine how the Cuban government will react to this plan.)

Other funds go to organizations like Freedom House and the International Republican Institute. But, Peters argues that President Obama should restore "people-to-people" licenses (suspended since 2003) and allow American civil society to travel to Cuba, and do for free what we are now paying millions for without any indication of effectiveness.

But, what concerns me most is the appearance that USAID is essentially funding Cuba's dissident groups, and this can become problematic on many levels. But, most importantly how do Americans feel about their government supporting a dissident movement in Cuba?

One analysis of polling data found that American don't really approve of government support towards dissidents of a non-democratic country. Instead, a majority of Americans seem to favor democracy-promoting efforts that are more cooperative and (not surprisingly) multilateral in nature towards countries that are headed towards democracy.

---[Update]---

The Cuban Triangle links to a recent article from Laura Rozen at Politico describing the temporary hold on USAID initiatives towards Cuba. The article says that the Cuba plans are under review and quotes a "former senior State Department official" saying:

"These are counterproductive programs...are completely ineffective coming from the U.S.," the former official said. They are done in a "ham-handed" way that is ineffectual and causes a backlash against the [Cuban] civil society activists they intend to support.

Among the Marchers

2010-03-31T00:43:00.005-04:00

When Luis Posada Carriles attended the Miami demonstration last week in solidarity with the Damas de Blanco many news outlets noticed, such as the Miami Herald, Reuters (photo above), local station WPLG Channel 10, and others.

But, BBC Mundo (Luis Fajardo) was able to interview Luis Posada briefly. In the interview Posada said: "I am strongly supporting freedom, and freedom in the United States, and over in Cuba. Soon we shall be free. Viva Cuba libre!"

In the photo above, it seems that Posada also gave an interview to U.S.-funded Radio and TV Marti. I haven't yet found that audio, but I am curious to hear it.

Gloria's March for the Ladies in White

2010-03-25T22:07:00.018-04:00

"Tens of thousands" came out this late afternoon to march in Little Havana, according to The Miami Herald. Other local reports say approximately 100,000.

After this successful demonstration, I'm thinking to myself: Will Gloria Estefan emerge as the newest leader of the next generation of Cuban exiles?

[Video of march among the crowd by Wencesloacruzblanco]
[Video from Famaus marching alongside Gloria Estefan]
[Video from Cubademocratic]
[Video from Univision23, WPLG Channel 10 and The Miami Herald]
[Photo by Getty Images]

Today's Detour

2010-03-25T13:02:00.006-04:00

The FP Cuba blog, one of my favorite Cuba blogs, briefly answers some very important questions about Cuba's future.

[Photo (by Getty Images) of Cuban audience at the recent Calle 13 concert in Havana. AP story here.]

Gloria Supports Ladies in White [Updated]

2010-03-24T01:43:00.005-04:00

World-renowned singer Gloria Estefan appeared before the press on Tuesday expressing her strong support for the Ladies in White (wives and relatives of Cuba's political prisoners), and to express her solidarity Estefan is organizing a demonstration on Thursday in Little Havana.

Alfonso Chardy from the Herald notes that "it's not often that a world-class celebrity like singer Gloria Estefan talks about Cuba," and its true. Gloria Estefan has mostly kept herself out of politics, but her personal opinion about the Cuban government has been made clear:

"[Fidel Castro] just needs to go away... I wish he would, that would be the best for the Cuban people, obviously, with no violence and no bloodshed."

Which puts Estefan's ideology along with hardliners (many of whom were present at the press conference), and not exactly with the militants (some of whom were also present at the press conference). But, Gloria Estefan's description of Cuba yesterday [from Herald video] as a country where "the Cuban people ... are enslaved right now" is an exaggeration more likely to come from militants.

But, Cuban exiles of all political stripes are invited to march on Thursday in Little Havana, a demonstration which seems to be part of a larger effort to keep Cuba's political prisoners in the headlines. Since the recent death of political prisoner Orlando Zapata Tamayo and the international outrage that followed, some Cuban exile organizations (and other political hard-liners) have made it clear that this is an opportune time to highlight Cuba's human rights record, and justify the use of political sanctions on the island nation.

Of course, the recommendations by human rights organizations to improve the desperate situation of Cuba's political prisoners are totally ignored. But, the message of a "free Cuba" that will be often heard at the march should be clear: a Cuba free from Fidel and Raul Castro. Until then, the U.S. government shouldn't change a thing about its policy towards Cuba. Welcome to Little Havana, everyone.

(Telemundo51, in an obvious promotional stunt, asks viewers if they will attend Thursday's march: 75% say "yes.")

---[Update]---

The Miami Herald and El Nuevo Herald websites will be live-streaming the march tomorrow, and local news stations are planning to provide live coverage during the march which begins at 6pm. It will be interesting to see what effect this maximum coverage will have in Miami and Cuba.

[Gloria Estefan interviewed on Maria Elvira Live!]

[Photo by AP, Ladies in White march in Havana.]

Black Spring 2010

2010-03-19T02:49:00.009-04:00

The Ladies in White have been marching this entire week protesting the arrest of 75 Cuban dissidents in 2003. The massive political repression seven years ago, now known as the "Black Spring," was (and continues to be) widely condemned across the world, but has left its direct victims and families without recourse, and desperate.

Amnesty International again has called for the release of all Cuban political prisoners, many of whom were arrested in 2003, and to revoke its laws that authorize political repression. But, it should be clear to readers that Amnesty International (AI) and Human Rights Watch (HRW) have long ago presented their recommendations on improving the plight of Cuba's political dissidents.

I have addressed them before and will repeat them:

- AI believes "the US embargo has helped to undermine the enjoyment of key civil and political rights in Cuba by fueling a climate in which such fundamental rights as freedom of association, expression and assembly are routinely denied" and that "any tightening of the existing sanctions would only heighten the negative human rights impact of the embargo." Thus, US policy creates "a situation in which perceived external aggression is met with increased internal repression of dissent." [AI 2003 report that recommends the end of the U.S. embargo.]

- HRW believes "the US must end its failed embargo policy. It should shift the goal of its Cuba strategy away from regime change and toward promoting human rights. In particular, it should replace its sweeping bans on travel and trade with Cuba with more effective forms of pressure." [HRW 2009 report that recommends a multilateral policy of smart sanctions.]

It should come to no surprise then that the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has recently written a letter to the European Union, and not the White House, urging the European countries to pressure Cuba to release political prisoners and enact reforms.

With our current policy the U.S. has no influence over Cuba, and has virtually abandoned the Ladies in White.

[CPJ 2008 Report on "Cuba's Long Black Spring"]
[BBC report on Wednesday's protest (video)]
[Photo of Reina Luisa Tamayo, mother of Orlando Zapata, by Javier Galeano/AP]

1961: Funds for UM Cuban Exiles

2010-03-18T23:55:00.008-04:00

Here's an interesting report from the archives. On March 17, 1961, the Miami News printed this AP story about "a grant of $75,000 to the University of Miami for the next six months, when the government will determine what further action may be required."

According to the article, a government program was approved for "maximum use of scholars and other professionally trained Cubans" already at UM and "developed from instructions issued by [President] Kennedy early last month."

The relevant background here is that the incoming Kennedy administration had already been handed the Eisenhower plans for a covert military operation against Cuba, and President Kennedy recently had given his authorization for increased propaganda and sabotage operations against Cuba. It is most likely that the $75,000 grant for UM was related to the "further actions" that eventually culminated on April 16-17, 1961 [Check Bay of Pigs Chronology and Bohning's The Castro Obsession].

Interestingly, the University of Miami, specifically its Institute for Cuban and Cuban American Studies (ICCAS), presently continues to receive large federal grants supporting U.S. policy towards Cuba. Since its first $1 million grant in 2002, ICCAS has helped shape a hard-line policy towards Cuba, but most importantly helping formulate the Report of the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba, which according to Adolfo Franco of USAID "used the [ICCAS] project’s materials extensively in preparing a 400-page report to President George Bush." Policy analyst Lars Schoultz described the report's goal of "hastening Cuba's transition" as an obvious euphemism for overthrowing the Cuban government.

How little things change.

Archives of the Miami News

2010-03-15T15:21:00.007-04:00

Back in 2008, Google began a project to digitize old newspaper microfilm with the goal to present historic news articles online. (What a great idea.) And, recently I was happy to see that the archived microfilm of the now-defunct Miami News (first known as The Miami Metropolis) is now increasingly available.

I believe the Palm Beach Post has provided Google with the Miami News microfilm, and its been a virtual treasure to search through. I think I will start posting about some of the more interesting historical articles I find related to U.S. policy towards Cuba.

Above is a photo of Fidel Castro above an opinion column titled "We have no right to meddle in Cuba's internal affairs," dated January 18, 1959 and written by William "Bill" Baggs, editor of the Miami News. The article concludes:

"And, as declared in this comment, no one ever gave any citizen of the United States any right to reside over the domestic affairs of Cuba.

"And anyone who assumes the right, a Congressman or anyone else, is a foolish meddler in a nervous world."

Beyond Politics II

2010-03-14T23:58:00.002-04:00

Cuban athletes again impressed the world at the recent 2010 World Indoor Championships in Athletics at Doha, Qatar.

Cuba had big wins in the men's triple jump (silver and bronze) and the 60m hurdles (gold). Cuba ranked 6th in overall scores among the 27 nations that were awarded medals.

The photo above shows bronze medalist David Oliver (USA) and gold medalist Dayron Robles (Cuba) celebrating after the 60m hurdles competition. Robles finished with the third-fastest time ever recorded for the 60m hurdles (7.34 seconds). Silver medal went to Terrence Trammell (USA) who was just two-hundredths of a second behind Robles.

[Photo by AP]

Human Rights Watch on H.R. 4645

2010-03-14T23:12:00.009-04:00

From José Miguel Vivanco, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch, Americas Division to the House Committee on Agriculture:

[Excerpts below]

Human Rights Watch fully supports the Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act (H.R. 4645), which would remove obstacles to legal sales of US agricultural commodities to Cuba and abolish restrictions on travel to the island. We believe the proposed legislation, as well as similar legislation in the United States Senate (S. 1089), represents a necessary step towards ending a US policy that has failed for decades to have any impact whatsoever on improving human rights in Cuba.

[...]

The death in custody on February 23, 2010, of political prisoner Orlando Zapata Tamayo after an 85-day hunger strike served as a tragic reminder of the abuse suffered by those who dare to criticize the Castro government, and the lack of recourse for victims of repression. In the aftermath of Zapata's tragic death, some have argued that the US embargo policy should not be changed, or that restrictions on trade and travel should be tightened further. Human Rights Watch disagrees.

[...]

There is no question: the Cuban government bears full and exclusive responsibility for the abuses it commits. However, so long as the embargo remains in place, the Castro government will continue to manipulate US policy to cast itself as a Latin American David standing up to a US Goliath, a role it exploits skillfully. Ending the travel ban and removing obstacles to agricultural trade are steps in the right direction toward reforming this failed policy, and Congress should act swiftly to pass the Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act.

[Full letter here]
[Human Rights Watch Report (November, 2009): "New Castro, Same Cuba"]

Postponed Cuba Conference [Updated]

2010-03-01T16:13:00.010-05:00

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart was very upset this afternoon on Radio Mambi. He called Ninoska Perez-Castellon and appeared on her 3pm show today telling listeners that the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce needs to apologize to Cuban exiles in Miami.

The Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce (GMCC) has a Cuba Committee that every year presents a report on trade possibilities with Cuba. Along with a report, it also conducts conferences about Cuba and related issues. Last year's report was a significant departure from earlier hard-line attitudes, and included trade possibilities with an unchanged Cuban government. Trading with Cuba they argued was "potentially perhaps one of the greatest if not the greatest economic opportunity that Miami has or will have." This year, the GMCC was planning to hold its Cuba Conference on March 16th. But, they recently had to postpone the date.

Today it seems Radio Mambi and Rep. Diaz-Balart found out about this event. Even though they were slightly satisfied that it was postponed, they found it appalling that such an event would occur at the Freedom Tower, and sponsored by Miami-Dade College. They saw the Cuba Conference as a great insult, and demanded explanations and an apology from the GMCC.

But, one of the scheduled speakers at the conference really bothered Perez-Castellon and Rep. Diaz-Balart: Martin Aragones, representing Sol Melia, the Spanish hotel chain that currently operates 24 resorts in Cuba. They see Sol Melia as an accomplice to human rights violations in Cuba.

Several other speakers were scheduled to appear at the Cuba Conference, including Florida Governor Charlie Christ, former Miami Mayor Manny Diaz, and former Governor Jeb Bush. Of course, these speakers got a pass from Radio Mambi because they are likely ignorant of what the Cuba Conference is all about. Sure.

According to the GMCC website, the Cuba Conference was postponed due to "scheduling issues by key presenters" and "will be restructured and held later this year." It will be interesting to see how this conference changes in the future.

--- [Update: 3/3/10] ---

One thing that had me wondering when I first heard about this event was the reason Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart was suddenly on Radio Mambi. Was this such an outrageous event that he was compelled to call his favorite AM station in Miami? Or is Radio Mambi at the beck and call to whatever is on the mind of Mario Diaz-Balart?

Rep. Diaz-Balart occasionally appears on Radio Mambi, but usually when he has lots to say, such as on U.S.-Cuba policy or other national issues. He rarely (if ever) appears for short periods to express his outrage over domestic issues in Miami.

But, I recently became aware of possible reasons this Cuba Conference was such a thorn in the side of Mario. It was so obvious.

Miami Dade College, sponsors of the GMCC Cuba Conference, depend on the Diaz-Balarts (and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen) for crucial federal grants. For years (ever since Mario Diaz-Balart was Chairman of Florida's Senate Ways and Means Committee in the mid-90s) Eduardo J. Padron, President of Miami Dade College, has depended on Mario, Lincoln and Ileana for government funds.

Just last year, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart presented Padron a $142,500 federal grant for the Kendall campus. It was only one part of federal appropriations obtained for the College, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen also obtained a $95,000 grant for the Medical Center Campus. Rep. Lincoln-Diaz-Balart helped too, obtaining a total of $900,000 for both the Hialeah Campus, and the historic Freedom Tower, which Miami Dade College now owns. Of course, there have been other ways these three Florida legislators have helped Eduardo J. Padron.

So, it seems clear why Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart suddenly called Radio Mambi to voice his outrage at the Cuba Conference (sponsored by Miami Dade College). It is also no surprise why he was demanding an explanation from Eduardo J. Padron, whose name was specifically mentioned:

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart believes he has done a favor for Eduardo J. Padron, and therefore Miami Dade College should return the favor and grant him tacit allegiance to his hard-line attitude towards Cuba.

Looks like that federal grant came with baggage.

[Article on U.S.-Cuba trade possibilities]
[Tampa Chamber of Commerce cancels trip to Cuba]
[Photo above of the original title of the Cuba Conference]

Perspectives

2010-02-27T17:28:00.007-05:00

Above is a video that captures five interesting perspectives of Cuban-Americans in South Florida, and their reasons for not returning to Cuba. The video is directed by Jono Fisher, a professional photographer and video producer with family in South Florida, and recently intrigued with the idea of Cuban culture and the diaspora.

The video seems to be the beginning of a very promising project.

Second or Twelfth? [Updated]

2010-02-24T12:32:00.009-05:00

A recent news release from the Cuba Archive, an online database that "records" human rights violation cases in Cuba, states that they have "documented eleven other cases of death by hunger strike in protest of prison conditions under the Castro regime."

The statement is at odds with several other news reports indicating that the death of Orlando Zapata Tamayo was only the second death of a political prisoner in Cuba due to a hunger strike. The first recognized as the death of Pedro Luis Boitel, dissident who died in Castillo del Principe prison in 1972. Even Elizardo Sanchez, dissident inside Cuba who keeps records of all political prisoners, says that Zapata Tamayo is only the second death of this type.

So I reviewed some of the files from the Cuba Archive. And I found poor or conflicting data.

- Miguel Lopez Santos' cause of death is recorded as "hunger strike" in the Cuba Archive database. The date of death is recorded as April 2001. The only source comes from a June 2001 article by the Center for a Free Cuba. Miguel Lopez Santos is also the name of a Cuban dissident that went on a hunger strike in April 2001 [source: U.S. 2001 report], but he didn't die. He was soon released from prison, but arrested again in May 2001 for "social dangerousness" [source: Directorio Democratico Cubano, PDF]. The name Miguel Lopez Santos continues to appear in recent reports as an active dissident inside Cuba.

- Nicolas Gonzalez Regueiro's cause of death is also recorded as "hunger strike" by the Cuba Archive database. The date of death was September 16, 1992. There are more sources in this case, but they conflict. One important conflict of data comes from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights which reported that Gonzalez Regueiro "died by hanging on September 16, 1992" [source: IACHR, 1992-93 report].

- And, the case of Santiago de Jesus Roche Valle, recorded as death due to "hunger strike" in 1985, also contains several conflicting sources in the Cuba Archive database.

The Cuba Archive should have warned everyone in their news release about the credibility of their "records." Only until you get to read the "Terms of Use" on their website does one begin to understand how reliable the Cuba Archive really is:

"Cuba Archive provides access to the information as a service to the users and does not take responsibility for such content. It cannot guarantee that any or all details contained in any case record or any of its other reports are true, accurate, or reliable... It is expected that users use caution and common sense and exercise proper judgment when using the material reported by Cuba Archive. Users acknowledge that any reliance on material posted via this website will be at their own risk."

Readers should always be cautious with reports about Cuban dissidents and prisoners. Confirmation of these sources neutralizes attempts to exaggerate and play politics with the victim.

[Update: Ninoska Perez-Castellon, radio host on Radio Mambi, today corrected the Cuba Archive list and said that Miguel Lopez Santos is still alive. The Cuba Archive has now erased that case file. Somebody is reading Mambi Watch.]

Orlando Zapata Tamayo (1967-2010)

2010-02-23T23:49:00.007-05:00

The Miami Herald

BBC News
Al Jazeera
The Guardian

Profile at Uncommon Sense and Wikipedia
Amnesty International calls for investigation

[Photo by AFP]

Today's Detour

2010-02-23T09:10:00.004-05:00

There's a wonderful post by Tracy Eaton from Along the Malecon. It expands on a recent article by Juan O. Tamayo for El Nuevo Herald which reviews two books on the difficulties reporting inside Cuba. The Tamayo article is the typical negative story about Cuba, and not surprisingly recently used by Radio Mambi as part of their propaganda.

But, Eaton's post provides an important dimension which Juan O. Tomayo neglected to report:

"I've heard some say that if they had the chance to run a news bureau in Cuba, they'd write about nothing but human rights abuses and prison conditions until the Cuban government kicked them out. Then they'd make a heroic exit...

"But I wanted to write about Cuba over the long haul. I wanted to maintain relationships with Cubans of all political persuasions, from government officials and press spokesmen to activists who don't agree with the government. I also wanted to stay in touch with those who have had enough of the Castro brothers, including U.S. officials, diplomats and some Cuban-American activists...

"Cuba is a complicated place. I know that we journalists only cover a tiny fraction of what goes on. We skim the surface. We write about the people who have the most extreme views, but fail to talk to those in the middle. We write about blacks and whites, not the subtle tones of gray."

Full post here.

Dia del Exilio Cubano [Updated]

2010-02-18T09:48:00.010-05:00

This morning Miami-Dade County Commissioner Rebeca Sosa will propose before the board a resolution [PDF] designating February 24th as "International Cuban Exile Day."

The idea for "Dia del Exilio Cubano" (which I translate as "Cuban exile community day") was conceived by the militant organization La Junta Patriotica Cubana (Cuban Patriotic Council) last month. The significance of February 24th is based on the day that the Cuban War of Independence (1895-98) began, which included Jose Marti as one of its leaders.

Coincidentally, a radio marathon begins today to collect funds for Luis Posada Carriles' trial beginning in El Paso, Texas next month. (According to Radio Mambi, the fund-raising was organized by Amadeo Lopez Castro, President of Intercontinental Bank in Miami.) Radio Mambi (WAQI 710 AM) and La Poderosa (WWFE 670AM) are providing listeners with a phone number to call (number is posted on the Univision/Radio Mambi website [screenshot]), and locations where listeners can go to leave checks and money orders. Locations include the Versailles Restaurant in Little Havana, the WWFE radio station, and Nuevos Horizontes, the Hialeah lodge of the Federation of Cuban Exile Masons.

This morning on Radio Mambi, Armando Perez-Roura talked about how Luis Posada Carriles is symbolic of the Cuban exile: his character of sacrifice to wage a cosmic battle against communism, only to be betrayed in the end by the rest of the world.

But, aside from praising the exploits of Posada, Perez-Roura also admires the life of being in perpetual conflict. He felt compelled this morning to quote Jose Marti saying:

"A sad thing it is to not have friends, but even sadder must it be not having any enemies; that a man should have no enemies is a sign that he has no talent to outshine others, nor character that inspires, nor valor that is feared, nor honor to be rumored, nor goods to be coveted, nor anything to be envied."

Meaning that if you have critics, then maybe you are doing something right. But, this also sounds like self-deception or making false attributions over one's own character.

[Update: The Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously approving "Dia del Exilio Cubano" for February 24th, according to a report from Radio Mambi.]

[Photo of Cuban Mambises that fought the Spanish during the Cuban Wars of Independence]

[Along the Malecon has regular updates on the trial of Luis Posada Carriles]

Portuondo Show Cancelled [Updated]

2010-02-12T00:54:00.009-05:00

The scheduled concert by Cuban singer Omara Portuondo for next month in Miami Beach has been cancelled.

The renowned Cuban singer, who won a Grammy Latin Award last November, was scheduled to perform at the Fillmore/Jackie Gleason Theater in Miami Beach on March 2nd. Yesterday, the blog Villa Granadillo announced (and celebrated) that they had received word from the City of Miami Beach that the show was canceled. The ticket website LiveNation also indicates that the show has been canceled.

There are no other details yet on the reasons for the cancellation. Portuondo has three other shows scheduled for this month in Washington D.C., Boston and New York.

Portuondo received harsh criticism last December when she performed at the closing ceremony of the ALBA Summit in Havana, Cuba.

[Update: Erik Maza from the Miami New Times blog confirms that the show was canceled due to slow ticket sales. The article includes the absurd reactions by some Cuban exile militants.]

[Video of Omara Portuondo being interrogated over her ALBA performance by local Spanish-language news AmeraTeVe as she arrives in Miami.]

[Photo by Reuters: Portuondo receives a Latin Grammy last November for Best Contemporary Tropical Album.]

Irrational

2010-02-11T22:43:00.008-05:00

So why did Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart decide to finally end his political career in Florida's 21st Congressional District? I have yet to hear a rational answer.

This evening Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen was very busy, appearing on Radio Mambi's "Mesa Redonda" for two hours, and then appearing for an interview with Maria Elvira Salazar which aired at 8pm. Later, by 9pm, she reappeared on Radio Mambi with Marta Flores. She spoke about Rep. Diaz-Balart's announcement today, but failed to give a clear answer as to why Lincoln was leaving. Instead, her goal seemed to be to reassure everyone that support for U.S. policy towards Cuba was still secure in Congress.

Also on tonight's broadcast with Maria Elvira Salazar was Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (who will now run for Lincoln's seat), and Ana Carbonell, Lincoln's long-time Chief of Staff. Despite the host's attempts to probe for an answer, none gave in. All just repeated what Lincoln had announced earlier today: Lincoln decided that he would better serve the mission (or "la lucha") for a free Cuba as a private citizen. This explanation seems straightforward, but raises many questions.

It seems to imply that Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart felt he could no longer achieve anything more towards a free Cuba in Congress. (Could anymore be done after Helms-Burton?) It also implies then that Lincoln's ultimate goal in Congress was to influence U.S.-Cuba policy, while serving the other interests of his constituents was secondary, or not worth representing anymore.

Also, Lincoln could've stayed in Congress to achieve important positions like Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen who has been serving in Congress for over 20 years and now expected to become chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. Lincoln was certainly in a safe Republican district, so why decide to leave it when he could have achieved more in Congress?

I think he did it for his brother Mario.

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart is not in a safe Congressional district (FL-25). Since his first race in 2002, Mario's winning percentages have progressively decreased: 65% in 2002, 58% in 2006, and 53% in 2008 [source]. It was a dangerous trend. So, I figure that Lincoln sacrificed himself for his brother Mario, since the 21st district is much safer.

But, this is not a rational answer. It risks too much because Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart could still lose the district. An online poll by Telemundo51 today indicates that Mario is not favored as a replacement for Lincoln, 68% voting for "another candidate."

And, is Lincoln in a better position as a lobbyist, possibly working with the U.S. Cuba Democracy PAC? Lincoln is a firebrand, not really someone to work behind the scenes I think.

So far it all seems irrational. But, time will tell.

[Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart says he will continue working on a project called "The White Rose." It is a project started 50 years ago by his father, and outlines a comprehensive transition process for a free Cuba. It can be viewed here in Spanish.]

Lincoln Diaz-Balart Will Leave 21st District [Updated]

2010-02-11T12:16:00.016-05:00

As I write this post, Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart is announcing that he will not run for re-election in Florida's 21st Congressional District. His speech was given this afternoon at Florida International University inside the Law Library, part of which is dedicated to his grandfather Rafael Diaz-Balart.

[Correction] The announcement was broadcast live in its entirety by local news reports. [Full video available here.]

The Miami Herald reports on the possibilities for Rep. Diaz-Balart, and his brother Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart.

[Update: Full speech by Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, and the official announcement by Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart to run for the 21st District. And, questions by reporters after announcement.]

The Cuban Five Must Suffer

2010-02-06T00:11:00.007-05:00

I've been listening regularly to Ninoska Perez-Castellon (photo) on Radio Mambi for years now. And, I've noticed that she has an ongoing peculiar interest in the suffering of the Cuban Five.

Before some of the Cuban Five had their life sentences reduced, Ninoska Perez-Castellon would boast on her radio show about how well-deserved their life-sentences were. One could almost sense her satisfaction that these men would spend the rest of their lives in prison. According to Perez-Castellon, the Cuban Five were part of the larger Cuban government conspiracy to destroy the Cuban exile community, and were justly sentenced for their involvement in the shootdown of the Brothers to the Rescue planes.

But, even their imprisonment was not enough. When the wives of the Cuban Five were denied visas to visit their husbands in federal prison, Perez-Castellon showed no sympathy saying that the denials were well deserved.

Yesterday, Ninoska Perez-Castellon's peculiar interest in the Cuban Five found its way to Louisville, Kentucky, where the paintings of one of the Cuban Five (Antonio Guerrero) are scheduled for an exhibition. The location of the exhibition is at a library on the campus of the University of Louisville, and sponsored partly by the Kentucky Interfaith Taskforce on Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Henry Wallace Brigade.

Perez-Castellon comments (as indicated from Friday's radio show) on the internet article from the Courier-Journal: "How pathetic that a university sponsors the so-called art work of a federal prisoner serving time for spying the United States." In the end, Perez-Castellon goes on to describe Antonio Guerrero as a "terrorist," which is clearly manipulative since Guerrero was not charged with such a crime, nor convicted of such actions.

Perez-Castellon, after expressing her indignation, shared on the radio the contact information to the President of the University of Louisville, James R. Ramsey. Radio listeners we're told to send a fax, if they wanted to.

Antonio Guerrero was originally sentenced to 10 years, plus life inside a Supermax prison in Colorado, but was re-sentenced last year producing the possibility of being released by 2016. Along the Malecon has examples of Guerrero's work posted, including information from a previous exhibition in Colorado Springs.

So, it seems that imprisonment until at least 2016 (Guerrero has already served about 11 years) is not enough according to Ninoska Perez-Castellon. Guerrero's right to "take part in cultural life" as described in Article 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights should be ignored. That is certainly strange for someone who regularly talks about defending human rights. Unless, of course, human rights apply only to some, while the others must suffer.

[More information on the Cuban Five]
[Cuba and Terrorism, research from the Center for International Policy]

Los Van Van Return (Part 4)[Updated]

2010-02-01T11:25:00.005-05:00

"Los Van Van rocks downtown Miami" is the headline of today's concert review by the Miami Herald. Jordan Levin writes:

"A scene of such enthusiastic unity between a Miami exile audience and the band that, for both Cuban music fans and critics of the island's government, embodies contemporary Cuba, would have seemed impossible even a few years ago."

El Nuevo Herald (Arturo Arias Polo) also writes a very positive review of last night's concert by Los Van Van. According to both stories, the audience number inside the James L. Knight center was around 3,500 to 4,000.

Outside the Knight center, protesters with their picket signs yelled at and insulted concertgoers. No violent incidents were reported. According to the Miami Herald, the protest crowd numbered 350 to 400. But, according to Spanish news agency EFE, the crowd size was more around 200. Even stranger, is the account by Manuel Prieres, author of the Villa Granadillo blog, who reported a crowd of 2000 (?) protesters.

In response to the concert, Alina Fernandez Revuelta, "unconfirmed" daughter and critic of Fidel Castro, writes in the Miami Herald the typical critique of Los Van Van: they represent the Cuban dictatorship. But, also goes further to describe last night's concertgoers as trained animals:

"The islanders are more than used to, indeed, trained to, move our waists with the Van Van, with their hijacked or explicit lyrics, their considerable if sometimes tiresome rhythm -- as tiresome as the propaganda that these musicians back."

A review of the local Spanish television news reports (Univision and Telemundo) showed positive coverage of the protest crowd (indicating that it was a success despite predicted low numbers), and negative coverage of the concert (indicating that the show failed to sell out the Knight center). Both Spanish reports neglected to give any approximations of either crowd size.

[Update: Radio Mambi (Univision Radio) news package before protest shows their cooperation with the protest organizers, and their coverage after shows their continued agenda to denigrate Los Van Van and their fans.]

[Photo by Miami Herald/C.W. Griffin]

Los Van Van Return (Part 3) [Updated]

2010-01-31T17:12:00.012-05:00

This afternoon, local Spanish radio station "La Poderosa" (WWFE 670AM) was in close contact with Miguel Saavedra, leader of Vigilia Mambisa, by phone. In these last few days, WWFE, like Radio Mambi, has given plenty of air time to Saavedra and others planning to attended today's protest of Los Van Van in downtown Miami. Saavedra reported lots of excitement as people prepared the caravan leaving from Little Havana. Yesterday, Saavedra was invited on Radio Mambi's "Mesa Redonda" (with Armando Perez-Roura) for a full hour informing listeners about the several departure locations around Miami heading towards the James L. Knight center. As I write, the protest has already begun.

Lots of rumors and misinformation have spread since Los Van Van first appeared in Miami in 1999. All of them have been essentially used to defame and denigrate the Cuban band, who happen to be immensely popular in Cuba. But, to recognize their incredible success seems to be taboo in Miami.

PROVOCATION

Many detractors of Los Van Van accuse the band of "provocation" by their presence in Miami. This argument assumes that Los Van Van represent the Cuban government, and since the City of Miami inhabits many of the victims of the Cuban government, it would be an outrage to welcome them because it would "provoke" the trauma of Cuban exiles.

This argument falls apart simply because Los Van Van (the band) do not represent the Cuban government. If they did, then their lyrics (for example) would immediately resemble the appearances of Cuban government policy or ideology. But, once one reviews their lyrics, it becomes clear that Los Van Van talk about what most other songwriters talk about: love, relationships, the larger meanings of life, etc. Whatever personal political opinions any group members might have are absent.

Also, many Cuban exile militants misrepresent the popularity of Los Van Van by suggesting that only Cuban riff-raff listen to them. These remarks not only highlight the contempt that some Cubans have for other Cubans in Miami, but also tend to highlight the cultural differences between Cubans by their wave of arrival to the U.S. (such as those that listen to Timba, and those that refuse to).

Finally, one of the reasons Los Van Van eventually came to Miami in 1999 was because of their radio popularity noticed a couple years before, and not simply to provoke.

THE TEN MILLION TON SUGAR HARVEST

This is probably the next most mentioned allegation against Los Van Van: their name is in honor (or recognition) of a Cuban government program that pressured Cubans to cut sugar cane in 1970 with a propaganda campaign that went: "Y de que van, van. Los diez millones van!" (Those that go, go. The ten million must go!)

According to Juan Formell, leader and founder of Los Van Van: "Our name had nothing to do with that. It was just a coincidence, a phrase that was fashionable then. Nothing more. And there’s nothing else, no other story. 'Van van' in Spanish means it will happen, it will go."

The coincidence with their name and the sugar harvest program is unfortunate because it is an event that is recalled by some in exile as forced labor. But, Formell's explanation about the band name makes more sense because it is consistent with their many years of making apolitical music.

NEW LIES AND RUMORS

Cuban exile militants certainly don't rest went it comes to attacking their perceived enemies. One recent lie that spread recently about Los Van Van said that band leader Juan Formell signed a 2003 letter supporting the Cuban government crackdown of dissidents that year, and the execution of three males. This letter was never signed by Formell (as he declared in a television interview last year), but the lie was repeated many times this month by Ninoska Perez-Castellon on Radio Mambi (who corrected her error this past Friday), and by other militants such as Iliana Curra, an activist linked to the Cuban Liberty Council.

One recent rumor targets Juan Formell's son, who is also a member of Los Van Van. According to this allegation, Samuel Formell was convicted of a heinous crime back in the 1980s and received an 18-year sentence, but was soon set free after the intervention of the Cuban government.

The rumor originates from an article written by a Cuban dissident named Juan Gonzalez Febles. The article mentions many details, but strangely does not provide any dates, such as what year the crime occurred, or when Formell was supposedly released. The article has spread throughout the internet, among the usual anti-Castro blogs, to a mention in a recent El Nuevo Herald article, and to a post in the Miami New Times blog. According to Jorge Casuso of the Miami New Times, this alleged crime occurred in 1984 based on anonymous sources "who were closely and personally acquainted with Formell and the victim's family."

It should be noted that rumors usually begin by supposedly "close" acquaintances, especially in Miami.

[Update: CBS4 has first video of tonight's protest]
[Update2: Video of protest and concert from Zayramo]
[Update3: Some photos by El Nuevo Herald]

Los Van Van Return (Part 2)

2010-01-28T22:41:00.005-05:00

Yesterday, Emilio Izquierdo Jr. appeared on Radio Mambi to inform listeners about the planned protest for Sunday (Jan. 31) at the James L. Knight Center. Cuba's "Rolling Stones of Salsa," Los Van Van, are scheduled to perform that evening as they had intended a decade ago. Host Ninoska Perez-Castellon made sure to write down all the important information for the protest against the band Izquierdo described as "the most representative" music group of the Cuban government.

According to Izquierdo, who describes himself as a spokesperson for UMAP News, there will be four locations throughout Miami that will be the departure points for caravans heading to the Knight Center, with some locations providing bus transportation. As expected, the Versailles Restaurant in Little Havana is among the departure locations. The protest at the Knight Center is expected to start around 5pm. Izquierdo suggests the theme of the protest be "GOD, DEMOCRACY, AND FREEDOM FOR CUBA." And, according to a letter published yesterday by Libre Magazine, Izquierdo also suggests...

"The Cuban exile community of Miami should hold Juan Formell [leader of Los Van Van] and his delinquents prisoner inside the James L. Knight [Center], like the Castro-Chavista accomplice Manuel Zelaya [found] himself inside the Brasilian embassy in Honduras."

If you're beginning to think that this protest is starting to sound like an act of repudiation, which is ironically an act condemned by the Cuban exile community when it targets dissidents inside Cuba, then prepare to be shocked. What is being planned for Sunday is, in my opinion, an act of repudiation, as it was in 1999.

REPETITION

In my previous post I described the actions of the City of Miami to stop the 1999 concert of Los Van Van. The city's discriminatory actions eventually ended when they had to pay over $90,000 in a lawsuit for violating the free speech rights of the concert promoter. What I didn't describe was the reasons behind the actions of the city officials.

When the Knight Center canceled the originally scheduled concert of Los Van Van in 1999, Cuban exile militancy had prevailed. And city officials shared their sentiments. "I am so relieved," said then-City Commissioner Joe Sanchez (loser of last year's mayoral contest). "The city does not need any more controversy," he declared. Then-commissioner Tomas Regalado (now Mayor of the City of Miami) believed the concert was "a challenge to the capital of the exile community," and then-Mayor Joe Carollo described Los Van Van as "the official Communist band of Fidel Castro."* Both Regalado and Carollo at the time made sure to let Miami know how they felt as they appeared on Spanish-language radio, such as Radio Mambi.

All the comments above have resurfaced within the Cuban exile community as the concert by Los Van Van approaches. From Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart calling the leader of Los Van Van the "musical ambassador" of the Cuban government, to Ninoska Perez-Castellon saying that the concert is a "provocation" and an attempt to "penetrate" the Cuban exile community. Encouraged by these leaders of the Cuban exile community, much more radical voices on the radio have also appeared calling Los Van Van "ratas" (rats) or "agents" of the Cuban government. Others have directed their insults towards the fans of Los Van Van calling them "chusma" or riff raff. It's the same kind of language used by Radio Mambi callers more than a decade ago.

REPUDIATION

When fans of Los Van Van arrived to the Miami Arena that evening of October 9, 1999, they faced a growing crowd of protesters. At its peak, police reported the crowd size around 4,000. Militant Cuban exile groups, like Unidad Cubana, Vigilia Mambisa and the F4 Comandos, were among the protesters. Days before the protest, Miguel Saavedra, leader of Vigilia Mambisa told the Miami Herald that he planned to videotape the concert attendees.

"Miguel Saavedra ... said his group would film those attending but would not publish the pictures. The videos would be kept until the collapse of the Castro government so the successor government could identify concertgoers who were Castro sympathizers."

Entering the Miami Arena to see Los Van Van, some fans met shouting protesters. Without provoking anyone, Mario Garcia was welcomed with a shout: "Communist, male prostitute, gigolo and whore." He was not bothered though, and responded: "I have as much right to listen to Los Van Van as they have to demonstrate." Unfortunately, others met with spitting or being the target of a thrown object. Joseph Adler, artistic director of GableStage at the Biltmore Hotel, while leaving the concert was attacked by rocks and eggs. After the concert was over, city riot police escorted concert attendees as they navigated back into the streets. [Video available here]

As the return concert approaches this Sunday, militant Cuban exiles are using desperate efforts to once again denigrate the members of Los Van Van. And, as expected, lies and rumors are spreading.

*[Miami Herald, September 11, 1999, "Concert canceled for Cuban dance band" by Tyler Bridges.]

[Raw footage of the Los Van Van protest from 1999, courtesy of Telemundo51]

[Photo: Protester at Miami Arena, October 9, 1999, courtesy of Villa Granadillo blog.]

Los Van Van Return (Part 1)

2010-01-26T15:58:00.003-05:00

When Los Van Van, one of Cuba's most popular music groups, came to Miami in October of 1999 they met opposition from officials of the City of Miami and approximately 4,000 protesters who saw the music group as representatives of the Cuban government. A decade later, times have changed... a bit.

A recently published Miami Herald article concerning the return of Los Van Van for this Sunday forgot to mention the intense (and unlawful) opposition that promoters of the musical group faced from the City of Miami back in 1999. From the moment that city officials, like Miami Mayor Joe Carollo, discovered that Los Van Van had scheduled a performance in downtown Miami they took immediate actions to stop them. Debbie Ohanian, promoter of Los Van Van at the time, had already reached an agreement with the James L. Knight center for a September performance, but after the City of Miami intervened the venue imposed new regulations and the show was eventually canceled.

The Miami city attorney demanded Los Van Van to present additional documentation that no other city had ever requested, and the city also demanded Ohanian purchase "liability insurance to cover the venue's losses if disturbances on the night of the concert forced the Knight Center to cancel other events." One of those possible "disturbances" that the City of Miami had on their minds demanded Ohanian purchase "an additional two-million-dollar insurance policy so the city could rebuild the [James L. Knight] theater if it were blown up." This particular deal with the city was described by one the negotiatiors as "additional insurance over and above what [the City of Miami] would normally require of concert promoters."

These discriminatory measures were being imposed at the same time that Mayor Carollo was on Radio Mambi with Armando Perez-Roura expressing his opposition to the concert. As Radio Mambi callers insulted Los Van Van calling them "dogs" and "garbage," Mayor Carollo seemed undisturbed, even after a caller threatened to attack the Knight Center.

Negotiations with the City of Miami eventually broke down and Ohanian soon reached a deal that would allow Los Van Van to perform at the Miami Arena (demolished in 2008). The concert was scheduled for October 9, 1999, the same day that a Cuban exile organization would schedule a movie screening at the Knight Center, and after which they would provide shuttles to the Miami Arena for their planned protest of Los Van Van.

After the performance, the City of Miami mobilized about 50 police in riot gear to protect and escort the leaving audience from the estimated crowd of 4,000 protesters. Police grew concerned that night with some protesters who earlier threw objects at the concert-goers. Three city commissioners who observed the protest that night became upset at the show of force by the police department and vowed to not let Los Van Van (or any other Cuban music group) to perform in Miami again. One of those commissioners is now the mayor of the City of Miami (Tomas Regalado), and another was recently re-elected as a city commissioner (Willy Gort).

Willy Gort described the concert at the Miami Arena as something similar "to having a Nazi band play before Miami Beach's Jewish community." Immediately after the concert he promised to propose "a resolution to the City Commission that would force the promoter of a band who draws a massive crowd to pay for all police and other expenses instead of sending the bill to taxpayers."

Ohanian was forced to pay the City of Miami over $36,000 for security costs for the night of the concert. She sued the city the following year, and in 2004 won her lawsuit. The City of Miami had to pay back over $90,000. The judge described the discriminatory actions of the Mayor and commissioners as having "a chilling effect" on the rights of free speech.

But, with the scheduled return of Los Van Van on Sunday, it seems that the city has learned its lesson. There are no reports of opposition from the city. Unfortunately, some of the same local organizations that protested in 1999 have not changed much.

Lies Upon Lies

2010-01-25T13:46:00.011-05:00

Not that long ago I came to the conclusion that the local media in Miami functions as a sophisticated propaganda system that mainly depicts the Cuban government (and sometimes its people) as pariahs. While these broadcasts generally express support for U.S. policy toward Cuba, they mostly serve the local political agenda directed by influential hard-liners in Miami. The history of this agenda in Miami is rooted in the ideological (and media) battles of the Cold War and its persistence as a cultural trait in Miami deserves a post of its own.

And you may wonder how this hard-line ideology persists in the media. Well, first it is rooted in Cuban exile politics that for decades has presented the Cuban government as a totally immoral manifestation (which also infects all that associate with it), and the reliance on culturally imposed prejudice about Cuba which results in misinformation and lies. Lies upon lies, and misinformation upon misinformation, for years the media made sure to let its audience know that the Cuban government was the bad guy. And, like Cuba, the government of Venezuela and its President, Hugo Chavez, have become the new pariahs in the eyes of the local media. And, a recent story proves how bias in the media manifests itself.

On January 20th, many news outlets around the world were reporting that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said the United States military caused the 7.0 magnitude earthquake in Haiti. Despite the absence of evidence that Pres. Chavez made these comments, this did not stop the media from perpetuating this lie. Why? Because of media propaganda that feeds upon its own lies and misinformation, all rooted in culturally imposed prejudice.

Here's what really happened.

- On the 19th of January, Spain's ABC Newspaper published a report headlined: "Chavez accuses the U.S. of provoking Haiti earthquake." The misinformation spread quickly in Spain, and across Latin America from Peru to Columbia. And, of course, Radio Mambi couldn't help itself either. In the afternoon, Armando Perez-Roura relished reporting this absurd account, showing his radio audience that Pres. Chavez finally went mad.

- The next day, Russian television picked it up and posted it on YouTube, spreading wildly as video. Soon, American political websites like Reason.com, Fox News, and Prison Planet picked up the story and ran with it. (Guess what they have in common.)

- Even the Miami Herald's Cuban Colada blog, after investigating the rumor, came to the wrong conclusion that Pres. Chavez did make these comments. The Cuban Triangle blog also blamed Pres. Chavez.

- If any of the above had considered how absurd these comments were, and suspended their prejudices for a moment, they might have presented real facts for their readers. Just like the Anchorage Daily News did for their readers, with a little commonsense.

You see, if Renato Perez Pizarro DID read the Russian articles that he links to in his Cuban Colada post, he might have found the right answer: Hugo Chavez never made comments that the U.S. military caused the Haiti earthquake, instead the comments come from a Russian website "which clearly gives conspiracy fabrications."

Suspicions should have been immediate because the first ABC article from Spain on the 19th sourced their information to an internet article that was immediately taken down. Other reports should have led readers to the original story that was posted in Spanish on the 16th of January on some blog which suspiciously sources to an agency called "Panorama Alternativo." (This Spanish article eventually made it to a Venezuelan socialist website.) It was on the 16th that the original fabricated Russian report was posted on the internet. That Russian website I found thanks to the links on the Cuban Colada post, but Perez Pizarro for some strange reason came to another conclusion.

Must be that media bias going around.

Unsung Heroes in Haiti

2010-01-25T11:16:00.011-05:00

News stories about Cuban doctors in Haiti have finally found their way into the mainstream. Yesterday, a report from NPR called them the "unsung heroes" inside Haiti, while El Nuevo Herald on Saturday published a brief report by Juan Carlos Chavez on the Cuban doctors inside La Renaissance Clinic in Port-au-Prince. The Herald report also includes a wonderful collection of photos by award-winning photojournalist Roberto Koltun.

The NPR report by John Burnett describes the difficult work that Cuban doctors have been dealing with constantly in Haiti since the 7.0 magnitude earthquake of January 12th. Today, the Cuban Medical Brigade has expanded to four clinics in the cities around Port-au-Prince, and receive two flights daily from Cuba with food and medical supplies.

On Sunday, Mirta Roses, the director of the Pan American Health Organization visited Cuban doctors working inside La Paz University Hospital in Port-au-Prince. She praised the outstanding work of the Cuban Medical Brigade. Among those who also toured the hospital yesterday was Haiti's Health Minister Alex Larsen, who had more words of appreciation for the Cuban doctors and the Cuban government, which he described as Haiti's principle partner in providing health services.

"We cannot repay everything you have done for us now, but we say that we carry you in our hearts. We thank the government and people of the Republic of Cuba for everything they have done. We say: Viva Cuba. Viva Haiti. And, Viva Castro."

Alex Larsen was interviewed in a television report from Cuba which can be viewed below (in Spanish). Additional information and links about Cuban doctors in Haiti can be found on the Cuban Triangle blog, here and here. And the Cuban Colada blog here.

[BBC Special Reports from Haiti]

[Photo by El Nuevo Herald/Roberto Koltun, Cuban doctor, Frank Diaz, holds a four-year old patient with a recently amputated left leg.]

"A Sense of Common Humanity" (Part 2)

2010-01-15T13:50:00.015-05:00

Cooperation between Cuba and the U.S. has taken a step forward.

White House spokesman Tommy Veitor said yesterday: "We have coordinated with the Cuban government for authorization to fly medical evacuation flights from the U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay to Miami, through Cuban airspace, cutting 90 minutes off one-way flight time."

According to the New York Times, this was a U.S. request from a Guantanamo Base commander to the Cuban military. Occasional military communication between the two nations are the closest thing to diplomacy we have.

Cooperation and coordination between the two nations will only help the whole relief effort. Currently, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba is receiving supplies and equipment for navy ships currently entering Haiti.

In the meantime, a report on the Cuban medical unit inside Haiti has emerged. According to this television report [in Spanish, video below], Cuban doctors have constructed a field hospital outside their home in Port-au-Prince.

One doctor, Rafael Reyes says that they had no other choice because most of the hospitals around the capital are closed or destroyed.

An additional emergency room of Cuban doctors has been opened at an ophthalmology center in Port-au-Prince, which before headquartered the Miracle Mission project, a Cuba-Venezuela initiative providing free eye surgery for the poor.

Inside the center, Dr. Frank Diaz, an orthopedic surgeon, reports that 90% of the injuries arriving are open fractures that require immediate attention. Dr. Diaz also mentions his experience operating in Peru during the aftermath of their earthquakes, but highlights that the injuries in Haiti have been much more severe.

[Photo by Reuters, Sea Hawk helicopters to embark aboard the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson en route to Haiti.]

[BBC Special Reports from Haiti]
[Dr. Paul Farmer on Cuban doctors in Haiti]
[What You Can Do To Help Haiti]

"A Sense of Common Humanity" (Part 1)

2010-01-14T14:15:00.009-05:00

The horrible destruction from Tuesday's 7.0 earthquake has killed an estimated 50,000 Haitians and may potentially bring additional suffering for millions of Haitians now lacking access to water, food, shelter, and health services. It's most vulnerable of course being the children. Countries from all over the world have now been provoked to send immediate aid.

But, ironically, before the recent earthquake and the devastating hurricanes of 2008 (which caused about $1 billion in damage), Haitians had already been living in dire predicaments.

Health data collected around 1999 and 2000 by the World Health Organization describe a country where a significant number (12%) of children under 4 would die from diarrheal diseases likely caused by a lack of clean drinking water. (The child mortality rate still stands around 80 per 1000 live births.) For adults and adolescents, AIDS was the leading cause of deaths. This was followed by intestinal infections as the second leading cause, most likely associated with the level of sanitation and access to clean drinking water.

Currently, it is reported that only half of all Haitians have access to clean drinking water, and 19% have decent sanitation.

On the Human Development Index, which measures life expectancy, literacy/education, and purchasing power and income, Haitians find their "well-being" on par with citizens living in war-torn nations like Sudan and Timor-Leste.

Yet, despite those grave conditions, humanitarian aid for infrastructure only trickled into Haiti. Not even former President Bill Clinton, as a newly appointed UN special envoy to Haiti, could help collect a total of $270 million in internationally committed aid to Haiti. By September of last year only a pitiful $21 million had been delivered.

So, when we talk about helping Haiti, it should be noted that it is very strange to hear calls for "a sense of common humanity," especially when such common humanity for Haiti seemed absent for so many years.

But, it is never too late to help. And with relief aid pouring into Haiti from nations around the world, one should assume that this common humanity also means cooperation among the donor nations. Unless, of course, you are from the Heritage Foundation.

Cuba experts such as Julia Sweig and Steve Clemons have recently proposed the idea that cooperation in U.S. and Cuban relief efforts inside Haiti can provide an opportunity to improve relations. Clemon's proposal sees a broader regional effort where cooperation among Latin American nations, including Cuba, could perhaps improve relations and bring about positive long-term outcomes.

But, the Heritage Foundation, which takes a hard-line stance against Cuba, sees only a restricted form of cooperation. Aside from recommending the Obama administration take advantage of the current crisis to initiate a long-term "reform program" and build a "stronger democracy" inside Haiti, Heritage advises the U.S. to ignore cooperation relief efforts with Cuba. Instead, we should be cautious of Cuba.

"Cuban medical personnel and Venezuelan cash and assistance teams will arrive in Haiti, and there is certainly bound to be tension and jockeying for credit and media attention. In this tragedy, one would hope a sense of common humanity prevails. But the Castros and Chávezes of this world do not play that way."

Heritage has a very strange sense of "common humanity." Anyway, Heritage recommends the Obama administration to instead cooperate with "friendlier nations" and create "a strong and vigorous public diplomacy effort to counter negative propaganda emanating from the Castro-Chávez camp."

Boy, the Heritage Foundation sounds really worried about propaganda from the "Castro-Chavez camp." It'll be interesting to see in the following days what Heritage is so fearful of.

In the meantime, it is being reported that Cuba already has a medical unit inside Haiti attending to hundreds of the injured and performing surgeries. They are expecting to build three field hospitals soon.

For years, at least since 1998, Cuba has provided humanitarian aid to Haiti in the form of Cuban doctors and scholarships for Haitian students to receive medical training. Cuba has since maintained a medical unit inside Haiti of over 300 doctors and providing health care for millions. At a 2004 UN press conference, a Cuban spokesperson reported that the Cuban medical team inside Haiti had treated "nearly 5 million Haitians."

[BBC Special Reports from Haiti]
[Dr. Paul Farmer on Cuban doctors in Haiti]
[Medical experts on Haiti's Aftermath]
[What You Can Do To Help Haiti]

[Photo my Gideon Mendel]

Welcome 2010

2009-12-31T17:54:00.007-05:00

With the start of 2010 just a few hours away, I thought I would end this year writing about a few things I learned in 2009.

Probably the most important thing I learned this year about U.S.-Cuba relations is that it is going to be a slow process towards the goal of normalization, which happens to be what most Americans want. And, also what most academic researchers recommend for policy makers. So, why has it been so difficult to reach normalization? Because of South Florida hardliners and militants that support economic sanctions towards and oppose diplomatic agreements with Cuba.

As you may have read about recently, Florida's leading Senatorial candidates gave speeches at a U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC meeting last week and all publicly gave their support for current U.S. policy towards Cuba, in direct conflict with what most Americans want and what most U.S. experts on the subject suggest.

What occurred last week at the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC meeting is what is called "elitism." You should have seen the photos of the audience because it was basically made up of the most politically influential people in Miami, local media personalities, and (of course) militants like Armando Perez Roura and Ninoska Perez Castellon from Radio Mambi (Univision Radio). But, together they shared one thing: their belief that they (and only they) know what is best for everyone else when it comes to Cuba.

Militants believe that the Cuban government is pure evil, and its destroys everything it touches, and therefore it must be isolated and eventually cut off (overthrown). Hardliners see the Cuban government as untrustworthy and deceptive, therefore its must be dealt with extreme caution and little patience. Agreements can be reached with hardliners, but hardliners are not willing to make any concessions, and are prepared to accept diplomatic stalemates.

In between the spectrum of militancy and the hard-line is where Florida politics currently stands when it comes to U.S. policy towards Cuba. And, I don't think we should expect a change soon.

If 2009 taught me anything, it was that militant and hard-line ideology in South Florida is encouraged and accepted widely in the local Spanish media. From the small Spanish-language newspapers to the various television broadcasts of news and gossip (better defined as propaganda). Militant and hard-line ideology expresses itself daily through these sources and are encouraged by local businesses through their advertising, and sometimes public support of such ideology.

So, does this mean that 2010 will bring the same results of 2009? I doubt it. Small changes within the Cuban exile community have already occurred that conflicted with hard-line and militant ideology, such as the community support given to the Peace Concert in Cuba, and the lifting of travel restrictions. And, more changes are destined to come in 2010. The enclave of the Cuban exile will change, not as a detachment from its painful past, but rather from its attachment to world changes in the future.

But, it will be a slow process. May 2010 bring us closer to what is fair, moral and just.

Enjoy the Holidays

2009-12-24T15:49:00.005-05:00

Happy Holidays to all, and to those that will be spending their Christmas in Cuba.

A TV report yesterday by local news station WPLG described the "biggest crowd" at Miami International Airport being those passengers on an "overbooked Cuba flight."

May everyone have safe travels, and happy celebrations.

[Funny post on the Export Law Blog: Santa Claus versus the Embargo.]

"If Santa delivers toys for U.S. children first, there will be toys destined for Cuba in the sleigh in violation of 31 C.F.R. § 515.207(b). That rule prohibits Santa’s sleigh from entering the United States with “goods in which Cuba or a Cuban national has an interest."

[Photo: man decorates a Christmas tree outside the San Francisco convent in Havana, Cuba by AP/Javier Galeano]

"A Dangerous President"

2009-12-04T23:20:00.004-05:00

Those were the exact words that Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen used to describe President Barack Obama when she appear on Radio Mambi last month.

Rep. Ros-Lehtinen occasionally appears on Radio Mambi to provide updates for listeners on her activities. She represents Florida's 18th Congressional District, which includes parts that most people recognize as "Miami," such as Coral Gables, Downtown Miami, Key Biscayne, Brickell and Miami Beach.

On November 13th, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen appeared on "La Mesa Redonda" (The Roundtable) with Armando Perez-Roura, programming director of Radio Mambi. I believe other issues were discussed, but the main issue seemed to be the decision that day by the U.S. Justice Department to federally prosecute five men accused of conspiring in the attacks of September 11. Rep. Ros-Lehtinen was outraged, as were many in the Republican party that day.

But, near the end of the radio show, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen summed it up for listeners. She not only felt that the decision from the Obama administration was misguided, and that the decision put U.S. security at risk (as other Republicans asserted), but she also felt that we had "a dangerous President" in the White House.

So I wonder what kind of decision a Radio Mambi listener might come to after that interview.

Here's an indication. Yesterday it was reported by El Nuevo Herald (Wilfredo Cancio Isla) that the U.S. Secret Service is investigating a call to Radio Mambi of someone who made an on-air threat to Pres. Obama saying someone should "shoot him in the head."

Now, some of you might think that maybe this was just some crazy person who called in one day, and said something stupid. Not likely. The Herald reports that the voice was from a regular caller to Radio Mambi (which is the case with most callers to Radio Mambi), and quotes an anonymous employee at the radio station saying that "what is heard there [on Radio Mambi] everyday against Obama and against any other is outrageous."

There is also a larger context here. Ever since Barack Obama became President, Radio Mambi has reached a new level of radicalism that I had never heard before. I will try to post about that soon, and with some audio samples.

[Another thing. The Herald article by Wilfredo Cancio Isla is not easily accessible to regular users of The Miami Herald and El Nuevo Herald websites. Doing a search for the article is useless. It doesn't even appear on Google News. Wierd.]

[Background on the recent decision by the U.S. Justice Department to prosecute 9-11 conspirators.]

[Photo by Getty Images]

A Prize for Yoani's Bruises

2009-11-25T19:14:00.009-05:00

Alex, from A Grand Illusion blog, has a great post about how Cuban exile hard-liners may be "deadly scared" about the moderate political views of Yoani Sanchez, the famous Cuban blogger. In his post, Alex highlights Yoani's past moderate viewpoints and mainly responds to Mauricio Claver-Carone, from Capitol Hill Cubans, who earlier this week tried to convince Yoani that those 178 U.S. Representatives who support the lifting of travel restrictions to Cuba are really trying "to take advantage of our [Cuban] family's diversity, in the hopes of hindering our united purpose."

This desperate attempt to deceive Yoani with a tale of Congressional conspiracy absolutely reveals that hard-liners, like Claver-Carone, ARE afraid of Yoani's moderate views, and the global attention they may generate.

So how are hard-liners going to deal with Yoani? Very carefully. This means they will emphasize Yoani's criticism against the Cuban government, acts of repression against her, but when it comes to her views on U.S. policy towards Cuba, she will have no voice. This has been the pattern with all other dissidents, many of whom do not support many aspects of U.S. policy.

If you don't believe me, here's a good example. The Cuban Liberty Council (CLC), one of Miami's most powerful Cuban exile organization, awarded Yoani Sanchez their "Heroes of Freedom" prize last Saturday. The award comes after Yoani has been blogging for about two years, has already gained worldwide attention, and her blog recognized with several international awards.

Why did it take so long for the CLC to award Yoani?

Simple, she's not hard-line enough. Like Alex showed in his post, in the past Yoani has not shown to be a hard-liner or militant. At least not as hard-lined as previous winners of the "Heroes of Freedom" prize, such as Roger Noriega, Mel Martinez or Carlos Gutierrez [full list of previous winners, PDF]. So, the CLC, like other organizations, kept their distance, suspicious of her authenticity.

So what made the CLC change it's mind? Answer: Yoani got beat up by Cuban state agents on November 6th.

After being violently attacked by Cuba's repressive machinery, Yoani recieved her bona fides for the CLC. You see, Yoani's writings were not enough, it took bruises and trauma for the hard-line to embrace Yoani because she now shared their pain. But, most of all, now the CLC had good propaganda: Yoani's traumatic experience would be used as proof of the evil Cuban government.

So why do I think this is what ultimately convinced the CLC?

After the violent incident on Nov. 6th, hard-liners on Radio Mambi (and other media outlets) seemed vindicated. Armando Perez-Roura, programming director of Radio Mambi, gave increased attention to Yoani Sanchez, reading her account of the incident on Radio Mambi, even quoting her entire blog post about the incident in his weekly column for Libre magazine. A rare move.

It was finally reported on November 17th that the CLC would award Yoani Sanchez the "Heroes of Freedom" prize for "her valor, her defense for the civil liberties of the Cuban people, and for the violent attacks she fell victim to, she deserves [the prize], but mostly for knowing how to get the attention of the world with her novel cybernetic struggle." The day of the award ceremony would fall on November 21st, the same day CLC would hold their annual fundraising dinner originally titled "A Cuban Evening with Albita" (Note that this post of the event from Nov. 11th had no mention yet of the award to Yoani, possibly meaning that CLC had not yet reached a consensus to award her).

On November 19th, CLC President Diego Suarez explained to Diario Las Americas (Ena Curnow) that they contacted Yoani "close to about 15 days" ago regarding giving her the prize. That estimate falls very close to the day Yoani was violently assaulted. According to Suarez, Yoani responded by saying it would be "a great honor."

On November 21st, the CLC fundraiser and award ceremony was attended by Diego Suarez, Ninoska Perez-Castellon, Luis Zuniga, Manuel Alzugaray, the new Mayor of the City of Miami, Tomas Regalado, and (of course) Reps. Lincoln and Mario Diaz-Balart.

All names above support U.S. travel restrictions to Cuba.

Yoani Sanchez does not support U.S. travel restrictions to Cuba.

But the CLC does not care.

[Photo by Sergio Alsina. (Left to right) Ninoska Perez-Castellon, Alberto Hernandez, Diego Suarez]

Ileana Still Needs to Apologize

2009-11-20T15:44:00.024-05:00

So I was watching online yesterday's hearing at the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. The Committee met to hear witnesses and discuss (and sometimes debate) current U.S. travel restrictions to Cuba, which currently prohibits American tourism. I haven't yet finished watching the entire three hour meeting, but had to comment on something I saw that bothered me.

When I have more time I will try to summarize and comment on the other speeches given yesterday. But, if you haven't heard or read by now, yesterday's hearing had one moment that became "highly-charged" as they say [video excerpt above]. This happened when Miami Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [FL-18] directed some controversial comments towards one of the invited witnesses, retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey. It should be noted that Gen. McCaffrey is a highly decorated 32-year U.S. Army veteran (three times wounded in action) who also served as "Drug Czar" during the Clinton administration. But, this didn't stop Rep. Ros-Lehtinen from mocking his title, repeatedly interrupting him, and completely misquoting him.

Rep. Ros-Lehtinen began by indicating that she would be quoting from Gen. McCaffrey's statements from an April hearing at the House Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs. After first deriding with a sarcastic "woo" cheer Gen. McCaffrey's mention that he met Mr. Castro, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen posed several questions aimed to cast doubt on Gen. McCaffrey's professional assessment that Cuba does not pose a serious threat to U.S. national security. At the April hearing, Gen. McCaffery argued strongly that Cuba and the U.S. should be cooperating in matters to combat drug and human trafficking, and terrorist threats. He even mentioned peacebuilding efforts that would consider the training of Cuban officers in order to carry out these cooperative efforts.

But, of course, cooperation with the Cuban government in any fashion (even to protect U.S. interests) is considered heresy to militants like Rep. Ros-Lehtinen. Therefore, yesterday Rep. Ros-Lehtinen had all intentions to ridicule Gen. McCaffrey and his comments from April. But, in the end, just makes a total fool of herself. Lets review.

MISQUOTE

Rep. Ros-Lehtinen misquotes Gen. McCaffrey from the April hearing where he asserts that the Cuban government is not directly involved in drug-trafficking and drugs that wash up on the shores of the island. She reads a quote that goes:

"... but it was clear to me that they [drugs] were not on a government basis, but part of an international conspiracy to threaten the regime and to threaten their sense of communist morality."

This is what Gen. McCaffrey REALLY said:

"... but it was clear to me that they were not on a governmental basis and part of an international conspiracy. It would threaten the regime, and it'd threaten their sense of communist morality."

[Extended audio excerpt from April, MP3]

Rep. Ros-Lehtinen's inaccurate quote makes Gen. McCaffrey appear to make a defensive argument. But instead he is making an assessment based on his professional review of the intelligence (mentioned in the April hearing), followed by a description based on his several meetings with Cuban officials.

DISRESPECT

Aside from the several attempts to disparage Gen. McCaffrey's professional expertise, and the reported disrespect by addressing him as "sir" instead of "general," Rep. Ros-Lehtinen displayed a complete lack of respect towards an invited committee witness with repeated interruptions, and making mockery of his title. Below is the heated exchange (Gen. McCaffrey in italics):

- I'm offended by your deliberate marginalization of my viewpoints. And let me go on to say that it is clear in my mind...

- Just quoting you sir.

- It is clear ...

- Are those not quotes sir? Are those quotes, yes or no?

- I'm offended by your language.

- You're offended by your quotes?

- Let me go on to continue to respond by telling you...

- What part of the quotes offend you? Your quotes offend me.

- Are you going to let me answer or you gonna...

- I have my five minutes. I can do with my five minutes what I wish "general."

The lack of respect is shocking. There is no question that Gen. McCaffrey as an invited witness still deserves an apology from Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. Her show of contempt yesterday was a poor example of how an elected U.S. Representative should act, and she should take immediate steps to apologize for her behavior, if she hasn't already.

(Speaking of apologies, has she ever apologized to Dollan Cannell, the filmmaker who caught her saying something on camera that she later denied and accused Cannell of manipulating?)

"Have You No Conscience?"

2009-11-18T19:00:00.020-05:00

That's Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart [FL-21] from last Monday. It seems that our favorite Congressman from Miami took the time on the House floor to remind everyone of Cuba's oppressed Cuban dissident movement, and comparing their repression to Jewish persecution, and shaming members of the American press for not doing enough to shed light on this genocide.

Rep. Diaz-Balart centered his speech on the health of political dissident Martha Beatriz Roque, who last week was described as gravely ill due to a hunger strike. But, Rep. Diaz-Balart on Monday declared that Roque was "close to death." Yesterday, Roque revealed herself to reporters in Havana who instead described her as "unsteady but far from death."

Huh? This is what happened...

Late last week, Miami Herald reporter Juan O. Tamayo reported about the deteriorating health of Martha Beatriz Roque during a hunger strike which began around Tuesday. (Local Spanish-language news stations America Teve and Telemundo51 also reported on the health of Roque.) The reports described Roque's condition jumping from extremely grave to stable based on examinations by an ambulance crew and one doctor. Tamayo's only source seemed to be political dissident Vladimiro Roca, who was also protesting alongside Roque. Then, on Sunday Roca reported [audio by Radio Marti] on Roque's latest diagnosis by one doctor. The diagnosis included a "sudden case of decompensation" (heart dysfunction by overload), "tachycardia" (abnormal rapid beating of the heart), paleness, sweating, and loss of consciousness.

By Monday morning, Marc Masferrer from the Uncommon Sense blog was convinced that "Cuban Dissident Martha Beatriz Roque is Dying." Masferrer wrote to his readers that this was "not a dramatic exaggeration" but "an accurate assessment of facts on the ground." By Monday evening on the House floor, Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart was also convinced that this was the case. (Rep. Diaz-Balart also clearly exaggerated the number of dissidents on a hunger strike with Roque as "dozens" when all reports indicate less than ten) Therefore, he wondered why there was no media coverage about the dying Roque and asked:

"Members of the press, have you no conscience? Do not continue to treat the suffering, oppressed people of Cuba, and their heroes, as non-persons. Please do your duty."

I agree, the press must do its duty. Yesterday, after appearing before reporters Martha Beatriz Roque refused to answer specific questions about her health. Reporters must not allow the rumors of her health go unaccounted for. Did she, Vladimiro Roca, or any doctor exaggerate her condition for increased media coverage? Did their hunger strike end because of Rep. Diaz-Balart's inaccurate public statements?

Cuba's dissidents cannot allow their credibility to be tainted. Their actions must be transparent and without doubt about their goals advocating human rights. Neither should their actions be concerned with politicians who exploit their suffering for selfish gain.

... And Still the Same U.S. Policy [Updated]

2009-11-18T15:10:00.005-05:00

Human Rights Watch (HRW) has just released an new 123-page report on Cuba focused on its systematic (and often violent) repression of dissent inside the island. In sum, the report calls for a multilateral policy towards Cuba, rejecting the U.S. embargo, and placing maximum pressure on the Cuban government for the release of political prisoners and a change to its repressive laws.

This new report is based on "more than 60 in-depth interviews [from June and July 2009] with human rights defenders, journalists, former political prisoners, family members of current political prisoners, members of the clergy, trade unionists, and other Cuban citizens." It is an impressive report [summary and full report], here's a sample:

"Raúl Castro’s government has relied in particular on a provision of the Cuban Criminal Code that allows the state to imprison individuals before they have committed a crime, on the suspicion that they might commit an offense in the future. This “dangerousness” provision is overtly political, defining as “dangerous” any behavior that contradicts socialist norms. The most Orwellian of Cuba’s laws, it captures the essence of the Cuban government’s repressive mindset, which views anyone who acts out of step with the government as a potential threat and thus worthy of punishment."

"Imprisonment is only one of the many tactics the Cuban government uses to repress fundamental freedoms. Dissidents who try to express their views are often beaten, arbitrarily arrested, and subjected to public acts of repudiation. The government monitors, intimidates, and threatens those it perceives as its enemies. It isolates them from their friends and neighbors and discriminates against their families."

I also noticed that some bloggers have already mentioned some points like the above, but have not yet gotten to the other important part of the report: the recommendations.

It should be first noted that a multilateral policy towards Cuba has been dismissed for years by hard-liners and militants who instead desire an overthrow of the Cuban government through unilateral pressure (or intervention) from the U.S. government. So, some are going to ignore or reject the recommendations by HRW.

According to HRW: "The embargo imposes indiscriminate hardship on the Cuban population as a whole, and has done nothing to improve the situation of human rights in Cuba. Rather than isolating Cuba, the policy has isolated the United States, enabling the Castro government to garner sympathy abroad while simultaneously alienating Washington’s potential allies."

Therefore: "To remedy this continuing failure, the US must end its failed embargo policy. It should shift the goal of its Cuba strategy away from regime change and toward promoting human rights. In particular, it should replace its sweeping bans on travel and trade with Cuba with more effective forms of pressure."

HRW recommends a multilateral policy that includes 1) a firm committment from "[the European Union], Canada and Latin American allies" to demand the "immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners" inside Cuba; 2) the commitment must include an agreement on the definition of "political prisoner"; 3) provide a six-month deadline that includes punitive measures (such as targeted sanctions) if the Cuban government does not comply; and 4) once this committment is secured, the U.S. must end its embargo towards Cuba

If the Cuban government does not release its political prisoners, the multilateral coalition must impose its targeted sanctions policy. If all political prisoners are released then the coalition should continue with a strategy to pressure Cuba to change its repressive laws on dissent.

The recommendations are bold and its application a moral imperative. I see no reason to ignore or dismiss the recommendations, given the facts of the report.

--- [Update] ---

The Cuban Interest Section in Washington D.C. has already responded to the HRW report saying:

"HRW is an organization that analyzes this issue from a discriminatory, selective and above all politicized perspective. Its evaluation of human rights in Cuba is illegitimate and illegal."

"The presentation of this report in a news conference precisely today has no other intention than to divert the public's attention from the hearing by the international relations committee of Congress on the elimination of restrictions on Americans' travel to Cuba. That audience will be tomorrow. No doubt, a strange coincidence!"

It should be reiterated that HRW, along with Amnesty International and other human rights organizations, has called for the end of the U.S. embargo repeatedly and consistently, including U.S. restrictions on travel to Cuba.

Mark Your Calendars!

2009-10-30T22:24:00.006-04:00

What better way to take a break from blogging about Cuba than to mark one's calendar with a host of activities about books on Cuba.

The Miami Book Fair International is coming soon next month, with its wonderful street fair just two weeks away. There are several book presentations concerning Cuba (as usual) that look interesting:

- Kenneth Treister will present his new photography book Havana Forever on Nov. 14 (more info), and, in case you miss him, he will also appear at Books and Books in Coral Gables on Nov. 28 (more info).

- Ann Louise Bardach will present her new book Without Fidel on Nov. 15 (more info), as well as Lars Schoultz the same day (more info) with his new (and remarkable) book That Infernal Little Cuban Republic.

[You can view previous book presentations by Bardach here, and Schoultz here. Also, Schoultz recently appeared on C-Span here.]

Spanish-speaking readers will also have some interesting presentations to attend:

- Nov. 14 (more info) a roundtable discussion on "Democracy in Latin America" will present author Alvaro Vargas Llosa (who recently changed his mind about the U.S. embargo towards Cuba) among others, and moderated by local television personality Maria Elvira Salazar. No doubt that Cuba will be among the topics.

- And, Juanita Castro, along with co-author Maria Antonieta Collins will present their new book My Brothers, Fidel and Raul on Nov. 15 (more info).

After the book fair, one can also attend a book presentation by Cuban historian and political analyst Julia Sweig for her new book Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know on Nov. 18 at Books and Books in Coral Gables (more info). Here's a book review by the L.A. Times.

And, I cannot end this post without mentioning the newest book by the prolific Cuban historian Louis A. Perez Jr., Cuba in the American Imagination. To my knowledge, he is not making any presentations, but make sure to pick up this book at your local bookstore or library. Here's an excellent summary of the book.

See you in a month or so.

[Photo by David Gallo]

A Man of Secrets

2009-10-30T19:57:00.005-04:00

Since the last post had to do with early CIA activities against the Cuban government, I though I'd add a few things about former CIA Director Richard Helms, the man who became the CIA official in charge of Cuban operations in 1962.

The video excerpt above shows Helms, at the Church Committee in 1975, publicly admitting CIA operations against the Cuban government. He told the committee that the activity "was a government-wide operation supported by the Defense Department, supported by the National Security Council, supported by almost everybody in high position in the government."

Helms mentions various attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro, as well as "task forces striking at Cuba constantly," targeting power plants and sugar mills.

Today we would call that terrorism.

In 1962, Richard Helms was assigned to lead Mongoose, the CIA operation against Cuba. Assessing those activities, Don Bohning quotes from Helms' memoirs:

"Despite our maximum effort we had not inspired any resistance activity worth the name in Cuba; the, in my opinion, ill-advised sabotage operations were but pinpricks."

Nevertheless, Helms described Mongoose as "the largest peacetime secret intelligence operation in history." Juanita Castro, sister of Fidel Castro, formed part of this intelligence community.

Juanita's World

2009-10-30T11:36:00.013-04:00

In this photo (courtesy of Libre magazine) Salvador Lew holds up a picture of a young Juanita Castro, sister of Cuban leaders Fidel and Raul Castro. I'm sure you've heard the news by now: two years after the Cuban Revolution of 1959, Juanita Castro worked with the CIA helping opponents of the Revolution. Juanita soon went into exile in 1964 after her brother Raul revealed that the Cuban government already knew about her secret activities.

Once exiled in Miami, Juanita Castro and Salvador Lew*, began a propaganda campaign against the Castro government. According to historian Don Bohning, the campaign tour was "secretly arranged by JMWAVE," the CIA headquarters in Miami. Juanita was mostly driven by a sense of betrayal against her brother Fidel Castro:

"He betrayed the thousands of us who suffered and fought for the revolution that he had offered, one that was generous and just and would bring peace and democracy to Cuba, and which, as he himself had promised, would be as 'Cuban as palm trees.'"

Before her departure to Miami Juanita wrote "various letters" to Salvador Lew asking him to head her public relations once she arrived. According to Ann Louise Bardach, Lew was a fellow classmate and student activist with Fidel Castro before the Revolution. Lew also became disillusioned with Fidel Castro and was exiled in 1961. Both Lew and Juanita met for the first time in 1964 when Juanita arrived in Miami.

According to Lew, both he and Juanita traveled to many cities and universities in the U.S. where Juanita would give speeches (in Spanish) against the Cuban government. Lew recalls how Juanita "amazed audiences" with her "extraordinary" oratory. Lew and Juanita even made it to Capitol Hill.

JUANITA THE MILITANT

June 11, 1965, Juanita Castro and Salvador Lew appeared before the controversial House Committee on Un-American Activities. In her submitted statement to the sub-committee, Juanita emphasized the dangers of communism:

"Communism is, and will always be, aggressive by its very nature. So are those who act as its tools... For this reason we affirm that no one can be a revolutionary, a democrat, a liberal, a pacifist, and a believer in progress if one is not an anti-Communist also. Communism is the exact opposite of a progressive democracy. By the same token, one cannot be good if one is not against evil and those who represent evil."

[...]

"I want to make a humanitarian appeal to save my people and the other endangered nations. Communist imperialism and its instrument in the Americas, Fidel Castro, are planning to take over this entire hemisphere. This is no secret."

During this period, with the help of the CIA, Juanita Castro was given a radio program that aired on shortwave inside Cuba and founded the Marta Abreu Foundation. After Juanita ended her relationship with the CIA, the agency cut all funding to both activities. According to her revelations for Univision, Juanita gave whatever money was left from the Marta Abreu Foundation to Alpha 66, the militant Cuban exile organization that was heading terrorist operations against Cuba. After the death of Vicente Mendez in 1970, one of Alpha 66's most admired leaders, Juanita Castro says she stopped supporting such operations.

JUANITA'S BROTHER

But, Juanita's militancy was more nuanced than others in Miami. Where most wished death upon her brother Fidel Castro as the only solution, Juanita only wanted an overthrow.

This nuanced position became apparent in 2006 when the news of Fidel Castro's surgery made headlines. Amongst the celebration in Miami at the possibility of Fidel Castro's death, Juanita stressed that "[t]his is a spectacle, all this happiness." She seemed to disapprove of how people took joy at the suffering of her brother. "The ties of blood are strong," she told the Herald. More specifically:

"To me, Fidel has always been two distinct persons. On one hand, the oldest brother that I love, and suffer knowing that he is sick and, on the other hand, the political Castro with whom I want nothing to do with and would be happy if he hadn't assumed power."

Juanita got a lot of negative criticism for these comments, especially from Radio Mambi. But, Juanita didn't care. She told the Herald: "I never listen to the radio. There is so much hatred in this community. And they will say that all Castro's are the same... And that is a lie."

CHANGES OVER TIME

Because of her more nuanced opposition against the Cuban government Juanita was never accepted by the larger Cuban exile community. Furthermore, Juanita sees her brother, Raul Castro, more favorably than Fidel and believes that Raul can bring about democratic changes in Cuba. This is a position that is also viewed poorly by hard-line Cuban exiles, and generally ignored by the local media.

The story of Juanita Castro and the CIA shows how drastically Miami and the U.S. government have changed in its opposition to the Cuban government. Ironically, the militancy that Juanita once supported, is now her most vocal critic. It's been an interesting half-century of hostilities, but more changes are still required from both governments if we are all to finally live in peace. One should wonder though, how many more secrets are still out there to reveal.

*[Salvador Lew, was former general manager of WRHC-Cadena Azul, founded in 1973 and one of Miami's most anti-communist Spanish-language radio stations. In 1984, the radio station told listeners to boycott Burdines for selling sports clothing by Jane Fonda. Lew at the time called Fonda a "leftist communist." Burdines conceded after receiving several calls from angry customers, including bomb threats.

Salvador Lew was also appointed director of Radio and TV Marti in 2001 (he beat out Radio Mambi's Ninoska Perez-Castellon), until he resigned in 2003 after tensions with employees and a critical U.S. government report. In 2008, he described working at Radio Marti like working in a "branch of hell here on earth."

In a 2008 radio interview, Lew stated: "We have to do away with all the labels. All Cubans are equal. We have all made errors and we all have to fight to free Cuba and so that freedom arrives without blood, without hate and to rebuild the country."]