By Roberto Morejón
In a communiqué published last January, the U.S. government stressed that in light of the convening of the ninth Summit of the Americas, it is valid to increase the capacity of democracies to close the gap between promises and what the authorities deliver.
However, the paradox in relation to Cuba stands out, since President Joseph Biden, who from the White House supports the tightening of the blockade dictated by Donald Trump, had promised during the electoral campaign to make it more flexible.
The gap between what has been proposed and what has been implemented gives Cuba grounds to continue denouncing the tricks of the neighbor to the North, especially when it seeks not to include it in the preparations for the Summit, scheduled for Los Angeles in June.
The Foreign Minister of the largest of the Antilles, Bruno Rodriguez revealed what he called extreme pressures from the tenants of the White House on numerous governments opposed to the alleged marginalization of Cuba.
In a recent statement to the press, the head of Cuban diplomacy urged the U.S. Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, to affirm whether the Caribbean nation will be invited or excluded from the meeting, along with other nations.
The core of the stratagem consists in the fact that without being the right one to determine who will or will not attend the Summit of the Americas, Washington once again sets itself up as a judge, this time a regional one, to determine who will be chosen.
Cuba, for its part, does not shy away from genuine dialogue and asks, as did Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez, how is it possible to talk about democracy if countries of the region, with which the Democratic government claims to want to work together, are separated.
Should the opaque procedures of the administration in Washington materialize, it would truncate the succession of Cuba's attendance to the Summits of the Americas, held in 2015, at the invitation of President Barack Obama, and in 2018, without any opposition from Donald Trump.
Cubans have reason to wonder why they want to prevent them from bringing their voice and vision about the issues under discussion, such as democracy, equity, health, migration and human rights.
If the absence is pointed out, it would be a "politically motivated decision with no support other than false accusations and double standards," said Rodríguez Parrilla.
This would be so because the organizer of the meeting takes, distributes, invites, finances and tries to impose resolutions.