By: Nino Pagliccia, 20 October 2016
Originally posted at http://www.cubasolidarityincanada.ca/2016/10/21/open-letter-to-mr-barak-...
Dear Mr. President:
Re: Your October 14, 2016 Presidential Policy Directive – United States-Cuba Normalization
First of all I would like to acknowledge the decisive change in your Cuba policy by re-establishing a diplomatic relationship with the Island that was broken for way too long. I would also like to recognize the positive developments in areas such as telecommunication, transportation and travel, and some aspects of trade and commerce since December 17, 2014.
I am writing to you as a concerned citizen in relation to two specific points that you mention in your Policy Directive towards normalizing the relationship with Cuba:
1) The Guantanamo Bay Naval Station; and
2) The U.S. embargo and sanctions against Cuba.
Regarding the Naval Station. You state in your policy directive that "The United States Government has no intention to alter the existing lease treaty and other arrangements related to the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station, which enables the United States to enhance and preserve regional security.” I will not refer to the complex legal aspect of the "lease treaty”, except to suggest that the U.S. may have broken the terms of that lease by using the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station as a prison and reportedly as a torture centre – outside your own country’s legislation and international law about the treatment of prisoners.
However, beside any appeal to the legality of the lease, you know very well that Cuba has removed the welcome carpet for your Naval Station. Cuba has requested the return of the territory now occupied by the Naval Station. It is of general understanding that U.S. military installations in other countries are present by request of those countries’ governments. Certainly this is not so in the case of Cuba.
Claiming its need in order to “enhance and preserve regional security” is a very weak reason to justify the presence of the Naval Station (not a military base) in Cuba. The U.S. has a strong presence in Latin America with formal bases in El Salvador (Comalpa), Aruba, Curação and Puerto Rico, the ongoing installation of two more bases that have been negotiated with the Macri government in Argentina, not to mention the U.S. so-called quasi-bases in almost every country in the Pacific coast of the Americas (Peru, Honduras, Costa Rica, Panama, Ecuador and Colombia, among others).
In relation to the embargo, despite some positive developments, we know that it continues to put limits to Cuba’s economic development and it creates hardship to the people of Cuba. This issue appears now to be left to the next President to deal with. Related to this, my concern is about your statement "We will not pursue regime change in Cuba.” That is hard to believe given the current U.S. foreign policy in many parts of the world including Latin America.
But even more specifically in relation to Cuba, how can you give such an absolute assurance when the first policy statement of the Torricelli Act of 1992 (Cuban Democracy Act) says: “It should be the policy of the United States –(1) to seek a peaceful transition to democracy”? In addition, the very fist sentence of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (Libertad) Act of 1996 (AKA Helms-Burton Law), states that this is "An Act to seek international sanctions against the Castro government in Cuba, to plan for support of a transition government leading to a democratically elected government in Cuba.” Transition spells regime change in Cuba.
There seem to be a contradiction. Those two Acts, which form the basis of the U.S. embargo, are still in place and can only be lifted by Congress, not by you. Although your "Administration has repeatedly called on the Congress to lift the embargo,” how can you assure Cubans that the U.S. will not pursue regime change?
In your Policy Directive you also acknowledge the annual Cuban embargo resolution at the United Nations. The resolution will be voted on next October 27th. You state that the "USNU [U.S. Mission to the United Nations] will participate in discussions" regarding the resolution. That sounds encouraging but still too vague.
Finally, Mr. President, I would like to conclude with my hope that you will deepen your legacy towards Cuba by addressing these two issues before your term comes to an end. Given the proximity of the upcoming discussion of the Cuban resolution at the U.N. on October 27th, I sincerely hope that at the very least you will instruct the U.S. Ambassador at the U.N., Samantha Powers, to vote in favor of the Cuban resolution and, by doing so, join the 191 countries that voted in favor last year. The U.S. stand at the U.N. will send a stronger message to Congress, to the next President of the United States and to Cuba in particular, that will be applauded by many in Latin America as a serious step towards normalizing U.S.-Cuba relations. Thank you.
Respectfully.
Nino Pagliccia
NINO PAGLICCIA has two Master’s Degrees from Stanford University and is a retired researcher on Canada-Cuba collaborative projects at the University of British Columbia. He has published many peer-reviewed journal articles and has contributed chapters to books on topics about Cuba, the Cuban healthcare system and solidarity. He has been a long-time activist and has organized groups to do voluntary work in Cuba for almost 15 years.
[A shorter version of this letter was sent to Mr. Obama through the White House website]
Tiny URL for this post: http://tinyurl.com/zsy5tuc