Sunday, July 14, 2024

U.S. Policy Toward Cuba Three Years on from July 11

END THE EMBARGO!


 
 JULY 12, 2024
Facebook

Photo by JF Martin

Three years ago this Thursday, thousands of people took the streets in Cuba’s largest anti-government demonstrations in decades.

The historic protests lasted only one day, but Cuba is still facing ruinous fallout in the form of unrelenting economic warfare waged by the Biden administration.

We take a look back at what led to the July 11 protests and how they were used by Biden to justify abandoning Obama’s detente in favor of Trump’s hostile hard-line policy.

A New Cuba Policy?

“We need a new Cuba policy,” Joe Biden declared at an October 2020 campaign rally in Florida.

As vice president, Biden and his wife Jill had had a front-row seat to Obama’s historic rapprochement with Cuba.

“It’s all about the relationships,” said Jill Biden during an October 2016 visit to Cuba, in which she became the first U.S. official in decades to visit the city of Camaguey and met with students, teachers, entrepreneurs, women leaders, artists, dancers and athletes, among others.

Those budding relationships were promptly severed by Donald Trump.

Trump effectively closed the U.S. embassy, restricted U.S. travel to Cuba and unleashed a barrage of devastating sanctions that pummeled the country’s economy.

Covid dealt a knock-out blow.

Cut off from investment and credit by U.S. sanctions, Cuba began suffering acute scarcities of food, fuel and medicine.

“The cushion that every other country in the world has, in terms of borrowing money during crisis, was not available to Cuba,” economist Emily Morris said in Episode Five of Belly of the Beast’s documentary series The War on Cuba.

When Biden assumed office in January 2021, many expected he would promptly roll back Trump’s hard-line policy and return to Obama’s engagement.

Instead, Biden stalled.

“Joe Biden is not Barack Obama on Cuba policy,” Juan González, who served as the National Security Council’s senior director for the Western Hemisphere under Biden, told CNN in April 2021. “Those who think the United States is now going to enter a dialogue of multiple years with Cuba don’t understand the political moment.”

González didn’t explain what this “political moment” was and the CNN journalist didn’t ask.

A Missed Opportunity

With its economy in freefall, Cuba had still managed to stave off a Covid spike for more than a year thanks to an internationally acclaimed public health system that prioritizes preventive and community-based care. Meanwhile, Cuban scientists were working around the clock to finalize the mass production and distribution of home-made vaccines.

The Biden administration hindered their efforts, ignoring appeals to lift sanctions on Cuba on humanitarian grounds.

Ultimately, Cuba’s vaccines arrived a few months too late, as U.S. sanctions caused the delay of key ingredients, according to Dagmar García, one of the scientists who developed Cuba’s Soberana vaccine.

“Often a crisis gives you an opportunity to change policy,” former CIA analyst and National Intelligence Officer for Latin America Fulton Armstrong said in Episode Five of The War on Cuba. “And this administration completely missed the opportunity.”

In June 2021, as the Delta variant swept Cuba, Covid patients overwhelmed Cuba’s hospitals and the death toll soared.

For many Cubans, who had endured ever-worsening scarcities with no end in sight, this was the last straw.

Biden’s Response to July 11

On July 11, protests erupted in cities across the island.

Major media outlets trumpeted the Miami-borne slogan “Patria y Vida,” portraying the July 11 protests as a cry for freedom and democracy.

But the country’s shortages of food, electricity and medicine were the primary factors driving people to take the streets.

The protests started in San Antonio de los Baños, a small city near Havana, in response to power cuts that lasted hours.

Biden’s response was to double down on the very policy that helped cause the crisis.

On July 22, he announced new sanctions on Cuba.

“This is just the beginning,” said Biden.

Biden also pledged to “support the Cuban people” by providing Internet access and vaccines.

These promises not only proved to be empty, they also didn’t respond to Cuba’s most pressing needs.

The Cuban government cut Internet access on July 11 in the wake of the protests, and blocked access to certain apps in the following days. But by the time Biden announced his administration was working to provide Internet access to the Cuban people, that access had already been fully restored.

Meanwhile, if not for U.S. sanctions, the country may already have had its Covid vaccines by the time of the outbreak.

Cuba would end up becoming the only Latin American country to produce its own Covid vaccines and it inoculated 90% of its population by the end of 2021, surpassing the vaccination rate in the United States.

“Biden can’t say he’s going to send vaccines, and impose a blockade that prevents the arrival of food, medications, supplies essential for our lives,” said Dagmar García.

Appeasing Hardliners

The “new Cuba policy” Biden had promised during the campaign was replaced by his full-fledged embrace of Trump’s “maximum pressure” strategy and the Cuban-American hardliners behind it, including Sen. Bob Menendez.

“The first person to bring this to my attention and to make sure that we were on top of this was Senator Menendez,” Biden told a group of Cuban-Americans at the White House three weeks after the protests. “The Cuban American people are actually the best ambassadors for the Cuban people.”

A president pandering to the Cuban-American hardliner lobby in Florida is nothing new. But it’s difficult to see the upside for Biden.

Long before Biden’s abysmal debate performance, Florida was considered a lost cause for the Democrats. Even if the state was in play, Miami’s Cuban-American hardliners are not exactly Biden’s constituency.

“It’s almost like they were trying to be more Trump than Trump on the Cuba issue,” said Armstrong. “If you try to chase after the right-wing leadership of the Miami community, which the Republicans already own, you’re not going to get anywhere.”

Nor is it clear if Biden got anywhere appeasing “Gold Bar Bob,” who is currently on trial in a federal court on corruption charges, reportedly becoming the first sitting senator to be tried on unrelated criminal charges twice.

Menendez was forced to step down as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Yet now, nearly three and a half years into his term, Biden keeps trucking on with Trump’s Cold War-era policy toward Cuba.

The consequences have been disastrous.

Biden’s Cuba Policy Backfires

Cuba’s economy, now plagued by inflation, has plunged into an even deeper crisis. Power cuts are a daily occurrence across the island. Fuel shortages are commonplace. The shelves of public pharmacies are bare. Earlier this year, the Cuban government asked the United Nations’ World Food Program for subsidized powdered milk for children, the first time it had ever made such a request.

Yet Cuba’s humanitarian crisis – fueled by the sanctions maintained by Biden – seems to have only encouraged his administration to keep tightening the screws.

“The more that Cuba suffers, the more optimistic some people behind our policies are that they don’t have to do anything, that Cuba is going to collapse,” said Armstrong in the Belly of the Beast documentary Uphill on the Hill.

Cuba has not collapsed. Meanwhile, Biden’s policy has backfired in glaring ways.

Human rights concerns are ostensibly a pillar of the administration’s Cuba policy. But there is no evidence that punishing Cuba with sanctions has improved the country’s human rights. The opposite may be true.

“Our embargo and putting [Cuba] on the State Sponsor List of Terrorists is literally strangling the island and I think it is tantamount to a human rights violation,” Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA) told a group of activists last year.

Meanwhile, a policy of aggression toward Cuba has proven counterproductive when it comes to civil and political rights.

“Every time U.S. and Cuban relations become more tense and more hostile, the Cuban government feels more under threat and more of a sense of being under siege, so they become less tolerant of domestic critics,” Cuba expert and Professor of Government at American University William LeoGrande said in an interview with Belly of the Beast journalist Liz Oliva Fernández. “It’s when U.S.- Cuban relations are warming up a little bit that the Cuban government feels less threatened and is more tolerant of a broader range of political discussion.”

More than a thousand protesters were detained on July 11, 2021. In the following months, hundreds were sentenced to prison. Three years later, many remain incarcerated.

Meanwhile, Cuba’s economic collapse has sparked an unprecedented wave of migration to the United States. More than half a million Cubans have crossed the border in the last two years, presenting another self-induced political problem for Biden.

Biden has loosened some restrictions on travel and implemented some measures to support Cuba’s burgeoning private sector. But overall, his policy remains largely indistinguishable from that of Trump.

As Jim McGovern told Oliva Fernández in Uphill on the Hill: “U.S. policy toward Cuba is an embarrassment and a miserable failure.”

“We can’t just refer to this as the Trump policy,” said McGovern. “It’s now the Trump-Biden policy.”

Reed Lindsay and Daniel Montero are journalists with Belly of the Beast, an award-winning U.S.-based media outlet that covers Cuba and U.S.-Cuba relations.

Rekindling the Old Love Affair: Can Trump Save Netanyahu? 



 
 JULY 12, 2024
Facebook

Image by Getty Images and Unsplash+.

Many political analysts believe that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is buying time in Gaza and Lebanon with the hope that Donald Trump returns to the White House, following the next November elections.

Whether this is the case or not, Trump, this time around, is unlikely to influence the outcomes of the war, or to alter Israel’s fate.

US foreign policy seems to be ruled by two different outlooks, one dedicated to the whole world and another only to Israel. The first is driven by the famous, and oft-repeated quote by former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, that “America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests.”

Israel, however, remains the exception, and the ongoing Israeli war on Gaza has, once more, demonstrated the truth of such a claim.

Though Washington fully shares Israel’s war objectives, it fundamentally disagrees with the concepts of the long war, and ‘total victory’, as championed by Netanyahu.

Two protracted US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq taught the Americans that neither the longevity of wars nor the lofty, unrealistic expectations alter inevitable outcomes.

In fact, many US officials, military generals and mainstream analysts have tried to warn Netanyahu, to no avail.

Destabilizing the Middle East at this specific historical juncture is simply bad for the US. It comes at a time when Ukraine is suffering serious weapons shortage, thus territorial losses, and at a time that the US-European allies are struggling under the weight of economic and political crises.

Since US-Israeli relations are governed according to a unique foreign policy paradigm, the Biden Administration continues to support Israel in every possible way so that it may carry on with a losing war.

The war is, of course, happening at the expense of over 125 thousand Palestinians, who, thus far, have been killed and wounded due to Israeli strikes, shelling and mass executions. Those dying from famine or disease are a different number, yet to be fully accounted for.

Washington is not perturbed by the Gaza genocide itself but by the outcome of the war on US plans in the Middle East, and the future of its forces, namely in Iraq and Syria. It is also concerned about its geostrategic sway in the region due to the unprecedented instability of the Red Sea.

Yet, Joe Biden continues to arm Israel and to provide a safety net to its dwindling economy. On April 20, the House passed a bill to provide $26.3 billion in assistance to Israel. Moreover, massive shipments of weapons continue to flow to Israel unhindered.

These explosives are not only destroying the whole of Gaza, but any chances that the US could ever regain any degree of credibility in the Middle East. Worse, US blind support for Israel has also shaken Washington’s position internationally.

So, what could Trump do that Biden did not?

Trump’s politics is abashedly Machiavellian. During his only term in office between 2017 and 2021, he served the role of the American genie, granting Israel’s every wish, though all such demands were flagrant violations of international law.

Trump’s pro-Israel policies included the recognition of all of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, the annexation of the Golan Heights and the recognition of all illegal Israeli Jewish settlements in the West Bank, among others.

But Netanyahu is also Machiavellian, a fact that irked Trump following his humiliating exit from the White House.

“I haven’t spoken to him since,” Trump said in an interview with Axios’ Barak Ravid in December 2021, in reference to the Israeli leader. “F**k him,” he said.

But now, both sides are trying to rekindle the old love affair. The Republican presidential candidate must be pleased with Netanyahu’s public criticism of the Biden Administration. In return, Trump is ready to “finish the job”, as he stated in the first presidential debate on June 27.

However, Trump’s return will do nothing to change Israel’s misfortunes since October 7, because Israel’s problems do not originate in Washington.

Israel’s crisis is multifaceted. It is unable to win the war in Gaza, despite the mass tragedy and destruction it has created there. It is also failing to change the rules of engagements in Lebanon due to the strength of its enemies, and the fact that its military is unable to fight and win on multiple fronts – let alone one.

Another dimension of the Israeli crisis is also internal: deep divisions in Israeli society, security apparatus and politicians. Not even Trump could possibly bridge the gap or end the polarization, which is likely to deepen in the future.

Even on the international front, Trump is likely to prove equally ineffective, again, simply because the Biden Administration has defied international consensus on Israel since the start of the war. The current US House of Representatives went as far as passing legislation to sanction the International Criminal Court (ICC) after its Prosecutor applied for arrest warrants against Israeli officials.

If Netanyahu thinks that Trump would offer him a better deal than that of Biden, he is mistaken. Biden has proved to be the greatest American enabler to Israel in its 76-year history.

Ironically, the US’ unquestioned support of Israel could be a contributing factor to its downfall.

“To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal,” Kissinger also said. He is not wrong.

Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is “These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons” (Clarity Press, Atlanta). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA), Istanbul Zaim University (IZU). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

A Dark Chapter Closes: Julian Assange Goes Free


 
 JULY 12, 2024
Facebook

Photograph Source: Alisdare Hickson – CC BY-SA 4.0

The dust has finally settled over Julian Assange’s release from jail, but it may never settle over what the U.S. state did, to him and to a free press. He is now in Australia, with his family, where he belongs, beginning the hopefully not too long process of healing from his ordeal, from being driven nearly out of his mind by official torture at the hands of British ghouls acting on behalf of American ones. Last reports were that Assange took anti-psychotic and anti-depressant medication to cope with existence in his Belmarsh prison cell. I hope it helped; such meds often save a life, but they entail dangers, too. The important thing for him, personally, is that the worst is over.

Above all, the Assange case sets a lousy precedent, not so much his guilty plea precedent, but something much worse, the precedent for how the American government may pursue, hound, persecute and prosecute a journalist. Previously, if the CIA wanted to disappear a reporter, the agency did it secretly. But Mike “Get Assange” Pompeo changed that, with the agency’s plans either to kill or kidnap the journalist.

There has been no official apology or explanation for this much bruited about, intended atrocity, which reached the planning stage. Instead, there’s a cover-up – fundamentally futile, given how widely this potential crime was rumored – with reports that part of Washington’s motive for the guilty plea was to coerce Assange’s consent never to investigate schemes to rendition him. Hard, factual news of such a rendition, you see, would be most embarrassing to Beltway bigwigs, who otherwise couldn’t care less about Assange or a free press. Horrified that their repulsive web of criminality might come to light, Assange’s American pursuers scuttled back into the darkness, abandoning their loathsome project.

This guilty plea underlines that congress must repeal the odious and illegal Espionage Act, which nullifies the First Amendment. It was under this Act that Assange was convicted. Thus now, as always, this repellent law muzzles free speech, which was indeed its original purpose when that deceitful war criminal, Woodrow Wilson, signed it. Unfortunately, given its obsession with suppressing so-called disinformation, aka free speech, the Biden gang (or the president’s wife, let’s not pretend el jefe himself makes these executive decisions) would veto any such repeal that came across the Oval Office desk. Supposing one ever did. Somehow it’s difficult to imagine Chuck “Wall street Is the Only Street” Schumer or Mitch “Democracy’s Grave Digger” McConnell standing up so bravely and forthrightly against the security state as to repeal the Espionage Act.

Meanwhile, don’t rush to attribute any good intentions to Washington nabobs who let Assange go free. They tried their damndest to break him and lock him up for life. According to the Washington Post June 27, “the near-collapse of the case in a British court sent prosecutors hurtling toward a plea deal.” Washington was gonna lose, so its manipulators grabbed what they could, namely a pledge from Assange never to pursue CIA rendition plans, and then stampeded the exists.

The “real scandal of this,” journalist Matt Kennard tweeted June 29 “is the English courts took five years to send this signal. [The] U.S. indictment was unconstitutional, criminalized journalism, and was brought by a country on record as plotting to assassinate the defendant. How did U.K. judges let it get this far? Who runs Britain?” One can only imagine what would have happened had Assange sought refuge in, say, Argentina, currently ruled by Donald “Dictator for a Day” Trump wannabe Javier Milei – it’s doubtful he would be a free man now thanks to someone in the judiciary showing spine.

Assange pled guilty to a single count of obtaining and revealing national security information, something investigative journalists do all the time. According to Matthew Ingram in the Columbia Journalism Review June 27, one press expert said the Justice Department’s allegations described “everyday journalistic practices as part of a criminal conspiracy.” That includes “cultivating sources, protecting sources’ identities and communicating securely. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press said the charges pose ‘a dire threat’ and the Freedom of the Press Foundation called them ‘terrifying.’”

But that didn’t stop those with little regard for the First Amendment, among them Trump’s former vp Mike Pence, who called Assange’s deal “a miscarriage of justice” because, Ingram reported, Wikileaks’ classified revelations “put members of the U.S. military in danger.” They did not. Indeed, the prosecution was unable to cite one instance of American soldiers, spooks or other personnel endangered by the carefully redacted info Assange published.

Another entity with great scorn for freedom of the press is Rupert Murdoch’s Times in the U.K., which claimed Assange was “not a genuine whistleblower, let alone a test case for journalistic freedom, but a thief,” a view cravenly echoed, as Ingram notes, by Doug Saunders in Canada’s Globe and Mail. This pusillanimous hack sneered at Assange as “a fraud who called himself a journalist and whistleblower, while greatly hindering journalism and making life harder for actual whistleblowers.” Saunders also charged that Wikileaks was a “tool of dictators,” in reference to the widespread (and stubbornly resistant to reason) canard that revealing Hillary Clinton’s emails helped the Kremlin. Nice to know leading journalists understand that their bread is buttered by the national security state and vindictive politicians and not some scruffy, rude reporter who reveals truths uncomfortable for those in power.

Because such views are commonplace among corporate media honchos and in the elite echelons of Western power, I would hope that Assange proceeds very carefully when he resumes steering Wikileaks. These bloodhounds will not lope away nor stop baying for blood. Among mainstream media’s most egregious prevarications were that Assange had nothing to fear from the U.S. and thus should not have fled to the safety of the Ecuadoran embassy. Ho, ho! And au contraire. He did, and if he resumes his vocation, he will. His worst fears were thoroughly justified, while the opinions of idiot pundits, who tarred him for seeking refuge, were categorically wrong.

Any journalist who does what Assange did, namely profoundly embarrassing the U.S. military with revelations of its war crimes in the Middle East or indeed anywhere, would be well advised to take up residence in Russia, China or some other nation without an extradition treaty to the United States. Who cares what lies such a move might generate? As Edward Snowden demonstrated to the entire planet, sometimes the better part of valor is self-preservation. At least, after all, if a journalist survives, he or she may continue to act as Snowden and Assange did, namely serving truth. That’s very tough to do in any public way for someone buried alive in a dungeon.

Eve Ottenberg is a novelist and journalist. Her latest book is Busybody. She can be reached at her website.