10,000+ Sign Letter Urging Biden to Reverse 'Terrorism' Designation for Cuba

An open letter organized by CodePink calls on U.S. President Joe Biden to abandon the Trump administration's hostile posture toward the Caribbean island.


People walk near a mural depicting a Cuban flag in Havana on April 16, 2021

. (Photo: Yamil Lage/AFP via Getty Images)


KENNY STANCIL

September 13, 2022


More than 10,000 people and 30 progressive advocacy groups have signed an open letter urging U.S. President Joe Biden to reverse the Trump administration's terrorism designation for Cuba and to reinstate Obama-era policy with the Caribbean island.

"Your policies toward Cuba, which have been more aligned with those of President [Donald] Trump than President [Barack] Obama, are hurting the well-being of the Cuban people and run counter to the will of the majority of U.S. citizens," says the letter, organized by peace campaigners at CodePink. "An important policy change that we urge you to take immediately is to remove Cuba from the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism."

Just days before Biden's inauguration, Trump's Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was roundly criticized for putting Cuba back on the U.S. State Department's list of "State Sponsors of Terrorism."

The Obama White House—in which Biden served as vice president—had removed Cuba from the department's blacklist in 2015, writing that "(i) the Government of Cuba has not provided any support for international terrorism during the preceding six-month period; and (ii) the Government of Cuba has provided assurances that it will not support acts of international terrorism in the future."

In a statement attempting to justify his last-minute decision to re-designate Cuba a "state sponsor of terrorism," Pompeo accused Cuba of "repeatedly providing support for acts of international terrorism in granting safe harbor to terrorists" and engaging "in a range of malign behavior across the region."

These were references to Cuba's refusal to extradite members of Colombia's National Liberation Army (ELN) over alleged involvement in a 2019 bomb attack in Bogotá and to the nation's ongoing support for Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who survived a U.S.-backed coup attempt in 2019.

As the new letter explains:

ELN representatives were in Cuba as part of an internationally recognized process of peace negotiations, similar to the one Cuba hosted with the FARC [Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia], which was supported by the United States, Norway, Colombia and other nations. In addition, the recently elected Colombian president, [Gustavo] Petro, has asked Cuba to serve as the host country again for peace talks with the ELN, erasing any lingering concern or justification that the United States may have of Cuba's role as anything but a guarantor country for peaceful dialogue.

As a result of Pompeo's terrorism classification, which U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has yet to undo after 20 months, Cuba has been forced to endure additional "sanctions and international financial restrictions that limit Cuba's ability to carry out critical financial transactions, including those needed to advance its efforts to combat the pandemic," the letter notes.

Related Content

Bank Blocks Donations Supporting Cuban Effort to Vaccinate World


Cuba has been dispatching doctors to various parts of the world to help tackle Covid-19, and it has launched an effort to share its homegrown vaccine technology with other countries to expand global supply. In defiance of decades of harmful U.S.-led sanctions, the biggest export of the small island nation, which has a lower child mortality rate than its more powerful and hostile neighbor to the north, is medical care.

Despite Democratic lawmakers' entreaties and Biden's own campaign pledge to abandon Trump's "failed" approach to Cuba—which included implementing more than 200 punitive policies following Obama-era efforts at normalization—the White House has imposed other sanctions in recent months, intensifying Washington's 60-year embargo on the Caribbean island.

"The economic deprivations to which U.S. sanctions contribute have resulted in the mass migration of Cubans, which is currently a major challenge to U.S. interests in border security, as well as causing a humanitarian crisis for the same Cuban people that your administration claims to support," states the letter.

Biden's recent easing of travel restrictions to Cuba is poised to "help Cuban Americans connect with their families," but that's far from enough to redress the deteriorating economic conditions harming millions of people on the island, the letter continues.

When the Obama administration certified the removal of Cuba from the State Department's blacklist in 2015, it declared that the U.S. would "continue to have differences with the Cuban government, but our concerns over a wide range of Cuba's policies and actions fall outside the criteria that is relevant to whether to rescind Cuba's designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism."

Signatories to the letter contend that "the same situation exists today."

"The United States does have clear differences with the Cuban government—as they do with many governments—but we also have both national and international interests in supporting global pandemic coordination" and in mitigating "Cuba's humanitarian crisis that is causing tens of thousands of Cubans to seek dangerous passage to the United States," says the letter.

At the start of his presidency, Biden said that Cuba's status as a so-called state sponsor of terrorism was "under review," the letter points out.

"Given that removal from the list requires an inquiry into any terrorism-sponsored activity before providing a rescission request to Congress, we request that your administration immediately complete that review and initiate proceedings to remove Cuba from the list," it adds. "Such a move will advance legitimate U.S. security and humanitarian interests and help the future of the Cuban people."

CodePink plans to deliver the letter to various progressive lawmakers this week, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.). McGovern was one of a few members of Congress who urged Biden to provide aid to Cuba in the wake of last month's catastrophic oil fire.

The anti-war group also intends to deliver the letter to "opposition figures that continue to advocate for hostility toward Cuba," including Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), as well as Rep. María Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.).

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

The scene from Cuba: 

How it's getting so much right on COVID-19

Jennifer Ruth Hosek, 

Professor, Transnational Studies,

 Queen's University, Ontario 
3/17/2021

As the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately harms underprivileged people globally, Cuba’s “people over profit” approach has been saving many lives — both on the island and abroad. From the onset, Cuba’s approach has been holistic and integrated.

© (AP Photo/Ramon Espinosa) A doctor shows an empty vial of the experimental Soberana 02 vaccine for COVID-19 being developed at the Molecular Immunity Center during a media tour of the facility's vaccine production in Havana on Feb. 25, 2021.

Its response is among the most respected in the world. Widespread confidence in the Cuban government’s science-based policies, public service media messaging and volunteerism are key reasons as to why Cuba has been able to control the viral reproduction rate until mass vaccination begins.

The cash-strapped Caribbean island risked opening to holiday visitors at the end of 2020 and is currently managing higher COVID-19 caseloads than ever before. Its health experts are combining international clinical trials of its vaccine candidates with mass production. Cuba is the only Latin American country with the capacity to manufacture a vaccine domestically other than Brazil, which is not doing so. Cuba aims to protect its populace, then give away or sell its vaccines abroad

.

© (Yamil Lage) A technician works with the Soberana 02 COVID-19 vaccine at the packaging processing plant of the Finlay Vaccine Institute in Havana, Cuba, in January 2021.

Before the virus’s arrival in Cuba, the country prepared for mitigation based on best practices from Asia and its own expertise with contagious disease.

Beyond Cuba’s borders, its medical diplomacy took over. Cuba’s Henry Reeve Medical Brigade has been fighting the pandemic in at least 37 countries and has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. When COVID-19 stranded the cruise ship MS Braemar, only Cuba allowed it to dock.

In contrast, many countries’ pandemic responses have been haphazard, with well-funded lobby groups representing restaurants and pharmaceutical companies, to name just two sectors, wielding excessive influence. Oscillating virus reproduction rates have required disruptive and costly mitigation measures and resulted in illness and death. The media, academics who include Helen Yaffe, Emily Morris and John Kirk and non-governmental organizations like Havana and Oakland-based Medicc have long documented Cuba’s emulation-worthy health system.

Read more: Coronavirus response: why Cuba is such an interesting case

Hard work, hard science

Care in Cuba is universal, research and training is robust and disease and disaster mitigation is well-organized. The public health-care system is co-ordinated across research institutes and centres of disease control, through to dispersed local neighbourhood clinics. Cuba also has a near 100 per cent literacy rate, with much attention paid to science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education.

Cuba’s achievements are the result of hard work and hard science in a not-for-profit system. The populace’s confidence has been earned through science-based campaigns against the likes of HIV, Ebola, dengue fever and the Zika virus.

Nations that have responded well to the pandemic have communicated clearly and factually with their people. Cuba has a tradition of multi-pronged public-service messaging.

The country’s epidemiology director has become a trusted household expert through his daily news reports. Every day at 9 a.m., a seated and masked Dr. Francisco Durán speaks directly to the public, noting and lamenting every fatality, detailing disease spread and treatments, answering viewer questions and sternly advising continued adherence to preventative measures.

The well-known psychologist Manuel Calviño discusses topics such as self-discipline and positive thinking. Cheerier spots feature famous actors urging fortitude and depict groups of people following health protocols.

In cartoons, angry “red meanie” viruses are drowned by hand-washing and blocked by face masks, animation heroes celebrate International Workers’ Day from their balconies, youngsters stay home to protect their grandparents and families play inside together. The socially distanced 42nd International Festival of New Latin American Cinema featured animated doctor’s orders in its promotional video. Ubiquitously stated, sung and danced slogans include “Cuba for life, with a new (masked) smile.”

Mask-wearing is popular

I surveyed residents of Havana online and later in-person while in Cuba in December and January. Most reported wearing masks to “protect others and myself.”

While masking has been broadly politicized elsewhere, Cuba mandated masks in March 2020, immediately sharing instructions on how to make them at home.

While in many countries volunteers struggled to find ways to help, in Cuba, existing organizations such as neighbourhood watches and universities quickly moved into action.

Medical students have gone door-to-door checking for symptoms. Computer science students have developed helpful apps and supported medical staff in their dorms-turned-quarantine centres. Necessary work got done while public buy-in solidified the mitigation efforts. The initial growth curve was inverted early on.

Banking on individual responsibility among its well-educated citizens, Cuba shifted to a “new normal” at the year-end holiday season. Tourists headed to isolated beach resorts and expats to their relatives’ homes. The hotels follow health protocols meticulously — speedy PCR testing, masking, sanitation and social distancing

.

© (AP Photo/Ramon Espinosa) A tourist, wearing a protective face mask, walks along the beach in Havana, Cuba, on March 2, 2021.

But family visits led to outbreaks, as they have globally. Some visitors, many of them arriving from areas with high rates of infection and science denial such as Miami, breached the requisite protocols: one PCR test with a negative result upon arrival, a five-day home quarantine and another negative PCR test before mingling.

Pandemic has been costly

All indicators show Cuba has put its limited resources to efficient use for the public good. But especially coupled with former U.S. president Donald Trump’s tightening of the American blockade against Cuba, the pandemic and the resulting plunge in tourism are costly. Scarcity of affordable food and consumer goods, along with an increased cost of living accelerated by a long-overdue monetary unification, have increased stress levels.

Read more: U.S.-Cuba relations: Will Joe Biden pick up where Barack Obama left off?

Sensing an opportunity, foreign interest groups are supporting small, lively social media and in-person protests, most characterized by vociferous yet vague demands for artistic freedom.

Daily cases are also now hovering around 850 compared to 42 on Nov. 15, 2020 — just before Havana’s airport reopened. Although the curve is again flat — exponential growth has been halted for the second time — medical personnel and supplies are strained. Against this backdrop, however, there are Cuba’s advances on the vaccination front.

In this breakneck race, Cuba is simultaneously running Phase 3 international clinical trials of Soberana (Sovereignty) 2 and, planned for late March, Abdala, with robust production of these vaccine candidates. Work is also continuing on Soberana 1 and Mambisa.

Looking ahead to COVID-19 variants and reinfections, a booster Soberana Plus is now being developed.

If Cuba’s vaccination program is successful, the country will have once again provided for its people against enormous odds as it produces and distributes a vaccine domestically, then shares it with the world.

Many market-driven, rich nations of the Global North, including Canada, are not so well-positioned. Cuba’s access to internationally produced vaccines was highly improbable due to the U.S. blockade. Its ensuing decision to make its own vaccines stands to pay off handsomely.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Jennifer Hosek receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

The US embargo on Cuba has failed

If Biden truly wants to put principles, and effectiveness, ahead of politics, he should make a bold choice and end the embargo.

Christopher Rhodes
21 Jul 2021

Police scuffle and detain an anti-government demonstrator during a protest in Havana, Cuba, Sunday July 11, 2021. Hundreds of demonstrators went out to the streets in several cities in Cuba to protest against ongoing food shortages and high prices of foodstuffs, amid the new coronavirus crisis. [Ramon Espinosa/AP Photo]

For nearly 60 years, the United States has enforced an embargo against Cuba, severely restricting the flow of goods to the island. Most US companies are forbidden from dealing with Cuba, and various US laws punish foreign companies that do business in Cuba. The restrictions are meant to economically squeeze the island and create enough discontent within Cuba to force the ruling Communist Party to either significantly reform or step down.

The Obama administration, with then-Vice President Biden’s support, sought to rethink the policy and pursue re-engagement with Cuba. Barack Obama relaxed sanctions, allowed direct flights between the two countries, and eased restrictions on Americans doing business in Cuba. Donald Trump reversed Obama’s strategy. He placed Cuba back on the US list of state sponsors of international terrorism, cut off travel between Cuba and the US, and barred Americans from sending remittances to their relatives in Cuba, cutting off a major economic lifeline for many Cubans.

Joe Biden promised to move away from this Trump strategy of “maximum pressures” against Cuba, but has so far not altered any of the Trump restrictions. The White House admitted earlier this year that “a Cuba policy shift is not currently among President Biden’s top priorities.”

However, the protests that have been rocking Cuba for the past week – some of the largest since the Revolution – have forced the issue. Many Cuban American activists and Republicans are urging Biden to keep up or even increase pressure on Cuba, and Democrats are divided on whether to maintain or ease the embargo.

The strongest reason to end the embargo against Cuba is the massive toll that the policy continues to enact on the Cuban population. Both the Cuban government and the United Nations have estimated that the embargo has cost the Cuban economy $130 billion over six decades. It’s also worth noting that the US Chamber of Commerce estimates that the embargo costs the US economy billions of dollars each year, as well. The human toll is harder to quantify, but has clearly been significant. Human rights experts at the UN have urged the US to ease sanctions during the COVID-19 pandemic, arguing that such a change will save lives by allowing Cuba greater access to medical supplies and equipment.

Cuba-policy hardliners have implicitly accepted the human and economic costs of the embargo as acceptable in order to achieve the goal of undermining the communist regime. They will point towards the unprecedented level of protests currently going on in Cuba as evidence that the embargo is working. It’s not. Yes, Cubans are angry at the economic hardships and pandemic suffering happening amongst their population. But as Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel uses repression and anti-US rhetoric to contain the protests, there’s little indication that the regime is in immediate danger.

The communist regime has already survived the fall of its Soviet sponsor, the death of Fidel Castro, and the handover of power from his younger brother Raul to Díaz-Canel, who is not a Castro and was born after the Revolution took power. Sixty years of sanctions have only created hardships for the Cuban people while providing the regime with a convenient scapegoat to blame for all of their country’s economic woes and societal discontent.

Counterintuitively, ending the embargo and promoting ties between the US and Cuba is the greatest weapon that America can deploy against the oppressive regime in Cuba. President Obama laid out the strategy when he opened up travel between the two countries: “Nobody represents America’s values better than the American people,” Obama said in 2014, “and I believe this contact will ultimately do more to empower the Cuban people.”

Exposing Cubans to the freedoms and opportunities available to their American relatives will increase outrage and pressure towards the Cuban government for failing to provide these things. And removing the ability of the Communist Party to blame the United States for its own failures will lay bare the consequences of the Cuban government’s unwillingness to shift away from Soviet-era economic policies and political repression.

Hardliners will argue that easing the embargo now will lessen the pressure on the Cuban government by lessening the societal desperation that has fuelled these protests. And while economic crises can lead to collective outrage, spontaneous protests against authoritarian regimes usually ends in renewed repression rather than regime change. Many experts believe that movements for social change are most effective when people and organisations gain the resources that are necessary for sustained political and social activism. Loosening the economic vice grip on Cuba will help to empower its citizens and civil society to stand up to their government.

The administration should be thoughtful about how it rethinks the embargo policy. It need not eliminate the policy all at once, nor should it relent on pressuring Cuba when it comes to democracy or human rights. But being thoughtful should not be an excuse for inaction. For example, rather than dismissing the idea of renewing remittances to Cuba, Biden should seriously explore ways to allow Americans to securely transfer money to their Cuban relatives.

Relaxing the embargo will be a risky political move for the president. Biden lost Florida in the 2020 election after underperforming among Latino voters, and a radical change in policy towards Cuba could risk alienating parts of the Cuban American population in the state.

Republicans will no doubt accuse the president of being soft on communism or caving in to progressive demands. But if Biden truly wants to put principles, and effectiveness, ahead of politics, he should make a bold choice and end six decades of US failure and Cuban suffering.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.



Christopher Rhodes
Lecturer in Government at Harvard University and lecturer in Social Sciences at Boston University.
Dr Christopher Rhodes is a lecturer in Government at Harvard University and lecturer in Social Sciences at Boston University. He is the author of the upcoming book Evangelical Violence: Christian Nationalism, the Great Commission and a Millennium of "Holy" Warfare and co-editor of the volume Conflict, Politics, and the Christian East: Assessing Contemporary Developments.

Exclusive: Top Cuba Diplomat Urges Biden to End Sanctions Now—World Agrees

BY TOM O'CONNOR 

NEWSWEEK

ON 11/5/22 

One day after the world delivered a near-unanimous rebuke of long-standing U.S. sanctions against his country for the 30th time in a row, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla discussed why he believed U.S. President Joe Biden should answer the international call in a wide-ranging interview with Newsweek Senior Foreign Policy Writer Tom O'Connor on the difficult relations between the two nations.

The U.S. trade embargo against Cuba is often described as the longest-running sanctions campaign in modern history, having begun only a few years after the island just 90 miles south of Florida underwent an uprising that brought revolutionary leader Fidel Castro to power in 1959. While some progress was made toward warming ties between the Cold War-era foes some 55 years later under former President Barack Obama, the process was reversed under former President Donald Trump, who went on to toughen the effective economic blockade against Cuba.

Since taking office, Biden, who championed Obama's efforts while serving as his vice president, has largely followed in Trump's footsteps. Even after some 185 countries voted against the sanctions campaign at the United Nations (U.N.) on Thursday, with only the U.S. and Israel rejecting the resolution and Brazil and Ukraine abstaining, the administration defended the restrictions and shifted the blame to Cuba for alleged human rights abuses, including the repression of recent protests.

But Rodríguez defended his country's track record at a time of economic turmoil in Cuba, which faces basic supply shortages that he also blamed on an embargo that was only tightened throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. He said Cuba was open to discussing any bilateral issue with the U.S. except for the Communist-led island's internal affairs, which he asserted was a matter of national sovereignty and independence.

Far from being a state sponsor of terrorism, Cuba, he argued, was a friendly neighbor prepared to work with the U.S. in good faith on a range of common issues and, days away from a contentious series of midterm elections set to take place across the U.S., he loathed the influence of domestic politics on Washington's relationship with Havana. Despite the bad blood between the two governments, he said it was within Biden's power to remove at least some of the harshest measures against Cuba with the stroke of a pen.

In a direct appeal, Cuba's top diplomat urged the Biden administration, U.S. policymakers and the public to rethink a policy that he argued was responsible not only for the suffering of everyday Cubans but also a deterioration in Washington's relationship with the international community. This was especially the case in Latin America, he noted, where a new wave of leftist leaders was expected to shore up ties with Havana, leaving Washington as isolated as ever in its own hemisphere.

This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity.

Cuban Foreign Affair Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla speaks during a press conference on the impact of the U.S. economic embargo against Cuba over the course of the past year at the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Havana on October 19, 2022.

YAMIL LAGE/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Newsweek: For the 30th time in a row, and with near unanimity, the international community has condemned U.S. sanctions against Cuba. And yet at the same time, there doesn't seem to be any indication in the near term that Washington is going to waver on this policy. What does this vote mean to you, to Cuba and the dynamics of this U.S. policy that's gone on for decades now?

Rodríguez: For me, it's a very personal and emotional issue. I attended the second vote in 1993 personally and saw the growth of this roll call, of the pattern of votes from a few dozens of votes, 59 in the first in the year, to almost unanimous support currently.

So, it's an important message, it's an ethical message, because the Security Council has a different means, Chapter VII use of force... With the General Assembly, it's a more democratic and universal body of the whole world and the United Nations and it's a powerful message, which we couldn't underestimate. It's an important political message, it's an important consideration from the international law point of view.

But for our people, it was impressive. Yesterday, people in the whole country gathered, following the speeches on the voting. I saw impressive images from Mantua, which is in the devastated province of Pinar del Río, people in the streets and from Havana University, thousands of students seeking live coverage of the vote. It's a popular issue in Cuba. Beyond politics, it's a national issue.

From the political point of view, I feel that is truly important and could connect with the American people also. Unfortunately, there is no massive coverage by the U.S. media or digital networks, but it's important and people know about that. This is an expression of a historical mass, a critical mass accumulation, and it's an expression of a historical trend and I feel really optimistic about that because I feel that this government or another U.S. government would have to change these unfair, unjustifiable policies.

I know that Cuba's position is that it does not get involved with the internal affairs of other countries. But this U.S. policy has become so intertwined with domestic politics here in the United States. We've seen that over various administrations to include this present one and now we have midterm elections coming up. Is Cuba concerned about the future policies of this administration, or a future administration, especially if there is a conservative shift here, and that this policy could stay for a long time or become even more hawkish?

Not especially, because it has been a very long experience. It is the longest sanctions regime and the most comprehensive one in human history. No doubt on that.

Secondly, we have been living with 13 U.S administrations. It's a matter of fact that during the years of 2014 to 2016, maybe early 2017, there was tangible evidence that this is workable, it's viable, it's positive and it's highly recognized by the American citizens, by the Cuban citizens, by the international community, and it seems that it's possible to do so again, despite uncertainties. Because it's unfortunate that some United States state decisions could be changed because of the politics...like the Paris Agreement, on a real, actual issue—which could be beyond ideological differences, political differences, even national interests, geostrategic interests, because it's a matter of survival of the human species—was changed solely by the then-new administration.

We are ready for discussing any bilateral issue, for negotiating all pending bilateral issues, with no shadow to our independence or sovereignty, on the basis of equal footing and sovereign equality, mutual respect and non-interference in internal affairs. I suffer, this is painful, the level of polarization in the American society, which has a powerful special cultural connection with Cuban families and Cuban culture and it's painful, this promotion of hate, violence, polarization, it's an explosion, and we suffer this epidemic that's maybe worldwide.

But I prefer to be focused on bilateral issues. Because it's up to you. It's up to the American citizens who decide about internal affairs. And I hope that Cuba's issue could be perceived not as a domestic one, because Cuba is a neighboring, friendly country, but an independent country, and shouldn't be kidnapped by politics or by the swing electoral conditions in any state of the American Union.

A list of 185 nations voting in support of the resolution titled the "Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba," with only the U.S. and Israel rejecting and Brazil and Ukraine abstaining, while Liberia, Moldova, Somalia and Venezuela did not vote, on November 3, 2022.

MISSION OF THE EUROPEAN UNION TO THE UNITED NATIONS

I want to focus on one aspect of these U.S. sanctions and the U.S. policy toward Cuba and that is the addition of Cuba to the list of state sponsors of terrorism. Having been here in New York during 9/11, having seen the horrors of terrorism in person, how do you perceive Cuba being on this list and what do you say to the people who, having seen Cuba on this list, believe that Cuba must be a threat to the United States?

It's unfair, no doubt of that. Cuba was for decades on the previous list, but was deleted in 2014 and, at this very moment, it was crystal clear that it was absolutely unfair to have my country on this list with absolutely no evidence, with a very rock-solid tradition and behavior by my country fighting terrorism.

When 9/11 happened, the reactions of the Cuban government and our people was immediately to offer all of our airports. You should remember that there were thousands of American planes flying under the conditions of no airports... Secondly, we offered plasma, blood and, thirdly, medical assistance. When there was the anthrax attack, even in New York City, we immediately offered Cuban medical equipment for performing massive blood tests because we developed this technology for dealing with the HIV epidemic at this time, but it's cheaper and very effective for performing massive blood tests and we offered equipment, technology.

And after that, because I remember the U.S. was in a deficit of antibiotics, ciprofloxacin. We offered immediately a massive donation of ciprofloxacin. It couldn't be possible, but we did it with the American Interests Section diplomats in Havana city.

When Hurricane Katrina impacted in New Orleans, we immediately offered Cuban medical personnel and the mayor of the city and the governor of the state immediately accepted, but it was prevented by the government.

But my bottom line is that we should not mix politics or political differences or ideological differences with really important human causes or issues, like I also pointed out climate change, but also, for instance, terrorism. The politicization, political manipulation of this terrible issue which is terrorism could affect the efficiency for fighting terrorism, for preventing terrorism and affected the international cooperation and dialogue, which emerged as maybe the only positive outcome after 9/11. But unfortunately, we couldn't take this opportunity as an international community.

Secondly, the pretext for listing Cuba was, firstly, the presence in Cuba of a guerilla ELN [National Liberation Army] peace dialogue delegation. This is slanderous and is a brutal manipulation. This delegation was in Cuba as a request of the Colombian government, the Colombian state and the request of the United Nations on the basis of an agreement which is international law, a body signed by six international guarantors they posted in the United Nations, and it has been absolutely slanderous. But just today and the day before yesterday, the most important issue in the statements and the new thing was advocating for eliminating Cuba from this list.

The second pretext was an alleged Cuban military presence in Venezuela, totally slanderous. The national security adviser [at the time], Mr. [John] Bolton, even said that more than 20,000 Cubans soldiers were in Venezuela. It's slanderous. He's a pathological liar, Mr. Bolton, and it's crystal clear because of the progress between the U.S. and the Venezuelan government in talks on fuel and different issues.

Thirdly, in 2015, there was a positive change on this view, and it was really recognized by the whole world. But this inclusion of Cuba on the list was the last blow by President Donald Trump nine days before the opening of the new government, nine days, it was January 11th, it was the last decision on Cuba and it was a blow targeting Cuba, but it could be possible to think it was a symbol also targeting President Obama's, President Biden's policy toward Cuba.

And President Biden could change this situation with a signature, no legislative decision... It would be the right thing to do. They could be fair, and the impact of this list is lethal to our economy, and it's provoking a huge humanitarian damage to our people.

READ MOREExclusive: Lavrov Warns U.S. It Risks Becoming Combatant in Ukraine War
Exclusive: Pakistan's Sharif Says World Can't Afford U.S.-China Cold War
Cuba to Vote on Same-Sex Marriage As Pressure Builds to End it in U.S.

Another set of accusations that the Biden administration has presented against Cuba is an array of human rights violations. They list political suppression, the arbitrary arrest of protesters. How does Cuba react to these allegations, especially after we saw several rounds of unrest in Cuba, which doesn't happen very often to that level? And does this policy of punishing Cuba for alleged human rights violations leave any room for dialogue between the two countries right now?

We feel as an obligation, as a duty of our government, to grant the full access to exercise all human rights by all Cuban citizens. Firstly, it's a very hypocritical position to accuse the Cuban government and to blame the Cuban government for the conditions that are generated by the U.S. policy against Cuba.

In fact, there has been a deterioration of the living conditions of Cuban families, mostly from the second half of 2019 in which the embargo was extremely strengthened on the basis of the policy of maximum pressure, trying to provoke the collapse of the Cuban economy without thinking of the day after that or even the implications of that for regional stability or even migratory flows between Cuba and the U.S. But the main issue, creating very harsh living conditions for the Cuban families, is the embargo's policy.

Secondly, there is a payment and encouragement in looking for a social outbreak in Cuba. The U.S. embassy, the State Department, the American officials are permanently advocating for that and encouraging people to do so. There are even toxic digital platforms, mostly based in Miami, all the time instigating violence, inciting even terrorist acts in Cuba... What you saw for the situation of January the 6th in the Capitol Building and around it, people are under indictment of all seditions, of all their crimes, serious crimes. They are dissidents? Could we call them political dissidents? Or are they involved in criminal acts?

When it happened in Cuba, and people with guns or with a really violent attitude try to occupy a police station, a police precinct or an official building or damage private or social property, rioters... why does the State Department call them dissidents or political protesters? Most of the persons involved in disturbances in Cuba one or two years ago did not have a violent attitude. But in Cuba, only persons involved in violent events have put been on trial on the basis of our laws and our constitution with full due process or legal guarantees, no minors, absolutely no minors, were put on trial.

Yesterday, I was listening very carefully to the speech U.S. Political Counselor John Kelley made. His first idea was that the U.S. government's priority is the well-being and support to the Cuban people. It's a lie. It's a terrible manipulation. They could relax the embargo. They could even have relaxed the embargo through temporary exceptions like the U.S. government did during the peak of the COVID pandemic but excluding Cuba of this temporary benefit. Why, if it is a humanitarian, and a purely humanitarian, issue? Targeting remittances, which is brutal, my God, it's not a bilateral issue, it's not a political issue, it's a matter of families, people who love each other.

And it's a very demagogic position, because there are many and serious American sources stating that there are no less than 600,000 detentions of juveniles on a daily basis in the U.S. Regarding the criminal age, half of the American states have no limits on that. Two states could even try a child of two years, three years. I remember after 9/11 here, during the anthrax epidemic, a boy in a New York primary school, 9 years old, spread out powder or some substance, making an unfortunate joke, and he was put on trial!

Also, the police violence in the U.S. is very well-known and highly recognized. The racist, systemic profiling in the U.S., police repression and in a systemic way is very well-known.

Let me finish by saying that we will continue granting the full participation of Cuban citizens in the decision-making process in our country like we did it in 2019 in a national referendum passing the constitution in place. And we just did it a few weeks ago passing a code of our families, a new law by a national referendum not by a political decision by a Cuban court, not by a parliamentarian decision even. And people attended in the midst of a blackout, very difficult living conditions, shortages of food, medicine, public transportation... people attended, 74% of Cuban voters voted and 66% voted "yes" and it's a very democratic expression of the Cuban life.

But if the U.S. government could have legitimate, sincere concern on the well-being of Cuban families and Cuban people, they could firstly lift or relax the embargo, mostly in the humanitarian field. For instance, we just suffered a terrible hurricane, more than 100,000 houses damaged. Why not introduce some exemptions to the embargo policy, purely, only for humanitarian reasons?

And, secondly, if the U.S. government could be concerned in looking for a regular, safe and orderly flow of migrants, it could begin abrogating the so-called Cuban Adjustment Act, eliminating the schizophrenic policy in the U.S. border with Mexico that accepts Cubans and discriminates against all migrants from different countries and understanding that even these issues, like the disturbances and the stress, the suffering of our people... could be relieved with some executive changes of the policy toward Cuba.

Young Cubans watch on a screen the speech of Cuban Foreign Affair Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla prior to the vote on the draft resolution to end the U.S. embargo against Cuba at the United Nations, outside the University of Havana, on November 3, 2022.

YAMIL LAGE/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

On the future of this policy toward Cuba, the U.S. has received a rebuke from the international community, but also from the region in the form of a recent letter to the White House by former Latin American leaders. With the rise of leftist governments across the region and more pressure on the U.S., do you believe that it's likely the U.S. will change course and, if not, what is Cuba to do?

It's a bit of a hypothetical question. Firstly, these 18 former heads of state and government respectfully requested not only lifting the embargo but deleting Cuba from the list of country sponsors of terrorism, which is a very new and important approach by them.

Secondly, we have had, for many decades, excellent relations with all Latin American and Caribbean countries. Cuba was the second presidency pro tempore of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. It was in 2014, in Havana city, that was signed, not only proclaimed but signed by heads of state and government of all American countries, a proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a zone of peace, which is a brief, but very substantial, historical document.

We have had for decades a very important level of bilateral cooperation with most Latin American and Caribbean countries. In disaster conditions, we deploy medical personnel, even in countries with a very hardline, right government, even with no diplomatic relations. But we did it in the past because we believe in total separation between politics and ideological issues and humanitarian ones. We build together a tradition of very respectful positive relations between all countries of the region and Cuba.

A few years ago, after the first decade of this century, there was a regression in the region and a dramatic change in the political balance favoring right-wing political forces, neoliberalism, economic agendas. And we kept this excellent level of relations with them. There is a new wave of leftist government, popular movements... We are glad for having that. But there could be no change in our attitude, no change in the nature or quality of our relations with all Latin American and Caribbean countries.

But I feel that it's an opportunity, it's even an opportunity for the U.S. government for implementing a new, more efficient, more democratic policy, a fair policy toward Latin American and Caribbean countries. And, like the expression by the international community in different ways, because one month ago, dozens and dozens of heads of state and government attended the high-level segment of the General Assembly, appealing to the U.S. government for lifting the embargo, 185 votes requesting to the U.S., "Please, lift the embargo on Cuba."

It is evidence that this policy, which is anchored in the past and in the Cold War, is obsolete, it's dysfunctional. The U.S. goals have not been met because of this policy.

A very well-known conservative Republican senator said once that if you implement a policy for 50 years with no result, then there is a good reason for rethinking this policy. Why not? It's a policy that should provoke discredit and profound international isolation for the U.S. government. It's an undemocratic policy because most American citizens have a different opinion. It's interfering with fundamental rights and freedoms of American citizens who are forbidden to exercise freedom to travel and visit Cuba. Why not? Why not have American citizens, a boy from Columbia University, a girl from Hostos College, go to Cuba and have first-hand information, receive free information and form their own personal opinion? The U.S. government is afraid of that.

It's a nonsense policy. And I feel that a change in the U.S. policy toward Cuba could be highly beneficial for the relations between the U.S. and the whole region, highly beneficial for the U.S. national interest and it could remove an unsurmountable obstacle creating division between Latin American and Caribbean countries and the U.S.

Large majority of UN General Assembly calls for US to end embargo on Cuba  

AFP

Cuba embargo: Why does the US continue to reject UN moves to end it? 
FRANCE 24 English
 Nov 2, 2022

Now 60 years old, the trade embargo on Cuba has been perpetuated primarily at the behest of Washington. When it was imposed in 1962, John F. Kennedy was US president and Fidel Castro was the revolutionary leader of Cuba: a Communist too close for comfort for Washington at the height of the Cold War. Arms sales to Havana had been banned four years earlier and Cuba leant on its major ally, the Soviet Union, to fill the gap. Our panel discusses why the embargo remains in place today and if there is any hope of lifting it.

 

END THE EMBARGO

Massachusetts federal lawmakers call on Biden to remove Cuba from list of countries protecting terrorists

Cuba was placed back on the State Sponsor of Terrorism list in 2021 after being removed by the Obama administration in 2015

 By Greg Wehner Fox News
Published January 2, 2024

Fox News senior strategic analyst Gen. Jack Keane (Ret.) joins 'Fox & Friends' to discuss China's plans to build a military facility in Cuba, just miles from the coast of Florida.

Democratic federal lawmakers from Massachusetts are calling on President Biden to remove Cuba from the State Sponsor of Terrorism (SSOT) list as quickly as possible.

In a letter addressed to the President, and signed by Reps. Ayanna Pressley, James P. McGovern, Seth Moulton, Lori Trahan and Stephen F. Lynch, as well as Senators Elizabeth Warren and Edward J. Markey, the lawmakers advised Biden that Cuba was removed from the SSOT list in 2015 by him and then President Obama after determining the designation was "without merit."

The Trump administration placed Cuba back on the list in January 2021, which according to the Democratic lawmakers, was "a vindictive action" as he was leaving office.

The lawmakers said the policy is "overdue for change," adding that Cuba and the U.S. have been working together to counter terrorism.

US DESIGNATES CUBA STATE SPONSOR OF TERRORISM

An old American car passes by the US embassy in Havana on May 26, 2023. 

 (YAMIL LAGE / AFP) (Photo by YAMIL LAGE/AFP via Getty Images)

"We believe the time to act and remove Cuba from the SSOT list is now – not months from now," the letter reads. "There is no political or other policy argument that can justify the U.S. continuing to knowingly add to the suffering of the Cuban people."

The letter explains that all sectors of Cuban society are facing unabated hardships, which have driven thousands to abandon their homes and migrate to the U.S.

"It therefore runs counter to U.S. direct interests to continue the collective economic restrictions that result from Cuba remaining on the SSOT list," the letter reads.

FORMER US AMBASSADOR ARRESTED, ACCUSED OF SECRETLY SERVING AS AGENT TO CUBA: REPORT

Colombian president Gustavo Petro speaks to the media during Colombia's regional elections in Bogota, October 29, 2023. 

 (Sebastian Barros/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Additionally, the lawmakers reminded Biden that Colombian President Gustavo Petro asked him to remove Cuba from the list to facilitate peace negotiations between Colombia’s government and the National Liberation Army (ELN) guerrillas.

The President of Mexico also asked that Cuba’s designation be rescinded, the lawmakers noted.

"As a candidate for President, you promised to address re-engagement with Cuba and return to the policy begun during the Obama-Biden administration, and we supported you on this commitment," the letter reads. "We recognize that much has changed in Cuba and in the United States since 2018, but two and a half years into your Presidency, the overwhelming number of sanctions put in place by your predecessor, including placing Cuba back on the SSOT list, remain in effect.

President Biden was mocked on social media for appearing confused during the Veterans Day ceremony at Arlington National Ceremony this weekend. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

"We call on you now, Mr. President, to help ordinary Cubans at this critical time by acting swiftly to remove Cuba from the State Sponsor of Terrorism list. It is the only option worthy of the United States, and we stand ready to support you in this decision," the letter concluded.

In January 2021, the U.S. State Department announced the designation of Cuba as a state sponsor of terror, accusing it of providing safe harbor to malicious actors and engaging in "malign behavior" in the region.

The designation returned the Caribbean nation to a list that it was on from Ronald Reagan's administration and until that of Barack Obama. In 2016, Obama became the first U.S. president to visit Cuba since 1928.

Obama became the first U.S. president to visit Cuba since 1928.

 (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

The Obama administration attempted to normalize relations in 2015 but encountered resistance from President Trump, whose administration recently argued that Cuba had failed to cooperate on counterterrorism.

State Department officials said Cuba refused to extradite 10 suspects wanted in Colombia for a police academy bombing that killed 22 people and injured dozens more. Authorities also accused Cuba of harboring multiple American fugitives, including Joanne Chesimard, also known as Assata Shakur. She was convicted of killing New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster in 1973.

Former top Obama adviser Ben Rhodes called on the Biden administration to reverse Trump's decision in January 2021.

"The Biden Administration should not allow itself to be constrained by last minute political favors being done by an authoritarian administration that recently sought to overthrow the democratically elected U.S. government," Rhodes tweeted. "This decision should be reversed as soon as possible."

Greg Wehner is a breaking news reporter for Fox News Digital.

BACKGROUNDER

Cuba is poor, but who is to blame – 

Castro or 50 years of US blockade?

RECENTLY THE TRUMP EMBARGO HAS CAUSED DESPERATE CUBANS TO TRY TO GET TO AMERICA UNLIKE THE BARCADI FAMILY 

THEY GET NO SPECIAL TREATMENT AND GET SENT BACK HOME

Alongside his depiction as a “brutal dictator”, negative reflections on Fidel Castro since his death on November 25 (2016) have focused on his “mismanagement” of the Cuban economy and the consequent “extremes of poverty” suffered by ordinary Cubans.

This caricature is problematic – not only because it ignores the devastating economic impact of the United States embargo over 55 years, but also because it is premised on neoclassical economic assumptions. This means that by stressing economic policy over economic restraints, critics can shift responsibility for Cuba’s alleged poverty on to Castro without implicating successive US administrations that have imposed the suffocating embargo.

This approach also ignores key questions about Cuba after the revolution. Where can medium and low-income countries get the capital to invest in infrastructure and welfare provision? How can foreign capital be obtained under conditions which do not obstruct such development, and how can a late-developing country such as Cuba use international trade to produce a surplus in a global economy which – many claim – tends to “unequal terms of trade”?

It was the search for solutions to the challenge of development that led Cuba’s revolutionary government to adopt a socialist system. They adopted a centrally planned economy in which state ownership predominated because they perceived this system as offering the best answer to those historical challenges.

But the commitment to operate within a socialist framework implied additional restraints and complications, particularly in the context of a bipolar world. My book, Che Guevara: the economics of revolution, examines the contradictions and challenges faced by the nascent revolutionary government from the perspective of Guevara’s role as president of the National Bank and minister of industries.

Literature on Cuba is dominated by “Cubanology”, an academic school central to the political and ideological opposition to Cuban socialism. Its emergence and links to the US government are well documented. Its arguments are that the revolution changed everything in Cuba – and Fidel (and then Raul) Castro have personally dominated domestic and foreign policy since, denying Cuban democracy and repressing civil society. Thanks to their mismanagement of the economy, growth since 1959 has been negligible. They simply replaced dependency on the US with dependency on the USSR until its collapse in 1990.

These ideas have also shaped political and media discourse on Cuba. But the problem with this analysis is that it obstructs our ability to see clearly what goes on in Cuba or explain the revolution’s endurance and Cuban society’s vitality.

What did Castro inherit?

Arguments about the success or failure of the post-1959 economy often hang on the state of the Cuban economy in the 1950s. The post-1959 government inherited a sugar-dominated economy with the deep socio-economic and racial scars of slavery. Cubanologist Jaime Suchlicki argues that Batista’s Cuba was “well into what Walter Rostow has characterised as the take-off stage”, while Fred Judson points to structural weaknesses in the Cuban economy: “Long-term crises characterised the economy, which had a surface and transient prosperity.” So while one side insists that the revolution interrupted healthy capitalist growth, the other believes it was a precondition to resolving the contradictions obstructing development by ending Cuba’s subjugation to the needs of US capitalism.

Following the revolution, Castro set out to bring social welfare and land reform to the Cuban people and to confiscate the ill-gotten gains of the Cuban elite. But when the defeated Fulgencio Batista and his associates fled Cuba, they stole millions of pesos from the National Bank and the Treasury. The country was decapitalised, severely limiting the capacity for public spending and private investments. Wealthy Cubans were leaving the island, taking their deposits and taxes with them. How was the new government going to carry out the ambitious socio-economic reforms without financial resources?

We have to consider these real circumstances at every juncture. For example, when the US embargo was first implemented, 95% of Cuba’s capital goods and 100% of its spare parts were imported from the US – and the US was overwhelmingly the main recipient of Cuban exports. When the Soviet bloc disintegrated, Cuba lost 85% of its trade and investment, leading GDP to plummet 35%. These events produced serious economic constraints on Cuba’s room for manoeuvre.

Putting a price on poverty

Moving on, we should also ask: how are we to measure Cuba’s poverty? Is it GDP per capita? Is it money-income per day? Should we apply the yardsticks of capitalist economics, focusing on growth and productivity statistics to measure “success” or “failure”, while paying little attention to social and political priorities?

Ration cards symbolise poverty and shortages in Cuba. EPA/Alejandro Ernesto

Even factoring in its low GDP per capita, the Human Development Index (HDI) lists Cuba in the “high human development” category; it excels not just in health and education, but also in women’s participation and political inclusion. Cuba has eliminated child malnutrition. No children sleep on the streets. In fact, there is no homelessness. Even during the hungry years of economic crisis of the 1990s, Cubans did not starve. Cuba stuck with the planned economy and it enabled them to ration their scarce resources.

Yes, salaries are extremely low (as both Fidel and Raul have lamented) – but Cubans’ salaries do not determine their standard of living. About 85% of Cubans own their own homes and rent cannot exceed 4% of a tenant’s income. The state provides a (very) basic food basket while utility bills, transport and medicine costs are kept low. The opera, cinema, ballet and so on are cheap for all. High-quality education and healthcare are free. They are part of the material wealth of Cuba and should not be dismissed – as if individual consumption of consumer goods were the only measure of economic success.

Operation miracle

The specific and real challenges Cuban development has faced has generated unique contradictions. In a planned economy, with an extremely tight budget, they have had to prioritise: the infrastructure is crumbling and yet they have first-world human development indicators. Infant mortality rates reveal a lot about the standard of living, being influenced by multiple socioeconomic and medical factors. Cuba’s infant mortality rate is 4.5 per 1,000 live births, which sits it among first-world countries – and above the US on the CIA’s own ranking.

It is not just Cubans who have benefited from these investments. Tens of thousands of Cuban doctors, educators and other development aid workers have served around the world. At present some 37,000 Cuban doctors and nurses work in 77 countries. They generate foreign exchange of some US$8 billion a year – Cuba’s biggest export.

In addition, Cuba provides both free medical treatment and free medical training to thousands of foreigners every year. As a direct initiative of Fidel, in 1999, the Latin American School of Medicine was inaugurated in Havana to provide foreign students from poor countries with six years of training and accommodation completely free. In 2004, Cuba teamed up with Venezuela to provide free eye surgery to people in three dozen countries under Operation Miracle. In the first ten years more than 3m people had their sight restored.

Prohibiting even trade in medicines, the US embargo led Castro to prioritise investments in medical sciences. Cuba now owns around 900 patents and markets pharmaceutical products and vaccines in 40 countries, generating yearly revenues of US$300m, with the potential for massive expansion. The sector produces more than 70% of the medicines consumed by its 11m people. The entire industry is state owned, research programmes respond to the needs of the population, and all surpluses are reinvested into the sector. Without state planning and investment it is unlikely that this could have been achieved in a poor country

.

Cuban researchers developed the first synthetic vaccine against a bacteria that causes pneumonia and meningitis. EPA/Alejandro Ernesto

In the mid-1980s Cuba developed the world’s first Meningitis B vaccine. Today, it leads in oncology drugs. In 2012 Cuba patented the first therapeutic cancer vaccine. The US embargo forces Cuba to source medicines, medical devices and radiology products outside the United States, incurring additional transportation costs.

Sharing economy

Ecuador’s president, Rafael Correa, told me in 2009:

A great example provided by Cuba is that in its poverty it has known how to share, with all its international programmes. Cuba is the country with the greatest cooperation in relation to its gross domestic product and it is an example for all of us. This doesn’t mean that Cuba doesn’t have big problems, but it is also certain that it is impossible to judge the success or failure of the Cuban model without considering the US blockade, a blockade that has lasted for 50 years. Ecuador wouldn’t survive for five months with that blockade.

Let’s consider the embargo: the Cuban government estimates that it has cost the island US$753.69 billion. Their annual report to the United Nations provides a detailed account of that calculation. That’s a lot for a country whose average GDP between 1970 and 2014 has been calculated at US$31.7 billion.

Yes, Castro presided over mistakes and errors in Cuba’s planned economy. Yes, there is bureaucracy, low productivity, liquidity crisis, debt and numerous other problems – but where aren’t there? Castro pointed to these weaknesses in his own speeches to the Cuban people. But President Correa is right – to objectively judge Castro’s legacy, Cuban development and contemporary reforms today, we cannot pretend that the US blockade – which remains today despite rapprochement – has not shaped the Cuban economy.

Castro almost saw out 11 US presidents since 1959, but he never lived to see the end of the US embargo. New challenges face Cuba, with economic reforms underway and the restoration of relations with the United States. Next week, I will begin new research in Cuba to assess the revolution’s resilience in this post-Castro, Donald Trump era.

December 2, 2016

Author

Helen Yaffe
LSE Fellow, Economic History, London School of Economics and Political Science
Disclosure statement
Helen Yaffe has received research funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.
Partners
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under Creative Commons license.

VIVE CUBA LIBRE
Cuba reopens but faces challenge wooing back tourists

Issued on: 20/11/2020 - 21:18

A receptionist sanitizes her hands at the Melia Habana Hotel in Havana -- Cuba is reopening its doors to foreign tourists after months of coronavirus-related closures, but will travelers return?  YAMIL LAGE AFP

Havana (AFP)

Cuba is reopening its doors to foreign tourists after an eight-month shutdown due to the coronavirus pandemic, but the cash-strapped country faces an uphill struggle to woo back wary travelers.

Tourism chiefs are banking on the island's track record of keeping the virus in check to win back holidaymakers.
"This is a major challenge," said Francisco Camps, deputy general manager of Melia, a Spanish hotel chain that currently is operating only 10 of its 34 locations in Cuba.ADVERTISING


The industry is pinning its hopes for the November-April high season on the capital Havana, the country's main tourist draw, which opened its international airport last weekend.

With its old fashioned Caribbean charm, the UNESCO World Heritage city attracts hundreds of thousands of visitors every year.

"Havana is important because it has regular flights, which allows connections with Europe," says Camps.

"It also allows a flow of visitors who do not only come to see the city but also do tours" -- bringing more tourist dollars than mere beachgoers.

The rest of the country's six international airports reopened last month to charter flights.

Tourism was worth $2.6 billion to Cuba in 2019. Deprived of that revenue this year, the island had to drastically reduce imports -- the source of 80 percent of its food.

Across the country, lines outside supermarkets are getting longer, with shortages of basics like coffee, milk and even toilet paper increasingly common.

"The shortages we are experiencing are quite significant -- I think it's the worst since the 1990s," said economist Ricardo Torres of the University of Havana.

That decade was dominated by a period of extreme austerity known as the Special Period, following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

- 'Safe destination' -

Torres said tourism "is the sector that really managed to pull Cuba out of its worst economic crisis," after that period.

But these days, opening the country's doors to international visitors is not risk-free.

Several cases of coronavirus have been detected on flights of British and Russian tourists who have recently come to visit the island's beaches, forcing dozens of travelers into isolation.

"This is undoubtedly a great risk," said Francisco Duran, chief epidemiologist at Cuba's health ministry.

"I think our population needs to be aware of this, so that they can protect themselves as well as the people who arrive."

Case numbers here are among the lowest in the Americas, with just over 7,700 infections in a population of 11.2 million.

"Cuba, a safe destination" has been adopted as a slogan designed to reassure travellers.

Cuba's protocols require new arrivals to take a PCR test costing $30 on arrival and limit their movements until results are made available 24 hours later.

Every hotel will have a permanent medical team in place, due to a national health network that boasts 82 doctors per 10,000 inhabitants -- compared with 32 in France and 26 in the United States.

"Cuba's very successful strategy in controlling the epidemic is also an asset when it comes to opening up," said Torres, "because the tourists in the coming months will be looking for safe destinations from a health perspective."

"So, yes, we have to protect people's lives, but we also need to revive our economy, which is in a downward spiral," he said.

- Teleworking from Cuba? -

Cuba hosted a seminar for a group of 150 German travel agents earlier this month. Such is the importance of the German market that Prime Minister Manuel Marrero went to meet them.

But several European countries such as France are still not allowing citizens to travel abroad for pure tourism due to a second wave of the pandemic.

Canada, Cuba's biggest tourist market, is imposing a quarantine on people returning from the island.

The World Tourism Organization does not foresee a rebound in the industry before the end of 2021 -- hence the need for Cubans to be creative.

Melia now offers long stays -- of two to three months -- to Canadian "snowbirds" seeking to escape the harsh northern winter.

The industry is also seeking to exploit the new trend of teleworking, but that poses a challenge in a country where internet connections are often slow and unstable.

"One thing that is obviously important is the need to ensure connectivity," said Camps.

"So, for each of the five pilot hotels selected, we have acquired a gigabyte of bandwidth."

But Melia will keep a third of its Cuban hotels closed in 2021, believing a return to normal is unlikely for at least two years.

© 2020 AFP 

How To Make A Classic Cuba Libre Cocktail
Written by 
Colleen Graham
Updated 09/09/19

 

Nutritional Guidelines (per serving)141 Calories
0g Fat
4g Carbs
0g Protein

See Full Nutritional Guidelines
(Nutrition information is calculated using an ingredient database and should be considered an estimate.)

The Cuba Libre recipe is an easy and popular mixed drink that you will find very familiar. Translated from Spanish, the name means “Free Cuba,” a phrase that was popularized around the end of the Spanish-American War and used to celebrate that Cuba was freed from Spanish rule.


This simple mixed drink is similar to a rum and Coke, but the addition of fresh lime juice lightens up the mix and cuts through the sweetness of the cola. The lime is the single element that defines the Cuba Libre as a separate drink and it should be fresh (not from a bottle) to keep the drink authentic.


Ingredients

1/2 lime (juiced)
2 ounces light rum
4 ounces cola (Coca-Cola)

Steps to Make It

Gather the ingredients.

Squeeze the juice of half a lime into a collins glass or highball glass.

Add ice cubes and pour the rum into the glass.

Fill with cola and stir well.

Serve and enjoy!


Tips

If you want to make a more complex drink, after squeezing the lime, drop it into the serving glass and muddle it to release the citrus oil from the rind. Remove the fruit before adding the other ingredients.

A collins glass is taller and narrower than a highball glass, so it would maintain the carbonation of the cola longer. However, you can make a Cuba Libre at home in any tall glass you have handy.

If you can source some Mexican Coca-Cola that is sweetened with cane sugar, it will be more authentic than the American Coca-Cola sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). You can use other brands of cola or artisanal colas as you prefer.

Light rum is usually chosen for the Cuba Libre, and to be traditional you should use a Cuban-style rum. 

HAVANA CLUB AMBER

However, if you like dark rum, you can give that a try in your cocktail.

History

While the origins of the Cuba Libre and the rum and Coke claim to come from the end of the Spanish-American War in 1898, that is doubtful. Coca-Cola did not arrive in Cuba until 1900. If there was a Cuba Libre before 1900, it was made with rum, water, and brown sugar.


A Bacardi advertising executive claims he was in Havana in 1900 when the drink was first mixed with Bacardi Rum and Coca-Cola. A competing story is that the Cuba Libre was first mixed at La Florida restaurant in Havana in 1902 on the anniversary of Cuban independence.


Iced drinks had been popular in Cuba since the 1800s. Although Cuba didn't make its own ice in those days, they had plenty of ice because it was imported by ice entrepreneur Frederic Tudor to the Caribbean islands in the early 1800s.


The popularity of rum and Coke spread to the U.S. and during Prohibition, Coca-Cola was useful in hiding the flavor of low-quality booze. When the U.S. placed an embargo on Coca-Cola imports to Cuba in 1960, Cubans began making Cuba Libres with TuKola instead.


How Strong Is a Cuba Libre?


The Cuba Libre is a rather mild mixed drink. Its actual alcohol content will vary depending on the strength of your rum and the amount of cola you end up pouring. On average, though, it will mix up to just 11 percent ABV (22 proof). It's perfectly normal for highball drinks and about as strong as a glass of wine.

ALTERNATE RECIPE 

THE NOSEY CHEF

Cuba Libre

Ingredients

60ml Havana Club Especial rum (this is not the place for white Bacardi, people)

7.5ml freshly squeezed lime juice

2 dashes Angostura bitters

150ml Coca-Cola

BESIDES WE WOULD NEVER USE A REACTIONARY ANTI CUBA  BACARDI