Remembering Ramsey Clark

Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada

Translated by Walter Lippmann for CubaNews.
https://walterlippmann.com/remembering-ramsey-clark/

The news of his death did not come as a surprise since it was known that his health was declining and he was also affected by irreparable family losses. But the death of Ramsey Clark is a source of pain and suffering for many in many parts of the world.

His trajectory since the 1960s was one of admirable personal integrity and fidelity to the principles that made him one of the most respected personalities of the American progressive movement.

Attorney General of the United States during the administration of Lyndon B. Johnson, he played a key role in the approval and application of the Civil Rights Act, a decisive step in eliminating discrimination against African-Americans in electoral matters. He also accompanied Johnson in his efforts to ensure affordable health care for all. Both issues were flags that “liberals” raised but with increasingly hesitant hands while their elimination has become a priority for Trump and his supporters.

Ramsey for his part became a point of reference for those who did not abandon the ideals of freedom and true democracy.

He opposed the war against the Vietnamese people to the point that the President excluded him from the National Security Council despite the fact that his participation in that body derived from the high office he held.

Outside the government, Ramsey waged a tireless battle to stop this aggression, which generated a growing mobilization not only in his country but throughout the world, and to which he contributed as few others did. Not only with speeches and declarations. Of special significance was his physical, personal presence on Vietnamese soil in open violation of Washington’s official prohibition.

He had an exceptional capacity for work and delivering solidarity was for him a mission to which he gave his all. No cause was alien to him.

We Cubans owe him a great debt. Our cause was also his. His voice was raised time and again to denounce the blockade and the war that the Empire is waging against us in all fields.

His participation in the campaign to free Elián González and in the hard, complex and prolonged struggle for the liberation of our Five Heroes was decisive. Personally, as long as I live I will thank him for his help and from the bottom of my heart I say Thank you for everything dear friend, brother, compañero.

Ramsey Clark en la memoria

Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada

La noticia sobre su fallecimiento no causó sorpresa pues se sabía que su salud declinaba afectada además por pérdidas familiares irreparables. Pero la muerte de Ramsey Clark es fuente de dolor y sufrimiento para muchos en muchas partes del mundo.

Su trayectoria desde la década de los Sesenta del pasado siglo es de admirable integridad personal y de fidelidad a los principios que lo convierten en una de las personalidades más respetadas del movimiento progresista norteamericano.

Fiscal General de Estados Unidos durante la Administración de Lyndon B. Johnson fue pieza clave en la aprobación y aplicación de la Ley de Derechos Civiles paso decisivo para eliminar la discriminación contra los afroamericanos en materia electoral. Acompañó a Johnson también en sus medidas para asegurar servicios de salud asequibles para todos. Ambos temas fueron banderas que los “liberales” levantaron, pero con manos cada vez más vacilantes mientras que su eliminación se ha convertido en prioridad para Trump y sus seguidores.

Ramsey por su lado se convirtió en punto de referencia para quienes no abandonaron los ideales de libertad y verdadera democracia.

Se opuso a la guerra contra el pueblo vietnamita al punto de que el Presidente lo excluyó del Consejo de Seguridad Nacional pese a que su participación en esa instancia se derivaba del alto carga que desempeñaba.

Fuera ya del Gobierno Ramsey libró una batalla incansable para detener esa agresión que generó la movilización creciente no sólo en su país sino en todo el mundo y en cuyo despliegue él contribuyó como pocos. No sólo con discursos y declaraciones. De especial significación fue su presencia física, personal, en la tierra vietnamita violando abiertamente la prohibición oficial de Washington.

Tenía una capacidad de trabajo excepcional y entregar solidaridad fue para él una misión a la que se dio por entero. Ninguna causa le fue ajena.

Es grande la deuda que con él tenemos los cubanos. Nuestra causa fue también la suya. Su voz se alzó una y otra vez para denunciar el bloqueo y la guerra que el Imperio nos hace en todos los terrenos.

Fue decisiva su participación en la campaña para liberar a Elián González y en la dura, compleja y prolongada brega para la liberación de nuestros Cinco Héroes. Personalmente mientras viva le agradeceré su ayuda y desde el fondo de mi corazón le digo Gracias por todo querido amigo, hermano, compañero.

¡A amarrarse los pantalones!

Margarita A Alarcón Perea

Desde febrero del 2019 se supo que Cuba no podría adquirir ventiladores respiratorios, luego de que dos firmas fabricantes de estos equipos médicos que resultaban proveedores habituales de la isla fueran adquiridas por una compañía estadounidense.

La empresa Medicuba, entidad exportadora e importadora del Ministerio de Salud Pública, recibió notificación de que los fabricantes IMT Medial AG y Acutronic habían sido adquiridas por la empresa estadounidense Vyaire Medical Inc. con sede en Illinois, por lo que comunicaban que “la directriz corporativa que tenemos hoy día es suspender toda relación comercial con Medicuba”.

Sin ventiladores suficientes, Cuba no podría hacer frente al desafío que supone un alza en la curva de contagios. Esto es parte del bloqueo de los EEUU contra Cuba, no es nada nuevo.

Los efectos de la Covid 19 pasan por varios niveles. Desde el resurgimiento de una solidaridad casi perdida, hasta un nuevo tipo de venta especulativa, de pánico.

Es interesante también ver cómo los hay que dicen con cierto desdén que afecta a todos por igual, cuando en mi opinión no es así y se está demostrando a nivel mundial. Por ejemplo, el 60% de los fallecidos por la Covid 19 en Nueva York provienen de la comunidad latina y negra de ese estado. Si el nivel de vida, poder adquisitivo, estado económico y de salud en general del afectado está por encima de la media, no es que no lo vaya a contraer; es que, de contraerlo, los efectos van a ser menos devastadores.

Todo lo anterior, es muy cierto, pero esto que estamos viviendo hoy mismo en la isla no se compara ni por asomo con lo que fue el Periodo Especial: años de cero transportes, apagones de más de 18 horas seguidas, casi nada para comer; ni siquiera comprar, aunque sobrara el dinero. No había CUC ni dólar que usar, solo moneda nacional y nada o muy poco que hacer con ella. Sin embargo, adelgazamos, pero sobrevivimos. El punto no es quiénes recuerdan el Período Especial, el punto es que muchos pasaron hambre bajo las devastadoras circunstancias que aparecieron en la isla de la noche a la mañana. Sin embargo, no hubo muertos, no hubo riesgo de sobrecargar los hospitales ni las unidades de terapia intensiva ni de quedar sin equipos de ventilación.

En cambio, esto de ahora es mortal y va a afectar a algunos sectores de la población más que a otros sin decir de la economía. Por ello, no logro entender por qué no establecen un cierre total de todo por cuatro escasas semanas. Todo el mundo en casa. Sólo el personal indispensable (PNR, bomberos, FAR y cuerpos de salud) y el resto en casa a “sobrevivir” con lo que tengan. Durante ese tiempo, el MINCIN y demás entidades responsables del abastecimiento de alimentos a las tiendas y bodegas del país, podrían dedicarse a cuantificar lo que hay, y con el uso de la muy criticada Libreta de Abastecimiento que entre otras cosas controla la ubicación física de la población, comenzar a vender. Pero una venta organizada contra libreta de abastecimiento y por barrio. Tal que, si me entero desde el Vedado que “sacaron galletas de sal” en la calle Obispo en la Habana Vieja, tendré que esperar a que lleguen a mi municipio.

El Estado debe recordar que nuestro código penal contempla sanciones para aquellos que violenten una regulación de este tipo establecida bajo la Constitución actual de la República de Cuba donde en el Capítulo 4, Art 222 se describen las Situaciones Excepcionales y de Desastre que incluye el Estado de Emergencia. Este artículo confiere al Presidente de la República la potestad de suspender algunos derechos individuales por un tiempo específico, bajo circunstancias, requisitos y garantías específicas. Esto lo contempla la nueva Carta Magna aprobada.

¿Cuál es el Estado Excepcional?: La indisciplina social ante una pandemia como esta. ¿Cuáles serían los derechos que se regularían por un tiempo determinado a determinar por el personal científico de la salud?: El de movimiento. ¿Cuáles son estas circunstancias?: Se está enfermando, contagiando y muriendo la gente. ¿Cuáles son los requisitos?: Quedarse en casa. ¿Cuáles serían las garantías?: Las ya establecidas por el país y la repartición ordenada de alimentos y artículos de higiene.

El Dr. Francisco Durán, jefe Nacional de Epidemiología la OPS y la OMS, y el propio Ministro de salud de Cuba, llevan días, semanas y ya pronto meses, implorando que las personas acaten la orden de quedarse en casa, de evitar las aglomeraciones, de no salir a la calle salvo por lo imprescindible. Realmente no es tan difícil, en Italia, España y China lo han tenido que hacer y al parecer es lo único que funciona. Si las personas se quedan en casa, dejan de transmitir el virus, el cual muere porque no encuentra nuevos receptores, y el MINSAP puede pesquisar en paz.

Ya Cuba rebasa los 1000 contagios y 92 de esa cifra son personal de la salud. Eso es imperdonable en un país que históricamente ha tenido como baluarte uno de los sistemas de salud más alabados a nivel mundial. Aplaudir, si, ovacionar más aun, pero el quid está en proteger. Y si para hacerlo hay que quedarse en casa con lo que tenemos mientras el país logra organizar los insumos, pues como dijo el Dr. Durán, ¡A amarrarse los pantalones!”

El Periodo Especial duró años, esto si quieren puede acabar antes del verano, pero al paso que vamos, la luz al final del túnel no la veo ni asomarse a pestañar.

 

 

Trump: Thunder and Traps

By Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada

Much has been said and will be said about the grotesque show that took place in Miami on June 16 and the lies and threats against Cuba there pronounced. Trump’s speech, incoherent and clumsy like all of his, made at least two things clear: he will do all he can to harden US policy toward Cuba, canceling the timid steps that his predecessor had taken and [the fact that] the current President is an irremediable liar.

It is customary there in the North to mix politics with spectacle, information with entertainment, even if, as in this case, in terrible taste. For those who look at it from the outside, a good dose of Cartesian doubt is advisable and prudence is necessary to avoid being confused. Especially if it’s about what someone says like the quirky occupant of the White House.

Congresswoman Barbara Lee, a tireless fighter for justice and civil rights, was right to reject Trump’s speech. She stressed the importance of fighting to prevent specific regulations which would translate the presidential directive into mandatory rules that are even more damaging to peoples of the two countries. There, on that very day, there was evident proof of the correctness of her concern.

In his speech, Trump announced that he would issue a new executive order to replace the one already repealed that had guided Obama’s policy in its last two years. There in front of everyone, he added his signature to the document that appears on the official site of the White House, but which nobody read.

What he said does not correspond exactly with what he signed and the latter is what counts, because it has legal force and will guide the conduct of his administration. The contrast is evident, for example, in the case of remittances many Cubans on the island receive from their relatives residing in the United States. According to the speaker in Miami, such remittances would continue and would not be affected.

But right there, in the same act, without hiding, he signed an order that says exactly the opposite. On this issue of remittances, the document entitled “Presidential Memorandum for the Strengthening of The United States Policy towards Cuba,” which Trump signed and which was publicized by the White House. The fine print states that there would be millions of Cubans living on the island who would not be allowed to receive remittances.

In Section III, subsection (D), the definition of “prohibited officials of the Government of Cuba” is now extended to cover not only the leaders of the Cuban State and Government, but its officers and employees, the military and civilian workers of the Armed Forces and the Ministry of the Interior, the cadres of the CTC, of the trade unions, and the Defense Committees of the Revolution. Professor William M. Leogrande estimates that this would be more than one million families.

Trump boasted that he would drop all Obama’s moves and he probably intends to do so.
But he knows that this contradicts the interests and opinions of some business sectors linked to the Republican Party and that is why he hides behind aggressive rhetoric and often undecipherable jargon. With regard to the issue of Cubans and remittances he had no choice but to use his favorite weapon: the lie.

We must now see how they write and apply this new order that seeks to punish the Cuban population as a whole.

Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann.
http://walterlippmann.com/trump-thunders-and-traps/

Micheal Ratner

“The author with Gerardo Hernandez his wife Adriana Perez and Michael Ratner on one of Michaels last visits to Havana.”

 

By Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada

He came to Cuba often. The last time was in February 2015, on the occasion of the International Book Fair in which the Spanish edition of “Who Killed Che? How the CIA Got Away with Murder” was presented. It was the result of painstaking research and more than ten years demanding access from relevant authorities to official documents jealously hidden.

The work of Michael Ratner and Michael Steven Smith proved beyond doubt that the murder of Ernesto Guevara was a war crime committed by the US government and its Central Intelligence Agency, a crime that does not have a statute of limitations, although the authors are on the loose in Miami and flaunt their cowardly misdeed.

We met again in July on the occasion of the reopening of the Cuban Embassy in Washington. We were far from imagining that we would not meet again. Michael Ratner looked healthy and showed the optimism and joy that always accompanied him. On that occasion we celebrated that the Cuban Five anti-terrorist Heroes had returned home and also the fact that President Obama had had no choice but to admit the failure of Washington’s aggressive policy against Cuba.

Michael was always in solidarity with the Cuban people since as a very young person he joined the contingents of the Venceremos Brigade. That solidarity remained unwavering at all times. His participation in the legal battle for the freedom of our comrades, including the “amicus” he presented to the Supreme Court on behalf of ten Nobel Prize winners, was decisive.

A tireless fighter, for him no cause was alien. He stood always on the side of the victims and faced with courage, even at the risk of his life, the oppressors who dominated that judicial system. He also did it with rigor, integrity and love. More than a brilliant legal professional, he was a passionate fighter for justice.

He was present in 1968 at the Columbia University strike before completing his studies, and fought racial discrimination together with the NAACP. Soon after graduating he represented the victims of the brutal repression at the Attica prison. Thus he began a remarkable career –impossible to describe in just one article– which knew no borders: Nicaragua, Haiti, Guatemala, Palestine, a never ending list.
When nobody did, he undertook the defense of the hostages in the illegal naval base in Guantanamo. He convened more than 500 lawyers to do so –also for free– and achieved an unprecedented legal victory with a decision by the Supreme Court recognizing the rights of the prisoners.

Many other cases absorbed his time and energy, working in a team, without necessarily appearing in the foreground. He did not hesitate, however, to legally prosecute powerful characters like Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush whose “impeachment” he tried very hard to obtain.

He also accused Nelson Rockefeller, when he was governor, and more recently Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. He published books and essays in favor of legality and human rights. He was considered one of the best American lawyers and chaired the National Lawyers Guild and the Center for Constitutional Rights and founded Palestine Rights. He combined his work as a litigator with university teaching at Columbia and Yale and helped train future jurists able to follow his example.

He was the main defender of Julian Assange and Wikileaks in the United States. An insuperable paradigm of a generation that aimed for the stars, he was an inseparable part of all their battles and will remain so until victory always.

A CubaNews/Google translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann.

Ya es hora

 

Margarita Alarcón Perea

 

Era de esperar, la Habana lentamente se vuelve el lugar del momento en este hemisferio. Al igual que el ritmo de las olas de los mares, la Habana es un contínuum, un todo compuesto de muchos momentos en la historia; juega un papel – similar al de un actor – con el fin de entretener, hacer un planteamiento y crear una ilusión a la vez que permanece inmóvil.

En este caso la ilusión ha sido creada por personas que están bajo la impresión de que las cosas en la isla mágicamente han cambiado luego de los sucesos del 17 de diciembre de 2014 y que esa es la razón por la cual tantos vienen de visita a la isla.

Semanalmente desde principios de este año 2015, desde que se produjeron las primeras rondas de conversaciones bilaterales, miembros del cuerpo de la prensa, del Congreso, del Senado, a distintos niveles de gobierno, de las artes, el mundo de la ciencia, intelectuales, hombres y mujeres de negocio andan por toda la ciudad contemplándola boquiabiertos en un estado absoluto de fascinación.

Esto no debería sorprender a nadie. Era de esperar. La Habana históricamente ha sido un lugar mágico desde la época de Humphrey Bogart y Lauren Bacall o cuando el Buick del 56¨ era el carro del año. Por tanto, ahora que está en boga y resulta tan fácil llegarse a Cuba, ¿por qué no hacerlo?

No quiero que me malinterpreten. Estoy feliz de que tantos procedentes de los EEUU estén dando esos primeros pasos y se anden montando en aviones y viniendo de visita. Lo que me resulta simpático es como todos creen que ahora de repente “no hay problemas” con venir cuando lo único que ha cambiado en la isla es que la bandera estadounidense ondea delante del Malecón habanero luego de 56 años de ausencia. ¡Eso es todo! En lo que a lo demás respecta, el cuartico está igualito!

Así que recomiendo que la próxima vez que se pregunten algo respecto a Cuba y la Habana, no se vayan pensando que las cosas han cambiado en la isla y que es por eso que ahora pueden viajar de visita libremente y ver por uno mismo.

No estaría mal que se aseguren que en los próximos 15 meses se den pasos para garantizar que esos viajes puedan continuar, digamos que hacienda algo como eliminar el bloqueo estadounidense contra Cuba, ¿no creen que ya sea hora?

El tiempo pasa….

Step by Step

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/margaritta-alarcon/step-by-step_2_b_8339920.html

 

Margarita Alarcón Perea

 

Last century, I took off for my summer vacation in New York City. Upon arrival, I remember my mom telling me my father was over at the Mission on 38^th, so I headed downtown to see him.

It was early summer, beginning of July; days were getting longer and night’s warmer in the City.

After entering the building over on Murray Hill I bumped into Abelardo Moreno, then Councilor at the Mission (Permanent Cuban Mission to the United Nations), in one of the halls on the way to catch the elevator leading to the Ambassadors office. Abelardo was in a hurry with a mound of papers in one hand and a lit cigarette in the other, I quickly said “hi” and as we were both travelling up to the top floor I asked: “what on earth are you doing so late in the day on a Saturday? Has somebody else decided to invade yet another sovereign state?!” Abe, said, no and then went on to explain, it was summer, and the gulf war was no longer on the table for Cuba as we were no longer members of the Security Council and since it was summer and no one was going off on vacation to the Caribbean, my father was bored and when he got bored he would find something for them to do. He said all of this in his classic ironic fashion with just the right amount of “Im loving every minute of this.” But what was this excess work load in the middle of the lethargic summer heat? Well, that´s the funny part, or the punch line of the joke. He along with the Minister Councilor, the second Ambassador, and two younger 3^rd secretaries were gathering all the information my father was requesting in order to prepare a document that he would present to the General Assembly the first week in September, and would entitle: Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba.

It was the summer of 1992, and so it all began.

Back in 1992 when this issue was first put forth it “won” a majority of 71 abstentions ,  3 votes against and 59 votes in favor of the resolution. We are now going on the 24^th year that the United Nations General Assembly puts this resolution up for a vote. Since 1993, the balance flipped and votes in favor went in the triple digits, and abstentions in this century remain steady in the single digit margin, primarily 1, 2, 3. The one thing that has remained the same, just like the song, has been the votes against. Invariably swaying from 3 or 4 to sometimes 2 and then back to 3 or 4 again.

Come the morning of October 27^th of this year 2015, the UN will once again hear a speech from Bruno Rodriguez Cuba´s Minister of Foreign Affairs. It will then hold the vote and a large screen will light up with the results.

What if this year there were to be an unprecedented surprise? The United States of America has in its Constitution something which provides for a very specific and clear separation of powers. Three branches of government such that no one person or group of peoples could ever again subject the nation to any form of tyranny. You have the Congress which is the legislative power that makes the laws, the Presidency which is the executive power which carries out the laws, and then the Supreme Court which evaluates the laws. Three groups that don’t necessarily have to be in sync and as it turns out, next October 27^th, they won’t be.

Since the end of last year, President Obama has been stating on camera, where ever he goes, whenever asked about Cuba and the US, when he spoke at the State of the Union, he´s probably mentioned it to his cook at the White House: the US Congress should do away with the Embargo against Cuba. His reasoning has less to do with the atrocity that the Embargo has been, subjecting the Cuban people to depravations and hardships that go beyond reason; the Embargo has been qualified by many as the longest form of warfare against a sovereign nation in the history of the world. Granted, these have not been the arguments used by the President he adheres to Einstein’s definition of insanity. Yet whatever the case, whether you do away with it because it’s insane or inhumane, the gist is to do away with it.

Now, will the US break with its forefathers system of government or should I say, put it to the test of true democratic principles of decent? Will this presidency actually prove to the world that real democracy can actually happen? Will the executive instruct its Department of State to instruct its Ambassador to abstain during the vote next Tuesday?

It would be a first and definitely a vote, if not a political step,  in the right direction.

 

Published in The Huffington Post and End the Travel Ban

The times they are a changin´… or are they?

Margarita Alarcón Perea

It was to be expected, Havana is slowly turning into the “in spot” of the hemisphere. Like the rhythmic movement of the waves in the ocean, Havana a continuum, a whole in history made up of many parts; it plays a roll, not unlike a theater production, to entertain, make a statement, and create illusion, changing while yet remaining the same.

The illusion in this case, has really been created by others who are under the impression that magically things, after December 17^th of 2014, have changed in the country and that is the reason why everyone is visiting.

On a weekly basis since the beginning of the year 2015, ever since the first bilateral talks began, members of the press, the Congress, the Senate, all levels of government, the arts, sciences, intellectuals, business men and woman are prancing around town in awe.

This is not something that should shock anyone. It was to be expected. Havana had always been a sort of “private getaway” since back when Bogie and Bacall were the ¨in couple¨ and a 56´ Buick was the car of the year. So, now that it’s chic and above all, easy peasy to come down to Cuba, why not do so?

Don’t get me wrong, I am very happy actually ecstatic that so many people from the United States are taking those first baby steps and getting on flights to visit, see, scout about, gaze in awe and wonder and then go back home. I just find it funny, how suddenly it’s “ok” to come down, when the only thing that has changed on the island is technically and practically the fact that there is a US flag waving on the Malecón after 56 years. That’s it! Everything else is exactly the same.

So next time you wonder about Cuba and Havana, don’t go off thinking that things changed on the island hence making it easy for you to get there, think that things changed –somewhat- back home and now you can travel -sort of – freely down to Cuba and check the scene out.

Might be a good idea to make sure the next 16 months include steps that guarantee you make those trips as often as you desire by say eliminating stuff like, I dunno, the US Embargo against Cuba, maybe?

Tic toc Clarice…

 

Also published in Latino Voices Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/margaritta-alarcon/the-times-they-are-a-changin_b_8306176.html

International Diplomacy/ Diplomacia Internacional

Margarita Alarcón Perea

Full Definition of DIPLOMACY as found in Merriam-Webster
1: the art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations
2: skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility
3: the work of maintaining good relations between the governments of different countries
4: skill in dealing with others without causing bad feelings

On July 20th, 2015, the Cuban flag was raised for the first time in over half a century at what will once again be the site of the Embassy of the Republic of Cuba to the United States of America. On that same day normal diplomatic activities began across the Florida Straights at the reinstated Embassy of the United States of America to the Republic of Cuba.

No longer will there be an Interests Section. No longer will the Czech Republic or the Swiss need to bother with the issues of either nation across the Atlantic. With the re-opening of both these embassies; Cuban in DC and US in Havana, both countries began what is known as “a diplomatic relationship of one nation’s government with another,” key word here being “government”. To put it bluntly: these shall be diplomatic representations to governments, something that takes place when one country’s government recognizes the legitimacy of another country’s government, again, key word: “government”. When you are a serious diplomat you do not establish open parallel relationships with peoples or groups of peoples who are openly intent on undermining the legitimate government to which you have presented letters of credit! It’s really as simple as that.

Diplomacy is not meant to create chaos or disrespect. Quite to the contrary, it was created, and has been practiced for centuries, in order to build proverbial bridges, to prevent hostilities and bring about order in as peaceful a manner as possible. So please, more respect to both countries. And above all, more respect to the peoples of these two nations who have spent the better part of more than half a century struggling in a peaceful manner in order to reach this point in history.

Also published in the Huffington Post

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Diplomacia

1   Disciplina o conocimiento de las relaciones entre los estados

2   Conjunto de personas e instituciones que se ocupan del estado de las relaciones con los demás Estados.

3   Corrección y amabilidad interesadas o habilidad en el trato.

El pasado 20 de julio del año 2015 se izó la bandera cubana por primera vez en más de medio siglo en la sede de lo que volvería a ser a partir de ese día la Embajada de la República de Cuba ante los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. Ese mismo día comenzaron las actividades normales de sede diplomática en el edificio que se encuentra frente al malecón habanero, reanundano sus actividades como representación diplomática de los Estados Unidos ante la República de Cuba.

Ya no hay más sección de intereses. Ya ni los checos ni los suizos tendrán más que atender los asuntos de cada una de estas naciones al otro lado del Atlántico según correspondiera. Cuando se abrieron las dos embajadas, la cubana en Washington DC y la estadounidense en La Habana, ambas naciones comenzaron lo que se denomina “la representación diplomática de cada nación ante el gobierno de la otra,” siendo clave en este caso la palabra “gobierno”. Básicamente y gramática simple: son representaciones diplomáticas ante los GOBIERNOS, lo cual equivale a que cada cual reconoce la legitimidad del otro. No son representaciones diplomáticas ante grupos de disidentes en cualquiera de los dos países. Por tanto, los diplomáticos cubanos NO deben hacer una vida paralela con grupos que aspiran a derrocar o acabar con el gobierno legitimo de EEUU (insisto, del partido que sea) y los diplomáticos estadounidenses no deben reunirse con miembros de la disidencia en Cuba.

La diplomacia no debe servir como arma para crear el caos sino por el contrario, debe ayudar a evitarlo. Por favor, más respeto tanto para una nación como para la otra. Y sobre todo más respeto para los pueblos de los dos países que a lo largo de más de medio siglo han estado luchando de manera pacífica y respetuosa por llegar a este punto en la historia.

Cuba and the United States: a new era?

By Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada

On December 17, by freeing the five Cubans imprisoned for more than 16 years in the United States, President Barack Obama put an end to an excessively prolonged injustice and, at the same time, gave a change of direction to history.

By recognizing the failure of the anti-Cuban policy, restoring diplomatic relations, abolishing all restrictions within his reach, proposing the complete lifting of the blockade and the beginning of a new era in relations with Cuba –all in one speech– he broke all predictions and surprised everyone, including the brainiest analysts.
The hostile policy established by President Dwight Eisenhower(1953-1961), before the current President was born, was the rule applied–only with secondary sharing s– by Republican and Democratic administrations alike. It was eventually codified in the Helms-Burton Act, signed by Bill Clinton in 1996.

In the early years they practiced it quite successfully. In 1959, at the triumph of the Cuban Revolution, the US was at the zenith of its power and exercised unchallenged hegemony over much of the world and especially the Western Hemisphere. This allowed it to secure the exclusion of Cuba from the Organization of American States (OAS) and granting the almost total isolation of the island. Cuba could count only with the help of the Soviet Union and its partners in the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA), formed by the Warsaw Pact countries.

The collapse of “real socialism” created in many the illusion that this would bring the end of the Cuban revolution.

They anticipated the advent of a long period of “uni-polar” dominance. Drunk with victory, they failed to assess correctly the depth of what was happening: the end of the Cold War opened up new spaces for social struggle, and presented capitalism with increasingly difficult challenges.
The fall of the Berlin Wall prevented them from seeing that, at the same time, in February 1989, Venezuela was shaken by a social uprising called “el Caracazo“, a sign  indicating the start of new era in Latin America.

Cuba managed to survive the demise of its former allies and its resistance was instrumental in the profound transformation of the continent. Years ago it became obvious that the policy designed to isolate Cuba was a failure. Such a policy ended up isolating the United States as its current Secretary of State, John Kerry, has recognized.

A new relationship with Cuba was indispensable for Washington. It needed to rebuild its ties with a continent that is no longer in its backyard. Achieving this is crucial now because, despite its power, the US cannot exercise the comfortable leadership it had had in times gone by.

There is still much to achieve with this new relationship. First of all, it is necessary to completely eliminate the economic, commercial and financial blockade as demanded with renewed vigor by important sectors of US business.

But normalizing relations would especially imply learning to live with the differences, and abandoning old dreams of domination. It would mean respecting the sovereign equality of states, a fundamental principle of the United Nations Charter, which, as history shows, is not liked by the powerful.

Regarding the release of the five Cuban prisoners, all US presidents without exception, have widely used the powers exclusively granted to them by Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution. This has been so for more than two centuries without anything or anyone being able to limit them.

This constitutional paragraph empowers the President to suspend the enforcement of sentences and grant pardons in cases of alleged crimes against the United States.

In the case of the Five there were more than enough reasons for executive clemency. In 2005, the panel of judges in the Court of Appeals quashed the process against them –defining it as “a perfect storm of prejudice and hostility”– and ordered a new trial.

In 2009, the full meeting of the same Court found that this case had nothing to do with espionage or the national security of the United States. Both verdicts were adopted with unanimity.

Regarding the other main charge of “conspiracy to commit murder”, made only against Gerardo Hernandez, his accusers acknowledged that it was impossible to prove this slander. They even tried to withdraw the accusation in May 2001 in an unprecedented action, taken by none other than the prosecutors under President George W. Bush (2001-2009).

For five years, Hernández had been expecting some response from the Miami court. He had made repeated requests for the court to release him, or review his case, or order the government to present the “evidence” used to convict him, or agree to hear him, or ask the government to reveal the magnitude and scope of the official financing of the massive media campaign that had created the “perfect storm”.

The Court never responded. Nothing was said by the mainstream media about the unusual legal paralysis. It was obvious that this was a political case and could only be resolved by a political decision. No one but the president could do it.

Obama showed wisdom and determination when, instead of just using his power to release any person, he courageously faced the underlying problem. The saga of the five was the result of an aggressive strategy and the wisest thing was to end both at the same time.

Nobody can ignore the significance of what was announced on 17 December. It would be wrong, however, to ignore the fact that there is still a road to travel that can be long and tortuous.  It will be necessary to move forward with strength and wisdom.

 

 A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann.
http://www.walterlippmann.com/docs4281.html