| WHITE BOOK 2007 >>CHAPTER 1 | ||
CHAPTER 1: THE HOSTILITY AND AGGRESSIONS AGAINST CUBA BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAS REACHED UNPRECEDENTED DIMENSIONS. In the history of the 49 years of the Cuban Revolution, the policies, programs and aggressive actions of successive US governments against Cuba, with the goal to destroy the revolutionary process undertaken by the Cuban people, have been unending. The sick US hostility with regards to Cuba has reached unprecedented levels. Never has a foreign policy against another country included such a broad and sophisticated arsenal of aggressive measures in political, economic, cultural, diplomatic, military, psychological and ideological spheres. No coercive and actively hostile policy against a country has lasted so long, despite them being two countries that are not in a declared state of war. Without respecting any legal barrier or reasoning, the actions and measures adopted by the Bush administration have focused on the main objective of the imperialist US policy towards Cuba - the defeat of the process of profound revolutionary transformations embarked on by the Cuban people starting in 1959. Any path or method is valid to obtain this established goal; the military option has not been ruled out. The often used euphemism of “promote a transition to democracy and the respect of human rights,” attempts to hide the imperialist motivation of the aggressive United States plans against the Cuban people. The temporary factor of urgency added in recent years to the messages and statements of high level officials in Washington regarding their effort to promote a “transition” in Cuba — read “regime change” —, include an additional warning signal in an evaluation of the anti-Cuban plans of the Bush administration. A “regime change” always has been a policy of the United States with relation to Cuba. It has been structured with total disrespect of international law and world public opinion; a plan to annex the island that encompasses all the programs and aggressive anti-Cuban actions. The hypocritical and cynical rhetoric of spokespersons in Washington about freedoms has been a central element in references to Cuba in repeated statements by President Bush and other top level State Department officials, as well as the most extremist of the rightwing anti-Cuban and terrorist mafia of Miami. Liberate Cuba?! The Cuban people obtained their full liberation in 1959, when they put an end to the bloody tyranny of Fulgencio Batista, whose dictatorship was imposed and sustained by the United States to consolidate its neocolonial control over the island. The Cuban Revolution freed, saved and strengthened the Cuban nation. The Cuban people broke the yoke of institutional racism, of discrimination against women, of nepotism and ended the political corruption, murders and politically motivated disappearances. It also did away with illiteracy, chronic unemployment, insalubrities and ideological domination and the imposition of totally alien pseudo-cultural standards of hunger and misery. The only thing Cuba needs to be freed from today is the United States blockade and the hostile policy of aggressions, pretensions and plans of successive U.S. administrations to impose their domination, from the underdevelopment inherited from colonialism and neocolonialism and from an unjust international economic order that limits its opportunities for development. The unshakable decision of the Cuban people to fully exercise their right to self determination constitutes a clear obstacle to the plans of political, economic and military domination of the imperialist United States circles. This comes not only from her invulnerable military defense, but mainly from the political challenge represented by the attitude of a small country in the traditional “back yard” of the United States and for the hopeful alternative its project of social justice and equity represents to millions of people around the world. To try and break our example, the United States has tried, on repeated occasions, to fabricate the theory of the supposed “threat” that Cuba represents for the security of the United States. In its determination, top ranking officials of the current US administration have used false pretexts, among them, supposed ties between Cuba with terrorism and international drug trafficking, the supposed existence of programs to develop biological weapons of mass destruction in Cuba, and the eventuality of a massive emigration to the State of Florida. Each one of these false allegations has been publicly refuted and dismantled by the Cuban government, with evidence that the United States could not refute. At the same time, the United States has considerably increased its financing of small internal counterrevolutionary groups that act as salaried mercenaries of a foreign power that seeks to conquer Cuba and subjugate its people. The anti-Cuban actions that the government of the United States carries out from its national territory range from thousands of hours of illegal radio and television transmissions with subversive propaganda, which have not excluded incitement to terrorism, to the persecution and punishing of U.S. citizens that travel to Cuba. All these actions were systematized into an anti-Cuban program by the current tenant of the White House, a real plan for the annexation of Cuba, approved on May 6, 2004 and updated and hardened on July 10, 2006. It should also be recalled that in the legislative arena, the laws known as the Cuban Adjustment Act, the Torricelli Act and the Helms Burton Act, among others, remain in effect. The following is a description of the evolution of some of the components of the hostile policy, blockade and aggressions of the United States against Cuba in 2006, with some concrete examples that confirm the intention to escalate and harden them. The Unites States Interests Section in Cuba: command post of the counterrevolution. The United States Interests Section in Havana, (USIS) was opened under the administration of President James Carter in 1977, in the locale of the building formerly occupied by the U.S. embassy in Cuba. The objectives that made the agreement possible were to institutionalize a direct and permanent channel for communication between the two governments, as well as facilitate consular matters of common interest. However, much has changed. The USIS, as denounced by Fidel Castro in January 2006, has become a true command post of the counterrevolution. Contrary to the objectives for which it was established, officials of the U.S. Interests Section maintained, during all of 2006, a meddling conduct in disrespect of the laws and the dignity of the Cuban people. A conspiratorial profile seeking to encourage subversion and develop the most diverse actions directed to increase the effectiveness and the impact of the hostile policy, blockade and anti-Cuban aggressions. Starting January 2006, the USIS began an escalation of its provocations against our people. An electronic illuminated ticker was installed on one of the top floors of the building occupied by the U.S. Interests Section in Havana supposedly to “communicate messages to the Cuban people.” Actually, it is an unprecedented provocation. Gigantic illuminated letters are used to lie and offend. What diplomatic mission of a country that respects international laws and the sovereignty of the host country where it is accredited would carry out such an act of aggression? How can the regime that represses its own citizens, like the courageous Cindy Sheehan who tried to show a message of peace during President Bush’s State of the Union Address in January 2006, attribute itself the right to transmit illuminated calls to destroy the constitutional order endorsed by the Cuban people? To give an idea of the type of “messages” the USIS has been spreading via its electronic ticker, read this example: Many decent Cubans can not live decently without doing something indecent. If you are young and pretty what brings you greater benefit: Pursue a career or pursue a Spaniard? (Transmitted on April 7 and 8, 2006.) At the same time, the chief of the USIS, Michael Parmly, continues to organize activities and indoctrination conferences for his salaried mercenaries at his residence or at the USIS buildings. On January 20, in one of his “educational” talks, former Polish President Lech Walesa was presented in a video conference. Walesa advised the counterrevolutionaries assembled to continue in their effort to finish with communism in Cuba. On February 19, a libelous article published by The Miami Herald, voice of the anti-Cuban mafia, contained statements by John Virtue, the director of the International Center for Press of the International University of Florida, who recognized that “…now we teach video classes in the USIS. They are very effective…” The Interests Section has become a true center for recruitment and training of mercenaries on the payroll of the United States anti-Cuban policy. On October 23, another video conference was held. This time the transmission came from the anti-Cuban TV and radio stations financed and managed by the US government and baptized at the height of insult with the name of Cuban National Hero and profound anti-imperialist Jose Marti. From the den where the poorly named Radio and TV Marti broadcast, former Afro-American activist James Meredith, today a conservative, exchanged with the counterrevolutionaries gathered at the residence of USIS chief, Michael Parmly, on nothing less than the “racial” situation and the supposed current sociopolitical situation in Cuba. Meredith promised to spread the “truth” about the situation of the "Afro-Cuban political prisoners and the young Blacks that are harassed and persecuted on the island". Dr. James Howard Meredith, once a United States civil rights activist, ended up betraying himself and all Afro-Americans. It’s not so strange then that Meredith would so deeply offend the dignity of Cubans of African and mixed decent. In Cuba it was the Revolution that made a reality Jose Marti’s premise that Cubans are all those who love their Homeland, regardless of the color of their skin. It’s hard to believe that the first Black student to enter the University of Mississippi in 1962 went to work for Senator Jessie Helms in 1989, the same one of the Helms Burton Act, also known as “Lynching Jessie.” Mr. Meredith also worked for the candidacy of David Duke — member of the Ku Klux Klan — for governor of Louisiana. The Bush Plan to Annex Cuba: Part Two is Presented The publication of the second report of the “Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba” — created by President Bush with the objective to prepare and periodically update his plan to annex Cuba —, was first announced on May 20, 2006. Finally on July 10, the commission’s second report was officially released, containing additional measures to speed up the implementation of the Bush Plan to annex Cuba. In the presentation of the document to the press, a brief written statement from President Bush was circulated. Attending were the co-chairs of the commission, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutiérrez. Two days later, on July 12, the State Department’s “coordinator for a transition in Cuba,” Caleb McCarry, went to speak with the Cuban mafia of Miami, where he formally presented the report. The 2006 report does not substitute or modify the 2004 plan. To the contrary, it uses it as a base document and enriches it with additional measures in the policy of economic warfare against Cuba. The addendum significantly increases the direct and indirect financing for anti-Cuban subversion. All the measures included in 2004 continued in full force. The existence of additional recommendations contained in an appendix was kept secret citing reasons of national security and to “achieve their effective carrying out” is a new aspect of this report. Its greatest repercussion lies in the fact that such recommendations are referred to specifically in Chapter 1, designed to speed up the overthrow of the revolutionary Cuban government. The Bush plan is based on the strictest compliance of the dispositions in the Helms Burton Act, which establishes that the blockade will remain even after the hypothetical imposition of a government of occupation, until a group of prerequisites are met. The top one being “tangible progress in the process of returning the properties” of the old exploiters (Section 206), going so far as to state that this point is “an indispensable condition for the full reestablishment of economic and diplomatic relations” (Section 207) between the two countries. The second report of the Bush Plan for the annexation of Cuba contains 93 pages, organized in 7 chapters. In the making of this new version of the anti-Cuban plan, 100 staff members from 17 federal departments and agencies participated. Intense activity of Cuban proconsul Caleb McCarry The imperial proconsul to Cuba carried out a tight calendar in 2006. In January, he —along with the head of the Office of Cuban Affairs of the Department of State, Stephen McFarland— met with representatives of the anti-Cuban and terrorist Miami Mafia at the Florida International University (FIU). On that occasion, McCarry announced that in May the commission would present a “strategic plan” for providing specific support from the (US) government stating at the very beginning of a political transition on the island, and expressed that the fundamental part of the work of the commission is that the government is prepared to offer support to Cuba when the possibility of a change appears. At that time, McCarry reiterated the clear opposition of figures within the Bush Administration to any succession in Cuban leadership from within the revolutionary government, saying it is not possible to predict what will happen in the Cuban process, but to be part of the present regime and to think about democratic transition is not a way to advance in this race for freedom. In April, Caleb McCarry met with the secretary general of the Organization of American States (OAS), José Miguel Insulza and the ambassador of that organization to the United States —described as its ministry of Colonies, John Maisto— with the objective of analyzing the future policy toward Cuba, as well as possible actions that the OAS could undertake to force the so-called transition, or “regime change.” It was said that McCarry wanted to press hard and obtain support of the OAS for the application of the so-called Inter-American Democratic Charter against Cuba concerning supposed human rights violations. Nevertheless, the secretary general of the organization, knowing full well the limitations and resistance that would exist at that time to the OAS promising to act as an accomplice by supporting to an attack against Cuba, rejected the proposal using the argument that Cuba does not participate in the work of the OAS. May 24, four days after the date on which the publication of the second report of the Bush Plan for the Annexation of Cuba, which had been promised, Caleb McCarry participated in the creation of the Association of Nations Friendly to a Democratic Cuba, during a meeting held in Washington at the so-called Center for a Free Cuba. At the meeting the Congressional representatives of the anti-Cuban and Mafia terrorist of Miami, Lincoln and Mario Díaz Balart (R-FL) and an assistant of the equally anti-Cuba representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) were present. At the anti-Cuban meeting were also the ambassadors to Washington from Hungary, the Czech Republic, Lithuania and Slovakia and officials from the embassies of Poland and Slovenia, as were other representatives of organizations of the Miami Mafia terrorists. There were no surprises in the meeting. Participants responded attentively to the anti-Cuban call, representing governments of Central and Eastern Europe that obediently complied with and subjected themselves to the edicts of the Empire, which was trying to impose its world-wide hegemony. Most of them were already enthusiastic accomplices of the policy of hostility against Cuba that was, and is, being implemented Washington. Several of them even got to send their troops as mercenaries to the imperialistic predatory war against the Iraqi people. The interchange with the press, held July 10 at noon, dealt with the presentation of the second report by the Bush Plan for the Annexation of Cuba, was in the hands of Caleb McCarry, who assured that the document “defines the actions that must be undertaken now to develop the support plans for the democratic transition tomorrow.” At the end of September 2006, McCarry began a working tour of Europe. He began in Spain from September 27 to 28. There he met with officials of the Ministry of Spanish Foreign Affairs and with members of FAES Foundation, directed by the former Spanish Prime Minister, the fascist José María Aznar. During the visit, McCarry declared that the objective of the meetings was to “consult with other governments, to listen to their opinions and to explain our policy.” He added that “the democratic countries close to Cuba, such as the USA and Spain, can help to open the space to democracy in the Island.” On September 29, 2006 he traveled to Finland, where met with officials of the foreign ministry, professors and students of the University of Helsinki and journalists. McCarry declared that the next few months would witness a great change in Cuba and that the US and Europe would have to be prepared to work together to promote a “true democratic transition,” in conformity with the opportunities that appear. In December he visited the Dominican Republic, where he participated in several anti-Cuban activities that included interviews with television networks, talks and lectures. Caleb McCarry will be relegated to the same place in history that the Cuban people have sent all those who have assumed the coordination of anti-Cuban plans created by imperialist power circles in Washington with the complicity of the terrorist and anti-Cuban mafia. Meanwhile, we will be following his actions. OFAC is a gendarme for the implementation of policies of sanctions and restrictions against Cuba. As part of the toughening of policies of sanctions and restrictions against Cuba, the US government has ordered the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) to strengthen control over all economic, commercial and financial activities destined to or originated from Cuba. This office has unleashed a virtual hunt and imposed a policy of terror to guarantee the absolute pursuit of the Cuban assets. In 2006, it established new prohibitions and suppressed all exchanges with Cuba and travel by US citizens and institutions. As it is known, after the devastation of Hurricane Michelle in December 2001, the US Congress authorized the sell of agricultural products to our country under strict conditions. However, the purchase of these products has now become more difficult. In the second half of August, OFAC withheld payments by concept of cargo load to the US shipbuilding company San Juan Navigator, which imposed interruptions in the unloading in port or the exit of two ships with food for Cuba: San Juan Orcas V-5, with 27,000 metric tons of corn, whose cargo load was valued at $852,023 USD and the Grain Trader V-11, with a cargo of 25,000 metric tons of corn, valued at $613, 639.44 USD. On October 11, 2006, the Office of the Federal Public Prosecutor of the South District of Florida, Alexander Acosta, officially announced the creation of the “Working Group for the Application of Sanctions Against Cuba,” made up of representatives of OFAC, the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Immigration and Customs Control (ICE) and the Department of Commerce, as well as agents of the Coastguard Service and aerial and terrestrial units of Customs and Border Security (CBP). The main target of the group is to rigorously and aggressively investigate violations of blockade regulations and to prosecute violators. The creation of this group was one of the recommendations of the second reports of the Bush Plan for the Annexation of Cuba. On January 3, 2006, the Cuban business delegation attending the Cuba-US Energy Summit, held in Mexico D.F, was expelled from Maria Isabel Sheraton Hotel owned by US Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide. The management acted in compliance with instructions received from the US Treasury Department. The hotel’s management confiscated the Cuban delegation’s security deposit and sent it to OFAC, adding this to the sum of Cuban funds previously frozen by the US government. On February 6, Cuba’s Granma newspaper published an article titled “Miserliness and Hatred Against Cuba and Disdain for the Mexican Government Inundates Sheraton,” which served to denounce the expulsion of the Cuban delegation from a hotel in Mexico D.F. The extraterritorial action of the US government was questioned even by US private-sector representatives. William A. Reinsch, President of US National Foreign Trade Council, sent a letter to John Snow, Secretary of the Treasury, in which he said the sanctions weakened the cooperation between governments relative to security and economic issues, and harm the US’ image before the Mexican people. In that letter, Reinsch hoped that given the negative repercussions caused by the application of extraterritorial sanctions, OFAC would refrain from imposing such measures in the future. This incident stands as one of the most embarrassing examples of a third world country’s sovereignty being violated —in this case Mexico’s— in the implementation of extraterritorial regulations of the blockade against Cuba. In addition, this poses a threat to possible business relations between businesspeople from both countries in the energy field, where there exist ample benefits to cooperation. - Traveling to Cuba is considered a crime. OFAC performs three rigorous and shameful functions: it establishes new restrictions on trips to Cuba and toughens the already existing ones; it pressures and threatens people or institutions that have the intention of flying to Cuba; and it punishes those who take the risk of flying to Cuba, disregarding the deranged and tangled process that could allow one to obtain authorization, under strict restrictions. The year 2006 was characterized by the reinforcement of restrictions on travel to Cuba, increased prosecutions and the exacting of punishment. On January 27, OFAC audited travel agencies serving Cuba. OFAC spokesperson Molly Millerwise announced that the office would carry out about 25 similar audits every year to ensure that travel agencies follow the rules by the book to get them used to keeping restrictions currently in force and to strengthen OFAC regulations in compliance with the sanction program imposed on Cuba. As a result, some agencies had their licenses revoked. On March 29, 2006, OFAC once again started up their offensive with unexpected inspections and audits of Miami-based travel agencies and charter companies to detect supposed violations on religious licenses to travel to Cuba. Continuing with these measures, on April 28, 2006, OFAC officials met in Miami with travel agencies and charter company representatives providing travel services to Cuba to make clear the regulations they have to follow to keep valid their travel service and flight supplier licenses to Cuba, based on additional restrictions imposed in 2004. The El Nuevo Herald newspaper published statements made by OFAC Spokesperson Molly Millerwise, who, using a threatening tone, revealed that the Treasury Department has many officials in Miami who investigate illegal trips and money wires to Cuba. The anti-Cuban mafia’s petition also reported that in accordance with the documents issued by OFAC, 16 agencies, most of them based in the area of Miami, lost their authorization to sell trips to Cuba in March. So far that year, the number had increased to 26 agencies, 4 on account of flagrant violations of the established conditions in their licenses: Baby Envíos Travel, Fortuna Travel Services, Cubatur Express and La Estrella de Cuba. Furthermore, Mrs. Millerwise stated that six entities that sponsor religious trips to Cuba had their permissions revoked and that “the process is ongoing.” She said that any violations would result in warnings, fines or the definite suspension of licenses. The hunt continued and in June three other travel and remittance agencies (La Perla del Caribe, Transair Travel and Uno Remittance Inc.) were caught. As a result of the offensive, on November 3, the Treasury Department informed that during the 2006 fiscal year, OFAC fined 23 people for a total amount of $57,265 USD and 4 entities for a total of $208,000 USD for violating travel and business regulations with Cuba. These figures do not include the economic impact of the decision to suspend the license or close some travel agencies. Recent piracy cases protected by anti-Cuban policies: the theft of commercial trademarks. On July 28, 2006, one of the dirtiest actions in the U.S. economic war against Cuba took place contrary to the most basic principles of international law, when OFAC did not allow the Cubaexport Company to renew the register of the Havana Club trademark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. This left the door open for the theft and use of the brand name in the U.S., which occurred a few days later. On August 8, 2006, The Wall Street Journal and The Miami Herald reported that the Bacardi Ltd. Company had waited for that day to announce the relaunching of the Havana Club brand in the U.S. after the decision taken by OFAC and the US Patent and Trademark Office. The theft of the trademark had been accomplished in a joint operation between the U.S. authorities and the owners of Bacardi, a company completely at the service of U.S. anti-Cuban policy. In the current U.S. administration, threatening and offensive remarks against Cuba and its leaders occupy a privileged place. During the course of 2006, several senators and authorities insulted and threatened our country. What’s more, the amount of insults grew after declarations by President George W. Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, ex-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and other members of the executive. The hatred of the U.S. imperialists against the Cuban people is constant in declarations from Washington. - Declarations of President Bush and other members of the executive. On March 3, during a speech delivered by President Bush in the framework of a visit to India, he said that men and women from North Korea to Myanmar, Syria, Zimbabwe and Cuba long for their freedom. On May 12, 2006, Bush declared in Orlando, Florida, that he wouldn’t allow U.S. companies to drill near Cuba, arguing that the money would be used to support a government that oppresses its people's rights. On July 10, 2006 the White House issued President Bush’s official statement in which the second report of the so-called “Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba” and the “Commitment to the Cuban People” were approved. Bush reiterated that the report shows that the US government is taking an “active role” in trying to bring about change in Cuba instead of “simply waiting for this to happen.” At the same time the U.S. president urged “all friends and democratic allies” of the world to join his campaign in support of freedom for the Cuban people; a blatant call to internationalize the U.S. hostile policy, blockade and aggressions against the Cuban people. The statements from the superpower’s president made it clear that the United States had stepped up their aggressive actions to force “regime change” against the sovereign will of Cuba. This has been repeatedly denounced by the Cuban people. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has also commented on Cuba several times in 2006. In February, before the Foreign Relations Committee Chamber she said that they were trying to implement policies more effectively because the “Cuban regime is about to end” and “we want to be sure that this regime in particular, Fidel’s regime, won’t be able arise again". This is why we have tightened policies regarding travel to Cuba, among other areas.” On May 21, 2006, Rice told the press that the objective of the embargo is to prevent Fidel Castro’s dictatorship from using trade and business to finance and strengthen his regime and his control over the Cuban population. As a pretext for intensifying the blockade she added, that almost all economic activity in Cuba benefits Castro’s regime. - Aggressive Statements by Members of the US Congress The year 2006 was highlighted by statements full of hate and vengeance made by Cuban-American senators Mel Martinez (R-FL) and Bob Menendez (D-NJ), and representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) and Lincoln and Mario Díaz-Balart (R-FL). On February 8, the magazine Newsmax reported that Senator Mel Martínez (R-FL) sent a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and to National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley expressing what he described as deep disappointment for the omission in President Bush’s State of the Union Speech relative to the largest and longest surviving tyranny maintained in the world today: Cuba. In his letter, the senator of the anti-Cuban mafia added that Bush had many times spoken clearly about his hopes for freedom and democracy in Cuba, which —Hadley said— made the omission more incomprehensible. On March 27, the poorly-named Radio Martí broadcast the anti-Cuban statements of Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), who in a meeting with leaders of the anti-Cuban mafia in Miami said he would back the increase of broadcasts by Radio and T.V. Martí. On August 30, 2006 it was discovered that congressional member Lincoln Díaz-Balart (R-FL) stated to a Miami television station that he felt deep respect and affection for terrorists such as Santiago Alvarez, Osvaldo Mitat and their families, and that he and representatives Mario Díaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) were carrying out secret actins to free them. In a response to a journalist, Lincoln Díaz-Balart argued that those terrorists did not plant bombs in markets. When referring to the bombs placed in hotels and restaurants in Cuba by Posada Carriles, Alvarez and Mitat, Lincoln justified the murders of innocent civilians in those cases. On October 25, 2006, The Miami Herald published an article in which it reported the statements by congress member Mario Díaz-Balart (R-FL). The representative of the Miami terrorist mafia in the U.S. Congress reiterated his commitment to continued economic sanctions against Cuba and described the Cuban head of state as a terrorist only 90 miles away. Mafioso Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) didn’t lag behind in the competition of foolishness and fabrications by individuals and the representatives of the terrorist and anti-Cuban organizations in Miami and New Jersey in the U.S. Congress. At the end of 2006, a scandal erupted when declarations made by Ros-Lehtinen appeared in the British documentary “638 Ways to Kill Castro.” The video, which was broadcast over the Internet, showed Ros-Lehtinen saying she would applaud any initiative to murder Fidel Castro and/or any leader that oppresses their people. The congress member highlighted that she would see it as very good if Castro died of natural death, illness or at the hands of an assassin. She added that “I have always said it and I don’t fear to say it now (…) I have never called for anyone to murder him (…) but if somebody does, I wouldn’t cry.” On December 8, the Mafioso congressional member hurried to deny what she had said, alleging that her statements had been manipulated. Days later, on December 21, her press adviser Alex Cruz admitted that the representative had advocated the Commander-in-Chief’s murder. The congressperson did not want to respond directly to the questions from the press on this issue, while her spokesperson stated that if it is in the documentary, she said it. How could it be admitted that legislators of the most powerful country in the world openly encourage the murder of the President of another country? Does this leave any doubt about the true desires and the methods that the United States resorts to in its policies of hostility, blockade and aggression against Cuba? Efforts to isolate Cuba in international organizations In the eagerness of the United States government to discredit the work and prestige of Cuba in international organizations, numerous actions were executed to demonize and isolate Cuba in those forums. In 2006, American actions against Cuba were visible, both aimed at impeding its election to the Human Rights Council and strangling support for the resolution of the UN General Assembly requesting an end to the economic, commercial and financial blockade of United States against Cuba. On March 9, 2006, during a press conference at the State Department, the then U.S. Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, stated that the United States is seeking a strong and effective council, while Cuba wants a weak and inefficient council. During his address explaining the vote opposing the General Assembly resolution that decided upon the creation of the Council, John Bolton declared that the true test of the Council will be the quality of the membership and whether it acts effectively in facing up to cases of serious human rights abuses, like those in Sudan, Cuba, Iran, Zimbabwe, Belarus and Myanmar. On March 16, The Miami Herald reported statements made by anti-Cuban representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) about the vote in the UN General Assembly resolution that established the Human Rights Council. The Mafioso representative said that the resolution approved did not create barriers for the entry of human rights violators and added with irony that the initiative essentially requested that dictators like Fidel Castro review the state of human rights in China, Sudan, Venezuela or Iran and decide if they can be members of the Council. On March 31, 2006, Senator Bill Frist (R-TN) presented resolution S.R. 419 expressing the consternation of the senate —the same body that has not hesitated in exercising the crudest attempts to financially blackmail the United Nations— for the fact that, as he said, the new Human Rights Council is not able to appropriately reform the commission and prevents it from becoming an effective supervisor of human rights around the world. The text was presented as supposed evidence of the “failure” of the Human Rights Commission, given the fact that countries like Cuba were among its members. It noted that in the creation of the Council, there was a failure to prevent nations such as those from joining. On April 6, 2006, Department of State spokesman Sean McCormack, when referring to the decision of the U.S. government not to present its candidacy to the UN Human Rights Council, said the U.S. would work with its allies to urge the council to address the serious cases human rights abuses in countries like Iran, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Myanmar, Sudan and North Korea. On September 26, 2006, the US representative to the Human Rights Council in Geneva, Warren Tichenor, when referring to the report on human rights in Cuba presented by the Personal Representative of the High Commissioner, Christine Chanet, declared that Cuba was one of the most repressive regimes in the world, while at the same time opposing the part of the report referring to the impact of the US blockade. Last November, the United States pressured Australia into presenting an amendment to the resolution titled “The necessity to put an end to the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed by United States on Cuba.” This amendment was defeated by a vote of almost the two-thirds of the members of the General Assembly. The amendment sought to justify the genocidal policy of blockade used against the Cuban people based on supposed human rights concerns. The superpower failed in its objective to neutralize the impact of the resolution. There were 183 countries that supported its adoption. Once again, it was the government of the United States that was the one that was isolated in the application of its anti-Cuba policy. Ample funding to satisfy the appetites of salaried mercenaries at the service of the anti-Cuban policy of the United States. The government of the United States assures the channeling of ample financial support and materials to salaried mercenaries of its anti-Cuban policy. The funding in question, although it has a main source —the public and secret allocations of the U.S. budget for anti-Cuban activities— is channeled through the most diverse routes. In fact, most of the money dedicated to subversion in Cuba doesn’t make it to the Island; it stays in the hands of intermediary agents in Miami, Prague, Madrid and other centers from where Cuban counter-revolutionaries organizations operate. There are also a few other groups, though their members are for the most part non-Cuban, which don’t want to miss out on the allotment of the booty of such a juicy business. Among these latter can be highlighted a few supposed NGOs —with close ties and clear subordination to European governments and American special services— such as the Czech organization People in Need and France’s Reporters Without Borders. The favorite channels for financing the U.S. mercenaries in Cuba are via the counter-revolutionary organizations and terrorists in Miami. Although Washington knows that most of the money remains in the den of the anti-Cuban mafia, through this route they continue paying for the services of the most fervent defenders of its annexationist objectives against the Cuban nation. Many of the organizations and foundations of the counter-revolution in Miami owe their very existence to the dirty war against Cuba. The vice administrator of USAID for Latin America and the Caribbean, the anti-Cuban Adolfo Franco, said during a hearing of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on “Democracy in Latin America: Successes, Challenges and the Future,” held June 21, 2006, that the Cuba Program of the USAID worked closely with the coordinator of the Department of State for the Transition in Cuba and with the Bureau of Western Hemispheric Affairs to help strengthen independent civil society through increasing the flow of information on democracy and free enterprise toward, from and within Cuba. Franco recognized that USAID had granted more than $48 million (USD) to United States universities and NGOs to support “human rights activists,” given a voice to independent journalists, defended the rights of workers, strengthened independent NGOs and assisted with the plan of the Cuban people for transition to democracy. That money also serves to pay for the services of “activists” from several countries who at one time or another express their “solidarity” with the supposed cause of human rights in Cuba. Washington’s “freedoms” can always be had through money. Among the new measures recommended in the second report of the Bush Plan for the Annexation of Cuba is the creation of a “Cuba Fund for a Democratic Future,” with $80 million (USD) for the first two years, and another $20 million annually to promote subversive actions and propaganda campaigns. The money is to be administered by USAID and the Democracy and Human Rights Office of the Department of State. However, with so much money among so many Mafiosos and corrupt individuals, we know what happens. On November 15, 2006, the Government Accounting Office (GAO), published a report saying that the assistance of the U.S. government for democracy in Cuba requires better handling and supervision; the report revealed the waste of the millions of dollars in funds allocated by Washington to promote subversion in Cuba. Despite the fact that the GAO only partially investigated 10 of the 36 programs that have received funds from USAID, it discovered dubious expenses and significant weaknesses in control. The report pointed out that between 1996 and 2005, a total of $73.5 million (USD) was dedicated to this objective. On December 14, 2006, Granma newspaper published an editorial titled “The Dance of the Millions for Counterrevolution in Cuba” based on the findings of the report by the Government Accounting Office (GAO). It denounced the fact that, according to US sources themselves, more than half of the funding for counter-revolution never made it to Cuba. Part of the money was used to buy such articles as videogames, canned crab meat, bicycles, designer coats and chocolates, and DVD players – reflecting only a small portion of the enormous dividends collected in the anti-Cuban industry of the mafia based in Miami. Anti-Cuban funding also flowed across the Atlantic In Europe there are individuals and entities that sell their services for the money of the anti-Cuban program of the United States. On December 23, The Gainsville Sun newspaper reported that the U.S. government had for years sent millions of dollars to groups that work in Europe to, what it called, “promote democracy in Cuba”. It added that through the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), more than $200,000 (USD) had been given to the group People in Need in the Czech Republic, $33,000 (USD) to the groups People in Danger and Foundation Pontis of Slovakia and $771,000 (USD) to the Spanish magazine Encuentro de la Cultura Cubana. It added that over the last 20 years, NED dedicated nearly $14 million (USD) to programs for democracy in Cuba. The reinforcement of radio-electronic and media aggression against the Cuban Revolution The radio and television transmissions that the United States broadcast from its territory against Cuba infringe on international norms related to this matter. U.S. authorities have also repeatedly ignored requests by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) to cease interfering with Cuban television services. The use of sophisticated technology and army aircraft for these ends has been directed to increase the effectiveness and reach of the radio-electronic and media war against Cuba. Among the measures included in the second report of the Bush Plan for the Annexation of Cuba that they were adopted for immediate application is the financing of broadcasts of the ill-named TV Marti via satellite, and the expansion of transmissions toward Cuba from third countries. On June 29, 2006, the U.S. House of Representatives approved —by 393 votes in favor and 23 against— HR.5672 bill for the budgets for science and the departments of State, Justice and Commerce for 2007. This bill allocated $36.1 million (USD) pursuant to a proposal by anti-Cuban congress member Lincoln Díaz-Balart (R-FL) for the ill-named Radio and T.V. Martí. This funding was to be used particularly for what it termed the purchase, rental, construction and improvement of facilities for transmissions to Cuba, as well as for the purchase, use and installation of necessary equipment, including an airplane. On August 7, 2006, El Nuevo Herald newspaper reported that the Office of Cuban Broadcasting (OCB) announced that on August 5, daily transmissions of TV Martí began toward Cuba from an airplane. OCB Director Pedro Roig said in an official statement that the transmission was the execution of President George W. Bush’s commitment to break the information blockade of the Cuban dictatorship against the people of the island. The plan contemplates broadcasting for five hours on Saturdays and Sundays and four hours from Monday to Friday. The OCB allocated $10 million in additional funding above the initial budget of $26 million to support the program. On August 8, the head of OCB of the Department of State, Alberto Mascaró, confirmed that on August 5 OCB inaugurated a new G-1 aircraft that would increase the number of television broadcasts. He added that reports from people in Havana and Matanzas were that people were seeing the broadcasts. On August 9, The Tampa Tribune reported statements by the head of OCB of the Department of State on broadcasts of the ill-named Radio and TV Martí. Mascaró affirmed that special receivers were not needed to receive the signal from the station. According to him, the signal was in the air and therefore all one needed was a television. He added that the new airplane was only being used for transmissions of TV Martí, but a new generation of airplanes will possibly be used for FM broadcasts of Radio Martí. On October 24, 2006 the first official flight was made by the new airplane transmitting the subversive signal of TV Martí. The airplane in question is a twin-engine craft operated by the company Phoenix Air. With its registration number N820CB, it has been baptized as “Air Martí” and will operate from Cayo Hueso (FL) from Monday to Saturday from 6:00 to 11:00 p.m. On December 19, the Nuevo Herald newspaper reported that the Office of Cuban Broadcasting (OCB) rented time for six months from two radio stations in Miami at a cost of $ 377,500 (USD) to transmit Radio and TV Martí. The radio stations are television stations WPMF-38, property of TVC Broadcasting, that rebroadcast programming from Aztec America, and Radio Mambí WAQI 710AM, of the Univision network. According to the media, broadcasts of WPMF-38 began December 18 while those of Radio Mambí have not still begun. United States deepens the manipulation of the issue of migration between the two countries. The year 2006 reflected a very dangerous tendency in the conduct of United States authorities looking to interrupt the application of effective migratory agreements. The Miami press and representatives of the anti-Cuban mafia in Washington launched a clear offensive demanding the termination of the so-called “wet feet, dry feet” policy. All this commotion had as a pretext an incident in which 15 illegal immigrants were intercepted by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) on an old breakwater of the Seven Mile Bridge, currently in disuse, and returned them to Cuba at the request of the USCG of Miami. The Coast Guard authorities alleged that the bridge was not part of United States territory. In January 2006, anti-Cuban representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Lincoln Díaz-Balart and Mario Díaz-Balart (R-FL) sent a letter to the White House and to the departments of State and Homeland Security demanding “the immediate revision of immigration policy toward Cuba.” Among their recommendations they highlighted: the revision of the way in which interviews are conducted with Cubans intercepted at high sea, to determine whether they have “believable fear of being persecuted;” to allow legal counsel for those detained on USCG cutters; to transfer Cubans intercepted to the Guantánamo naval base (GNB), in case it is impossible to send legal advisors to the ships so as to guarantee them the same procedural rights as those who request asylum on the mainland; to dedicate a percentage of the quota of 20,000 visas for refugees in the 2006 fiscal year to Cubans who are not relocated to third countries after a stay of 120 days at the GNB; and to request a report from U.S. Interests Section (USIS) on those repatriated and the state of their applications for immigrant visas. In an expedited manner, on January 20, 2006, the assistant secretary of the Department of State for Legislative Affairs, Jeffrey T. Bergner, sent a response letter to anti-Cuban congressional representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Mario and Lincoln Díaz-Balart in which he pointed out that “it would please us to meet with you to discuss the migratory agreements and to facilitate exchanges with other agencies related with this important issue.” He also expressed thanks for the interest of the congressional members on the issue of U.S.-Cuba migration and their “commitment to policies that encourage the democratic aspirations of the Cuban people.” On that same day, January 20, The Miami Herald reported that the so-call Movimiento Democracia (Democracy Movement) had reiterated its demands to the White House that migratory policies be revised, insisting, among other aspects, that there be supervision of those detained at high seas and an investigation be made into the possible link between officials of the government of Cuba with human trafficking operations. On February 7, 2006, The Miami Herald reported statements by Florida senators Mel Martínez (R) and Bill Nelson (D) on the so-called “wet feet, dry feet” policy and migratory agreements with Cuba. Mel Martínez stated, “I think it was a bad agreement (...), the migratory agreements with Cuba (...) were not good for the U.S.” He added that their application had been one-sided, adding that the U.S. had adhered to the strict letter of the law, including, what he called, the “absurd notion” shown a few days earlier of what constitutes American soil and what did not. For his part, Nelson mentioned that the problem was not the policy in itself, but the way in which the Bush administration applied it, affirming that the Democrats support the policy if it is applied without heightened discrimination and was the stone heart of the administration. Nelson added that the Clinton administration began the policies to protect the borders, to keep from having waves of immigrants suddenly flooding the U.S. coasts. He concluded by saying that the U.S. should put the policy in context. On February 22, 2006, the television program CBS News reproduced statements by Senator John McCain (R-AZ) saying it was time to review migratory policy on Cuba. On February 28, a federal judge of the Southern Florida District, Federico Moreno, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in the case of the 15 illegal immigrants who were repatriated after having made it to the Seven Mile Bridge. The judge ruled that the bridge was North American territory and he ordered the government to do everything possible to correct the error which ended in repatriation. On March 8, 2006, a meeting took place at the White House to analyze the “wet feet, dry feet” policy, which was attended by anti-Cuban congressional members Mario and Lincoln Díaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen along with the supposed religious leaders Monsignor Agustín Román and Reverend Martin Añorga. Also present were Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Jackson; Assistant Secretary of State for Hemispheric Affairs Thomas Shannon; Latin America Director of the National Security Council Dan Fisk; and the head of the Immigration Bureau, Emilio González. The latter was named as the administration liaison on this issue with the congressional representatives and the Cuban-American community. Concerning the meeting, White House spokesperson Maria Tamburri said it was a serious dialogue, but that it didn’t mean an indication of a change in policy in relation to Cuban immigrants or those from another country. During a press conference in Texas on August 8, 2006, the White House spokesperson while commenting on possible changes to immigration policy regarding Cuba confirmed the existence of a project and declared that there were no foreseen changes. In addition, the spokesperson reiterated that the Department of Homeland Security, the State Department and other government agencies were closely monitoring and observing the current situation in Cuba and remarked that if there were a change, a dramatic change, in the political situation in Cuba, there could be changes in U.S. policy. On August 11, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Bureau of Immigration and Citizenship Services announced new immigration measures involving Cuba. The DHS expressed in a communiqué their commitment to working closely with Congress to create legislation that would increase criminal and civil sanctions against human smuggling by sea. The new announced measures were: 1) to create a new category of “Accumulated Family Reunification Visas” that excludes Cubans who are intercepted trying to illegally enter the U.S.; 2) to create an information system for U.S. residents on family members who are intercepted at sea; 3) to encourage immigration to the U.S. of Cuban medical personnel who are working or studying under the Cuban government in third countries; 4) to prohibit the entry into the U.S. of members of the Cuban government who “have committed human rights abuses” or have occupied important positions. These new measures, especially those related to Cuban medical personnel studying or working in third countries constitute an aggression against the dignity of our health professionals and seek to obstruct health care assistance programs developed by Cuba in several Third World countries. In 2006, on 59 occasions groups of illegal immigrants were returned to Puerto Cabañas, 21 (26 percent) fewer than in 2005. In 2006, the US Coast Guard Service returned 2,045 illegal immigrants to Puerto Cabanas, which, together with the 57 who were returned by the Puerta Terreste (Land port) at the Guantánamo Navy Base, makes for a total of 2 102. Therefore, in 2006, 611 (23 percent) fewer illegal immigrants were returned than in the previous year. Nevertheless, according to official Coastguard Services data, in 2006 the US Coastguard intercepted 2,293 Cubans, which means 191 (8 percent) of the illegal immigrants were not returned. This represents a slight decrease in relation to 2005, when 14 percent of the intercepted illegal immigrants were not returned. The 8 percent of illegal Cuban immigrants that were not returned constitutes a violation of the Immigration Agreements of May 1995 that establish that all those who are intercepted at high seas must be returned to Cuba. The United States has unfairly included Cuba in their “black list” in every one of the unilateral reports issued by the State Department. On March 1, 2006, the State Department published a report on the International Narcotics Control Strategy for 2005. The section of the document that reported on the control of drugs and chemicals indicated that “the increase in trade with Venezuela” is one of the “principal factors that exposes Cuba to drug trafficking.” The report adds that the effectiveness of drug prevention and confiscation in Cuba is a result of tyrannical and coercive methods that facilitates the regime’s infiltration of production and trafficking networks. It goes on to assert that the Cuban government sustains relations with its U.S. counterpart for political reasons, including its interest to project a false image of legitimacy and normalization with the U.S. Continuing the barrage of lies against Cuban authorities the report says with this objective, [the Cuban government] announced its interest to establish bilateral agreements with the U.S. government to combat drug trafficking, terrorism and human trafficking, and further adds that these agreements will not be possible until the Cuban regime abandons its totalitarian nature and its role as a state sponsor of terrorism. On April 5, 2006, the State Department published the report “Supporting Human Rights and Democracy: The U.S. Record 2005 – 2006.” In the chapter on Cuba, the report highlights the role of the US Interests Section in the support of internal subversion. It reiterates that the Cuban government violated all the fundamental Human Rights of its citizens, including the right to change government. It cynically indicates that the priorities of the U.S. government in Cuba consist in encouraging a peaceful and real transition towards democracy and to raise international awareness about the severe Human Rights crisis on the island. On April 28, 2005, the State Department published the annual report entitled “Country Reports on Terrorism 2005,” which mentions six countries as sponsors of terrorism: Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria. The documents reports, “Libya and Sudan continued to take significant steps to cooperate in the global war on terrorism,” while “Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Syria, however, continued to maintain their ties to terrorist groups.” On May 3, 2006, the Federal Commission on International Religious Freedoms released their Annual Report, once again with a section dedicated to Cuba, to reiterate false accusations on supposed policies, actions and legal regulations supposedly applied by the Cuban government to limit religious freedom in the country. The document, which recommends that the US government maintain Cuba on the list of countries “under observation,” is the basis from which the annual report of the State Department on Religious Freedoms is made. On June 5, 2006, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice presented the Sixth Annual Trafficking in Persons Report. For the fourth year in a row, Cuba was placed at Level 3, the worst. Twelve countries were classified in this category for supposedly not fulfilling minimum standards and not making significant efforts to combat and eliminate human trafficking. During a press conference, John Miller, director of the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons declared that if Cuba would take certain measures they could be dropped down from Level 3, and added that the tourist industry in Cuba, operated by the government or government affiliates, promotes child prostitution, which is considered human trafficking under U.S. Laws, and according to UN Protocol, and that this is done in a very open way. On September 5, 2006, the White House published the National Strategy for Combating Terrorism 2006, in which Cuba is mentioned in the section entitled “Strategy for Winning the War on Terror.” In this section the report mentions that State sponsors are a critical resource for our terrorist enemies, often providing funds, weapons, training, safe passage, and sanctuary. The document adds that some of these countries have developed or have the capability to develop WMD and other destabilizing technologies that could fall into the hands of terrorists. It continues, “The United States currently designates five state sponsors of terrorism: Iran, Syria, Sudan, North Korea and Cuba.” As can be observed, Cuba has been included on each of the international lists for bad conduct prepared by the State Department and other US federal agencies. They are not bothered by the fact that the inclusion of Cuba discredits the credibility of the document itself nor about the embarrassing lie that Washington has to resort to carry out its shameful purpose. When it comes to its dirty, imperialist war against Cuba, anything is fair play for the superpower. Not even baseball escapes the United States’ war against Cuba. The Olympic and World Champion Cuban baseball team was invited to participate in the World Baseball Classic held in March 2006 in several countries, including Puerto Rico and the United States. Cuba has won the right to take part in any world baseball competition, taking into account the quality of its players and the fact that it has won all the existing amateur titles. Nevertheless, responding to pressure from representatives of the Cuban counterrevolution in the US Congress and other rightwing power circles, US authorities initially decided to deny Cuba the possibility of participating in the event. Fortunately, by January 2006, US authorities were forced to give in and allow the Cubans to participate. This was the result of the insistence of the organizers, including those in the headquarters in Puerto Rico; the efforts undertaken by various legislators and other well-intentioned people in the United States; and above all, because of the announcement made by Cuba that it would donate all earnings made as a result of their participation in the event to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. This denied the US authorities the ability to use their greatest pretext, the blockade policy. And so, on January 19, the Treasury Department granted the “World Baseball Classic, Inc." organization the license to sign a contract with the Cuban Amateur Baseball Federation to participate in the event, specifying that it would not receive any direct or indirect revenue or monetary award from the Classic. It was specified that this license did not mean that the US government would authorize the visas to the Cubans to travel to the United States with the objective to develop activities related with the contract. Responding to the affirmative for the Cuban participation, on January 23, 2006, Representative Lincoln Díaz-Balart (R-FL) said that even though they would be monitored, he hoped some of the players “would take advantage of the opportunity.” He added that, in addition to supporting those who might seek political asylum, he was going to keep a close watch on the State Department so that they would not issue visas to any members of the Cuban security. In the games that were held in Puerto Rico and the United States, the Cuban baseball players were subjected to harassment and hostilities from the anti-Cuban, terrorist mafia. They also received the respect of the overwhelming majority of the public that attended the games. The World Baseball Classic was held between March 3 and 20. The Cuban team, with a world class demonstration, competing with a good fighting spirit and love for their uniform and their people, finished in second place. Along the way, millions of dollars and the frustrated attempts to buy Cuban baseball players were left at the wayside as were the hopes of those who wished to see the Cuban team fail. Our country provided another lesson of modesty, patriotism and the nobility of ideals in the face of the arrogance of power. The year 2006 also saw a series of promotions and appointments of individuals from the anti-Cuban mafia to key positions in both the US government and Congress. On January 4, Cuban-American Emilio González was sworn in as the new director of the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration, a position equal to the rank of sub-secretary in the Department of Homeland Security. On March 8, 2006, during a meeting at the White House to discuss the “dry feet-wet feet” immigration policy, Emilio González was named liaison officer between the Bush Administration and the Cuban-American community and members of Congress. On September 1, 2006, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff announced President Bush’s intention to name Cuban-American Marta Brito Pérez as head of Human Resources of this department. Other renowned individuals from the anti-Cuban mafia also climbed the ladder in their respective careers in the Legislature or within their parties. On November 13, 2006, President Bush named Cuban-American Senator Mel Martínez (R-FL) as president of the National Republican Committee. The appointment came following midterm elections, in which the republicans lost some of the Hispanic vote. Martínez became the first Hispanic to head one of the two major political parties in the United States, which eventually could boost the pull of the anti-Cuban faction within the Republican Party. On December 10, 2006, the Republican Conference elected Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) as minority leader of the Senate International Relations Committee for the 110th Congress. At the state level, on November 21, 2006, Representative Marco Rubio was elected Speaker of the House of Representatives of the State of Florida. As a result, he become the first Cuban-American to hold this position in Florida. These events have enabled the anti-Cuban mafia to solidify their institutional position in relation to opposing any attempt at relaxing the policy of blockade and hostility against the Cuban people and any initiative that may facilitate normalization of the almost non-existent relations between Cuba and the United States.
Washington is worried about the awakening of forces of unity and integration in Latin America. In 2006, several governments have emerged and consolidated in Latin America that are committed to regional integration and unity and are determined to confront the scourges that have resulted from the neoliberal recipe. The wave of changes that this part of the continent is living has made Washington especially nervous. In this context, the individuals in control of imperial power have made offensive remarks aimed at blaming Cuba for these changes that have been to the detriment of the United States’ hegemonic interests. On February 2, when asked at the National Press Club about the political trends in South America, the then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said that the U.S. had seen the majority of these countries, with the exception of Cuba, move towards democracy. Rumsfeld, one of the main person’s responsible for the war crimes committed by U.S. military forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, added that Chávez was legally elected, just as Adolf Hitler was and that he then consolidated his power and is now working with Fidel Castro and Mr. Morales and others. He then commented that this situation “worried” him. On March 8, in the “U.S. Policy Towards Iran” hearing, held by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives, John C. Hulsman, a member of the Heritage Foundation and Michael A. Ledeen, from the American Enterprise Institute, both made interesting statements. Hulsman compared the current situation between the U.S. and Iran to the 1962 Missile Crisis; while Ledeen declared that Iranian nuclear weapons “could be launched from the territories of his new strategic allies: Castro, Chávez and Morales.” On March 30, 2006, during a hearing on drug trafficking held by the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs, Representative Dan Burton (R-IN), the president of the committee, spoke about the debates currently taking place in Congress on the issue of immigration. He said that if things get out of control due to Chávez, Morales, Castro or Daniel Ortega, the U.S. will have a serious problem. The co-sponsor of the Helms-Burton Law continued with his apocalyptic warnings saying that wars that could occur that would be very bad and could mirror what the U.S. is dealing with in the Middle East. To confront these challenges to U.S. hegemony in the region, Burton proposed to "give our friends the necessary means to fight the problem now, without waiting". Who are these friends? Counterrevolutionary individuals and organizations, terrorists, those who take part in coups and fascists like the anti-Cuban mafia or the forces that held power for more than a decade thanks to the bloody military dictatorships in Latin America. Does Cuba constitute a threat to the United States? The reality indicates exactly the opposite. All the efforts undertaken to deem Cuba a threat to U.S. security are undermined by the transparency and objectivity with which our country has refuted each of the declarations to this effect. Irrefutable facts, proofs and testimonies have invalidated each lie. Nevertheless, the efforts of those who attempt to fabricate a pretext with which to escalate the policy of hostility, blockade and aggressions against Cuba continues. The most aggressive amongst this faction are the terrorist and anti-Cuban mafia of Miami who today have enlisted into their ranks congresspersons, top-level representatives in the executive and allies of the intelligence community. In 2006, the State Department once again included Cuba on its list of countries that sponsor terrorism. In the section on Cuba, it states that our country continues to actively oppose the U.S.-led coalition; has publicly criticized several U.S. policies and actions; maintains close ties to other states that sponsor terrorism, such as Iran and North Korea; has received members from ETA, the FARC and the ELN; makes substantial investments in biotechnology although there is disagreement within the United States whether there are biological weapons included in the so-called Cuban offensive program; and Cuba does not participate in any of the international and regional anti-terrorism efforts, among other accusations. On August 4, 2006, U.S. and international media outlets reported that the State Department levied sanctions against seven foreign entities including the Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CIGB) for providing materials to Iran that could be used to develop weapons of mass destruction. The measure, initially imposed for a period of two years, came into effect on July 28 and was adopted by virtue of the “Iran Non-Proliferation Act” of 2000. Several honorable voices arouse to counteract these fallacies and manipulations. On May 28, the executive president of the TBS International Limited shipping company, Joseph Royce, sent a letter to Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) questioning the continuing of the blockade and U.S. arguments that Cuba represents a military threat to the U.S. or possesses weapons of mass destruction. U.S. officials themselves are left without arguments when unscrupulous members of the anti-Cuban mafia try to portray our country as a supposed threat to the United States. A panel discussion on Terrorism in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was held on June 14, where Special Coordinator for Counterterrorism Henry Crumpton, among others, responded to allegations made by anti-Cuban Senator Mel Martínez (R-FL). Martínez said that he was “worried about the Cuban biological research program being disproportionate to the size of Cuba and its level of development and about Cuban cooperation with Iran in the area of biotechnology.” Crumpton responded that he did not have a good answer and that he would investigate the issue and contact Martínez. He added that he had not seen any indications that the Cubans were trying to develop biological weapons. No violent act against the United States has ever been planned, organized, financed or started in Cuba. The opposite can not be said. According to the El Nuevo Herald, on February 17, 2006, counterrevolutionary organizations such as the Movimiento de Recuperación Revolucionaria (MRR), Congreso Nacional Cubano, Comandos F-4, Comando Nazario Sargén, Fundación Caribe, Junta Militar, Municipio Bayamo and Cubanos Combatientes No Afiliados, all of which promote armed struggle against Cuba, announced “the creation of a committee to support Insurrection in Cuba.” On April 14, press outlets reported the discovering of more than 1 571 machine guns, grenades and rifles —the largest arms cache ever captured in U.S. history, according to federal officials— in the house of Cuban-American Robert Ferro, in California. On April 20, 2006, the Los Angeles Times referred to declarations made by Ferro to federal officials acknowledging that he was a member of the Alpha 66 terrorist organization that, according to Ferro, “paid for the weapons.” The Los Angeles Times reported that in an April 27 interview Ferro stated that some of the arms that were found in his house had been secretly supplied to him by the U.S. government with the idea of trying to overthrow Cuban President Fidel Castro. |