Cuba

On the death of Fidel Castro my thoughts today turned immediately to Huber Matos, who sadly did not live to see this day. Matos was a true hero of the Cuban Revolution--and was therefore imprisoned by Fidel Castro for twenty years. Such a sentence was the true measure of the cruelty and vindictiveness of Fidel Castro--and of his fear of liberty for the Cuban people.  For it was when Matos showed his true goal as a revolutionary--the freedom of the Cuban people--that Fidel Castro had him arrested and jailed. Matos emerged from prison in 1979 and joined his family in Costa Rica, and then soon moved to the United States--where he lived until his death in 2014 at age 95. He founded and for nearly two decades led Cuba Independiente y Democratico, an organization that worked for freedom for the Cuban people. Today, I just wish he could have lived to 97. The Obama statement about Castro’s death refrained, I am happy to say, from outright praise of the dictator. It has careful phrases like "we offer condolences to Fidel Castro’s family, and our thoughts and prayers are with the Cuban people"--suggesting that the Cuban people are thinking but not mourning. Obama also said "History will record and judge the enormous impact of this singular figure on the people and world around him." True enough, precisely as one could say of Stalin or a whole bevy of Latin American dictators--though few of them as cruel as Fidel Castro. Compare this to the wretched statement by Justin Trudeau on behalf of Canada. Here is part: “It is with deep sorrow that I learned today of the death of Cuba’s longest serving President....While a controversial figure, both Mr. Castro’s supporters and detractors recognized his tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people who had a deep and lasting affection for ’el Comandante’....It was also a real honour to meet his three sons and his brother President Raúl Castro during my recent visit to Cuba.On behalf of all Canadians, Sophie and I offer our deepest condolences to the family, friends and many, many supporters of Mr. Castro. We join the people of Cuba today in mourning the loss of this remarkable leader.” Most heads of state are offering statements like this, and each and every one is a disgrace and a moral outrage. Deep sorrow for the passing of a vicious dictator who built Cuba’s own political prisons? A real honor to meet Raul Castro, the current ruler who by the way testified against Huber Matos at his trial and who stands for nothing but continuation of the communist dictatorship? Joining the "people of Cuba" in mourning--including those who are weekly beaten and jailed for seeking freedom, those punished for trying to exercise freedom of speech or press, or form a free trade union, or call for a free election? This is either pure hypocrisy, or it is shameful ignorance. History will indeed judge Fidel Castro, and it will judge him as a cruel dictator who wrecked the lives of Cubans who sought freedom, and who held his nation back from liberty for decade after decade. And some day, the Castro statues will be replaced by statues of men like Huber Matos. When? When Cuba is free.

Moving fast in his waning months, President Obama concluded he had not done enough to overturn U.S. policy toward Cuba and ensure that his new policies will survive. So he has issued a new "Presidential Policy Directive" that goes even further. Two things are striking about it. First, what the United States gets in return from the Castro regime is exactly and precisely nothing. This is not a bargained-for exchange; Castro makes no promises, allows no one to get out of prison, does not even make a vague allusion to reform. Nothing. This is because Cuba policy is, for the President, less an exercise in statesmanship than the true product of ideological politics. This policy is a remedy, a medicine, an apology, to make up for what he sees as decades of American sin toward Cuba. Of course, in Mr. Obama’s imagination "Cuba" means "Castro;" the Cuban people are really not an actor here. The benefits of all the commerce that will now grow go directly to the regime. For example, the hotels that Mr. Obama wishes to fill with American tourists are owned by the Cuban military. No matter, it seems. One can see glimpses of all this in the actual text of the Directive. For example, take these lines: "we are not seeking to impose regime change on Cuba; we are, instead, promoting values that we support around the world while respecting that it is up to the Cuban people to make their own choices about their future." Later in the text we see this again: "We will not pursue regime change in Cuba. We will continue to make clear that the United States cannot impose a different model on Cuba because the future of Cuba is up to the Cuban people." This is blindness, because the real problem facing the Cuban people is precisely that the future of Cuba is NOT up to them, but is under the control of a tyrannical communist regime. They are not permitted "to make their own choices about their future," and when they try they are beaten and jailed. Mr. Obama’s failure to recognize and admit this is at the heart of the moral abdication that is his Cuba policy. And it is at the heart of his administration’s broader failures in human rights policy: when he sees "Iran," he sees the regime, not the people, so he remains silent in June 2009 when they rise up in the Green Revolution. In truth the people of Iran were getting in the way of his Iran policy, so they had to be ignored. This is the precise phenomenon we see as well in Cuba. In fact the Cuban people are suffering from a human rights crackdown since the signing of the first agreement with the regime. (See this report, or this, for example.) American newspapers have reported this very widely, and one might have expected Mr. Obama to hold back on further concessions until the crackdown was lifted. One might, that is, if one had not been paying attention: for Mr. Obama, this is another "legacy item," and it has nothing to do with the actual, real-world human rights situation in Cuba. Human rights and democracy activists there are on their own. The second striking aspect of the Obama Cuba policy is found in these lines in the Directive:   The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) will support broader United States Government efforts to normalize relations with Cuba, with Intelligence Community elements working to find opportunities for engagement on areas of common interest through which we could exchange information on mutual threats with Cuban counterparts.   This is nothing short of amazing. The Miami Herald has correctly reported that "Since Fidel Castro seized power in January 1959, and over the next five decades, Havana built one of the world’s most active intelligence services — one that dispatched spies and agents to penetrate the highest levels of the American government and some of the leading Cuban exile organizations." The Cuban regime is an enemy of the United States and an ally of Russian intelligence. Now Mr. Obama is ordering DNI to cooperate with the Cubans, which can only have them licking their chops. Once again, ideology takes precedence over all else--in this case including national security. To force the U.S. intelligence community into cooperation with Cuban intelligence is insult and injury in equal measure. Here is a part of an article about Cuban intelligence from The National Interest in 2013:   According to the long-standing PCC [Partido Comunista de Cuba] narrative, the United States is the principal threat to the revolution, and so U.S.-related intelligence collection is likely to remain a Cuban imperative....Intelligence supports other Cuban official interests. U.S. intelligence specialists have long assumed that Cuba provides other countries in the anti-U.S. firmament—such as Iran, China, and North Korea—with information, including commercial and technical data, collected by its U.S.-based spies. No country (including the United States) shares intelligence for nothing. “Intelligence liaison,” as it is known, is a transactional relationship, and the Cubans can reasonably expect to receive information, money and commodities in return. Cuba will probably try to expand its market for intelligence about the United States.   The new Presidential Directive, ordering DNI to cooperate with the Cuban intelligence services, will help this along. Mr. Obama has sided with the regime against the Cuban people, and when the regime has cracked down he has remained silent. He has pushed democracy in Cuba further away, and refused to use American leverage to stop the abuse of dissidents. He is enriching and strengthening the regime and lengthening the tyranny under which Cubans live. This is the true Obama legacy in Cuba.  

Two almost simultaneous events in recent days have shed even more light on the Obama administration’s treatment of America’s enemies. In Cuba, a Marxist, pro-Russian, anti-American tyranny, the administration pressed hard to abandon decades of policy in exchange for nothing. Human rights conditions there are awful, but the United States did not bargain to end the embargo in exchange for improvements. And since Obama’s announcement of a new policy, which was a simple free gift to the Castros, human rights conditions have deteriorated further. The most recent event was the first commercial flight to Cuba in decades, from Fort Lauderdale to Santa Clara. Santa Clara is the residence of Guillermo Farinas. Who is he, and why does he matter? He is one of Cuba’s bravest human rights advocates, a recipient of the Sakharov Prize from the European Parliament in 2010. The citation says among other things this:   A Cuban doctor of psychology, independent journalist and political dissident, Guillermo Fariñas has over the years conducted 23 hunger strikes with the aim of achieving peaceful political change and freedom of expression in Cuba....For his activism, Fariñas has in recent years been threatened with death and confinement in a psychiatric hospital, beaten and hospitalised, and repeatedly arrested and detained, including at the funeral of Oswaldo Payá, another Sakharov Prize laureate and Cuban dissident.   Farinas is in the 48th day of hunger strike right now and was hospitalized on September 5. I write of all this because last week when that Jet Blue flight landed, the Obama administration celebrated it-- but has not said one word about Farinas nor has any American diplomat sought to visit him. (And by the way, that flight was chock full of journalists, as the web site Capitol Hill Cubans points out, and not a single one of them or of the foreign correspondents from Havana who went to Santa Clara sought to visit and speak with him. They were too busy celebrating, it seems. Capitol Hill Cubans quotes Martin Luther King: "in the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.") Meanwhile, half a world away the Iranian Navy is making a laughingstock of the U.S. Navy, taunting it with small boat actions that endanger our ships, get within about 100 yards of them, and have forced them to take evasive action to avoid collisions. Reuters reported that   A U.S. Navy coastal patrol ship changed course after a fast-attack craft from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps came within 100 yards (91 meters) of it in the central Gulf on Sunday, U.S. Defense Department officials said on Tuesday. It was at least the fourth such incident in less than a month. U.S. officials are concerned that these actions by Iran could lead to mistakes.   One U.S. Navy official said “This type of incident would have led NAVCENT to recommend that the State Department deliver a diplomatic message of protest if this interaction had been with a country with which the United States had an official diplomatic relationship.” Wrong: the time for a "diplomatic message of protest" is long gone. Here’s an August 25 report from The New York Times:   Iranian naval boats made dangerous maneuvers around United States warships in the Persian Gulf area on at least four occasions this week, Pentagon officials said Thursday, including one episode in which the Americans fired warning shots from a 50-caliber deck gun to prevent a collision.   It was unclear whether the confrontations — one near the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday and three in the northern Persian Gulf on Wednesday — were deliberate efforts to send a hostile message about American naval activity.... The Iranians came within about 300 yards of the Nitze before veering off, Commander Raines said. Unsure of their intentions, the Nitze changed course several times to try to keep a safe distance from offshore oil rigs in the area. “We assessed the interaction as unsafe and unprofessional due to the Iranian vessels’ not abiding by international law and internationally recognized maritime rules of the road, as well as their high rate of closure of Nitze and disregard of multiple warnings by the ship’s whistle and flares,” he said.   And of course all these incidents this summer follow the January capture of ten American sailors. But the Times is dead wrong: it is crystal clear that these confrontations were deliberate efforts to send a hostile message. It is crystal clear that Iran is showing the world, as it did in January with the capture, that the United States no longer runs the Gulf and is in fact afraid of Iran. What has been the American response? What has the White House decided? To do nothing, and to tell the Navy to bob and weave and duck. The administration remains committed to its nuclear deal above all, and is willing to allow these dangerous and humiliating maneuvers against the Navy without reply. It is engaged in covering up Iran’s violations of the nuclear deal, denying them, and allowing secret exemptions. Meanwhile Iran increases its presence and activity in Iraq and Syria and uses the nuclear deal to build its economy. It would be easy to show the Cuban regime, and the Cuban people, that we care more about freedom than Jet Blue; all that was required was a visit to Guillermo Farinas. Still, the administration won’t do it, refusing to undermine its message that Cuba is changing and is our new friend. It is not so easy to show the world that we are not cowed by Iran and that our Navy will not be abused by the Iranian Navy; that will actually require sinking an Iranian vessel. But here again, the administration will not undermine its message that the nuclear deal will bring peace and moderation. So it will be up to our next president to distinguish between friends and enemies. If he or she wants to send the world a message that the Obama era is over and America is back, visits to Cuban dissidents like Farinas and one sinking of an Iranian ship that is illegally and dangerously harassing a U.S. Navy vessel would be the best and likely the cheapest ways to do so.  

The motto of the American Bar Association (or ABA) is "Defending Liberty, Pursuing Justice." It should perhaps be revised to "Defending Liberty, Pursuing Justice, and Travel to Cuba."  Right now the ABA is sponsoring at least two trips to Cuba--but neither one has anything to do with liberty or justice. One could dream of an ABA-sponsored trip that would try to visit political prisoners, or meet with the "Women in White" and other peaceful protesters for human rights. One could envision a confrontation between ABA members and officials of the Cuban regime’s "courts" or its "Ministry of Justice." But don’t hold your breath. The two tours advertised in the ABA Journal right now are "Cuba: People, Culture and Art" for next March and "Cuban Discovery" for next February. In the latter, one does not "discover" anything about Cuba’s dictatorship and its complete disrespect for law--theoretically of some concern to the ABA. "People, Culture, and Art" has nothing to do with those Cuban people who are trying desperately to gain a measure of freedom and live under a system of law. The brochure describes the latter trip this way: "A uniquely designed itinerary provides opportunities to experience the Cuban culture, history and people in four destinations: Havana; Cienfuegos; Trinidad; and Pinar del Río. Discover the arts during visits to art, dance and music studios, and talk with artists, dancers and musicians about their craft and their lives in Cuba. Savor authentic flavors of Cuban cuisine at state restaurants and paladars, privately owned and operated restaurants. Learn about contemporary and historic Cuba during insightful discussions led by local experts." Want to bet how many of the "local experts" are dissidents or human rights activists, fighting for a state of law? The actual state of life in Cuba is described this week in The Economist. Here is an excerpt:   QUEUES at petrol stations. Sweltering offices. Unlit streets. Conditions in Cuba’s capital remind its residents of the “special period” in the 1990s caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union. Today, the benefactor in trouble is Venezuela.For the past 15 years Venezuela has been shipping oil to Cuba, which in turn sends thousands of doctors and other professionals to Venezuela. The swap is lucrative for the communist-controlled island, which pays doctors a paltry few hundred dollars a month. It gets more oil than it needs, and sells the surplus. That makes Cuba perhaps the only importer that prefers high oil prices. Venezuelan support is thought to be worth 12-20% of Cuba’s GDP.   Recently, the arrangement has wobbled. Low prices have slashed Cuba’s profit from the resale of oil. Venezuela, whose oil-dependent economy is shrinking, is sending less of the stuff. Figures from PDVSA, Venezuela’s state oil company, suggest that it shipped 40% less crude oil to Cuba in the first quarter of 2016 than it did during the same period last year. Austerity, though less savage than in the 1990s, is back. Cuba’s cautious economic liberalisation may suffer.   The regime ought to be worried indeed--but help is on the way, suggests The Economist:   Tourism has surged since the United States loosened travel restrictions in 2014, which will partially offset the loss of Venezuelan aid.   So that’s where the ABA-- remember, "Defending Liberty, Pursuing Justice"--comes in. This vicious, repressive regime depended on the Soviets, and then the Venezuelans, and may now depend on American tourists. Will it be enough? One cannot know. One can only know that the American Bar Association wants to lend a hand. This is unconscionable, and in fact no American should be lending a hand to oppression in Cuba. No Americans should be dancing and dining their way through Cuba, enjoying the beaches and the architecture while those struggling for freedom lie in prison. That American lawyers are willing to do this, and that their main professional association wants to promote it, is a sad reflection on the profession. If the ABA said we want our members to visit if and only if they can do something to promote liberty and law and human rights in Cuba, such visits might be a genuine contribution. Perhaps the ABA has secretly done this and actually all these trips do include spending time with dissidents and pressing officials to respect the rights of the Cuban people. I wouldn’t place a lot of money on that wager. If it has not, it is betraying the cause of justice and assisting the most repressive regime in the Western Hemisphere. That isn’t "Defending Liberty" or "Pursuing Justice;" instead, it is shameful.    

In 2007, President George W. Bush awarded the Medal of Freedom in absentia to the Cuban human rights and democracy activist Oscar Elias Biscet. This week, he was able to place the award on Biscet’s shoulders. The 2007 citation read as follows:     Oscar Elias Biscet has dedicated his life to advancing human rights and democracy in Cuba. A medical doctor, he has been persecuted for his peaceful calls for a free Cuba. A former prisoner of conscience, he remains a powerful advocate for a Cuba in which the rights of all people are respected. Freedom-loving people everywhere are his brothers and sisters, and his sacrifices benefit all mankind. The United States stands with Oscar Elias Biscet in his heroic struggle against tyranny, salutes him for his courage, and honors him for his devotion to freedom and human rights.       Former President George W. Bush awards Cuban dissident Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet the Medal of Freedom. (Courtesy: George W. Bush Presidential Center)   Biscet could not receive the award because he was in one of Castro’s prisons. But this week he was able to travel to Dallas, where former President Bush gave him the award. Here’s some of what Bush said:   Laura and I welcome you, we thank you. This is an extraordinary event, one that should lift the soul of every American.   In 2007, I awarded the Medal of Freedom to Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet. I did so because of his courage and devotion to freedom. He couldn’t be with us then because he was in a prison cell, locked away for daring to criticize Cuba’s communist regime and for demanding respect for the fundamental rights of the Cuban people. For the past several years, Oscar has entrusted his Medal of Freedom to the Bush Institute’s Freedom Collection.... There’s still a long road ahead before Cuba’s freedom is realized, but at long last, Oscar has finally been released from prison and allowed to leave the island. So, we welcome you, Oscar. We’ve been waiting for you and we are thrilled you’re here. I want to read a few words from my speech in the East Room when we announced your Medal of Freedom. Here is part of what I said: "Oscar Biscet is a healer -- known to 11 million Cubans as a physician, a community organizer, and an advocate for human rights. For decades, he has told the world what he has seen in Cuba: the arrogance of a one-party state; the suppression of political dissent; the coercion of expectant mothers. For speaking the truth Dr. Biscet has endured repeated harassment, beatings, and detentions. The international community agrees that Dr. Biscet’s imprisonment is unjust, yet the regime has refused every call for his release. "To the Cuban dictatorship, Dr. Biscet is a ‘dangerous man.’ He is dangerous in the same way that Martin Luther King, Jr. and Gandhi were dangerous. He is a man of peace, a man of truth, and a man of faith. In captivity, he has continued to embody courage and dignity. His example is a rebuke to the tyrants and secret police of a regime whose day is passing. "Dr. Biscet is also a young man. God willing, he’ll soon regain his freedom, as justice demands. He deserves to be reunited with his wife, Elsa, and all their family. And the land they call home deserves to be free." This trip is Dr. Biscet’s first time out of Cuba. He and Elsa have finally been able to reunite with their children. They’ve celebrated with old friends, and it’s been a joyous occasion, he told us. But the land they call home still deserves to be free. Even outside of prison, Dr. Biscet is still harassed by state security. He remains under surveillance, except at the Bush Center. [Laughter.] He continues undaunted in his struggle for a free Cuba. I’m inspired by his unyielding commitment to his people and his nonviolent defiance of an unjust regime. He symbolizes all the brave men and women of Cuba who continue to have a vision for a free and democratic Cuba. Laura and I will continue to stand with the Cuban people for their freedom. The Bush Center will continue to stand for the Cuban people’s liberty. We will continue to stand with a great man with a mighty heart, Oscar Biscet. I’m now honored to finally present Dr. Biscet with the Medal of Freedom.   This was a wonderful occasion and , though Bush is far too polite to say so, a stark contrast to Obama administration Cuba policy--whose goal has been rapprochement with the Castro regime despite any level of human rights abuses. Biscet truly is a hero, and one can only hope that this recognition provides him with a modicum of protection. As President Bush said, Biscet’s courage and sacrifice for the freedom of his fellow Cubans is an inspiration- as is, in its way, Bush’s own continuing dedication to the expansion of freedom in the world.

The United States and Cuba are about to enter a series of "dialogues" including one about law enforcement. Here is what Reuters reported:   Cuba and the United States aim to reach new agreements on cooperation in law enforcement, health and agriculture over the coming months, a senior Cuban official said on Monday, as part of the former Cold War foes’ drive to normalize ties....   A bilateral commission met on Monday in Havana to establish a roadmap for talks over the rest of this year, which would include more high-ranking official visits, said Josefina Vidal, head of the Cuban delegation.... "The United States looks forward to holding these meetings in the near future," the [United States] embassy said. "Tomorrow (we) will discuss specific steps related to bilateral security during the law enforcement dialogue."   How do you have a law enforcement dialogue with a regime that is giving sanctuary to, and protecting, American fugitives who include murderers? The most famous case is that of Joanne Chesimard, but she is not alone.  Here is what NBC reported in March:   White House officials would not tell NBC News whether President Obama will raise the issue of 70 fugitives from U.S. justice — including convicted cop-killer JoAnne Chesimard — who are hiding in Cuba when he meets Cuban leaders during his visit to the island.   A White House official did say, however, that the "United States continued to seek the return from Cuba of fugitives from U.S. justice and has repeatedly raised those cases with the Cuban government." Chesimard, who fled to Cuba in 1984 after escaping from a New Jersey prison in 1979, was convicted of the 1973 execution-style murder of New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster. She is on the FBI’s Most Wanted International Terrorists list, and is the most notorious of a group of criminals and violent radicals who have sought refuge in Cuba since Fidel Castro took power.   If the "law enforcement dialogue" is aimed at getting back such fugitives, we can only hope it succeeds. If it does not have that objective, it is another in a series of give-aways and disgraces that have marked recent U.S. policy toward Cuba.

"Cuba has an extraordinary resource – a system of education which values every boy and every girl." This is a remarkable statement to make about a communist dictatorship. It is disturbing and disappointing to find it coming from a high official of the Obama administration--Valerie Jarrett. Does Castro’s Cuba value every boy and girl who wants freedom and wishes to denounce the one-party dictatorship? Does it value every boy and girl whose parents are political prisoners? Does it value every boy and girl who wants to read freely about liberty and democracy, not just the Marxist clap-trap prescribed by the Party? As a Brookings Institution study of education in post-Communist societies put it, Communist societies such as Cuba consider ideas weapons in the class struggle. They stress the function of education in facilitating political indoctrination of the population.... Countries such as Cuba have had total command of education and have used it to indoctrinate children in schools. The system also controls mass media by creating a monopoly on the information and interpretations Cubans use to make sense of their social world. The Castro regime has indeed invested heavily in the educational system, and that is perhaps what Ms. Jarrett meant to communicate. But that is not what she tweeted. Instead her words suggest blindness to what is taught in those schools. Surely closing minds, surely Party indoctrination, do not "value" the children of Cuba--except, as the Brookings study put it, as "weapons in the class struggle."

President Obama’s speech to the Cuban people today included many nice lines about democracy and human rights. But the ideological content was found in this line, early in the speech: "I have come here to bury the last remnant of the Cold War in the Americas." If only that were so. The last remnant of the Cold War in the Americas, in the Obama view, is apparently the American embargo of Castro’s Cuba. But I would beg to differ. The last remnant is instead the communist regime that continues to deny freedom to the Cuban people. Toward the end of his speech the President says "The history of the United States and Cuba encompass revolution and conflict; struggle and sacrifice; retribution and, now, reconciliation. It is time, now, for us to leave the past behind." Again, this is a nice phrase, but its content is all wrong. The critical thing about leaving the past behind is not whether the U.S. Interests Section is henceforth called an embassy, or whether cruise ships can soon dock in Cuba. The critical thing would be leaving behind communism: no free elections, no freedom of speech, no freedom of the press, a court system subordinate to the Party, an economy whose wealth is all directed toward and controlled by the Party, and all the other elements that make communism loathsome. In the months since the Obama opening to Cuba, the regime has gotten stronger. In exchange for the loosening of all regulations about traveling to and spending money in Cuba, the United States and the people of Cuba have gotten nothing. The regime is led not only by Raul Castro, but by his son and son-in-law, who are obviously preparing a communist-style monarchy: the ruling family stays forever. When Americans stay at a hotel in Cuba, they are giving their money to GAESA, a holding company belonging to the Revolutionary Armed Forces that is run by General Luis Alberto Rodríguez, President Raúl Castro’s son-in-law. American firms investing in Cuba will have the Army and the Castros as their partners. Cuba is not the only country in the hemisphere that is not free, but it is the one being visited and celebrated by Mr. Obama. If only he would truly try to bury the "last remnant of the Cold War" by bringing freedom to Cuba instead of making life easier for its communist regime, that would be cause for celebration. This visit is not.

On Thursday, Sen. Robert Menendez (D, NJ) delivered a long and heartfelt statement on the floor of the United States Senate about Pres. Obama’s  forthcoming visit to Cuba. The entire text is copied below because the remarks are worthy of note. Sen. Menendez believes, as I do, that this visit will weaken the chances for freedom in Cuba because it is organized around embracing the current regime rather than pressuring it for change. There is no evidence that the president will meet with the key--and incredibly courageous--dissidents who struggle at enormous sacrifice for freedom in Cuba. There is no evidence he even comprehends that most of the economic benefits of his opening to Cuba are accruing to the regime and the armed forces. Menendez notes that “CNN has revealed that the Cuban delegation in the secret talks that began in mid-2013 with U.S. officials in Ottawa, Toronto and Rome, and which led to the December 17th policy announcement, was headed by Colonel Alejandro Castro Espin. Colonel Castro Espin is the 49-year old son of Cuban dictator Raul Castro." Moreover, as the Obama administration loosen the regulations to allow more and more Americans to visit Cuba, who benefits? Menendez reports that "Raul Castro named his son-in-law, General Luis Alberto Rodriguez Lopez Callejas, as head of GAESA, which stands for Grupo de Administracion Empresarial, S.A or translated Business Administrative Group. GAESA is the holding company of Cuba’s Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, Cuba’s military" and owns Cuba’s hotels. It is very clear today that since the Cuba deal was signed last year, human rights abuses in Cuba have worsened. Once upon a time the president promised not to go to Cuba if that happened, but the Castros understood that he did not mean it. This visit is a "legacy" item that was irresistible to Obama. But what a legacy! Read Menendez’s words, which explain at length the terrible legacy of supporting and extending the life of the regime in Cuba. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- “I rise in memory of all Cuban dissidents who have given their lives in the hope of Cuba, one day, being free from the yoke of the Castro regime. It is that freedom I had hoped President Obama was referencing when he said: ‘What I’ve said to the Cuban government is – if we’re seeing more progress in the liberty and freedom and possibilities of ordinary Cubans, I’d love to use a visit as a way of highlighting that progress. If we’re going backwards, then there’s not much reason for me to be there.’ “But that is obviously not the case, which is why the Boston Globe’s headline on February 25th says it all: Obama Breaks Pledge – Will Visit Cuba Despite Worsening Human Rights. “Instead of having the free world’s leader honor Latin America’s only dictatorship with a visit, he could have visited one of the 150 countries which he has not visited, including several in Latin America that are democracies. “The President has negotiated a deal with the Castros, and I understand his desire to make this his legacy issue, but there is still a fundamental issue of freedom and democracy at stake that goes to the underlying atmosphere in Cuba and whether or not the Cuban people – still repressed and still imprisoned – will benefit from the President’s legacy, or will it be the Castro Regime that reaps the benefits. “Unless the Castros are compelled to change the way they govern the island and the way they exploit its people, the answer to this won’t be any different: The Castro Regime will be the beneficiary. “At the very least the President’s first stops should be meetings with internationally-recognized dissidents: U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom winner, Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet; the European Union’s Sakharov prize recipients, Guillermo Farinas and Rosa Maria Paya in respect for her murdered father Oswaldo Paya who was leading the Varela Project advocating civil liberties, collecting thousands of signatures petitioning the Castro regime for democratic change as permitted under the Cuban constitution – so threatening was his peaceful petition drive that he was assassinated by Castro’s security agents. “And he should meet with Berta Soler, at her home, in her neighborhood; With the Ladies in White, with dissidents and democracy advocates in Havana – and then that will be the front-page photograph we see next week. Only then will the message that the United States will not give-in or give-up on our commitment to a free and democratic Cuba be clear to the world and to the Cuban people. “To leave a truly honorable mark in history, this would mean the President leaving the Castro’s cordoned-off-tourist-zone and seeing Berta Soler and her Ladies in White at their headquarters in the Lawton neighborhood of Havana, where poverty – Castro style -- not opportunity, not freedom, not democracy – but poverty – created by a Stalinist state, is the umbrella under which they live. “The President should witness their bravery, listen to their stories, feel their despair, see the fear under which they live – and stand-up with them and for them. “He could learn of the story of Aliuska Gomez, one of the Ladies in White who was arrested this past Sunday for marching peacefully. In an article in Diario de Cuba she told her story: ‘We were subjected to a lot of violence today, said Aliuska Gomez. Many of us were dragged and beaten,” she added pointing out that this has taken place only one week before President Obama’s visit. Aliuska…related how she was taken to a police station in Mariano where she was forcibly undressed by several uniformed female officers in plain view of some males. After they had taken away all of my belongings, she said, they told me to strip naked, and I refused so they threw me down on the floor and took off all of my clothing, right in front of two men, and they dragged me completely naked into a jail cell. Aliuska was then handcuffed and thrown on the cell’s floor, naked, and left alone for forty-five minutes.’ "Or how about the young Cuban dissident who met with Ben Rhodes and was arrested in Havana. It was reported on March 14th that ‘yesterday the Castro regime arrested Carlos Amel Oliva, head of the youth wing of the Cuban Patriotic Union, a major dissident organization. He is being accused of anti-social behavior. On Friday, Amel Oliva had participated in a meeting in Miami with Ben Rhodes, President Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor. He returned to Havana on Sunday.’ “I guess that’s what Raul Castro thinks about those who meet with the President’s Deputy National Security Advisor. “Notwithstanding their true stories, and the stories of thousands like them, the President first announced sweeping changes to America’s strategic approach to the Castro Regime in December 2014. In broad strokes, we learned of the forthcoming reestablishment of diplomatic relations – an exchange of symbols with the American flag flying over a United States Embassy in Havana and the Cuban flag flying over a Cuban Embassy in Washington. “We learned about the process by which Cuba’s designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism would be lifted; and, we learned about the forthcoming transformative effects of a unilateral easing of sanctions to increase travel, commerce, and currency. “For those of us who understand this regime, we cautioned for nuance, and against those broad strokes. We asked that the Administration at least require the Castros to reciprocate with certain concessions of their own, which would be as good for U.S. national interests as for the Cuban people and for U.S.-Cuban relations. “For example, before the President ever traveled to Burma—a country with notorious human rights abuses and with which this Administration began to engage—the U.S. first demanded, and received action by the Burmese to address their human rights record. To be sure, the Burmese government agreed to meet nearly a dozen benchmarks as part of this “action for action” engagement, including granting the Red Cross access to prisons, establishing a U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Office, release of political prisoners, conclusion of a cease fire in Kachin State, and ensuring international access to conflict areas. “We asked, as the President’s Cuba policy unfolded, that they push for changes that put Cubans in control of their own political processes, economic opportunities, civil society and governance. We didn’t get them. We asked for changes that would honor America’s legacy as a champion for human rights. We didn’t get those either. We suggested changes that would ultimately bring Cuba into the community of nations, contributing to, rather than detracting from, the overall prosperity of the hemisphere. And there were none. “But, most importantly, we asked that they remember that it is a lack of resources – not a change of heart – that slowed the Castros’ adventurism and instability-inducing support for those who would pose threats to our national interests within the Western Hemisphere. “In essence, we were not thinking strategically. Instead, we traded strategy for tactics. And leading Cuban human rights and democracy activists have criticized U.S. policy. “The simple truth is – deals with the Devil require the Devil to deal. Opening channels of communication controlled by the regime means nothing unless we are going to communicate our values. It means nothing if we do not champion the material changes that the Cuban people seek. It means nothing if we do not speak the language that the Castros understand – that the communist revolution has failed miserably, and it’s time to let the Cuban people decide their future. “The Castros know it, but it’s the antiquated hallmark of the revolution and the iron-fisted rule that came from it that keeps them in power. And, until that power is truly challenged, we can expect to witness the further weakening of our leverage. “In the meantime, the regime is already moving forward, already breathing new life into its existing repressive state systems: Cubans are being beaten, arrested, and otherwise muzzled at higher rates than ever before. The Cuban Commission for Human Rights (CCHR) has documented 1,141 political arrests by the Castro regime in Cuba during the short month of February 2016. In January 2016, the CCHR documented 1,447 political arrests. As such, these 2,588 political arrests -- thus far -- represent the highest tally to begin a year in decades. “This is what happens when President Obama first announces he won’t visit Cuba unless there are tangible improvements in the respect for human rights -- then crosses his own ‘red-line.’ And these are only political arrests that have been thoroughly documented. Many more are suspected. “U.S. fugitives and members of foreign terrorist organizations still enjoy safe harbor on the island – like Joanne Chesimard, the convicted killer of New Jersey State Trooper, Werner Foerster – or Charlie Hill who killed New Mexico State Trooper, Robert Rosenbloom. “Not a penny of the $6 billion in outstanding claims by American citizens and businesses for properties confiscated by the Castros has been repaid. Unrelenting censorship and oppression of Cuban journalists continues unscathed; and the Cuban path to liberty doesn’t include the United States Embassy. “So what do we learn? We learn that, despite the Obama Administration’s engagement with the Castro dictatorship and increased travel to the island, repression on the island is exponentially rising. Why? Because the Castro regime, one of the most astute observers of the American political system, is rushing to take advantage of the permissive environment created by the President’s hunger for legacy and the relaxation of restrictions. “M. President, legacy is not more important than lives. For years we’ve heard how an improvement in U.S.-Cuba relations, an easing of sanctions and an increase in travel to the island would benefit the Cuban people. A benefit not realized despite the visits and investments of millions of Europeans, Canadians, Mexicans, and South Americans. “These assumptions are wrong. And since December 17, 2014, the President has engaged the Castro regime, offering unilateral concessions that the Castros are more than happy to accept. “And, if that is not enough for us to at least question our Cuba policy, we are now facing a new unfolding Cuban migration crisis. The United States is faced with the largest migration of Cuban immigrants since the rafters of 1994. The number of Cubans entering the United States in 2015 was nearly twice that of 2014, some 51,000; and tens of thousands more are desperately trying to make the journey, via South and Central America. Why would Cubans flee if the promise of a better life in Cuba were on the horizon? When President Obama took office, the numbers were less than 7,000 annually. “We hear that ‘self-employment’ – such as it is in Cuba – is growing. But the number of ‘self-employed’ workers in Cuba has actually decreased. The Cuban government today is licensing 10,000 fewer ‘self-employed’ workers than it did in 2014. In contrast, Castro’s military monopolies are expanding at record pace. Even the limited spaces in which ‘self-employed’ workers previously operated are being squeezed as the Cuban military expands its control of the island’s travel, retail and financial sectors of the economy. “While speaking recently to a business gathering in Washington, D.C., President Obama argued how he believes this new policy is ‘creating the environment in which a generational change and transition will take place in that country.’ But the key questions is, ‘a generational change and transition’ towards what and by whom? Cuban democracy leader, Antonio Rodiles, has concisely expressed this concern – ‘legitimizing the [Castro] regime is the path contrary to a transition.’ “CNN has revealed that the Cuban delegation in the secret talks that began in mid-2013 with U.S. officials in Ottawa, Toronto and Rome, and which led to the December 17th policy announcement, was headed by Colonel Alejandro Castro Espin. Colonel Castro Espin is the 49-year old son of Cuban dictator Raul Castro. “In both face-to-face meetings between President Obama and Raul Castro this year -- first at April’s Summit of the Americas in Panama City and just last month at the United Nations General Assembly in New York -- Alejandro was seated (with a wide grin) next to his father. Alejandro holds the rank of Colonel in Cuba’s Ministry of the Interior, with his hand on the pulse and trigger of the island’s intelligence services and repressive organs. It’s no secret that Raul Castro is grooming Alejandro for a position of power. “Sadly, his role as interlocutor with the Obama Administration seeks to further their goal of an intra-family generational transition within the Castro clan similar to the Assad’s in Syria and the Kim’s in North Korea. And we know how well those have worked out. To give you an idea of how Colonel Alejandro Castro views the United States, he describes its leaders as ‘those who seek to subjugate humanity to satisfy their interests and hegemonic goals.’ “But, of course, it also takes money to run a totalitarian dictatorship, which is why Raul Castro named his son-in-law, General Luis Alberto Rodriguez Lopez Callejas, as head of GAESA, which stands for Grupo de Administracion Empresarial, S.A or translated Business Administrative Group. GAESA is the holding company of Cuba’s Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, Cuba’s military. “It is the dominant driving force of the island’s economy. Established in the 1990s by Raul Castro, it controls tourism companies, ranging from the very profitable Gaviota S.A., which runs Cuba’s hotels, restaurants, car rentals and nightclubs, to TRD Caribe S.A., which runs the island’s retail stores. GAESA controls virtually all economic transactions in Cuba. “According to Hotels Magazine, a leading industry publication, GAESA (through its subsidiaries) is by far the largest regional hotel conglomerate in Latin America. It controls more hotel rooms than The Walt Disney Company. As McLatchy News explained a few years back, ‘Tourists who sleep in some of Cuba’s hotels, drive rental cars, fill up their gas tanks, and even those riding in taxis have something in common: They are contributing to the [Cuban] Revolutionary Armed Forces’ bottom line.’ “GAESA became this business powerhouse thanks to the millions of Canadian and European tourists that have and continue to visit Cuba each year. The Cuban military-owned tourism company, Gaviota Tourism Group, S.A., averaged 12 percent growth in 2015 and expects to double its hotel business this year. “These tourists have done absolutely nothing to promote freedom and democracy in Cuba. To the contrary, they have directly financed a system of control and repression over the Cuban people all while enjoying cigars made by Cuban workers paid in worthless pesos, and having a Cuba Libre, which is an oxymoron, on the beaches of Varadero. “Yet, despite the clear evidence, President Obama wants American tourists to now double GAESA’s bonanza – and, through GAESA, strengthen the regime. “An insightful report by Bloomberg Business also explained how, ‘[Raul’s son-in-law, General Rodriguez] is the gatekeeper for most foreign investors, requiring them to do business with his organization if they wish to set up shop on the island…If and when the U.S. finally removes its half-century embargo on Cuba, it will be this man who decides which investors get the best deals.’ In other words, all of the talking points about how lifting the embargo and tourism restrictions would somehow benefit the Cuban people are empty and misleading rhetoric. “In addition, internet "connectivity ranking" has dropped. The International Telecommunication Union’s (ITU) Measuring the Information Society Report for 2015, the most reliable source of data and analysis on global access to information and communication. ITU has dropped Cuba’s ranking to 129 from 119. The island fares much worse than some of the world’s most infamous suppressors, including Syria (117), Iran (91), China (82) and Venezuela (72). “In Cuba, religious freedom violations have increased. According to the London-based NGO, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, last year 2,000 churches were declared illegal and 100 were designated for demolition by the Castro regime. Altogether, CSW documented 2,300 separate violations of religious freedom in 2015 compared to 220 in 2014. “And, if that is not enough, Castro reneged on the release of political prisoners and visits by international monitors. Most of the 53 political prisoners released in the months prior and after Obama’s December 2014 announcement have since been re-arrested on multiple occasions. Five have been handed new long-term prison sentences. “Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch noted in its new 2016 report, ‘Cuba has yet to allow visits to the island by the International Committee of the Red Cross or by U.N. human rights monitors, as stipulated in the December 2014 agreement with the United States.’ These were the conditions that prompted Congress, over the course of our long history with Cuba, to pass successive laws to build on -- not detract from -- Executive Orders that created the embargo. “I stand with thousands of Cuba’s civil society leaders, dissidents, journalists, and everyday men and women who long for the day when the freedom we enjoy in our great country extends to theirs. As long as I have a voice, they will have an ally to speak truth to power against this dictatorship, and against any effort to legitimize it or reward it. “We must realize the nature of the Castro regime won’t be altered by capitulating on our demands for basic human and civil rights. If the United States is to give away its leverage, it should be in exchange for one thing, and one thing only, a true transition in Cuba. “And, as for the latest announcements from the Administration, I stand against any rollback of the statutory provisions that codified Cuba sanctions. We learned this week that the Administration has cleared the way for individual travel to Cuba outside the auspices of a group or organization. This is tourism, plain and simple. “We learned this week that the Administration has cleared the way for Cubans – athletes, artists, performers, and others – to earn salaries in the United States. Unfortunately, much if not all of those salaries will go back to the regime as they must pay the regime most of their earnings. “We learned that Americans may purchase Cuban origin products and services in third countries – the cigars, alcohol, and basic products produced by a system of slave labor that funnels proceeds to one place – the regime’s pockets. When it comes to banking and financial services, we will now permit the U.S. financial system to facilitate the flow of these and other proceeds directly to the regime. “The Administration will allow the Cuban government, which profits from the sale of intelligence, to export Cuban-origin software to the United States – never mind that the Cuban government aggressively monitors the internet activity of Cuban dissidents and sensors users on the island – and permit direct shipping by Cuban vessels. “These ‘significant amendments’ to the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (CACR) and the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) – cornerstones of implementation of United States sanctions against the Castro regime -- announced on Tuesday create new opportunities for abuse of permitted travel. They authorize trade and commerce with Castro monopolies, and permit the regime to use United States dollars to conduct its business. “They are unilateral concessions, requiring no changes from the Castro regime to the political and economic system under which the Castros exploit the lives and labor of Cuban nationals. In meetings late last week, I warned officials at the Department of Treasury that these changes come up to the line and in some cases cross it with respect to statutory authority. “Their actions are inconsistent with existing statutes and incompatible with the intent of Congress as expressed through those statutes. I should know as I was one of the authors of the Libertad Act when I served in the House of Representatives. In my view, at the end of the day, this is a unilateral transfer of the little remaining leverage that the Administration hadn’t given away prior to this week’s announcement. “With these steps, I believe Commerce and Treasury have set the stage for legal action against the Administration. Congress has authorized categories of travel to Cuba, but none of the categories were tourism or commerce-for-commerce’s-sake with the regime. “The President has said that his Cuba policy ‘helps promote the people’s independence from Cuban authorities.’ But it does not. “And yet, this week, in what would seem to contravene the letter and spirit of U.S. law – the Administration will reportedly allow the regime to use U.S. dollars in international financial transactions and a U.S. hotel company to partner with a Cuban military conglomerate run by the Castro family. Let’s be clear, it’s not the Cuban people who are eager and willing to shuffle dollars through BNP Paribas, INB Group, and HSBC Bank. Only the regime is willing and eager to do so. “As for the reports that Starwood-Marriott is looking for arrangement with the regime – with the blessing of the Administration – it would be an agreement with a subsidiary of GAESA, the Cuban military conglomerate run by Raul Castro’s son-in-law, General Luis Alberto Rodriguez Lopez-Callejas. It would be an agreement to manage a hotel for the Cuban military. Among those considered is Havana’s swanky hotel Saratoga, which has been twice confiscated by the Castro regime – an agreement by which employees are hired by the regime’s state employment agency in violation of international labor laws. “So I ask – How does allowing U.S. companies to do business with the Castro regime – let alone the Castro family itself – ‘promote the Cuban people’s independence from the authorities,’ as the President has said? This breathes new life into the Castro’s repressive state systems. That new life means one thing – the repressive system will continue without changes. “M. President, next week, when we anticipate that we will see a photograph of the President of the United States laughing and shaking hands with the only dictatorship in the Western Hemisphere, I will be thinking of Berta Soler of the Ladies in White and her fellow human rights and democracy advocates, when she testified before Congress last year. She said in her testimony: ‘Our demands are quite concrete; freedom for political prisoners, recognition of civil society, the elimination of criminal dispositions that penalize freedom of expression and association and the right of the Cuban people to choose their future through free, multiparty elections.’ “Those are the words of freedom. That is the legacy we should work toward until the Cuban people are finally free.”

Eight months after the U.S. Embassy opened in Cuba, what is the effect of this much-celebrated opening of diplomatic relations? Who has benefitted? The Washington Post noted today that "there has been little movement on political freedoms...and the number of dissidents in detention has steadily increased in recent months." In fact there has been no progress on freedom whatsoever. So far, the real effect of the Obama "opening" is an increase in the flow of funds to the Castro regime through tourism and business with state-owned companies. But the White House says President Obama will visit Cuba in March. Why is the President visiting, given the lack of change? Because he cannot resist the photo op with Fidel Castro. It’s as simple as that. What about human rights? The Post tells us that "in recent weeks, administration officials have made it clear Obama would travel to Cuba only if its government made additional concessions in the areas of human rights, Internet access and market liberalization." The President has said that "If I go on a visit, then part of the deal is that I get to talk to everybody. I’ve made very clear in my conversations directly with President Castro that we would continue to reach out to those who want to broaden the scope for, you know, free expression inside of Cuba.” What does that mean? Will the President meet with the brave Ladies in White who have fought for freedom for years? Which courageous dissidents will he see? What does it mean to "reach out to those who want to broaden the scope for, you know, free expression," to quote the President’s inartful words. Not too hard to guess: a tame group of civil society types, some artists who have galleries catering to American tourists, some people who want the right to open new restaurants. The Cuban regime will never allow Obama to meet with "everybody," and they will get away with it. They know that Obama is dying to make this trip and get his photo with Fidel, and that gives the police state the upper hand-- just as it did throughout the Obama negotiations with Cuba. Yes, the trip could be salvaged--if Obama had a "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" moment. Yes, if he directly demanded free elections, and an end to the one-party rule, and free expression, and free trade unions, and demanded that every single political prisoner be released immediately. This visit is about the President’s vanity and search for a legacy, not about freedom and human rights for the people of Cuba. And that’s a disgrace.