The World Must Continue to Support Cuba’s Call for The U.S. Blockade Against The Cuban Nation to End

The U.S. blockade against Cuba is not just an economic measure - it’s a violation of human rights and international law

The U.S. Blockade on Cuba: A Humanitarian Catastrophe Fueled by Geopolitical Arrogance

By Dr. Kevin J Turnquest-Alcena 

“Deo adjuvante, non timendum”

"With God as my helper, I have nothing to fear."

This Latin phrase beautifully encapsulates the unwavering spirit of the Cuban people in the face of the relentless U.S. blockade.  For over six decades, Cuba has endured an economic siege meant to cripple its progress and suppress its people.  Yet, the Cuban people, bolstered by faith and resilience, remain defiant.  The blockade is more than an economic imposition—it is an affront to human dignity.  But with God’s help, as the phrase assures, no challenge is insurmountable.

Another Latin phrase, "In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas", meaning “In necessary things, unity; in doubtful things, liberty; in all things, charity,” reminds us that when faced with global crises, unity and empathy are essential.  The blockade against Cuba stands in stark contrast to this principle, as it continues to isolate the country instead of offering solidarity and support.

A Policy of Economic Strangulation

The blockade has turned Cuba into an isolated battlefield where economic deprivation is used as a tool to crush the human spirit.  From March 2023 to February 2024, Cuba suffered over 5.05 billion USD in losses, while the cumulative losses over six decades exceed USD 164 billion.  Losing 14 million dollars per day.  These figures reflect not just monetary deficits but lost opportunities for economic growth, healthcare, and education. 

As the Latin phrase goes, "Aegroto dum anima est, spes est", or “While there’s life, there’s hope.”  Despite these overwhelming numbers, Cuba’s hope lies in the resilience of its people and their unwavering determination to resist.  However, the blockade stifles their potential, prevents access to vital resources, and plunges the nation into deeper economic and social crises.

The Healthcare Crisis: The Human Cost of Sanctions

Perhaps nowhere is the cruelty of the U.S. blockade more evident than in Cuba’s healthcare system.  Once a global leader in providing high-quality, free healthcare for all its citizens, the Cuban health sector has been crippled, not by internal inefficiencies, but by U.S. sanctions that have blocked essential medical supplies and technologies.

 

“Vincit qui patitur,” meaning “He who endures, conquers,” illustrates the enduring struggle of Cuba’s healthcare workers and patients.  They fight on despite the severe limitations imposed on them.  The COVID-19 pandemic exposed this harsh reality even further.  The U.S. blocked Cuba’s access to ventilators, preventing the island from importing life-saving equipment at the height of the pandemic.

This policy has moved beyond economic sanctions to the point of moral bankruptcy.  By denying Cuba critical medical resources, the U.S. blockade transforms Cuba’s once-proud healthcare system into a casualty of geopolitical arrogance, leaving the most vulnerable citizens—children, the elderly, and the sick—without the care they need.

Food Insecurity and Education: Starving a Nation’s Future

In education and agriculture, Cuba is similarly stifled.  The Cuban government reports that due to the embargo, shortages have impacted over 437,000 school uniforms for the 2023-2024 academic year.  Basic educational tools such as textbooks, computers, and school supplies are increasingly scarce.  Agriculture is no better off.  Deprived of fertilizers, pesticides, and modern machinery, Cuban farmers have seen crop yields drop by 40%, which has led to food insecurity, especially among the nation’s most vulnerable.

Here we find relevance in the Latin phrase, "Veritas vos liberabit", or “The truth will set you free.”  The blockade is not merely an economic restriction—it is a violation of human rights.  The truth is that Cuba’s children, farmers, and educators are unjustly caught in the crosshairs of geopolitical gamesmanship.  It is not only the Cuban government that suffers; it is the Cuban people, whose rights to education, food security, and health are being systematically denied.

A Violation of Human Rights and International Law

The U.S. blockade is not just an economic measure—it’s a violation of human rights and international law.  Numerous international bodies, including the United Nations, have condemned the U.S. for its unilateral coercive measures, which disproportionately affect Cuban civilians.

“Fiat iustitia, ruat caelum”—“Let justice be done, though the heavens fall”—should resonate globally in the face of such egregious actions.  The Cuban people are not alone in their call for justice; the international community has, time and again, voted overwhelmingly in favor of ending the blockade.  However, the United States continues to ignore this global outcry, leaving Cuba isolated and under siege.

Biblical history also reminds us of the cycle of suffering and liberation.  Like the Israelites who were freed from Egyptian oppression, Cuba’s time of liberation will come.  Just as God delivered His people from bondage, we must believe that the Cuban people, too, will see an end to their suffering.

 

Lessons from History: Global Empathy and Responsibility

History teaches us that no policy of oppression goes unpunished.  As Mahatma Gandhi wisely said, “The future depends on what we do in the present.”  Just as leaders like Nelson Mandela, Voltaire, and Desmond Tutu fought against systems of oppression and inequality, so too must we stand up against this blockade.

The Bible reminds us in Galatians 6:7, “For whatever one sows, that will he also reap.”  The United States must recognize that sowing seeds of deprivation and suffering will only lead to more hostility, division, and unrest.  If we wish to sow peace, prosperity, and goodwill, we must begin with lifting this unjust embargo.

A Way Forward: A Call for Unity

The solution lies in the principle that the world is one family—"Una familia sumus"—“We are one family.”  The Bible teaches that we are all part of one body, and when one part suffers, we all suffer.  Cuba’s struggle is not just theirs alone, but a shared burden for humanity to address.  To lift the blockade is not merely a political decision; it is a moral imperative.

In 1 Corinthians 12:26, we are reminded that “If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.”  The world must act in unity, recognizing that the pain of the Cuban people is a call for collective empathy and action.  With over USD 14 million lost in health investments due to the blockade, thousands of Cubans are deprived of life-saving care.  Ending the embargo will not just restore Cuba’s dignity but will reaffirm the global commitment to human rights, justice, and equality.

1. Immediate Removal of Cuba from the State Sponsors of Terrorism List

This designation is arbitrary, politically motivated, and has no basis in reality.  As Secretary of State Antony Blinken himself acknowledged in 2024, Cuba does not sponsor terrorism.  Removing Cuba from this list would not only correct a grave injustice but also facilitate financial transactions and investments necessary for the country's recovery.

2. Lifting the Blockade

The blockade’s repeal is the most direct and necessary step toward justice.  The blockade violates international law, as recognized by numerous U.N. resolutions, and constitutes a form of collective punishment against the Cuban people.  The Biden administration has the executive authority to make substantial changes, as seen in previous administrations, but Congress must ultimately act to end this outdated policy.

3. Humanitarian Cooperation

The pandemic has shown the interconnectedness of global health.  By lifting the blockade, the U.S. could engage with Cuba’s robust biotechnology and medical sectors to foster collaboration that benefits both nations.  Cuba’s COVID-19 vaccines and medical personnel have received international acclaim, and cooperation in this area would bolster global health efforts and restore goodwill between the nations.

4. Re-establishing Trade Relations

Once the blockade is lifted, Cuba could re-enter the global market on fair terms, allowing it to import vital goods at competitive prices and export its world-class medical and agricultural products.  This would stimulate both Cuban and U.S. economies, particularly in sectors like biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, and tourism.

5. Encouraging Tourism and Cultural Exchange

The normalization of travel and tourism is a significant step toward reconciliation.  Cuba has much to offer, from cultural richness to natural beauty, and a restored flow of U.S. visitors would provide much-needed economic relief.  Furthermore, the lifting of travel restrictions would enable Americans and Cubans to engage in the people-to-people diplomacy that fosters mutual understanding and goodwill.

A Moral Imperative: The Role of Global Civil Society

The global community, particularly civil society organizations, religious groups, and human rights advocates, has a crucial role to play in ending the blockade. The voices calling for justice must grow louder and more unified, especially in nations allied with the U.S. These organizations must continue to pressure governments, share stories of the blockade’s human cost, and push for diplomatic resolutions that reflect humanitarian values.

As citizens of the world, we cannot remain silent in the face of such widespread suffering.  The Cuban people deserve the opportunity to build their future without external hindrance.  To echo the words of Archbishop Desmond Tutu, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”  Global citizens must remain engaged, advocating tirelessly for the end of this unjust blockade.

Faith and Resilience: A Testament to Endurance

As the Latin phrase "Per aspera ad astra"—*"Through hardships to the stars"—*suggests, the Cuban people have faced incredible adversity, yet continue to reach for the stars.  Despite the blockade’s severe economic, social, and humanitarian impacts, Cuba has developed world-class education, healthcare, and cultural systems.  This resilience, deeply rooted in faith and a strong sense of community, has allowed the Cuban people to endure challenges that would have crushed less determined nations.

In the words of the late South African leader Nelson Mandela, "It is said that no one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails."  While the Cuban people are not in physical jails, the blockade has created an economic prison, limiting their access to the world and its opportunities.  Yet, like Mandela, the Cuban people remain hopeful, faithful, and resolute.

 A Future Without Fear

"Deo adjuvante, non timendum"—"With God as my helper, I have nothing to fear."  This powerful statement embodies the spirit of the Cuban people, who despite the hardships imposed upon them, continue to stand firm in their faith and hope for a better tomorrow.

The end of the U.S. blockade would not just be a political victory; it would be a triumph of human dignity, justice, and the resilience of the human spirit.  The Cuban people have shown that, even under the harshest of circumstances, they can innovate, persevere, and thrive.  But they should no longer have to struggle under the weight of such an unjust policy.

The world must continue to support Cuba’s call for the blockade’s end, not only as a matter of economic necessity but as a moral imperative.  Justice demands that the United States acknowledge its mistake and move toward a future of peaceful coexistence, mutual respect, and shared prosperity.

The words of the Cuban poet José Martí ring especially true: "La libertad no es negociable"—"Freedom is not negotiable."  The Cuban people deserve the freedom to live without fear, without restrictions, and without the yoke of an economic blockade that has caused so much unnecessary suffering.  May we all join in the call for justice, remembering that with faith, perseverance, and the support of the global community, no challenge is insurmountable.

The International Call for Solidarity

The international community's overwhelming support for ending the blockade reflects a shared belief in justice and human rights.  Year after year, the United Nations General Assembly has passed near-unanimous resolutions calling for the lifting of the blockade, with only a few nations standing in opposition.  These resolutions represent a collective voice, affirming that the blockade is not only an American-Cuban issue but a global one that affects international law, trade, and humanitarianism.

Organizations like the Non-Aligned Movement, the Group of 77, and many civil society groups across the globe have continued to express their solidarity with Cuba.  Countries in Latin America, Africa, Europe, and Asia have called for the blockade’s end, recognizing the harm it has caused not only to Cuba but also to their own citizens and companies that have faced penalties for engaging with Cuban entities.

Even within the United States, growing numbers of politicians, activists, religious leaders, and businesspeople are advocating for a change in policy.  Recent polls indicate that a significant portion of the American public, including Cuban-Americans, favor normalizing relations with Cuba and lifting the restrictions that have long outlived their Cold War rationale.  The time is ripe for the U.S. government to listen to its people, as well as the global community, and move toward constructive dialogue and cooperation with Cuba.

Economic Justice: A Key to Sustainable Development

Lifting the blockade would open doors to economic opportunities that have been denied to Cuba for decades.  The country’s potential for growth, innovation, and integration into the global economy is vast.  Cuba’s biotechnology and pharmaceutical sectors, already recognized for their achievements despite the blockade, could expand further with access to international markets and partnerships.  The island’s strategic location in the Caribbean also positions it as a potential hub for tourism, shipping, and trade.

With the blockade lifted, Cuba could attract foreign investment, which would contribute to rebuilding its infrastructure, modernizing its industries, and creating jobs for its people.  It would enable the country to import essential goods at competitive prices and export its products, from medicines to agricultural goods, to the world.  The Cuban economy would flourish, benefiting not only its people but also regional and global markets.

Moreover, U.S. businesses, particularly in sectors like agriculture, technology, and tourism, stand to gain from open trade with Cuba.  American farmers could sell their goods to the Cuban market without the restrictions that have cost them millions in potential revenue.  U.S. companies could invest in Cuban industries, fostering mutual economic growth and innovation.

A Path Forward: Diplomacy Over Division

The path forward lies in diplomacy, not division.  While political differences between the U.S. and Cuba remain, they should not prevent constructive engagement.  Countries with far greater ideological differences have found ways to coexist and collaborate on issues of mutual interest, and Cuba and the U.S. are no exception.

Diplomacy requires respect for sovereignty and an understanding that imposing punitive measures harms both nations.  The U.S. can work with Cuba to address shared challenges, from climate change to public health, while respecting Cuba’s right to chart its own course.  Cuba, for its part, has repeatedly expressed a willingness to engage in dialogue and cooperation on equal footing, and this openness should be met with reciprocal goodwill from the U.S. government.

The road to lifting the blockade will not be easy, but it is a necessary step toward a more just, peaceful, and prosperous future for both nations.  As global citizens, we must continue to advocate for policies that promote dialogue, reconciliation, and mutual benefit, rather than division and hostility.

Conclusion: Building Bridges, Not Barriers

In closing, the U.S. blockade against Cuba is not just a relic of a bygone era; it is an ongoing injustice that must be rectified.  The economic, social, and humanitarian toll it has taken on the Cuban people is immense, and the moral case for ending the blockade is irrefutable.  Cuba deserves the opportunity to thrive, to engage freely with the world, and to shape its own future without external interference.

"Per aspera ad astra"—through hardships to the stars—remains an apt description of Cuba’s journey.  Despite the blockade’s many challenges, the Cuban people have shown remarkable resilience, creativity, and solidarity.  They have persevered, not out of fear, but out of hope for a better future.

It is time for the United States to honor that hope by ending the blockade, allowing Cuba to flourish as a free and sovereign nation.  It is time for the international community to continue raising its voice in solidarity with Cuba, demanding an end to this unjust policy.  And it is time for all of us, as global citizens, to remember that with faith, perseverance, and a commitment to justice, we can overcome any obstacle.

The world will be watching, and history will judge the actions taken in this critical moment.  Let us all work toward a future where walls of division are torn down, and bridges of cooperation are built, ensuring that the Cuban people, like all people, can live in peace, dignity, and prosperity.

References:

• Cuba’s Report Under United Nations General Assembly Resolution 78/7 Entitled “Necessity of Ending the Economic, Commercial and Financial Blockade Imposed by the United States of America Against Cuba,” July 2024.

• United Nations Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur, "The Negative Impact of Unilateral Coercive Measures on the Enjoyment of Human Rights in Cuba," A/HRC/54/23.

• "United States: Unilateral Designation of States as Sponsors of Terrorism Negatively Impacts Human Rights," United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2024.

Source

U.S. Senators reintroduced bipartisan legislation to lift the Cuba trade embargo

U.S. Senators Klobuchar, Moran, Murphy, Marshall, Warren Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Lift The Trade Embargo on Cuba

The Freedom to Export to Cuba Act would eliminate legal barriers preventing Americans from doing business in Cuba and create new economic opportunities by boosting U.S. exports and allowing Cubans greater access to American goods

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Roger Marshall (R-KS), and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) reintroduced bipartisan legislation to lift the Cuba trade embargo.  The Freedom to Export to Cuba Act would eliminate legal barriers preventing Americans from doing business in Cuba and create new economic opportunities by boosting U.S. exports and allowing Cubans greater access to American goods.  The legislation repeals key provisions of existing laws that block Americans from doing business in Cuba, but keeps in place laws that address human rights or property claims against the Cuban government.

“I have long pushed to reform our relationship with Cuba, which for decades has been defined by conflicts of the past instead of looking toward the future,” said Klobuchar.  “By ending the trade embargo with Cuba once and for all, our bipartisan legislation will turn the page on the failed policy of isolation while creating a new export market and generating economic opportunities for American businesses.” 

“The unilateral trade embargo on Cuba blocks our own farmers, ranchers and manufacturers from selling into a market only 90 miles from our shoreline, while foreign competitors benefit at our expense,” said Moran.  “This legislation will expand market opportunities for U.S. producers by allowing them to compete on a level playing field with other countries.  It is time to amend our own laws to give U.S. producers fair access to market to consumers in Cuba.”

“We can expand opportunities for American businesses and farmers to trade with Cuba while still holding the Cuban government accountable for its human rights record.  This bipartisan legislation is a smart fix that will create American jobs and benefit the Cuban people,” said Murphy.

“I’m proud to sign onto the Freedom to Export to Cuba Act.  It’s important for the United States to boost our economic opportunities and increase market access for American-made goods.  Repealing the current legal restrictions and trade embargo on Cuba allows for Kansas farmers, ranchers and manufacturers to expand their businesses to Cuba and opens the door to a large export market, while leaving in place measures to address human rights abuses,” said Marshall.

“It is long past time for us to normalize relations with Cuba,” said Warren.  “This legislation takes important steps to remove barriers for U.S. trade and relations between our two countries and moves us in the right direction by increasing economic opportunities for Americans and the Cuban people.”

The Freedom to Export to Cuba Act repeals the current legal restrictions against doing business with Cuba, including the original 1961 authorization for establishing the trade embargo; subsequent laws that required enforcement of the embargo; and other restrictive statutes that prohibit transactions between U.S.-owned or controlled firms and Cuba, and limitations on direct shipping between U.S. and Cuban ports.

Cuba relies on agricultural imports to feed the 11 million people who live there and the approximately 4 million tourists who visited in 2019 prior to the pandemic.  The U.S. International Trade Commission found that if restrictions on trade with Cuba had been lifted, exports like wheat, rice, corn, and soybeans could increase by 166 percent within five years to a total of about $800 million.

Source

The Bahamas Immigration Minister Keith Bell resists United Nations - UN call to suspend deportations to Haiti as Haiti's crisis deepens

The Bahamas Immigration Minister Keith Bell resists UN call to suspend deportations to Haiti as situation spirals out of control

“Haiti has political instability, economic deprivation, and complete social collapse.  So you are talking about a myriad of challenges and problems.  That problem can only be addressed at the international level and so it isn’t a matter of frustration

DESPITE calls from United Nations officials to suspend deportations to Haiti, Immigration Minister Keith Bell said The Bahamas has “a job to do” to ensure that officials protect the country for Bahamians.

The Bahamas is facing an influx of Haitian migrants.  However, United Nations Secretary General António Gutierrez on Monday called on governments to consider halting deportations as the situation there spirals out of control

Speaking on the sideline of a Labour on the Campus event, Mr Bell recognised the duty of the secretary general, but made it clear what the government has to do.

“The United Nations obviously they seek to ensure that there is harmony, there’s unity among all nations, so obviously that is his job.  We in The Bahamas have a job to do to ensure that we protect The Bahamas for Bahamians.  It’s as simple as that.  The Bahamas as all governments have consistently said we cannot absorb these persons who come in The Bahamas illegally,” he said.

“If you want to come to The Bahamas as a tourist or want to work, then there is a process.  If you follow that process, you may be granted access to The Bahamas.

“If you come here illegally and unlawfully, then, of course, there has to be swift justice.  We will not tolerate, nor will we support reasonably anyone coming into The Bahamas from undocumented or illegal means you will stay in the jurisdiction you will be deported.”

He also shared doubts that The Bahamas would sign on to provisions allowing for free movement when asked about CARICOM’s freedom of movement or labour within the region.

“I know you’re talking about a treaty – I think the Treaty of Chaguaramas and the (free) movement of people through the Caribbean.  The government of The Bahamas, both PLP and FNM, has consistently not signed on to those specific provisions.  I do not foresee in the very far future that we’re going to support a free movement throughout this country of anyone.”

Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis said the crisis in Haiti poses a substantial threat to The Bahamas due to an increase in irregular migration.

He spoke earlier this week at the opening session of the heads of summit meeting of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

During his remarks, Mr Davis stated: “With the support and leadership of Haiti, collectively, we can, through CELAC and other regional organisations, help Haitians build a path out of crisis.”

Asked if there was frustration with the international community over addressing Haiti’s issues, the labour minister listed some of the factors that needed to be considered when helping countries.

“I will not say it there is frustration and you would have seen all around the world where first world developed countries, superpowers go into these countries where they need help — where there is a genocide or there is this civil war and the like.  When you go into these countries you have to ensure first of all, what is your objective?  What are the objectives of you going in?  And what would be your exit strategy?

“Haiti has political instability, economic deprivation, and complete social collapse.  So you are talking about a myriad of challenges and problems.  That problem can only be addressed at the international level and so it isn’t a matter of frustration.

“It’s just a matter of how we’re going to address these issues and challenges and then determine how we can help, but Haiti has 12 million people, The Bahamas cannot under no circumstance, support any illegal and unlawful entry of persons from Haiti and that has extended to Cuba where we’ve had an exponential growth in illegal migrants coming from that country. We will not tolerate it.”

Source

Cuba celebrates a victory in its struggle against the U.S. blockade with overwhelming support in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) against the U.S. economic embargo

The extraterritorial impact of the blockade harms the sovereignty of the countries of the United Nations, sanctions their businessmen and impedes access to their ports for third party ships that dock in Cuba

By Maby Martinez Rodriguez

Cuba celebrates Thursday a new victory in its struggle against the U.S. blockade, by achieving overwhelming support in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) for a resolution approved by 185 votes in favor, two against and two abstentions.

The report presented for the thirtieth time states that only between August 2021 and February 2022 that unilateral policy caused Cuba losses in the order of 3,806.5 million dollars.  The figure is 49% higher than that reported between January and July 2021 and a record in just seven months.

At current prices, the accumulated damages during six decades of the blockade amount to 150,410.8 million dollars, with a great weight on sectors such as health and education, in addition to the damage to the national economy and the quality of life of Cuban families.

In the first 14 months of the Biden Administration alone, the losses caused by the blockade amounted to 6,364 million dollars, which is equivalent to an impact of more than 454 million dollars a month and more than 15 million dollars a day, according to the document.

The extraterritorial impact of the blockade harms the sovereignty of the countries of the United Nations, sanctions their businessmen and impedes access to their ports for third party ships that dock in Cuba.  It also prevents the importation into Cuba of articles produced in any country when they have 10% or more of U.S. components, the foreign minister denounced.

Source

Disparities in US immigration policy toward Haiti and Cuba: A legacy to be continued?

by Alice Barrett & Kelsey Cary, COHA Research Associates:



Many points of comparison exist between Haiti and Cuba, as Ruth Ellen Wasem contends in a Congressional Research Report: “Both nations have a history of repressive governments with documented human rights violations. Both countries have a history of sending asylum seekers to the United States by boats.” In spite of these similarities, several political and economic factors have spurred divergent U.S. directives in these two island nations.

The United States and Cuba have maintained a tenuous relationship since Fidel Castro assumed power in 1959. The Kennedy administration implemented a two-tier policy consisting of an economic embargo paired with diplomatic isolation, both of which continue to dictate U.S. foreign policy toward Cuba today. Although the U.S. has not sought to diplomatically and economically isolate Haiti in the same manner, relations between the former French colony and the U.S. have been shaped by the protection of national interests and subsequent military intervention. Haiti has been unable to achieve stability, becoming a headache in the backyard of the U.S. and, consequently, ties between the two states have been tumultuous. These contrasting histories and foreign policy approaches surpass domestic boundaries, as reflected in current U.S. immigration legislation. Ironically, the U.S. holds refugees escaping from communist Cuba to more lenient standards than any other foreign nationals. Migrants facing at least equally urgent circumstances, such as Haitians, suffer the ramifications of our broken policies. The January 12, 2010 earthquake provides an example of a pressing and devastating event calling for the Obama administration to address the needs of the increasing numbers of refugees fleeing Haiti.

First Steps toward Favorable Status: The Cuban Adjustment Act

Cuba ranks as the fifth largest immigrant-sending country to the United States. In 2008 alone, 49,500 Cubans became Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs). The 1966 Cuban Adjustment Act (CAA) is arguably the single most important piece of legislation that initiated a longstanding pattern of preferential treatment of Cuban migrants. The CAA guarantees that Cubans living in the U.S. after January 1, 1959 for a least one year may adjust to permanent residence status.

Following a 1996 amendment to this statute, the “wet foot/dry foot” practice evolved. This practice implies that the U.S. Coast Guard interdict Cubans found at sea and return them to Cuba unless they profess fears of persecution. However, Cubans who effectively reach the shore are inspected for entry by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and are by and large permitted to remain in the U.S. for the year following. Moreover, if a confirmed Cuban national attempts to enter the U.S. by land, usually through Mexico, Customs and Border Protections (CBP) personnel can inspect the would-be intruder and frequently deem them exempt from deportation. Illegal Haitian migrants do not benefit from any comparable advantages. If they cannot provide a reason for an asylum hearing upon arrival in the U.S., they are immediately repatriated or detained.

The Cuba-US Migration Agreement

In 1994, the number of Cuban refugees seeking asylum or immigrant visas to the United States became so great that the Clinton administration was persuaded to establish a policy to effectively decrease the amount of money being spent on refugee services and impose a fixed limit. Consequently, the U.S. and Cuba willingly reached a migration accord in which the U.S. agreed to allow at least twenty thousand immigrants each year to enter the United States, excluding in this count the relatives of U.S. citizens, who would also be eligible to enter. However, hardly any Cubans met the eligibility standards determined by the INS, meaning only a few qualified for visas as family-sponsored immigrants or as employment-based immigrants. Additionally, a stronger U.S. interdiction policy forced migrating Cubans found in U.S. waters to be repatriated back to Cuba. Such attempts, which seemed to hinder Cuban migrants trying to enter via the shores of Florida, ironically resulted in the Special Cuban Migration Lottery, or more simply a “visa lottery.” According to a 2009 Congressional Research Report, 541,000 Cubans qualified for the drawing in 1998 alone. The Castro government found this number frighteningly high and subsequently put an end to these lotteries. However, the United States continues to parole Cuban registrants from 1998. The number of Cubans who qualified for potential U.S. entry in a single year exceeds the figure of Haitians living in the U.S. today, estimated at 532,000.

Haitian Immigration Policy: An Unaddressed History

Although Haiti has seen some democratic progress since the election of René Preval in 2005, it remains the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. The wide-reaching foreign policy arm of the White House has largely contributed to Haiti’s plight. A nineteen-year U.S. occupation of Haiti from 1915 to 1934 only exacerbated the dire economic and political situation in the country. Throughout this period, in which U.S. occupying forces continued to abuse their power, between 15,000 and 30,000 Haitian lives were taken. During its tenure, the U.S. failed to establish democratic traditions, but did find success in strengthening an already powerful institution: the Haitian military. Authoritarian regimes since then have predictably dominated the nation as only two leaders have voluntarily handed over power. An estimated 40,000 people were jailed, tortured or killed during the twenty-nine years (1957-1986) spanning the rule of Francois Duvalier (“Papa Doc) and his son Jean-Claude Duvalier (“Baby Doc”).

U.S. immigration policy towards Haitians originated during the dictatorship of Jean-Claude Duvalier with an aim of reducing the number of Haitian migrants seeking asylum or immigrant visas to the United States in the aftermath of the 1981 Mariel Boatlift. The boatlift was a seven-month time period when an influx of 125,000 Cubans and 25,000 Haitians seeking asylum in the United States arrived by boat to the shores of South Florida. As a result, Ronald Reagan negotiated with then Haitian Dictator Jean-Claude Duvalier to develop the policy of interdiction, a practice whereby the Coast Guard stops and searches boats on the high seas suspected of transporting undocumented immigrants. For instance, from 1981 to 1990, 22,940 Haitians were interdicted, yet only 11 of them were even considered qualified to apply for asylum in the United States. Washington claimed that Haitians seeking asylum in the U.S. during this time period could only be considered economic migrants and were therefore unqualified to remain in the country. However, this specious conclusion was stood on its head following the Presidential coup in 1991, which overthrew the constitutional Aristide government.

The Aftermath of the 1991 Coup

Jean-Bertrand Aristide had served as an embodiment of hope and prosperity for the poor, but the left-leaning policies he wanted to implement were deeply disturbing to both the Haitian army and elite. This frustration resulted in a coup that marked a continuation of Haitian military tyranny: Aristide had been the state’s first democratically elected leader and his ousting led to yet another oppressive military regime. The U.S. and the international community responded to the crisis by imposing an international trade embargo against Haiti, nominally calling for the reinstatement of Aristide. Additionally, nearly 40,000 Haitians boarded boats and departed for Florida’s shores, forcing the U.S. to re-evaluate the migrant status of Haitians.

The coup in 1991 challenged Washington’s assumption that Haitians were fleeing their country solely for economic reasons and were not eligible for asylum. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) stipulates that a refugee can only stay in the U.S. if they “demonstrate a well-founded fear that if returned home, they will be persecuted based upon one of the five characteristics: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” Although Haiti’s poverty suggests its citizens might only be seeking U.S. immigrant visas for economic purposes, a 1992 Amnesty International report contradicts this claim. It revealed that since the beginning of the coup, a minimum of 1,500 people had been killed and thousands more had been imprisoned and tortured for merely having a picture of Aristide hanging on the wall. Yet this created no changes in refugee policy, signaling that in reality, Washington was no more favorably oriented to Aristide than to the Haitian military.

The Bush administration ignored a basic tenant of a treaty on refugees to which Haiti and the U.S. had been parties since 1968. International refugee law forbids the return of refugees to their country of origin unless adequate assurances have been made that they will not be persecuted. Nevertheless, in November 1991, the Coast Guard sent home 538 Haitian escapees. This repatriation occurred in spite of an arrangement made between the U.S., the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNCHR) and other countries in the region to provide a safe-haven for these interdicted Haitian migrants. According to a 2005 Congressional Report, Washington returned these Haitians without interviewing them to determine whether they were at risk of persecution. In order for the interdicted Haitians to even be considered eligible for asylum, they would have had to attest to being in danger if repatriated. They were never granted the opportunity to do this, unlike their Cuban counterparts.

The Haiti Earthquake: an Amplification of Inconsistent Policy

The January 12, 2010 earthquake thrust Haitians into devastation: 230,000 died and 1.5 million are still left homeless. The immediate need for relocation remains evident: the temporary camps constructed for those dislocated on the island are rapidly turning into slums and are extremely vulnerable to approaching hurricanes. Although the United States’ capacity to accept immigrants has its limits, the continued disproportionate acceptance of Cubans over Haitians in light of Haiti’s latest crisis is unwarranted.

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has focused on two short-term immigration solutions for Haitians in need of respite: the extension of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for those residing in the U.S. illegally prior to the earthquake and the limited acceptance of Humanitarian Parole applications. According to USCIS, Humanitarian Parole visas are to be “used sparingly to bring someone who is otherwise inadmissible into the United States for a temporary period of time due to a compelling emergency.”

Immigrants from Haiti: Visas and Detentions

By the end of last February, 31,000 people, including 7,200 foreign nationals, had been evacuated from Haiti to the United States. However, as of May, only approximately 1,700 Haitian citizens had received Humanitarian Parole. A series of restrictive practices stand in contrast to the open arms extended to Cubans, who continue to benefit under the CAA and from a high number of family connections. The U.S. government set the 2010 admissions ceiling for refugees from Latin America and the Caribbean at 5,000. So far, 3,351 out of 3,429 resettled have been Cuban refugees. Considering the deplorable conditions Haitians currently face, their comparatively low acceptance is disconcerting. Furthermore, it creates a looming gap between evacuation and immigrant reception that tends to be filled through existing loop holes and illegal smuggling networks. Instead of Humanitarian Parole, the remaining official number of Haitian evacuees have received tourist visas. The drawback of tourist visas is that they prohibit legal employment in the U.S., likely leading to extended illegal residence and labor. These prospects put tourist visa holders at higher risk of detention.

Furthermore, many Haitians have once again resorted to illegal means of immigration, boarding boats to reach U.S. shores. Some U.S. officials seem to negate the link between such unlawful processes and the government’s limited immigration response. In January 2010, immediately following the Haiti earthquake, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirmed, “Our ordinary and regular immigration laws will apply going forward, which means that we are not going to be accepting into the United States Haitians who are attempting to make it to our shores. They will be interdicted. They will be repatriated.” This approach seems simple, but there is one caveat: deportations to Haiti have been at a stand-still ever since the earthquake, and the U.S. government has yet to name a date for their reinstatement. To make matters worse, U.S. immigration law contains no restrictions on the amount of time that suspected illegal immigrants and asylum seekers may be held in detention.

Though U.S. detention policies have always been in place, they were strengthened following the September 11th terrorist attacks. On April 17, 2003, the Attorney General ruled that the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) judges should take national security into account when deciding on bonds for detained immigrants demanding release. The Bush Administration justified this claim on the basis that terrorists could pose as Haitians seeking asylum. Cuban migrants have not been singled out in the same manner and many critics believe the term “national security” is employed too arbitrarily as justification for this practice. Such ambiguity results in the unnecessary detention of many Haitian migrants without proof of their being a danger to this country. Moreover, prison-like conditions, such as physical restraint, lack of medical attention, and occasional physical and verbal abuse in these centers are not in line with ICE regulations or international human rights standards.

Several Haitian migrants were placed in detention centers following the earthquake. An April 1, 2010 New York Times article discusses a specific case where thirty Haitians had remained in detention for over two months at the Broward County Transitional Center, an immigration jail in Florida. Marines directed these detainees onto military planes amid the chaos that erupted following the earthquake. Advocates who fought for their release contended, “There is no reason to spend taxpayer dollars detaining traumatized earthquake survivors who cannot be deported and who have demonstrated that they are neither a flight risk nor danger to the community.”

TPS: Complications and Concerns

Detention is not a fear limited to would-be emigrating Haitians. The crackdown of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been felt throughout the country’s immigrant community, preventing many eligible Haitians in the U.S. from applying for TPS. The U.S. government has granted TPS to Haitians in the U.S. until July 22, 2011. Technically, this option is open to all Haitian nationals who were already in the U.S. prior to the earthquake, regardless of their current immigration status. As of June 3, 2010, Alejandro Mayorkas, head of USCIS, received 52,000 Haitian TPS applications, lower than the expected number. Representatives of both University of Miami Law School and the law firm of Hunton and Williams requested that the agency issue a statement assuring Haitians they would not be referred to ICE or asked to appear in court due to their status. USCIS responded that laws of motions to appear in court (MTA) vary by state, making the issuance of such a statement impractical.

Lawyers also continue to face a number of hurdles in trying to help Haitians file TPS applications. For example, fees ranging from a total of $50 to $390 are difficult for many eligible applicants to provide. Birth certificates of applicants’ parents have also been required to verify Haitian nationality. These documents are often nearly impossible to obtain after the earthquake’s vast destruction. The current deadline for filing TPS applications is July 20, 2010. Due to complaints concerning the application process, the U.S. government is considering an extension of this deadline.

Why Preferential Treatment? Politics and Race

Arguably, Haitians receive a much colder welcome in the United States than Cubans. Cubans who are fleeing their island and breaking with a communist regime are in much better shape and generally considered deserving of asylum. If they reach U.S. territory successfully (either by boat or crossing the Mexican border) they receive refugee status and subsequently become LPRs. Critics argue that Washington rationalizes this immigration policy as serving a long-standing national political interest in accordance with the goals of the Cuban-American Lobby. Some suggest that Cubans’ special status serves as a purported blow against the Castro government.

Another explanation for this discriminatory treatment comes from Haiti’s lower average level of education. This initial disadvantage creates apprehension amongst Americans about Haitians’ ability to support themselves and contribute to U.S. society. Although Cuban immigrants still face some discrimination, they come from a nation with a 99.8% literacy rate and are thus perceived as less of a potential burden. Some critics even contend that preferential treatment bestowed upon Cuban refugees is an example of a double standard on the basis of race. TransAfrica, NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucus released an amicus curiae brief designating U.S. interdiction policy as discriminatory and further arguing that Haitians were subject to “separate and unequal” treatment.

The United States cannot continue to justify differences in immigration practices developed toward Haitians and Cubans. While the Cold War clearly ended twenty years ago, the Haiti earthquake has put the country in a state of emergency. Current U.S. policy, however, promotes dangerous travel attempts to enter the U.S. and continues to fuel an unproductive Cold War mentality that is the product of the Cuban-American lobby attempting to garner special treatment for its cause.

Looking Ahead: Environmental Reasons for Concern

Although the USCIS is considering an extension of the July 20th TPS deadline for Haitians, such small modifications emphasize the need for large-scale adjustments. Both TPS and Humanitarian Parole provided for Haitians are temporary emergency measures, while Cubans benefit from a standardized, annual quota set for refugees fearing persecution. Not only does the limited scope of these visas continue the U.S.’s long standing bias against Haitian immigrants; it also serves as an example of insufficient responses to natural disasters on a global scale. Tragic and unfair situations resembling the Haiti earthquake’s aftermath are becoming increasingly common in light of environmental dangers. In 2005, A United Nations group warned of the increasing number of “environmental refugees” that would soon need relocation around the world due to climate change. A 2009 article of the World Resources Institute points to the Carteret Islands as the first case of land deemed uninhabitable due to continuous flooding. Its residents are now relocating to nearby Papua New Guinea. Factual and scientific evidence points to rising sea levels and increased hurricanes. These are both migration drivers that transcend political and economic boundaries that have influenced Washington’s biased treatment of Haitians and Cubans. Further large-scale relocations due to natural disasters must be permanently accounted for in future immigration policy, both in the U.S. and around the world.

The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as being "one of the nation's most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers." For more information, visit www.coha.org

June 29, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Operation Peter Pan - Cuba

Peter Pan and child trafficking
By Gabriel Molina:



• IT is particularly difficult for Cuba’s enemies to justify the reason for U.S. citizens being prohibited to travel freely to Cuba.

Approximately 10 years ago, almost at the end of his second term, President William Clinton attempted to restore that right to his compatriots. At that time he affirmed that allowing citizens to travel to Cuba would be in the interest of the United States, as the best means of influencing the island.

But the rights and interests of U.S. citizens are not being respected. Mafia groups from Florida demanded of Clinton’s successor, the hated Bush, that he revoke that policy given that, incredibly, the ones who were influenced were the visitors and not the visited.

In total contrast to what is happening in relation to other underdeveloped countries, the interest of those groups, mostly located in Miami, is to provoke Cubans into leaving the island and taking refuge in the United States. Its neighbors cannot understand why, while walls have been constructed to keep them out, all kinds of obstacles are being put in their way, while they are hunted, maltreated, expelled and even killed, Cubans reaching U.S. territory illegally are given refugee status and all kinds of privileges – in the name of democracy and freedom.

That arbitrary regulation has been the cause of an incessant human trafficking that has turned into a lucrative and deadly business.

It all began 50 years ago, when in 1960 the CIA came up with a false law widely reproduced and distributed by its agents. In that way, Cubans were led to believe that the revolutionary government had decided to remove parental custody of children and abrogate it to the state.

An unheard of mass of confused children preparing to travel alone to the United States began to crowd into Havana’s José Martí airport. That was because approximately 14,000 families failed to think or act sensibly and let themselves be deceived by the criminal plot organized by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), under the codename Operation Peter Pan.

Researchers José Wajasán and Ramón Torreira describe it as "a sinister manipulation on the part of Washington of the major fears of Cuban parents."

In their book Operation Peter Pan, the authors quote documents from the Kennedy Library declassified from National Security Files, which, via a letter from General Maxwell Taylor, inform of a covert action program to defeat the Cuban government.

For the first time on October 26, 1960, the CIA-created Radio Swan referred to a supposed law to take children aged 5 to 18 from their parents, in order to convert them into "monsters of [Marxist] materialism."

The custody conspiracy had gone into operation by word of mouth months earlier. Initially the CIA gave the task to the conspiracy group headed by the ex-prime minister of the Carlos Prío government, known as Pony Varona, a derivative of his name Tony, in honor of his lack of personal refinement.

Later, other groups became involved, because Varona left the country, leaving the mission in the hands of his closest partners, Leopoldina and Ramón Grau Alsina, niece and nephew of ex-president Ramón Grau San Martín, who confessed their guilt after their arrest. They printed out the false law, saying that they had stolen it from President Dorticós’ office and circulated it clandestinely. The apocryphal document stated in its Article 3: "When this law comes into effect, the custody of persons under 20 years of age will be exercised by the state via persons or organizations to which this faculty has been delegated."

Panic virtually spread among thousands of Cuban families. Having structured the plot at national and continental level, the U.S. government stated that it could take in all Cuban minors who wished to travel there, without visas or papers. In that violation of its own immigration laws, Washington gave large sums of money to the airline companies to transport the minors to Miami.

Father Bryan O. Walsh, whom the authorities placed at the head of the program, declared years later that he received approximately 15,000 children. It was a tremendous paradox: parents abandoned their children to an unknown fate, with the ingenuous intention of protecting them.

The majority of those children suffered from major traumas that culminated in a total sense of non-belonging. Some of them learned alone to insert themselves in society, while there were extreme cases like that of Robert Rodríguez who, at the age of 55, brought a lawsuit before a Miami court, claiming that during the five years that he was under a "protection program in the archdiocese of the city, he was the victim, along with other children, of continuous sexual and emotional abuse." He affirmed that "he was mistreated and sexually abused in the various camps where he was placed, as were other children taken there."

During the last 50 years, a number of variations of Operation Peter Pan have emerged from Miami and Washington. The most recent one, essayed since 2003, did not surprise anyone. It was very much part of the excesses of the Bush administration, looked down on by the rest of the world on account of its unscrupulous form of government. But, by maintaining Cuba on the list of countries trafficking minors – as it announced on June 14 – the government of President Barack Obama, which it was thought had a minimum amount of decency, is destroying the few hopes of change that some people might still be holding onto. •

June 23, 2010

granma.cu

Bahamas Blog International

No more free lunch in Raul Castro's Cuba

By Isabel Sanchez:


HAVANA, Cuba (AFP) -- President Raul Castro is taking a bold gamble to ease communist Cuba's cash crunch by eliminating a costly government lunch program that feeds almost a third of the nation's population every workday.

The Americas' only one-party communist government, held afloat largely by support from its key ally Venezuela, is desperate to improve its budget outlook; the global economy is slack, and Havana is very hard pressed to secure international financing.

Raul Castro, 76, officially took over as Cuba's president in February 2008 after his brother, revolutionary icon Fidel Castro, stepped aside with health problems.

Though some wondered if Raul Castro would try to move Cuba's centralized economy toward more market elements, so far he has sought to boost efficiency and cut corruption and waste without reshaping the economic system.

And so far it has been an uphill battle, something akin to treading water.

But now, Raul Castro has moved to set in motion what will likely be the biggest rollback of an entitlement since Cuba's 1959 revolution -- starting to put an end to the daily lunch program for state workers, as announced Friday in Granma, the Cuban Communist Party newspaper.

In a country where workers earn the average of 17 dollars a month, and state subsidized monthly food baskets are not enough for families, more than 3.5 million Cuban government employees -- out of a total population of 11.2 million -- benefit from the nutritionally significant free meal.

The pricetag is a cool 350 million dollars a year, not counting energy costs or facilities maintenance, Granma said.

But that will come to a halt in four ministries experimentally from October 1, Granma said. As workers stream to the 24,700 state lunchrooms, the government "is faced with extremely high state spending due to extremely high international market prices, infinite subsidies and freebies," Granma explained.

Parallel to the cutback, workers will see their salaries boosted by 15 pesos a workday (.60 dollar US) to cover their lunch.

It is a dramatic shift in Cuba, where the government workers' lunchroom has been among the longest-standing subsidies, though even authorities have called it paternalistic.

And more troubling, especially for authorities, is the fact that the lunchrooms' kitchens have become a source of economic hemorrhaging, from which workers unabashedly make off with tonnes of rice, beans, chicken and cooking oil to make ends meet.

The Castro government is keen to reduce the 2.5 billion dollars a year it spends on food imports, which it has to buy on the international market in hard currency.

"Nobody can go on indefinitely spending more than they earn. Two and two are four, never five. In our imperfect socialism, too often two plus two turn out to be three," Raul Castro said in an August 1 address alluding to corruption problems.

Some Cubans were aghast at the idea of losing a free lunch.

"What am I going to buy with 15 pesos," asked a bank worker, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "I cannot even make anything, even something horrible, at home for that little."

But Roberto Reyes, a construction employee, said sometimes the state lunch is so bad, he would rather not eat it -- and pocket the small monthly raise.

The president has said health care and education were not cuts he would willingly make.

But Cubans wonder how long it will be until the legendary monthly ration books with which Cubans receive limited basic food goods, such as rice and beans, for free, come under the budget axe.

September 28, 2009

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Caribbean Blog International