Thursday, Mar 03 2011, 4:52PM
This is a guest note by Lawrence Wilkerson, Visiting Harriman Professor
of Government and Public Policy at the College of William and Mary, and
Arturo Lopez-Levy, Lecturer in the Josef Korbel School of International
Studies at the University of Denver. Dawn Gable contributed to this article.
by Lawrence Wilkerson and Arturo Lopez-Levy
The trial in Cuba against USAID subcontractor Alan Gross, which will
begin on March 4, presents an opportunity for the Cuban government to
both demonstrate the legitimate basis for nationalist defense against
U.S. interventionist policy and its good will towards the millions of
potential American travelers to Cuba.
By the end of the trial, it should be clear that U.S. travelers to Cuba
have nothing to fear if they keep a healthy distance from regime change
programs and that Washington and Havana would both gain from dismantling
hostile attitudes.
The trial serves three Cuban government purposes:
(1) It will mobilize the nationalist sentiments of the Cuban people
to denounce foreign interference in Cuba's internal affairs. The trial
must clarify whether Gross informed the leaders of the Jewish community
in Cuba of his link to the USAID Cuba program sponsored under the
auspices of the Helms-Burton Act. If not, this will expose a design flaw
of a semi-covert subversive program in which the USAID placed Cubans at
risk of long prison sentences without their informed consent, thus
violating basic standards of international development assistance. By
now it is evident that the Bush Administration, which conceived the
project, was not interested in promoting Cuban civil society, but rather
in using religious solidarity as a political weapon.
(2) It will set an example and deter other Cubans, Americans, and
nationals of third countries from participating in regime change
programs under the Helms-Burton Act. No one after Alan Gross will be
able to claim ignorance of the risk involved. Everything related to
section 109 of the Helms Burton Act carries the stigma of illegal
interference in Cuba's sovereign affairs and is punishable in Cuba by up
to 20 years imprisonment.
(3) It will generate international condemnation of US policy and
invigorate solidarity with Cuban sovereignty. By exposing the
unilateralist, covert and interventionist nature of the USAID Cuba
program, the trial will mobilize international opinion, not only
triggering a more vigorous rejection of the U.S. embargo, but also
tarnishing the credibility of the USAID in other countries. It is a
blow, intangible but significant, to President Obama's foreign policy
that focuses on the use of US popular appeal and bridge building. To the
extent that the impact in countries such as Brazil, Bolivia, Venezuela,
Nicaragua, Ecuador and even El Salvador and Argentina, for example, will
be greater, the State Department and the U.S. Congress cannot ignore the
costs of disguising a Cuba regime change policy as international
development assistance.
Undermine the Helms-Burton Act but set Alan Gross free
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Roberta Jacobson's hope that Gross
be tried and sent home is reasonable. Alan Gross is a victim of the
hostility between the two countries and a policy that is not typical of
American values and standards. His and his family's ordeal has attracted
considerable humanitarian solidarity. As the first US citizen arrested
under the law to defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of
Cuba, Gross should be given the benefit of the doubt and become an
example of Cuba's goodwill towards the people of the United States.
If the Obama administration offers to facilitate a favorable
international climate for the economic reforms taking place in Cuba, the
utility of retaining Alan Gross, once the trial has concluded, would
decline for the Cuban government.
Once the dividends related to the denouncement of the policy outlined in
the Helms-Burton Act are obtained, the only benefit for the Cuban
government in keeping Gross in prison would be the frequent mention of
his case in relation to the situation of the five Cubans who were
sentenced in Miami on charges of espionage in trials considered by
Amnesty International and the UN group on arbitrary detention as lacking
guarantees of fairness and impartiality. Although the cases must be
analyzed separately, it is worth noting that the lawyer representing
Gross at trial also serves as legal counselor for the families of the five.
In these circumstances a visit to Havana by the two highest ranking
members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senators John Kerry
and Richard Lugar would be very helpful. Such a visit could be preceded
by a delegation from the Conference of Presidents of Major American
Jewish Organizations. Through interacting with the Cuban office of
religious affairs and the leadership of the Cuban Jewish community, they
would learn firsthand how their brothers in faith reject the
Helms-Burton Act and any misuse of inter-religious contacts as a
political weapon for regime change.
Journalists could accompany the entourage and report on the island's
welcoming attitude toward US travelers. The visiting US delegation could
meet the relatives of the five Cubans imprisoned in the U.S., hearing
their views on that trial and becoming aware of the need for political
courage on both sides of the Florida Straits to end the policies that
led to the arrests of the Cubans and of Gross.
A Cuban humanitarian gesture towards the Gross family would add impetus
to the advocates of a change in U.S. policy toward Cuba and recognize
those many Americans who oppose the embargo. It might also create
momentum for a substantial American gesture of détente, before the 2012
electoral season (for instance, removing Cuba from the list of state
sponsors of terrorism, eliminating embargo elements that hinder Cuba's
emerging private sector, or allowing food sales on credit).
The personal tragedy of Alan Gross, a U.S. citizen with an interest in
international development assistance, has revealed once again the danger
of allowing the values of US society to be hijacked by agendas unrelated
to human rights and outside American strategic interests. The U.S. has
no reason to apologize for its democratic values but the promotion of
these principles should not be used to mask Cuban exiles' property
claims, regime change aspirations or unilateral actions against the
principles of international law.
Cuba, meanwhile, should not confuse enemies. Those who passed the
Helms-Burton Act are precisely the ones who want to turn Alan Gross into
an insurmountable obstacle for the advancement of better relations.
The Gross trial must expose the illegal, unilateralist and
interventionist nature of the Helms-Burton Act and the USAID Cuba
program. But after the trial, a humanitarian gesture towards Alan Gross
and his family would be the best way to show the Cuban openness
necessary to undermine the ban on travel to the island.
-- Lawrence Wilkerson and Arturo Lopez-Levy
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2011/03/a_road_map_to_s/
No comments:
Post a Comment