CUBA-US: Conflicting Interests Affect Incipient Thaw

By Dalia Acosta Reprint | | Print |

Dalia Acosta

HAVANA, Feb 18 2002 (IPS) - The incipient thaw between Cuba and the United States could end up trapped in a vicious circle, due to the conflicting interests in Washington of hard-line political forces that insist on the embargo against the socialist government of Fidel Castro and business sectors keen on doing business with the island.

As occurred in the mid-1990s but is happening with greater strength than ever today, relations between the two countries appear to be moving along divergent paths, with some sectors in the United States pushing for a lifting of economic sanctions, while others are arguing louder than ever for a continued hard- line stance against Cuba.

More than 2,000 U.S. citizens have visited Cuba so far this year, without even counting those who came as tourists in violation of U.S. law, which prohibits unauthorised visits to this socialist Caribbean island nation of 11 million.

Several business delegations have carried out missions to explore future business prospects, while other delegates have accompanied shipments of food sold to Cuba in the wake of Hurricane Michelle, the first commercial transactions between the two countries in over 40 years.

Cuba’s purchases of foodstuffs, amounting to 35 million dollars, could be repeated this year and even expanded threefold if the United States extends the licences it granted the exporters, and if it approves the use of financing, Castro announced last week.

However, the licences were granted to U.S. food companies in the context of the humanitarian emergency created by the hurricane, which swept through Cuba on Nov 4, and there is no specific reason they would be extended in the future.

While some U.S. business leaders and lawmakers say relations between the two countries are at a historic juncture, representatives of the government of George W. Bush insist that nothing has changed.

On Feb 5, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell told a hearing of the House of Representatives Foreign Relations Committee that the government’s Cuba policy had not changed one bit.

Powell was responding to a question raised by Cuban-American Republican Representative Ileana Ross-Lethinen, one of the staunchest advocates of even stiffer economic sanctions against Cuba.

Two days later, the same view was expressed by the head of the U.S. Interests Section in Cuba, Vicki Huddleston, who said that any interpretation that pointed to an improvement of relations between the two countries was “superficial.”

After describing Havana’s current attitude towards the United States as a “charm offensive,” the diplomat said any loosening of the sanctions was dependent on a political opening in Cuba in the areas of democracy and human rights.

Relations are not improving, because we are still concerned about human rights, democracy, and the free flow of information on the island, said Huddleston in an unusual meeting with the foreign press accredited in Cuba.

“For 43 years they’ve been saying the same thing,” responded Castro, who added that “the use of cannons must be left to prehistoric times, and replaced by the use of ideas.”

Diplomatic sources in Havana said Huddleston was called to the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Relations last Wednesday where she was admonished for her remarks.

The “charm offensive” described by Huddleston included Castro’s offer of humanitarian aid to the United States after the Sep 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

She was also referring to Havana’s acceptance of Washington’s decision to hold prisoners of war from Afghanistan in the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo, 970 kms from Havana.

But the U.S. diplomat said Cuba “must do more” to be removed from the list of countries that allegedly sponsor terrorism, put together every year by the U.S. State Department.

Washington demands that the Castro government hand over around 70 fugitives wanted by the U.S. justice system, who are reportedly living in Cuba. It also insists that Havana deport members or former members of the Basque separatist organisation ETA.

Analysts say the Bush administration is maintaining its hard- line, confrontational approach towards Cuba to appease influential Cuban exile sectors, but without turning its back on the route of reaching pragmatic agreements.

The tendency seems to be towards a continued opening of small gaps in the four-decades-old embargo, via commercial transactions and collaboration on different fronts, while the sanctions against the island remain in place with few changes in U.S. legislation.

The first of the set of laws making up the U.S. embargo against Cuba date back to 1960. The sanctions were stiffened in 1996 by the signing into law by then-president Bill Clinton (1993-2001) of the Helms-Burton Act, which is also designed to punish companies from third countries that do business with property confiscated by the Cuban revolution.

In 2000, the U.S. Congress approved exports of food and medicines to Cuba, although it did not lift the restrictions on financing for such sales or modify the strict requisites for obtaining licences to engage in business with Cuba.

Castro responded that Cuba would not buy “a single grain of rice or a single aspirin” from the United States until the entire blockade was struck down.

But things began to change last year with the offer of U.S. humanitarian aid for the victims of Hurricane Michelle and Cuba’s counter-proposal of cash purchases instead of donations.