Congressional Oversight Needed as Obama Administration Moves to Remove
Cuba from State Sponsors of Terrorism List
By Ana Quintana
The Obama Administration has recently chosen to normalize relations with
Cuba. In addition to establishing embassies and expanding commercial
transactions, the White House has also declared that Cuba will be
removed from the State Department's State Sponsors of Terrorism list.
To remove Cuba from the list would be to ignore both the Cuban
government's inherently malicious nature and the utility of terrorist
designations. For over three decades, the Castro regime has directly
supported organizations designated by the U.S. government as terrorist.
Recent activities that warrant Cuba's place on the list include Havana's
violations of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions,
leadership role in directing Venezuela's military and intelligence, and
steadfast support and intimate relationship with such countries as
Syria, Iran, and North Korea. The Castro regime also continues to harbor
U.S. fugitives and subsidize their livelihoods. One fugitive has been on
the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorists list since 2013 for killing a New
Jersey State Trooper.
Removing Cuba from the list would also remove restrictions that preclude
their receipt preferential foreign aid and trade benefits. Repealing the
designation combined with further weakening of sanctions will not bode
well for U.S. taxpayers. The regime routinely defaults on foreign loans
and is guilty of the largest uncompensated theft of U.S. assets in
recorded history, valued at $7 billion. Congress cannot ignore the
implications of an undeserving regime's being removed from this list.
Why the Castro Regime Cannot Be Trusted
President Obama's new Cuba policy has been heavily criticized and
rightfully so. His predecessors, both Republican and Democrat,
recognized that a Cuba governed by the Castro regime will never be
receptive to genuine engagement.
Previous unilateral attempts by the Carter and Clinton Administrations
to reduce hostilities ended up backfiring on the U.S. In 1977, President
Carter reestablished diplomatic relations by allowing each country
reciprocal interest sections. The government in Havana responded shortly
thereafter by sending expeditionary forces and resources to Marxist
insurgencies in over a dozen African countries. The Clinton
Administration for years attempted to improve relations and was rewarded
by the Castro regime's shooting down of Brothers to the Rescue flights.
In what the U.S. determined to be an international act of terrorism, the
Cuban military, at the order of current leader Raul Castro, shot down
two American aircraft over international waters, killing three American
citizens and one U.S. resident.
According to the State Department's annual terrorism report, the
government in Havana continues to support the terrorist Colombia's
Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC).[1] While the FARC have been weakened,
it is premature to assume that they have been defeated. Throughout the
past two years of peace talks in Havana, the FARC has continued to
kidnap and kill Colombian civilians and military alike. FARC strongholds
still exist throughout the country, and it is widely known that they
have sanctuary just across the border in Venezuela. Considering that the
FARC has relationships with Islamist terrorist organizations, has
murdered a quarter-million Colombians, and has established drug
trafficking networks spanning the globe, the threat that it poses is
obvious.
Most recently in July of 2013, Havana was found to have violated UNSC
arms trafficking resolutions 1718, 1874, and 2094. Panamanian
authorities seized a North Korean freighter for attempting to transport
missiles and fighter planes through the Panama Canal concealed under
sacks of sugar.[2]
Cuba walked away unscathed, despite being the first country in the
Western Hemisphere to violate these resolutions. It should be noted that
the State Department's 2013 Country Reports on Terrorism made no mention
of the incident despite its release date of April 2014.
Cuba's Removal Would Violate the Law and Potentially Endanger U.S. Taxpayers
According to Section 6 of the Export Administration Act (EAA), the law
by which Cuba was added to the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, the
country can be removed from the list only if:[3]
(A) (i) there has been a fundamental change in the leadership and
policies of the government of the country concerned;
(ii) that government is not supporting acts of international terrorism; and
(iii) that government has provided assurances that it will not support
acts of international terrorism in the future; or
(B) (i) the government concerned has not provided any support for
international terrorism during the preceding 6-month period; and
(ii) the government concerned has provided assurances that it will not
support acts of international terrorism in the future.
It is easy to deduce that Cuba fails to meet the requirements of both
sections. Cuba's leadership has not changed, nor has its political
system. In spite of its new relationship with the U.S., Cuba's leader
Raul Castro claims the government will not democratize. While Cuba's
financial circumstances have curbed its ability to support international
terrorism, its alliances with Syria, Iran, and North Korea should remain
a source of concern. It is also unlikely that the U.S. could ever
receive genuine guarantees against future actions, as recent talks in
Havana proved. Cuba's top diplomat stated: "Change in Cuba isn't
negotiable."[4]
Terrorism designations as determined by the EAA are a critical
instrument in foreign policy, as they carry restrictions on U.S. foreign
aid, commercial transactions, and participation in international
financial institutions.
Even though these restrictions and others are further reinforced by the
Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (Libertad) Act of 1996, a law
which strengthened the Cuban embargo, the Obama Administration is
systematically chipping away at the embargo until it becomes obsolete.
For example, the Administration recently expanded the allowable
exceptions on Cuban imports from the U.S. Items such as building
materials are now classified as agricultural products. It can be argued
that this new regulation is a violation of the law as Castro's military
controls much of Cuba's agricultural sector.
Congress Cannot Ignore the Dangerous Implications
While terrorist designations fall under presidential powers, Congress
can and should remain vigilant with respect to the White House's
dangerous rapprochements. The ultimate focus should be on promoting
policies that protect U.S. national security while simultaneously
promoting U.S. values such as freedom and democracy.
More specifically, Congress should:
-Urge the President to condition all future U.S. agreements with the
Cuban government upon significant, meaningful, and measurable changes.
The President's new Cuba policy has gone against the principle of
existing U.S. law by not requiring the Cuban government to modify its
behavior one iota in exchange for a loosening of restrictions. Many are
quick to point out that the regime released 53 political prisoners in
January, but that proved to be mistaken. Many of the prisoners either
had already been released or were close to being set free. They were
also subsequently put under strict house arrest or arrested shortly
afterwards for political reasons. In the 18 months the White House was
secretly negotiating with the regime, there were over 13,000 political
arrests on the island. Arrests in 2014 represented a 40 percent increase
from the preceding year. The White House has yet to impose any serious
conditions on Cuba.[5]
- Continue to support Cuba's democratic opposition and human rights
activists. Congress must make sure that U.S. policy continues to support
civil society groups on the island that uphold U.S. values and are
unaffiliated with the Castro regime and its Communist ideology. The
Cuban government is strongly against Washington's support for dissidents
and is painting it as an obstacle to the President's much-wanted embassy
in Havana. Congress has must continue its active support for these
groups.[6]
- Ensure that current and future funding from the U.S. Agency for
International Development and State Department does not support the
Cuban government or military. While these groups have generally been
prohibited from receiving U.S. assistance, the Cuban government is
pushing the Obama Administration to fund its regime-sponsored Communist
groups. Members of Congress hold the purse strings, and prohibiting the
funding of these groups falls to them.
- Reject policies that support financing for U.S. exports. Business
interests have been leading the movement against the Cuban embargo, and
the President's new policy has emboldened them. Recently, the U.S
Agricultural Coalition for Cuba was launched. Backed by large
corporations such as Cargill, the coalition is lobbying to end the
embargo in order to receive U.S. taxpayer subsidies for exports to Cuba.
Business interests should not be allowed to dictate foreign policy.
- Keep the Focus on Cuba. Congress must stay vigilant with respect to
the President's naïve approach to the Castro regime. President Obama has
granted an undeserving dictatorship the prestige of being allowed an
embassy and an ambassador in the U.S. He continues to refer to Cuba's
leader and unelected dictator, Raul Castro, as president. The next move
appears to be removing Cuba from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list.
Terrorism designation is not only about what the country is currently
doing, but also about the potential for future malicious actions.
Removing Cuba from the terrorist list is much more than a symbolic
gesture. It carries far-reaching implications that can endanger U.S.
national security interests.
—Ana Quintana is a Research Associate for Latin America in the Douglas
and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign and National Security Policy, of
the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and
Foreign Policy, at The Heritage Foundation.
Source: Cuba, Latin America, Alan Gross, Fidel Castro -
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/01/congressional-oversight-needed-as-obama-administration-moves-to-remove-cuba-from-state-sponsors-of-terrorism-list
Saturday, January 31, 2015
Friday, January 30, 2015
Do Obama’s measures promote democratic change on the Island?
Do Obama's measures promote democratic change on the Island? / Antonio
Rodiles
Posted on January 29, 2015
Diario de Cuba, Antonio G. Rodiles, Havana, 28 January 2015 — The recent
visits to Havana by American legislators and by Assistant Secretary of
State Roberta Jacobson, have reawakened controversy over the
transparency in the process of political dialogue between the Obama
administration and the Castro regime. So far, the aim of furthering a
previously determined plan has been evident, as well as raising the
profile of those political actors who support and conform to this policy.
Indispensable voices from the opposition movement have been
conspicuously absent from the meetings held. Equally apparent was the
reluctance to have a balance of opinions in these contacts.
On multiple occasions, in support of the new policy, the Obama
administration has posited the premise that the Cuban people should be
the ones who guide the process of change on the Island. This
pronouncement implicitly seeks approval for the new measures and opens
the door to strong criticisms of those of us who reject the
unconditionality — and the notable lack of transparency and consensus —
that have characterized the start of this process.
This premise, presented simplistically and with an added dose of false
nationalism, tries to label those of us who demand firm commitments to
the advancement of democracy and human rights,as individuals who are
incapable of assuming our political responsibilities — stuck in the past
or wanting foreign governments to come in and make the needed changes.
The administration's theory is curiously parallel to the old idea of
"national sovereignty" employed by the regime for so many years and
echoed as a part of the arguments of the self-declared "loyal" opposition.
Do Obama's measures promote the Cuban people's empowerment, insofar as
their civil and political rights are concerned? Can the opposition
generate a broad social compact, given the degrees of control,
repression and impunity with which the regime operates? Are there
guarantees that the new measures will generate a Cuban entrepreneurial
class in the medium term? Can Cuban society move toward a Rule of Law,
given the atomization, evasion and corruption in which the vast majority
of Cubans live?
If we are realists, the answers are obvious. The current Cuba only
functions through corruption and patronage. We lack the legal framework
that permits the empowerment of the people in any aspect. There cannot
exist any broad and extensive leadership by Cuban democrats and
entrepreneurs as long as the regime can maintain these high levels of
repression and social control without paying a large political price.
And a peaceful transition to full democracy requires such leadership.
Peaceful and sufficiently ordered transitions of despotic regimes to
democracies have occurred under intense international pressure coupled
with an effective internal push. Political results have emerged when
these regimes sense that their permanence in power is impossible and
they start to fear that a total social collapse will put them in
disadvantageous or dangerous situations.
The continued presence of the political heirs as a part of the new
system is one of the flashpoints in any transition. Experience also
shows that, in the majority of cases, this continued presence brings
with it an inheritance of corruption and a web of influences, and that
it ultimately hijacks the genuine interests in building full
democracies. To allow a transfer of power to the heirs correlates to
perpetuating the poverty of the Cuban people, and sacrificing the future
of our nation in the medium and long terms.
The dialogue conducted by the current American administration has not
achieved even the release of all political prisoners and the annulment
of their sentences. Many of the freed prisoners were released
conditionally and not to full liberty. Such is the case of the 12
prisoners from the wave of repression of 2003, released in 2010, who
decided to remain in Cuba and who now find themselves on parole and
prohibited from traveling outside the country. This dialogue also has
not managed to prevent further imprisonments and waves of arrests, such
as the ones that occurred at the end of 2014 and start of the new year.
To insist on the idea that Cubans don't understand fundamental rights
and that only basic necessities are their priority demonstrates
ignorance of our reality and gives a biased view of our genuine
democratic aspirations. Freedoms don't need to be explained; even when
they have not been experienced, the human being can recognize them. We
Cubans are not the exception.
A probable failure of this political process would be very harmful for
all concerned, but most of all for the Cuban people. The Obama
administration should combine effective pressure on the regime with the
consensual work of a large group of democratic actors from within the
Island and in exile. If the desired ultimate result is truly the
democratization of our nation, a change of direction is needed.
Translated by Alicia Barraqué Ellison
Source: Do Obama's measures promote democratic change on the Island? /
Antonio Rodiles | Translating Cuba -
http://translatingcuba.com/do-obamas-measures-promote-democratic-change-on-the-island-antonio-rodiles/
Rodiles
Posted on January 29, 2015
Diario de Cuba, Antonio G. Rodiles, Havana, 28 January 2015 — The recent
visits to Havana by American legislators and by Assistant Secretary of
State Roberta Jacobson, have reawakened controversy over the
transparency in the process of political dialogue between the Obama
administration and the Castro regime. So far, the aim of furthering a
previously determined plan has been evident, as well as raising the
profile of those political actors who support and conform to this policy.
Indispensable voices from the opposition movement have been
conspicuously absent from the meetings held. Equally apparent was the
reluctance to have a balance of opinions in these contacts.
On multiple occasions, in support of the new policy, the Obama
administration has posited the premise that the Cuban people should be
the ones who guide the process of change on the Island. This
pronouncement implicitly seeks approval for the new measures and opens
the door to strong criticisms of those of us who reject the
unconditionality — and the notable lack of transparency and consensus —
that have characterized the start of this process.
This premise, presented simplistically and with an added dose of false
nationalism, tries to label those of us who demand firm commitments to
the advancement of democracy and human rights,as individuals who are
incapable of assuming our political responsibilities — stuck in the past
or wanting foreign governments to come in and make the needed changes.
The administration's theory is curiously parallel to the old idea of
"national sovereignty" employed by the regime for so many years and
echoed as a part of the arguments of the self-declared "loyal" opposition.
Do Obama's measures promote the Cuban people's empowerment, insofar as
their civil and political rights are concerned? Can the opposition
generate a broad social compact, given the degrees of control,
repression and impunity with which the regime operates? Are there
guarantees that the new measures will generate a Cuban entrepreneurial
class in the medium term? Can Cuban society move toward a Rule of Law,
given the atomization, evasion and corruption in which the vast majority
of Cubans live?
If we are realists, the answers are obvious. The current Cuba only
functions through corruption and patronage. We lack the legal framework
that permits the empowerment of the people in any aspect. There cannot
exist any broad and extensive leadership by Cuban democrats and
entrepreneurs as long as the regime can maintain these high levels of
repression and social control without paying a large political price.
And a peaceful transition to full democracy requires such leadership.
Peaceful and sufficiently ordered transitions of despotic regimes to
democracies have occurred under intense international pressure coupled
with an effective internal push. Political results have emerged when
these regimes sense that their permanence in power is impossible and
they start to fear that a total social collapse will put them in
disadvantageous or dangerous situations.
The continued presence of the political heirs as a part of the new
system is one of the flashpoints in any transition. Experience also
shows that, in the majority of cases, this continued presence brings
with it an inheritance of corruption and a web of influences, and that
it ultimately hijacks the genuine interests in building full
democracies. To allow a transfer of power to the heirs correlates to
perpetuating the poverty of the Cuban people, and sacrificing the future
of our nation in the medium and long terms.
The dialogue conducted by the current American administration has not
achieved even the release of all political prisoners and the annulment
of their sentences. Many of the freed prisoners were released
conditionally and not to full liberty. Such is the case of the 12
prisoners from the wave of repression of 2003, released in 2010, who
decided to remain in Cuba and who now find themselves on parole and
prohibited from traveling outside the country. This dialogue also has
not managed to prevent further imprisonments and waves of arrests, such
as the ones that occurred at the end of 2014 and start of the new year.
To insist on the idea that Cubans don't understand fundamental rights
and that only basic necessities are their priority demonstrates
ignorance of our reality and gives a biased view of our genuine
democratic aspirations. Freedoms don't need to be explained; even when
they have not been experienced, the human being can recognize them. We
Cubans are not the exception.
A probable failure of this political process would be very harmful for
all concerned, but most of all for the Cuban people. The Obama
administration should combine effective pressure on the regime with the
consensual work of a large group of democratic actors from within the
Island and in exile. If the desired ultimate result is truly the
democratization of our nation, a change of direction is needed.
Translated by Alicia Barraqué Ellison
Source: Do Obama's measures promote democratic change on the Island? /
Antonio Rodiles | Translating Cuba -
http://translatingcuba.com/do-obamas-measures-promote-democratic-change-on-the-island-antonio-rodiles/
Our actions can make people lose their fears
"Our actions can make people lose their fears"
REINALDO ESCOBAR, La Habana | Enero 29, 2015
Few could imagine that this activist, born in the east of the country
and leader of Cuba's most numerous opposition organization, is also a
compulsive reader and an avid collector of famous quotes. Conversing
with José Daniel Ferrer is like a trip that starts with a pamphlet cast
in the streets of Palmarito del Cauto, then jumps to the best texts
about the French Revolution, and ends in the pages of some modern
psychological treatise.
Yet, the biggest pleasure of speaking to a man like him is to see him
behave as if he were free, despite the police surveillance andthe years
he has spent in prison. During a quick visit to Havana, Ferrer answered
some questions for the readers of 14ymedio about the current situation
of activism in Cuba and the new stage that is opening up for dissidents.
Escobar: How does the Patriotic Union of Cuba (UNPACU) view the
negotiations between Washington and Havana?
Ferrer: This process, which started after 18 months of secret talks,
will be very positive in bettering the difficult life conditions of our
people. However, the final result will best be appreciated as the
announced relaxation of policies is implemented and also in the way that
it is put in practice. If it is applied in an intelligent manner and is
consistently complemented by solidarity and support to the independent
civil society, it will yield better results than the prior policies.
Escobar: And the embargo?
Ferrer: Our people and the international community have in great part
been critical with regards to the embargo, which by now has lasted for
more than 50 years. In all this time, and especially following the
collapse of the Soviet bloc, the Cuban government has placed the blame
for our economic woes on the embargo, and has even used it to justify
repression within the country. Obama's policies delegitimize these
justifications. Additionally, they are in tune with the sentiments of
Cubans and of the international community.
Escobar: During your encounter with various American members of
congress, you expressed the gratitude of your organization's activists
who had been released from prison as a result of the negotiations. Can
you give us more details about them?
Ferrer: Of the 38 political prisoners that were freed between the days
of January 7 and 8, 28 of them were members of the Patriotic Union of
Cuba, in other words more than 70%. Of the 10 who were not members of
UNPACU, 4 have already reached out to us and vocalized their desire join
our organization. However, 14 of our activists are still imprisoned, 10
of them affiliated with our branches in eastern provinces and the other
4 belonging to organizations that are associated to our own.
Escobar: What type of activism does UNPACU carry out?
Ferrer: Our organization is not just a group of audacious and courageous
activists that protest peacefully on the streets. That mode of
operation, that type of battle, is just the tip of the iceberg. Our
strategy includes a great variety of means of peaceful combat, including
seminars, courses, disseminating leaflets when the wind is favorable,
putting up posters in public spaces… even better if it's at the
headquarters of the People's Power ( Poder Popular) or the offices of
the Communist Party.
In a society that has been paralyzed by terror for many years, our
actions can make people lose their fear.
Escobar: Do you see a disjunction between street activism and other
forms of dissidence?
Ferrer: Discrete activism also greatly annoys the regime. They, through
their intelligence apparatuses, know where we meet and with whom despite
our greatest efforts. As soon as they find out about someone who has
chosen not to make their dissent public, they threaten them with
removing them from their jobs or even worse things. This is especially
true when it's someone who, because of his or her training or talent,
could be a strong protagonist. But, if that person chooses to defend
their rights, then the threats can be greater. That's the proof that
they fear these forms of activism more than the others.
Escobar: It has transpired that the organization you lead has lost
alliances with other groups. Is that true? And if so why is that?
Ferrer: Many factors come to play here. In the first place, when other
organizations merged with the Patriotic Union of Cuba, the oppressive
bodies of the government also multiplied their efforts to divide us.
Another issue is that some leaders believed at certain points that the
best way to accelerate the process of non-violent combat was by uniting
with UNPACU and later they changed their minds. Be it because attacks
multiplied or because there were also instances of disagreement, some
chose to return to their prior situations.
In fact, the relations between these groups and us remain good. Our
disposition to cooperate remains. If we had to choose what was more
important, for everyone to come under the same name and things not run
as smoothly as they should, or that each keep their organization's name
and that things work better, we would choose the latter. We have
separated but we did not become enemies.
Escobar: And has Obama's announcement of December 17th deepened those
differences?
Ferrer: With regards to the recent changes in policy announced by the
Cuban and United States governments, there are some who believe it is a
mistake. Some activists and opposition leaders object to reestablishing
relations between the two countries and also disapprove of dismantling
the embargo. However, we have to find what unites us. They want the same
as we do: the democratization of the country and that Cuba respect human
rights. They want us to be a just and prosperous nation "with all and
for the good of all*." The difference is in the means, not the
objective, which we hold in common.
Escobar: So, you propose finding consensus points?
Ferrer: Yes, we would work together to reach that common end, including
those who disagree with us today on topics like the reestablishment of
relations between Cuba and the United States. We hope that they too
understand that they can cooperate with us.
*Translator's note: A quote from José Martí who is honored by both the
Castro regime and its opponents.
Translated by Fernando Fornaris
Source: "Our actions can make people lose their fears" -
http://www.14ymedio.com/englishedition/our-actions-make-people-lose-fears-Cuba_0_1715828412.html
REINALDO ESCOBAR, La Habana | Enero 29, 2015
Few could imagine that this activist, born in the east of the country
and leader of Cuba's most numerous opposition organization, is also a
compulsive reader and an avid collector of famous quotes. Conversing
with José Daniel Ferrer is like a trip that starts with a pamphlet cast
in the streets of Palmarito del Cauto, then jumps to the best texts
about the French Revolution, and ends in the pages of some modern
psychological treatise.
Yet, the biggest pleasure of speaking to a man like him is to see him
behave as if he were free, despite the police surveillance andthe years
he has spent in prison. During a quick visit to Havana, Ferrer answered
some questions for the readers of 14ymedio about the current situation
of activism in Cuba and the new stage that is opening up for dissidents.
Escobar: How does the Patriotic Union of Cuba (UNPACU) view the
negotiations between Washington and Havana?
Ferrer: This process, which started after 18 months of secret talks,
will be very positive in bettering the difficult life conditions of our
people. However, the final result will best be appreciated as the
announced relaxation of policies is implemented and also in the way that
it is put in practice. If it is applied in an intelligent manner and is
consistently complemented by solidarity and support to the independent
civil society, it will yield better results than the prior policies.
Escobar: And the embargo?
Ferrer: Our people and the international community have in great part
been critical with regards to the embargo, which by now has lasted for
more than 50 years. In all this time, and especially following the
collapse of the Soviet bloc, the Cuban government has placed the blame
for our economic woes on the embargo, and has even used it to justify
repression within the country. Obama's policies delegitimize these
justifications. Additionally, they are in tune with the sentiments of
Cubans and of the international community.
Escobar: During your encounter with various American members of
congress, you expressed the gratitude of your organization's activists
who had been released from prison as a result of the negotiations. Can
you give us more details about them?
Ferrer: Of the 38 political prisoners that were freed between the days
of January 7 and 8, 28 of them were members of the Patriotic Union of
Cuba, in other words more than 70%. Of the 10 who were not members of
UNPACU, 4 have already reached out to us and vocalized their desire join
our organization. However, 14 of our activists are still imprisoned, 10
of them affiliated with our branches in eastern provinces and the other
4 belonging to organizations that are associated to our own.
Escobar: What type of activism does UNPACU carry out?
Ferrer: Our organization is not just a group of audacious and courageous
activists that protest peacefully on the streets. That mode of
operation, that type of battle, is just the tip of the iceberg. Our
strategy includes a great variety of means of peaceful combat, including
seminars, courses, disseminating leaflets when the wind is favorable,
putting up posters in public spaces… even better if it's at the
headquarters of the People's Power ( Poder Popular) or the offices of
the Communist Party.
In a society that has been paralyzed by terror for many years, our
actions can make people lose their fear.
Escobar: Do you see a disjunction between street activism and other
forms of dissidence?
Ferrer: Discrete activism also greatly annoys the regime. They, through
their intelligence apparatuses, know where we meet and with whom despite
our greatest efforts. As soon as they find out about someone who has
chosen not to make their dissent public, they threaten them with
removing them from their jobs or even worse things. This is especially
true when it's someone who, because of his or her training or talent,
could be a strong protagonist. But, if that person chooses to defend
their rights, then the threats can be greater. That's the proof that
they fear these forms of activism more than the others.
Escobar: It has transpired that the organization you lead has lost
alliances with other groups. Is that true? And if so why is that?
Ferrer: Many factors come to play here. In the first place, when other
organizations merged with the Patriotic Union of Cuba, the oppressive
bodies of the government also multiplied their efforts to divide us.
Another issue is that some leaders believed at certain points that the
best way to accelerate the process of non-violent combat was by uniting
with UNPACU and later they changed their minds. Be it because attacks
multiplied or because there were also instances of disagreement, some
chose to return to their prior situations.
In fact, the relations between these groups and us remain good. Our
disposition to cooperate remains. If we had to choose what was more
important, for everyone to come under the same name and things not run
as smoothly as they should, or that each keep their organization's name
and that things work better, we would choose the latter. We have
separated but we did not become enemies.
Escobar: And has Obama's announcement of December 17th deepened those
differences?
Ferrer: With regards to the recent changes in policy announced by the
Cuban and United States governments, there are some who believe it is a
mistake. Some activists and opposition leaders object to reestablishing
relations between the two countries and also disapprove of dismantling
the embargo. However, we have to find what unites us. They want the same
as we do: the democratization of the country and that Cuba respect human
rights. They want us to be a just and prosperous nation "with all and
for the good of all*." The difference is in the means, not the
objective, which we hold in common.
Escobar: So, you propose finding consensus points?
Ferrer: Yes, we would work together to reach that common end, including
those who disagree with us today on topics like the reestablishment of
relations between Cuba and the United States. We hope that they too
understand that they can cooperate with us.
*Translator's note: A quote from José Martí who is honored by both the
Castro regime and its opponents.
Translated by Fernando Fornaris
Source: "Our actions can make people lose their fears" -
http://www.14ymedio.com/englishedition/our-actions-make-people-lose-fears-Cuba_0_1715828412.html
Cuba and the IMF - towards a new chapter?
Cuba and the IMF: towards a new chapter?
By Jeremy Tordjman
Washington (AFP) - After its rapprochement with the United States, the
steadfastly communist Cuba could further dismantle nearly six decades of
isolation by shaking hands with another old enemy, the International
Monetary Fund.
The IMF, the world's crisis lender but also an economic policy
disciplinarian, does not have an especially good reputation in Havana.
Cuba, like a number of its allies -- Venezuela and Bolivia, for instance
-- regards the Fund as too married to a liberal capitalist ideology.
Cuba's now-retired strongman of 50 years, Fidel Castro, has never passed
up an opportunity to label it an "evil" dispenser of "lethal advice". He
went so far as to call for the Fund's "demolition" pure and simple in
the early 2000s.
The Caribbean island was a founding member of the Fund in 1944 when it
was established along with the World Bank.
But in 1964, five years after Castro's revolutionary forces seized
power, Cuba became the first country to turn its back on the IMF, as
well as the World Bank.
That makes Cuba one of the few countries -- North Korea and
Liechtenstein are others -- cut off from the two Bretton Woods
institutions that form the core of the world's powerful development
finance system.
- Times change -
View gallery
A women walks out of a shop with a poster wishing a happy 2015, in
Havana, on December 23, 2014 (AFP …
But the times are changing. "El Lider Maximo" has retired, letting his
less-obdurate brother Raul take over as president.
With that, and an effort by US President Barack Obama to clear away the
cobwebs of the past, lines have opened between Havana and Washington.
And a new generation of Cuban leaders seem less hostile toward the two
institutions, according to experts.
"Younger Cubans are more open to participating in the global economy,
indeed they are eager to do so, and that implies normal relations with
the major international agencies including the IMF and World Bank," said
Richard Feinberg, who advised former president Bill Clinton on Latin
America policy.
Cuba's economy has been choked by the US embargo on the country dating
to 1961, and joining the two institutions could encourage foreign
investors to take advantage of its opening to American tourism and other
formerly blocked sectors.
"It would be a good thing for Cuba," said Terry Maris, former executive
director of the Center for Cuban Business Studies at Ohio Northern
University.
"There's just not sufficient infrastructure right now, it would cost
billions that are not going to come overnight. Cuba has to be stable to
attract foreign investment," he said.
- Struggling economy -
View gallery
US flags adorn a pedicab in Havana on January 26, 2015 (AFP Photo/Yamil
Lage)
Tightly controlled by the government, the Cuban economy is struggling,
with growth of just 1.3 percent last year, the weakest since Raul Castro
arrived in power in 2006.
But because of its longtime focus on health and education, the country
ranks high in social indicators, according to the United Nations Human
Development Index.
Returning to the IMF fold is not a simple thing. Cuba would have to
submit a formal request, possibly contribute millions of dollars to the
Fund's financial resources, and then agree "to fulfill the obligations
of IMF membership," noted an IMF spokesman.
That includes having to lift a veil on the state of the country's
economy, supplying data on government accounts and submitting to an
annual IMF evaluation.
Carl Meacham director of the Americas Program at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said the question is
whether they will take that step toward openness.
"Are they willing to play by the rules of the game by making their
economy much more transparent and cooperating with other countries?" he
asked.
The IMF has not yet received any request to join from Havana.
"We are just waiting and seeing," the Fund's Western Hemisphere
department chief Alejandro Werner said recently.
Also crucial is what Washington thinks, as the IMF's largest
shareholder. So far the US has not weighed in on the subject.
Asked about it Thursday, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki demurred.
"We're not even there at this point in time. We're far from there," she
said.
"The road will be long," Juan Triana, a professor at the University of
Havana, told AFP.
He pointed to the need for the US Congress to remove its Cuba embargo
law, and for Cuba to be removed from the government's official list of
states which sponsor terrorism.
As long as those two issues remain unresolved, he said, the IMF and
World Bank "can do nearly nothing."
Source: Cuba and the IMF: towards a new chapter? - Yahoo News -
http://news.yahoo.com/cuba-imf-towards-chapter-031216846.html;_ylt=AwrBEiS2dMtUzjQAXdbQtDMD
By Jeremy Tordjman
Washington (AFP) - After its rapprochement with the United States, the
steadfastly communist Cuba could further dismantle nearly six decades of
isolation by shaking hands with another old enemy, the International
Monetary Fund.
The IMF, the world's crisis lender but also an economic policy
disciplinarian, does not have an especially good reputation in Havana.
Cuba, like a number of its allies -- Venezuela and Bolivia, for instance
-- regards the Fund as too married to a liberal capitalist ideology.
Cuba's now-retired strongman of 50 years, Fidel Castro, has never passed
up an opportunity to label it an "evil" dispenser of "lethal advice". He
went so far as to call for the Fund's "demolition" pure and simple in
the early 2000s.
The Caribbean island was a founding member of the Fund in 1944 when it
was established along with the World Bank.
But in 1964, five years after Castro's revolutionary forces seized
power, Cuba became the first country to turn its back on the IMF, as
well as the World Bank.
That makes Cuba one of the few countries -- North Korea and
Liechtenstein are others -- cut off from the two Bretton Woods
institutions that form the core of the world's powerful development
finance system.
- Times change -
View gallery
A women walks out of a shop with a poster wishing a happy 2015, in
Havana, on December 23, 2014 (AFP …
But the times are changing. "El Lider Maximo" has retired, letting his
less-obdurate brother Raul take over as president.
With that, and an effort by US President Barack Obama to clear away the
cobwebs of the past, lines have opened between Havana and Washington.
And a new generation of Cuban leaders seem less hostile toward the two
institutions, according to experts.
"Younger Cubans are more open to participating in the global economy,
indeed they are eager to do so, and that implies normal relations with
the major international agencies including the IMF and World Bank," said
Richard Feinberg, who advised former president Bill Clinton on Latin
America policy.
Cuba's economy has been choked by the US embargo on the country dating
to 1961, and joining the two institutions could encourage foreign
investors to take advantage of its opening to American tourism and other
formerly blocked sectors.
"It would be a good thing for Cuba," said Terry Maris, former executive
director of the Center for Cuban Business Studies at Ohio Northern
University.
"There's just not sufficient infrastructure right now, it would cost
billions that are not going to come overnight. Cuba has to be stable to
attract foreign investment," he said.
- Struggling economy -
View gallery
US flags adorn a pedicab in Havana on January 26, 2015 (AFP Photo/Yamil
Lage)
Tightly controlled by the government, the Cuban economy is struggling,
with growth of just 1.3 percent last year, the weakest since Raul Castro
arrived in power in 2006.
But because of its longtime focus on health and education, the country
ranks high in social indicators, according to the United Nations Human
Development Index.
Returning to the IMF fold is not a simple thing. Cuba would have to
submit a formal request, possibly contribute millions of dollars to the
Fund's financial resources, and then agree "to fulfill the obligations
of IMF membership," noted an IMF spokesman.
That includes having to lift a veil on the state of the country's
economy, supplying data on government accounts and submitting to an
annual IMF evaluation.
Carl Meacham director of the Americas Program at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said the question is
whether they will take that step toward openness.
"Are they willing to play by the rules of the game by making their
economy much more transparent and cooperating with other countries?" he
asked.
The IMF has not yet received any request to join from Havana.
"We are just waiting and seeing," the Fund's Western Hemisphere
department chief Alejandro Werner said recently.
Also crucial is what Washington thinks, as the IMF's largest
shareholder. So far the US has not weighed in on the subject.
Asked about it Thursday, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki demurred.
"We're not even there at this point in time. We're far from there," she
said.
"The road will be long," Juan Triana, a professor at the University of
Havana, told AFP.
He pointed to the need for the US Congress to remove its Cuba embargo
law, and for Cuba to be removed from the government's official list of
states which sponsor terrorism.
As long as those two issues remain unresolved, he said, the IMF and
World Bank "can do nearly nothing."
Source: Cuba and the IMF: towards a new chapter? - Yahoo News -
http://news.yahoo.com/cuba-imf-towards-chapter-031216846.html;_ylt=AwrBEiS2dMtUzjQAXdbQtDMD
U.S. has no idea how many fugitives Cuba's harboring
U.S. has no idea how many fugitives Cuba's harboring
By Megan O'Matz and Sally Kestin
Sun Sentinel
The United States does not know how many fugitives are in Cuba.
Nobody tracks it. Nobody even routinely asks for the return of those
wanted on serious federal charges, much less more common state offenses,
the Sun Sentinel has found.
Law enforcement officials on state and federal levels say paperwork is
rarely filed in Washington to request diplomatic assistance out of a
sense that doing so would be futile. The United States has no working
extradition treaty with Cuba.
"I could request Mars send someone back and we'd probably have better
luck" said Ryan Stumphauzer, a former U.S. assistant state attorney in
Miami who prosecuted Medicare cheats, most of them Cuban-born. "We know
Cuba is not sending anybody back."
Since President Obama's surprise shift in December toward normalizing
relations with the Communist-led nation, some members of Congress have
demanded that Cuba hand over fugitives. The irony: law enforcement isn't
regularly seeking their return.
Last week, three U.S. senators, including Florida's Marco Rubio, asked
the FBI to produce the names of fugitives in Cuba and copies of their
indictments. No complete list is likely to be forthcoming.
There is no formal mechanism in use to request extradition, no centrally
collected records nationwide of how many likely are on the run in Cuba,
and no coordination among counties or states on the issue, the Sun
Sentinel has found.
Even in Miami-Dade County, where most Cuban-Americans live, state
prosecutors do not log or tally fugitives thought to be in Cuba.
"It's not like we send up to Justice our Christmas list of potential
felons," said Ed Griffith, spokesman for the Miami-Dade State Attorney's
Office.
In recent weeks the U.S. Marshals Office in South Florida has been
scrambling to compile a list of people possibly hiding in Cuba, in case
the Castro government suddenly agrees to expel such fugitives.
"We want to be prepared," said Marshals Office spokesman Barry Golden.
The Sun Sentinel, in a recent far-reaching investigation into Cuban
crime rings in America, disclosed that Cuban nationals are taking
advantage of generous U.S. immigration laws to come to the U.S. and
steal billions from government programs and businesses.
Millions of dollars have traveled back to Cuba, and many individuals
flee there when police close in on scams the Cubans specialize in. These
typically involve health care, auto insurance, or credit card fraud;
cargo theft; or marijuana trafficking, the Sun Sentinel found.
The Sun Sentinel located one fugitive wanted in a million dollar Texas
credit card fraud case living in Santa Clara, Cuba. He'd written to the
judge in his case in 2013, saying he "went to the U.S. to steal" and
included his return address in Cuba.
Prosecutors had no evidence he was actually in Cuba and had not sought
his return. "We can't extradite from Cuba. We wouldn't reach out to the
State Department in a case like that," said Scott Carpenter of the
District Attorney's Office in Fort Bend County, Texas.
In the occasional diplomatic talks, high-level U.S. officials have
brought up the issue of fugitives in Cuba — usually the cases of
prominent violent offenders, such as New Jersey cop killer Joanne
Chesimard, a member the militant Black Liberation Army who fled to Cuba
30 years ago and was given political asylum.
How these appeals happen are a mystery to most street level
investigators and prosecutors who simply don't bother filing voluminous
records to Washington because the process is cumbersome, costly and
likely fruitless.
"As far as them putting together a package for extradition, I guarantee
that isn't happening," said Humberto Dominguez, a Miami criminal defense
lawyer. "It would be worse if they did: it would be such a waste of
taxpayer dollars."
Why send the paperwork to Cuba, he asked. "So they can utilize it as a
bathroom implement?"
No answers or records
John Caulfield, chief of the U.S. Interests Section in Havana until
2014, said that for many years, American officials figured "there was no
point in talking to the Cubans" because they didn't expect any cooperation.
But he said he'd tell individuals in law enforcement that if you don't
ask, you don't know what will happen. "We were surprised in some cases"
when the U.S. asked for someone's return and got it.
In the past decade, Cuban officials have returned a handful of
criminals: Kidnappers. Child abusers. An insurance fraudster and others.
Neither the Department of State nor the Department of Justice will
answer questions about how many fugitives the U.S. has sought to have
returned, who, or even whether, state and federal prosecutors request
extradition.
In recent months, the agencies have provided the Sun Sentinel with the
same prepared statement three times: "The United States continues to
seek the return from Cuba of fugitives from U.S. justice, and repeatedly
raises their cases with the Government of Cuba."
Said Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr: "We generally do not
disclose if requests are made or provide information on whether specific
cases have been brought before different foreign authorities."
In March, the Sun Sentinel filed a Freedom of Information request with
the Justice Department seeking copies of requests from prosecutors for
the return of Cuban nationals wanted for felonies since 2007. The
newspaper also sought records showing what efforts were made to inform
Cuban authorities or US diplomats in Cuba of a fugitive's possible
presence in Cuba.
The agency replied that it "failed to locate any responsive records."
The Sun Sentinel has received no records under a similar request made
nine months ago to the State Department.
American University Professor William LeoGrande, a specialist in Latin
American politics, said Cuba has had difficulty getting solid
information from the Justice Department on fugitives the U.S. wants.
"I've had a Cuban official tell me they couldn't even get confirmation
that this was the right person."
Teddy Roosevelt's treaty
It's widely assumed that the U.S. has no extradition treaty with Cuba.
In fact, one was signed in 1904 under President Theodore Roosevelt. Its
use was suspended in the 1960s after Fidel Castro came to power.
"You often hear that the extradition treaty between the U.S. and Cuba
has been abandoned. That's not so," said Robert Muse, a Washington
attorney and expert on Cuban-related law. "It's listed by the State
Department as a treaty in force. This agreement exists, it's just in
abeyance."
Requesting extradition from any country is a long, formal, onerous
effort, guided by the terms of each treaty.
Prosecutors must assemble affidavits stating the facts of the case;
texts of relevant criminal statutes; certified copies of arrest warrants
and indictments; evidence such as court transcripts, photographs and
fingerprints of the criminal; and any conviction papers.
An original and four copies must be sent to the Justice Department's
Office of International Affairs in Washington, which translates the
material and funnels it to the State Department. Prosecutors are warned
not to contact foreign countries directly.
Appeals are made by American Embassy officials through "diplomatic
note," accompanied by the thick bundle of documents —certified and
secured with an official seal and red ribbon.
Though federal officials in Miami know that dozens of Medicare fraud
fugitives who stole millions fled to Cuba, "Why would the government
file extradition requests when there isn't even a treaty to proceed
under?" said Stumphauzer, who left the U.S. Attorney's Office in Miami
in 2011.
Asked what federal agents do when they learn a Medicare fraudster has
taken off to Cuba, one current investigator explained: they throw up
their hands and say: "Oh crap," knowing the likelihood of recovering
someone is low.
State and local officials, too, make no attempts at extradition.
Miami-Dade Police Sgt. Henry Sacramento, whose team repeatedly arrests
Cubans in marijuana grow houses, said: "We just put a warrant in the
system and hope they make a mistake in coming back into the country again."
"As far as extradition from Cuba," he said, "I don't know of anyone
that's tried to do that."
The Jan. 23rd letter Rubio and the two other senators sent to U.S.
Attorney General Eric Holder, requesting a list of all fugitives the FBI
believes are living in Cuba, notes "there is little definitive
information about their cases available publicly."
The senators wrote that there are longtime murderers and airplane
hijackers in Cuba, but also "numerous others guilty of lesser but still
important crimes, including money laundering and health care fraud."
For years, members of Congress have accused Cuba of harboring 70 to 80
fugitives: most of whom fled there decades ago
More recently, the FBI in Miami has compiled a spreadsheet showing 20
Medicare fugitives thought to be hiding in Cuba.
The Sun Sentinel, in its investigation, found references in court or
police records to an additional 50 wanted in other frauds, cargo theft
or marijuana trafficking.
The count could be far higher.
There are 500 Cuban-born fugitives wanted on federal charges and at
least another 500 wanted on state charges in Florida alone. They could
be anywhere in the world, according to records provided by the U.S.
Marshals Service and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
FDLE does not require country of birth to be filled out consistently on
warrants, so it's impossible to fully determine exactly how many are
from Cuba or may have gone back there.
Proving a criminal is in Cuba can be difficult. At times authorities
know a fugitive boarded a charter flight for Cuba, but in other cases
they have only the word of a family member to go on — and that person
may lie to throw police off the track.
"There's no method of confirming that somebody has fled, either directly
to Cuba or indirectly through another country, because we don't have
communication with anyone in Cuba to verify that," said Golden, the
Marshals Service spokesman.
Some criminal defense lawyers representing Cuban offenders believe
thousands of fugitives may have returned there.
Fort Myers defense attorney Rene Suarez, who represents Cuban clients,
said public estimates of fugitives in Cuba are typically "big, federal
type cases."
"But most of these folks that have gone back, they're not federal cases.
The vast majority are just state charges that are tracked county by
county," he said.
Asked if there could be hundreds hiding in Cuba, he said: "No … there's
got to be thousands of them."
Staff writer William E. Gibson and correspondent Tracey Eaton
contributed to this report.
momatz@tribpub.com
Source: U.S.-Cuba extradition treaty lacking - Sun Sentinel -
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/fl-cuba-fugitive-us-requests-20150130-story.html#page=1
By Megan O'Matz and Sally Kestin
Sun Sentinel
The United States does not know how many fugitives are in Cuba.
Nobody tracks it. Nobody even routinely asks for the return of those
wanted on serious federal charges, much less more common state offenses,
the Sun Sentinel has found.
Law enforcement officials on state and federal levels say paperwork is
rarely filed in Washington to request diplomatic assistance out of a
sense that doing so would be futile. The United States has no working
extradition treaty with Cuba.
"I could request Mars send someone back and we'd probably have better
luck" said Ryan Stumphauzer, a former U.S. assistant state attorney in
Miami who prosecuted Medicare cheats, most of them Cuban-born. "We know
Cuba is not sending anybody back."
Since President Obama's surprise shift in December toward normalizing
relations with the Communist-led nation, some members of Congress have
demanded that Cuba hand over fugitives. The irony: law enforcement isn't
regularly seeking their return.
Last week, three U.S. senators, including Florida's Marco Rubio, asked
the FBI to produce the names of fugitives in Cuba and copies of their
indictments. No complete list is likely to be forthcoming.
There is no formal mechanism in use to request extradition, no centrally
collected records nationwide of how many likely are on the run in Cuba,
and no coordination among counties or states on the issue, the Sun
Sentinel has found.
Even in Miami-Dade County, where most Cuban-Americans live, state
prosecutors do not log or tally fugitives thought to be in Cuba.
"It's not like we send up to Justice our Christmas list of potential
felons," said Ed Griffith, spokesman for the Miami-Dade State Attorney's
Office.
In recent weeks the U.S. Marshals Office in South Florida has been
scrambling to compile a list of people possibly hiding in Cuba, in case
the Castro government suddenly agrees to expel such fugitives.
"We want to be prepared," said Marshals Office spokesman Barry Golden.
The Sun Sentinel, in a recent far-reaching investigation into Cuban
crime rings in America, disclosed that Cuban nationals are taking
advantage of generous U.S. immigration laws to come to the U.S. and
steal billions from government programs and businesses.
Millions of dollars have traveled back to Cuba, and many individuals
flee there when police close in on scams the Cubans specialize in. These
typically involve health care, auto insurance, or credit card fraud;
cargo theft; or marijuana trafficking, the Sun Sentinel found.
The Sun Sentinel located one fugitive wanted in a million dollar Texas
credit card fraud case living in Santa Clara, Cuba. He'd written to the
judge in his case in 2013, saying he "went to the U.S. to steal" and
included his return address in Cuba.
Prosecutors had no evidence he was actually in Cuba and had not sought
his return. "We can't extradite from Cuba. We wouldn't reach out to the
State Department in a case like that," said Scott Carpenter of the
District Attorney's Office in Fort Bend County, Texas.
In the occasional diplomatic talks, high-level U.S. officials have
brought up the issue of fugitives in Cuba — usually the cases of
prominent violent offenders, such as New Jersey cop killer Joanne
Chesimard, a member the militant Black Liberation Army who fled to Cuba
30 years ago and was given political asylum.
How these appeals happen are a mystery to most street level
investigators and prosecutors who simply don't bother filing voluminous
records to Washington because the process is cumbersome, costly and
likely fruitless.
"As far as them putting together a package for extradition, I guarantee
that isn't happening," said Humberto Dominguez, a Miami criminal defense
lawyer. "It would be worse if they did: it would be such a waste of
taxpayer dollars."
Why send the paperwork to Cuba, he asked. "So they can utilize it as a
bathroom implement?"
No answers or records
John Caulfield, chief of the U.S. Interests Section in Havana until
2014, said that for many years, American officials figured "there was no
point in talking to the Cubans" because they didn't expect any cooperation.
But he said he'd tell individuals in law enforcement that if you don't
ask, you don't know what will happen. "We were surprised in some cases"
when the U.S. asked for someone's return and got it.
In the past decade, Cuban officials have returned a handful of
criminals: Kidnappers. Child abusers. An insurance fraudster and others.
Neither the Department of State nor the Department of Justice will
answer questions about how many fugitives the U.S. has sought to have
returned, who, or even whether, state and federal prosecutors request
extradition.
In recent months, the agencies have provided the Sun Sentinel with the
same prepared statement three times: "The United States continues to
seek the return from Cuba of fugitives from U.S. justice, and repeatedly
raises their cases with the Government of Cuba."
Said Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr: "We generally do not
disclose if requests are made or provide information on whether specific
cases have been brought before different foreign authorities."
In March, the Sun Sentinel filed a Freedom of Information request with
the Justice Department seeking copies of requests from prosecutors for
the return of Cuban nationals wanted for felonies since 2007. The
newspaper also sought records showing what efforts were made to inform
Cuban authorities or US diplomats in Cuba of a fugitive's possible
presence in Cuba.
The agency replied that it "failed to locate any responsive records."
The Sun Sentinel has received no records under a similar request made
nine months ago to the State Department.
American University Professor William LeoGrande, a specialist in Latin
American politics, said Cuba has had difficulty getting solid
information from the Justice Department on fugitives the U.S. wants.
"I've had a Cuban official tell me they couldn't even get confirmation
that this was the right person."
Teddy Roosevelt's treaty
It's widely assumed that the U.S. has no extradition treaty with Cuba.
In fact, one was signed in 1904 under President Theodore Roosevelt. Its
use was suspended in the 1960s after Fidel Castro came to power.
"You often hear that the extradition treaty between the U.S. and Cuba
has been abandoned. That's not so," said Robert Muse, a Washington
attorney and expert on Cuban-related law. "It's listed by the State
Department as a treaty in force. This agreement exists, it's just in
abeyance."
Requesting extradition from any country is a long, formal, onerous
effort, guided by the terms of each treaty.
Prosecutors must assemble affidavits stating the facts of the case;
texts of relevant criminal statutes; certified copies of arrest warrants
and indictments; evidence such as court transcripts, photographs and
fingerprints of the criminal; and any conviction papers.
An original and four copies must be sent to the Justice Department's
Office of International Affairs in Washington, which translates the
material and funnels it to the State Department. Prosecutors are warned
not to contact foreign countries directly.
Appeals are made by American Embassy officials through "diplomatic
note," accompanied by the thick bundle of documents —certified and
secured with an official seal and red ribbon.
Though federal officials in Miami know that dozens of Medicare fraud
fugitives who stole millions fled to Cuba, "Why would the government
file extradition requests when there isn't even a treaty to proceed
under?" said Stumphauzer, who left the U.S. Attorney's Office in Miami
in 2011.
Asked what federal agents do when they learn a Medicare fraudster has
taken off to Cuba, one current investigator explained: they throw up
their hands and say: "Oh crap," knowing the likelihood of recovering
someone is low.
State and local officials, too, make no attempts at extradition.
Miami-Dade Police Sgt. Henry Sacramento, whose team repeatedly arrests
Cubans in marijuana grow houses, said: "We just put a warrant in the
system and hope they make a mistake in coming back into the country again."
"As far as extradition from Cuba," he said, "I don't know of anyone
that's tried to do that."
The Jan. 23rd letter Rubio and the two other senators sent to U.S.
Attorney General Eric Holder, requesting a list of all fugitives the FBI
believes are living in Cuba, notes "there is little definitive
information about their cases available publicly."
The senators wrote that there are longtime murderers and airplane
hijackers in Cuba, but also "numerous others guilty of lesser but still
important crimes, including money laundering and health care fraud."
For years, members of Congress have accused Cuba of harboring 70 to 80
fugitives: most of whom fled there decades ago
More recently, the FBI in Miami has compiled a spreadsheet showing 20
Medicare fugitives thought to be hiding in Cuba.
The Sun Sentinel, in its investigation, found references in court or
police records to an additional 50 wanted in other frauds, cargo theft
or marijuana trafficking.
The count could be far higher.
There are 500 Cuban-born fugitives wanted on federal charges and at
least another 500 wanted on state charges in Florida alone. They could
be anywhere in the world, according to records provided by the U.S.
Marshals Service and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
FDLE does not require country of birth to be filled out consistently on
warrants, so it's impossible to fully determine exactly how many are
from Cuba or may have gone back there.
Proving a criminal is in Cuba can be difficult. At times authorities
know a fugitive boarded a charter flight for Cuba, but in other cases
they have only the word of a family member to go on — and that person
may lie to throw police off the track.
"There's no method of confirming that somebody has fled, either directly
to Cuba or indirectly through another country, because we don't have
communication with anyone in Cuba to verify that," said Golden, the
Marshals Service spokesman.
Some criminal defense lawyers representing Cuban offenders believe
thousands of fugitives may have returned there.
Fort Myers defense attorney Rene Suarez, who represents Cuban clients,
said public estimates of fugitives in Cuba are typically "big, federal
type cases."
"But most of these folks that have gone back, they're not federal cases.
The vast majority are just state charges that are tracked county by
county," he said.
Asked if there could be hundreds hiding in Cuba, he said: "No … there's
got to be thousands of them."
Staff writer William E. Gibson and correspondent Tracey Eaton
contributed to this report.
momatz@tribpub.com
Source: U.S.-Cuba extradition treaty lacking - Sun Sentinel -
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/fl-cuba-fugitive-us-requests-20150130-story.html#page=1
The U.S. Will Not Return Guantanamo Bay to Cuba, the White House Says
The U.S. Will Not Return Guantanamo Bay to Cuba, the White House Says
TIME Staff Jan. 29, 2015
U.S. has leased land on Guantanamo Bay since the 1903 Cuban–American Treaty
Despite the recent historic thaw in U.S.-Cuba relations, the White House
said Thursday it had no plans to return Guantánamo Bay, the site of a
significant U.S. naval base and military prison on the island-nation's
southeast coast.
This announcement comes in response to Wednesday's statement from Cuban
President Raúl Castro that restoring Havana's control of the bay is a
prerequisite for normalizing ties with the U.S, Agence France-Presse
reports.
However, White House spokesman Josh Earnest indicated any such move was
off the cards. "The President does believe that the prison at Guantánamo
Bay should be closed down," he said. "But the naval base is not
something that we wish to be closed."
The U.S. currently controls over 45 sq. mi. of Guantánamo Bay as a
result of treaties dating back to the Spanish-American War. The military
prison has been embroiled in controversy for reports of torture and the
absence of trials for inmates accused of terrorism.
The U.S. and Cuba reopened diplomatic ties in December after over 50
years of nonacknowledgment. Obama issued an executive order to close the
Guantánamo prison in 2009, but so far this has not come into fruition.
Source: The U.S. Will Not Return Guantanamo Bay to Cuba, the White House
Says | TIME - http://time.com/3688995/u-s-guantanamo-bay-cuba-return/
TIME Staff Jan. 29, 2015
U.S. has leased land on Guantanamo Bay since the 1903 Cuban–American Treaty
Despite the recent historic thaw in U.S.-Cuba relations, the White House
said Thursday it had no plans to return Guantánamo Bay, the site of a
significant U.S. naval base and military prison on the island-nation's
southeast coast.
This announcement comes in response to Wednesday's statement from Cuban
President Raúl Castro that restoring Havana's control of the bay is a
prerequisite for normalizing ties with the U.S, Agence France-Presse
reports.
However, White House spokesman Josh Earnest indicated any such move was
off the cards. "The President does believe that the prison at Guantánamo
Bay should be closed down," he said. "But the naval base is not
something that we wish to be closed."
The U.S. currently controls over 45 sq. mi. of Guantánamo Bay as a
result of treaties dating back to the Spanish-American War. The military
prison has been embroiled in controversy for reports of torture and the
absence of trials for inmates accused of terrorism.
The U.S. and Cuba reopened diplomatic ties in December after over 50
years of nonacknowledgment. Obama issued an executive order to close the
Guantánamo prison in 2009, but so far this has not come into fruition.
Source: The U.S. Will Not Return Guantanamo Bay to Cuba, the White House
Says | TIME - http://time.com/3688995/u-s-guantanamo-bay-cuba-return/
Obama won’t meet Raul Castro’s demands, but doesn’t regret Cuba move
Obama won't meet Raul Castro's demands, but doesn't regret Cuba move
By Ben Wolfgang - The Washington Times - Thursday, January 29, 2015
The Obama administration has no intention of meeting Cuban President
Raul Castro's various preconditions for normalizing diplomatic relations
with the U.S., officials said Thursday.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters the
administration, while not entertaining the idea of, for example,
returning the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay back to Cuba, does
not regret the historic decision to end 50 years of isolation and reopen
diplomatic avenues with Havana.
"I think what [Mr. Castro's] comments highlight is there are pretty
clear differences between establishing diplomatic relations and carrying
out the longer process of normalizing relations," Mr. Earnest said.
Mr. Castro this week laid out three central conditions for fully
normalizing relations with the U.S. — the lifting of the American
embargo on Cuba; the return of Guantanamo to the Cuban government; and
compensation for the "human and economic damage" suffered by the Cubans
as a result of U.S. policies.
It's not yet clear whether Congress will move to lift the embargo, but
the White House all but ruled out the other two conditions.
Still, Mr. Earnest said the decision to open diplomatic channels with
Havana was a good one, as it will allow the U.S. to have greater
influence over the country and provide a more formal way to express
displeasure with certain Cuban policies.
"There are a variety of concerns we have with the way the Castro regime
treats political dissidents, the way they treat individuals who are
trying to freely express their views, even the way they treat some
reporters," he said.
Source: Obama won't meet Raul Castro's demands, but doesn't regret Cuba
move - Washington Times -
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/29/obama-wont-meet-castro-demands-doesnt-regret-move/
By Ben Wolfgang - The Washington Times - Thursday, January 29, 2015
The Obama administration has no intention of meeting Cuban President
Raul Castro's various preconditions for normalizing diplomatic relations
with the U.S., officials said Thursday.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters the
administration, while not entertaining the idea of, for example,
returning the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay back to Cuba, does
not regret the historic decision to end 50 years of isolation and reopen
diplomatic avenues with Havana.
"I think what [Mr. Castro's] comments highlight is there are pretty
clear differences between establishing diplomatic relations and carrying
out the longer process of normalizing relations," Mr. Earnest said.
Mr. Castro this week laid out three central conditions for fully
normalizing relations with the U.S. — the lifting of the American
embargo on Cuba; the return of Guantanamo to the Cuban government; and
compensation for the "human and economic damage" suffered by the Cubans
as a result of U.S. policies.
It's not yet clear whether Congress will move to lift the embargo, but
the White House all but ruled out the other two conditions.
Still, Mr. Earnest said the decision to open diplomatic channels with
Havana was a good one, as it will allow the U.S. to have greater
influence over the country and provide a more formal way to express
displeasure with certain Cuban policies.
"There are a variety of concerns we have with the way the Castro regime
treats political dissidents, the way they treat individuals who are
trying to freely express their views, even the way they treat some
reporters," he said.
Source: Obama won't meet Raul Castro's demands, but doesn't regret Cuba
move - Washington Times -
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/29/obama-wont-meet-castro-demands-doesnt-regret-move/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
