<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div id="container" class="container font-size5 content-width3">
<div id="reader-header" class="header" style="display: block;"> <font
size="-2"><a id="reader-domain" class="domain"
href="http://en.granma.cu/cuba/2016-10-19/the-small-print-of-obamas-presidential-policy-directive-on-cuba">http://en.granma.cu/cuba/2016-10-19/the-small-print-of-obamas-presidential-policy-directive-on-cuba</a></font>
<h1 id="reader-title">The small print of Obama’s presidential
policy directive on Cuba</h1>
</div>
<div class="content">
<div id="moz-reader-content" class="line-height4"
style="display: block;">
<div id="readability-page-1" class="page"
xml:base="http://en.granma.cu/cuba/2016-10-19/the-small-print-of-obamas-presidential-policy-directive-on-cuba">
<div class="story-body-text story-content"
itemprop="articleBody">
<p><span class="g-story-author" itemprop="author creator"
itemscope="" itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"
itemid="/archivo?a=1369"><a
href="http://en.granma.cu/archivo?a=1369"
rel="author" title="Más artículos de Sergio
Alejandro Gómez"><span class="byline-author"
itemprop="name">Sergio Alejandro Gómez</span></a>
</span><time class="dateline" datetime="2016-10-19
14:10:49">- October 19, 2016<br>
<br>
</time></p>
<p>After decades of secret documents concealing sabotage
and destabilization plans, Barack Obama’s new
presidential policy directive on Cuba was publicly
unveiled on Friday, October 14.</p>
<p>The U.S. President stated that the document represents
a “comprehensive and whole-of-government approach” and
aims to make the transformations of the last two years
irreversible.</p>
<p>He added that the directive “promotes transparency by
being clear about our policy and intentions.”</p>
<p>Meanwhile, his National Security Adviser, Susan E.
Rice, went even further in recognizing that there were
“secret plans for Cuba” in the past, but that the U.S.
had now decided to make public the executive directives
concerning relations with the island.</p>
<p>As the saying goes, the devil is in the detail. Through
technocratic language and the typical neologisms of
diplomacy, the text conceals many of the contradictions
that remain between the two neighbors.</p>
<p>Since the announcements of December 17, 2014, U.S.
authorities have said on several occasions, and in
different ways, that they have changed their methods but
not their objectives.</p>
<p>“We recognize Cuba’s sovereignty and
self-determination,” the directive signed by Obama
notes, after describing the actions of the last half
century as “an outdated policy that had failed to
advance U.S. interests.”</p>
<p>Another paragraph of the document reads, “we are not
seeking to impose regime change on Cuba; we are,
instead, promoting values that we support around the
world while respecting that it is up to the Cuban people
to make their own choices about their future.”</p>
<p>However, the speech by Rice at the Woodrow Wilson
Center in Washington, and the subsequent exchange with
the press, made clear in both tone and content that the
aspirations to promote changes in the political,
economic and social order chosen by the Cuban people in
1959 have not disappeared.</p>
<p>The influential National Security Adviser justified the
current change of policy, arguing that the United States
could not “simply stand back and wait for Cuba to
change.”</p>
<p>She also said that Washington was interested in the
changes that have occurred on the island which,
according to her, have resulted from the rapprochement
between the two countries since the restoration of
diplomatic relations.</p>
<p>Rice added, “we believe that engaging openly and
honestly is the best way to advance our ideals,”
claiming that Washington is “making our democracy
programs more transparent.”</p>
<p>It is under this label of “democracy programs” that the
U.S. veils its regime change projects, to which it has
allocated millions of dollars for decades, without
achieving its objectives.</p>
<p>The directive contains almost identical terms in the
final indications to the various levels of government,
especially the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID), which is in the sights of several
countries due to its subversive work, and in Cuba was
behind operations such as the ZunZuneo alternative
social networking service, intended to create a support
base among youth.</p>
<p>“The USAID will co-lead efforts with State to ensure
that democracy programming is transparent and consistent
with programming in other similarly situated societies,”
the document details, as if the mere fact of making such
programs transparent, without changing their subversive
nature, would automatically make them acceptable to
Cuba.</p>
<p>Beyond the obscurity in the phrase “other similarly
situated societies” and assuming that Cuba is not the
only country where Washington funnels money to try to
influence the decisions of sovereign peoples who do not
respond to its interests, several questions arise: what
does making these programs “transparent” consist of?
Does being “transparent” make them less subversive?</p>
<p>Recent examples, such as the case of scholarships for
summer courses from the World Learning organization,
awarded surreptitiously and behind the backs of Cuban
authorities, are illustrative with regard to the real
interests of these USAID-subsidized programs in the
style of the “Color Revolutions”.</p>
<p>The directive recognizes that these operations affect
the process toward the normalization of relations, but
gives no indication of any intention to change, nor
modify, other aspects that undermine the ties between
the two countries: “We anticipate the Cuban government
will continue to object to U.S. migration policies and
operations, democracy programs, Radio and TV Marti, the
U.S. presence at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station, and
the embargo.”</p>
<p>The text continues, “The United States Government has
no intention to alter the existing lease treaty and
other arrangements related to the Guantanamo Bay Naval
Station, which enables the United States to enhance and
preserve regional security,” in reference to one of the
essential sovereign demands of the Cuban people,
regarding the illegally occupied territory, without
whose solution normal relations are not possible.</p>
<p><strong>WHICH CUBAN PEOPLE DOES IT AIM TO BENEFIT?</strong></p>
<p>“The objective of the new policy is to help the Cuban
people to achieve a better future for themselves,” the
new presidential directive notes. However, it is clear
that the bulk of changes made by the White House since
December 17, 2014, are aimed at a very specific sector
of the Cuban population and not at benefiting the
majority.</p>
<p>Among the results the United States seeks in the long
term with the transformation of its policy toward Cuba
is “the development of a private sector that provides
greater economic opportunities for the Cuban people.”</p>
<p>The text continues, “While the embargo remains in
place, our role will be to pursue policies that enable
authorized U.S. private sector engagement with Cuba's
emerging private sector and with state-owned enterprises
that provide goods and services to the Cuban people.”</p>
<p>The Cuban economic model, whose updating process has
been submitted to popular consultation on several
occasions, recognizes the non-state sector as a source
of employment and a complement to the economic
development of the country. However, the social
ownership of the basic means of production and the
socialist state enterprise are key to the present and
the prosperous and sustainable future to which we aspire
on the island.</p>
<p>In its conceptualization of the Cuban people, the U.S.
directive ignores the three of every four Cubans who
work in the public sector and are not beneficiaries of
current transformations.</p>
<p>Although undoubtedly the persistence of the blockade is
the main obstacle to trade and the normalization of
economic relations, the intention to prioritize the
private over the public sector (which constitutes the
majority in Cuba) for political purposes and to create
divisions within the country is also clear.</p>
<p>The directive contradicts itself on stating, in the
section entitled “Strategic Landscape”, that Cuba has
“important economic potential rooted in the dynamism of
its people, as well as a sustained commitment in areas
like education and health care.”</p>
<p>For over half a century, private capital has not
entered a Cuban school or hospital, but Washington does
not hesitate to recognize both sectors as strategic
strongholds for the country’s future.</p>
<p><strong>MEASURES ON THE RIGHT TRACK BUT LIMITED</strong></p>
<p>The latest round of measures from the departments of
Commerce and the Treasury, which accompanied the
publication of the directive, are on the same track as
the previous ones, again with a very limited, selective
and intentional scope.</p>
<p>While imports of Cuban pharmaceutical and biotechnology
products to the United States are approved for the first
time — for the benefit no doubt of its own population
which will now be able to access treatments like
Heberprot-P for diabetic foot ulcers — the restriction
remains on creating joint ventures in this sector for
the development and marketing of such products.</p>
<p>The opening in this area is evidence of the broad
executive powers of the U.S. president to substantially
modify aspects of the blockade, which continues to
restrict exports of the vast majority of Cuban products
to the neighboring country, the largest market in the
world.</p>
<p>Most measures are aimed at expanding transactions
already authorized in previous packages, demonstrating
their limited scope.</p>
<p>The ban on U.S. investment in Cuba remains, except in
the telecommunications sector, which was approved in
early 2015.</p>
<p>There is no new news to help dispel international
doubts regarding the financial persecution to which Cuba
is subjected and whose intimidating effects still
prevent cash deposits or payments to third parties in
U.S. dollars.</p>
<p>The fact remains that, despite the call on Congress to
lift the blockade, the bulk of this aggressive U.S.
policy remains standing; resulting in billions in losses
for the country. Its effects even inhibit the
implementation of the measures approved by the Obama
administration.</p>
<p>The President of the United States is far from having
exhausted his executive powers to make possible the
effective implementation of the measures adopted thus
far and decisively contribute to dismantling the
blockade.</p>
<p>Still, the historic steps of the last 22 months can not
be disregarded. Diplomatic relations were reestablished
and embassies reopened in both countries. Six U.S
Cabinet secretaries have visited Havana and four Cuban
ministers have traveled to the United States. Obama
became the first U.S. president to visit Cuba since
1928.</p>
<p>A Bilateral Commission was established to discuss
priority issues and agreements on environmental
protection; marine sanctuaries; public health and
biomedical research; agriculture; the fight against drug
trafficking; security of travelers and commerce; civil
aviation; mail; and hydrography have been signed. Talks
on cooperation in law enforcement, regulatory and
economic issues and claims, among others, have been
launched.</p>
<p>The list of progress between two countries that just
two years ago lacked an elementary diplomatic link is
considerable. But a long road remains ahead to achieve a
civilized relationship between neighboring nations not
only separated by 90 miles of sea, but by two centuries
of convulsive bilateral history.</p>
<p>Beyond a directive drafted as if there were no problems
between the two countries, and which could generate
false expectations, the present time demands real
political will to carry out the necessary changes and
set aside both the carrot and the stick.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863.9977
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.freedomarchives.org">www.freedomarchives.org</a>
</div>
</body>
</html>