<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div id="container" class="container font-size5 content-width3">
<div id="reader-header" class="header" style="display: block;"
dir="ltr"> <font size="-2"><a id="reader-domain" class="domain"
href="https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/10/06/sonic-attacks-in-cuba-who-benefits/">https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/10/06/sonic-attacks-in-cuba-who-benefits/</a></font>
<h1 id="reader-title">“Sonic Attacks” in Cuba: Who Benefits?</h1>
<p class="post_meta"> <span class="post_author_intro">by</span>
<span class="post_author" itemprop="author"><a
href="https://www.counterpunch.org/author/kirkkimb0098/"
rel="nofollow">John Kirk – Stephen Kimber</a></span> -
October 6, 2017<br>
</p>
</div>
<hr>
<div class="content">
<div id="moz-reader-content" class="line-height4" dir="ltr"
style="display: block;">
<div id="readability-page-1" class="page">
<div class="post_content" itemprop="articleBody">
<p>Consider this. The United States government doesn’t
know who’s responsible for the so-called acoustic
attacks on its embassy personnel in Havana. Then
consider this. Cuban president Raúl Castro didn’t simply
claim his government had nothing to do with the
incidents, he did the unthinkable and invited the FBI to
investigate. FBI agents haven’t been able to figure it
out. Neither have American acoustics specialists or
medical experts. Even Canada’s Mounties, whose own
diplomats reported similar attacks, are stymied.</p>
<p>Despite the fact no one has identified either culprit
or cause, the Trump administration is pre-emptively
creating conflict with Havana. Why? And who benefits
from that?</p>
<p>On October 3, the State Department announced it was
expelling two-thirds of Cuba’s Washington embassy
personnel, less than a week after it announced it was
withdrawing sixty per cent of its own diplomats from
Havana, and warning Americans against traveling there.
The department called the moves “reciprocity,” but
didn’t explain for what, since the Cubans haven’t
expelled anyone.</p>
<p>The State Department insists it isn’t blaming the Cuban
government for the attacks; it’s simply trying to
protect American diplomats and tourists. Ironically, the
U.S. Foreign Service Association, representing American
diplomats around the world, opposes Washington’s
directive. So do travel companies and airlines ferrying
eager American visitors to the island in increasing
numbers. So presumably do Americans generally, the
majority of whom support improving relations with Cuba.
While over 600,000 Americans visited Cuba last year,
it’s worth noting not one has so far complained of
symptoms similar to those reported by the diplomats.</p>
<p>Some context may be useful here. Late last year, U.S.
diplomats in Havana began reporting hearing loud
grinding, ringing noises inside areas of their homes and
experienced the sensation that their bodies were
vibrating. They claimed to suffer nausea, headaches and
hearing loss. U.S. government officials now say some
have been diagnosed with mild traumatic brain injuries.
Twenty-one American and at least five Canadians
diplomats and/or their families have been affected.</p>
<p>In the absence of evidence about who did what and why,
media have been rife with speculation. At first, the
most popular assumption was that the Cuban government
must be targeting these diplomats. This is now
considered unlikely, since the first of the so-called
attacks occurred at a time when bilateral relations were
beginning to improve, and Cuban president Raúl Castro
has consistently favored improving relations with the
United States.</p>
<p>Likewise, given that Canada and Cuba have traditionally
maintained solid ties, there would have been little
advantage for the Cubans in rocking that diplomatic
boat.</p>
<p>That led to other theories: “rogue elements” in the
Cuban security forces; officials inside US intelligence
services keen to resort to Cold War times; Russians
eager to bolster their own relationship with their
erstwhile ally while sowing discord between the US and
Cuba; maybe even Donald Trump himself, anxious to
deflect attention from his own many domestic and
international challenges.</p>
<p>We don’t know. And perhaps we never will. Or maybe the
truth will only be revealed 30 years from now after
sufficient time has passed and intelligence agencies
(from whichever country is involved, <em>if</em> they
are involved) finally release the pertinent
documentation.</p>
<p>So what do we really know?</p>
<p>Well, we certainly know who is already working overtime
to twist these unexplained events to their ideological
advantage: anti-Cuba hawks in Washington and Miami.
Still nursing their wounds from the Obama
administration’s 2015 reset on relations with Cuba, they
are eager to reassert their own hardline views on US
policy.</p>
<p>The Trump White House — which has talked tough on Cuba
but done relatively little so far to scale back actual
policy changes implemented during the Obama era — seems
eager to do the hawks bidding under cover of protecting
US diplomats.</p>
<p>On Sept. 15, five right-wing Republican Senators,
including virulent anti-Cuba Florida Senator Marco
Rubio, sent an open letter to Secretary Rex Tillerson,
asking him to “immediately declare all accredited Cuban
diplomats in the United States persona non grata and, if
Cuba does not take tangible action, close the U.S.
Embassy in Havana.”</p>
<p>Two days later, Tillerson — who has since come close to
putting a full checkmark beside their first demand —
told CBS the State Department has shuttering the embassy
“under evaluation… It’s a very serious issue with
respect to the harm that certain individuals have
suffered.”</p>
<p>It is indeed a very serious issue — which is exactly
why Washington shouldn’t allow its response to be
hijacked by baseless arguments of self-interested
Senators eager to turn back the political clock, and a
president paying back his political commitments to the
wealthy Cuban-American lobby.</p>
<p>Over five decades were wasted after the Washington
broke diplomatic relations with Cuba in 1961. The
reopening of diplomatic relations just two years ago was
a victory for common sense—but sadly is now in danger of
being overturned because of self-seeking politics and
ignorance.</p>
<p><em><strong>John Kirk</strong> is Professor of Latin
American Studies at Dalhousie University. He is the
author/coeditor of 16 books on Cuba. His most recent
book is <a
href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0813061059/counterpunchmaga">Healthcare
without Borders: Understanding Cuban Medical
Internationalism</a> (2015), and he is the coeditor
of “The Evolution of Cuban Foreign Policy under Raúl
Castro” (to be published in 2018). For many years he
was the Editor of the Contemporary Cuba series with
the University Press of Florida, and is now the
Co-editor of the new series on Cuba published by
Lexington Books.</em></p>
<p><em><strong>Stephen Kimber </strong>is a Professor of
Journalism at the University of King’s College in
Halifax, CANADA, and the author of nine books,
including the award-winning <a
href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1552665429/counterpunchmaga">What
Lies Across the Water: The Real Story of the Cuban
Five</a>.</em></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-freetext" href="https://freedomarchives.org/">https://freedomarchives.org/</a>
</div>
</body>
</html>