Center for a Free Cuba

The Miami Herald December 10, 2004

by Frank Calzon

What a thrill to learn that members of Washington’s prestigious Corcoran Gallery were ”curious about the real Cuba and its people.” How discouraging to discover that their curiosity was limited to a $70-$90 evening of propaganda — a reception, film and ”firsthand” conversation with Section Chief Dagoberto Rodríguez about U.S.-Cuba relations.

Scheduled for the last day of November, in the elegant, grand ballroom of the Cuban Interests Section, the soiree was ultimately postponed after Cuban Americans complained and the media took an interest. A spokesman for the Corcoran told the paper that its real purpose was ”to have a dialogue about art.”

Having a dialogue of any kind with Fidel Castro’s regime is difficult, if not impossible. Ask the European Union whose ”common position” of opening its nations’ Havana embassies to all Cubans, including dissidents, has led to a diplomatic crisis. Ask any of the Latin American or European presidents who have tried engaging Castro only to be rebuffed as ”interlopers,” ”traitors,” ”fascists” or ”bootlickers” of the United States. Or ask Cuba’s bishops or members of Cuba’s courageous human-rights organizations. If the Corcoran is ignorant about ”the real” Cuba and Cubans, it must be by design.

The regime’s bankruptcy, cruelty and tyrannical nature have been well documented. Before befriending Castro’s diplomats, did the Corcoran ask any questions? Consult any of the four Cuban-American members of the House of Representatives? Contact Florida’s Cuban-American senator-elect?

When I initially heard about the Corcoran’s curiosity about Cuba, I was elated. I thought Corcoran’s voice might be added to those of Amnesty International and the growing number of world leaders, including former Czech President Vaclav Havel and John Paul II, who have urged Havana to cease its repression, release its political prisoners and reform.

To my dismay, I found the Corcoran dancing down the same discredited path taken by the Western elites who remained silent about Stalin’s gulags while dropping dollars on his henchmen and traveling to Leningrad to bathe in the splendor of its museums and enjoy Russian ballet. Since then, many have discovered the basic human decency of distancing themselves from murderous rulers. To their credit, U.S. cultural institutions did not lend their names to the likes of Augusto Pinochet, and their response to the South African white supremacist regime was not to engage in artistic ”dialogues” but to demand that apartheid be dismantled.

Why not focus curiosity about Cuba on the issue of artistic freedom? Only a few days ago, a group of Cuban dancers and musicians sought artistic asylum in Las Vegas where they are performing. The reality is that Cuban artists and intellectuals run the risk of Cuban government reprisals and long prison terms if they are unwilling to remain silent about Havana’s repression and a despicable apartheid that denies Cubans access to hotels, beaches, restaurants and clinics set aside for foreign tourists.

In the United States people meet, talk and associate with whomever they want. Among them is a significant Cuban-American community, including elected political leaders, judges, university presidents, scientists, business leaders, intellectuals, painters, sculptors and writers who had to leave Cuba to exercise such basic rights. In Cuba, their counterparts continue to pay a horrendous price for seeking freedom and truth. Many of these people hold in their hearts a poem by Heberto Padilla, a great Cuban poet who died in exile:

Say the truth/ Say at the very least, your truth/ And later/ Let anything happen/ Let them tear your cherished page/ Let them stone your door down/ Let the people gather before your body/ As if you were a prodigy or a corpse.

Frank Calzon is executive director of the Center for a Free Cuba, which is based in Washington, D.C.

El Nuevo Herald| Diciembre 10 del 2004

Por Frank Calzon

Que alegría me dio enterarme de que la prestigiosa Galería Corcoran en Washington tenía curiosidad por saber acerca de ”la verdadera Cuba y su pueblo”! !Y que decepcionante descubrir que solo les interesaba organizar una noche de propaganda a cambio de $70 o $90 dólares: una recepción, película, y ”conversación de primera mano” sobre las relaciones cubano-americanas con el jefe de la misión diplomática castrista, Dagoberto Rodríguez. La gran fiesta estaba programada para el martes 30 de noviembre en el elegante salón de bailes de la Sección de Intereses de Cuba, pero fue pospuesta la semana pasada, después que los cubano-americanos protestaron y la prensa se intereso sobre el asunto. Un vocero del Corcoran le dijo a la prensa que el verdadero propósito era ”tener un dialogo sobre arte”.

Lograr un dialogo de cualquier tipo con el régimen de Castro es difícil, si no imposible. Pregúntenle a la Unión Europea, ahora que su posición común de abrir las embajadas de sus naciones en La Habana a todos los cubanos, incluyendo los disidentes, ha resultado en una crisis diplomática. Pregúntenle a cualquiera de los presidentes europeos o latinoamericanos que han tratado de establecer un dialogo con el presidente vitalicio cubano, solo para acabar insultados como ”correveidiles”, ”traidores”, ”fascistas” o ”lamebotas” de los Estados Unidos. O pregúntenles a los obispos cubanos, o a los miembros de las valientes organizaciones de derechos humanos en la isla.

Si el Corcoran sabe poco sobre la ”verdadera Cuba” y menos sobre los cubanos debe ser a propósito. ¿Hizo alguna pregunta el Corcoran antes de acercarse a los diplomáticos de Castro? ¿Le preguntó algo a los cuatro cubano-americanos miembros de la Cámara de Representantes, o al cubano-americano recién electo senador federal por la Florida?

Cuando me enteré de la curiosidad sobre Cuba del Corcoran me alegré mucho. Creí que la prestigiosa institución washingtoniana iba a añadir su voz a los pedidos de Amnistía Internacional y de un grupo creciente de líderes mundiales que incluyen al ex presidente checo Vaclav Havel y a Juan Pablo II, que han pedido a La Habana que cese la represión, libere a los presos políticos y de paso a las reformas.
Para mi sorpresa, descubrí que el Corcoran bailaba al mismo ritmo de las elites occidentales que mantuvieron silencio sobre los campos de concentración de Stalin mientras daban millones a sus testaferros, viajando a Leningrado a disfrutar del esplendor de los museos y el ballet soviético. Aunque hay que reconocer que más tarde muchos descubrieron una decencia básica fundamental y se distanciaron de los gobernantes asesinos. Hay que reconocer que las instituciones culturales americanas no prestaron sus nombres a dictadores como Augusto Pinochet y respondieron al régimen racista de Sudáfrica no organizando ”diálogos artísticos”, sino exigiendo el apartheid.

¿Por que no aprovechar esa curiosidad sobre Cuba para examinar seriamente la situación de la libertad artística en la isla? Solo hace unos días un grupo de músicos y artistas cubanos solicitaron asilo artístico en Las Vegas, donde se encontraban de gira. La realidad es que los intelectuales y artistas cubanos corren el riesgo de la represión oficial y de largas condenas de prisión si no están dispuestos a mantenerse en silencio sobre la dictadura y la abominable segregación turística que les niega acceso a los cubanos a los hoteles, las playas, los restaurantes y las clínicas asignados a los turistas.

En los Estados Unidos la gente se reúne, habla y se asocia con quien quiere. En los Estados Unidos existe una comunidad cubano-americana de importancia que incluye a lideres políticos electos, jueces, presidentes universitarios, científicos, empresarios, profesores, intelectuales, pintores, escultores y escritores que fueron obligados a abandonar la isla para poder hacer uso de sus derechos mas fundamentales. En Cuba, sus homólogos pagan un precio horrible por buscar la verdad y la libertad. Muchos de ellos llevan grabados en el corazón el poema de Heberto Padilla, un gran poeta cubano que murió en el exilio:

Di la verdad / Di por lo menos tu verdad / Y después que pase cualquier cosa / que destruyan tu pagina querida / que apedreen tu puerta / que la gente se reúna ante tu cuerpo / como si fueras un prodigio o un muerto.

Frank Calzon es el Director Ejecutivo del Centro para una Cuba Libre, basado en Washington.

The Washington Times| November 7, 2004

By Frank Calzon

While the Washington debate on U.S. Cuba policy remains stuck on the issue of trade sanctions, the world has not stood still. At a recent meeting sponsored by the Czech government in Prague, a dozen former presidents and chiefs of governments, including Vaclav Havel of the Czech Republic, Jose Maria Aznar of Spain, and former leaders from Uruguay, Chile, Canada, Costa Rica, Bulgaria and Estonia, met not to discuss the U.S. embargo but to urge the international community to support the Cuban people’s aspirations for a transition to democracy.

The Czech meeting was followed by a similar meeting in Slovakia, where again prominent Europeans called on Fidel Castro to open his jails and allow civil society to grow. Earlier European illusions have been destroyed by Mr. Castro’s repression and unwillingness to reform. Just last week, three members of Parliament (two Dutch and one Spaniard) were prevented from entering the country at Havana airport because they intended to meet with Cuban human rights activists.

Much has also changed about the U.S. trade embargo. Those who still talk about “lifting the embargo” routinely ignore that American companies already sell foodstuffs and medicine to Cuba. The issue is not about selling, but getting paid.

American companies sell to Cuba on a cash basis; the U.S. government does not provide credit guarantees. So there are no American banks standing in the long queue of Mr. Castro’s creditors in the Paris Club.

The Paris Club is comprised of foreign governments and banks that have extended credit to Mr. Castro, who hasn’t made a payment on principal or interest since 1986 to many of them. Havana owes Mexico $380 million. In 2002, that debt was renegotiated. But last March, Mr. Castro stopped payments when he became angry with Mexican President Vicente Fox. BancoMex has since closed its offices in Havana.

Even South Africa, a longtime ally due to Mr. Castro’s support for Nelson Mandela during Mr. Mandela’s many years of imprisonment, suspended its export insurance and credits to Cuba because of nonpayment.

We all know what happens when American banks can’t collect on outstanding loans: One way or another, taxpayers shoulder the burden. Remember the U.S. savings and loan debacle? If the U.S. unilaterally lifts what remains of its Cuba trade sanctions, as some are pushing for, American taxpayers will be handed the bill and the Cuban people will see no benefit.

“Commercial engagement” with Cuba comes with an extra political price. When Mr. Castro buys from U.S. companies, he expects them to become apologists and lobbyists for his government. As USA Today reports, “Castro’s regime uses its checkbook as leverage so that U.S. political and commercial groups sign promises to work for changes in the laws that restrict travel and trade with Cuba.” Sysco, which was ready to export $500,000 in foodstuffs, backed out when told it had to “take legal action to promote changes in trade with Cuba.”

If the insolvency of Cuba’s government is not reason enough for caution, how about the fact Cuba remains in the State Department list of rogue-nation terrorism sponsors? Cuba’s espionage against the United States, in which a high-ranking U.S. intelligence analyst pleaded guilty to spying for Mr. Castro for many years? The hospitality Cuba has granted fleeing felons – including accused killers of American police officers? Commerce is not the only factor to weigh in determining U.S. relations with other countries.
With the Soviet Union’s collapse and the end of Soviet subsidies, Mr. Castro turned to tourism for financing his repressive government. Should Americans now join in exploiting Cuban workers?

“Private enterprise” doesn’t exist in Cuba. The government owns all businesses, and Cuba’s military controls tourism. Unless they work at a hotel, nightclub or restaurant, Cubans are routinely banned from businesses catering to tourists. Some call it “tourist apartheid.” Paychecks are issued by Cuba’s government; foreign investors deal only with the Cuban government and become complicit exploiters of Cubans who get only $15 to $20 a month.

That is not enough to live on, so prostitution thrives. Anyone who promotes or talks about an “independent labor union” or “collective bargaining” is fired, arrested and imprisoned.

Some argue American tourists in Cuba would promote democracy and freedom. They are wrong; they misunderstand the lessons of Eastern Europe.

It was not American tourists enjoying Soviet ballets in Leningrad that brought down communism. Rather, it was Western efforts such as Radio Free Europe that broke the Soviet news monopoly. And Western leaders, such as President Ronald Reagan, kept the pressure on while maintaining America’s commitment to freedom and human decency.

The American people have a role in helping Cubans and others achieve freedom. It is a solidarity that should not now be replaced by complicit exploitation. Cubans need help maintaining pressure for reform on one of the world’s last communist tyrants.

There will be plenty of time to trade with a free Cuba. □

Frank Calzon is executive director of the Center for a Free Cuba, an independent human rights organization. He has testified before congressional committees and the U.N. Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, Switzerland.

The Miami Heral May 24, 2004

BY FRANK CALZON

President Bush is acting prudently to keep U.S. dollars out of the hands of Cuba’s dictator Fidel Castro. In quick response to recommendations by the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba to improve enforcement of U.S. law, Bush ordered tighter controls over ”educational” travel and ”family” visits to Cuba that had become guises for vacation tourism. Equally important, he also directed the purchase of the long-sought ”airborne platform” that will allow TV Martí broadcasts to be regularly seen and heard in Cuba.

What Bush didn’t do is also important: He did not cut remittances, leaving in place approvals for Cuban Americans to send $100 a month directly to relatives on the island.

As foreign-policy initiatives go, Bush’s actions were logical, compassionate and consistent with current law to deny Castro the dollars he needs to finance his anti-American mischief around the world and to maintain his oppressive control over the Cuban people. Bush also made clear that the United States disapproves Castro’s maneuvering to ensure that his brother, Gen. Raúl Castro, succeeds him as Cuba’s next tyrant.

Before the commission’s report had been printed or the White House responded, however, Castro apologists and administration critics began piling on. The Economist alleged that remittances from Cuban Americans would be cut ”by half.” The Lexington Institute denounced the alleged new $50-per-month limit.

Yet the report recommended no such cuts, and Bush made no change. Most of the people discussing the report simply have not read it. Worse, copies in Spanish have yet to be made available.

Predictably Castro is lashing out at the United States and the ”Miami Mafia.” Recently, he trucked tens of thousands of the people to another anti-American rally. Once again, the president-for-life is raising the specter of a U.S. invasion. Given Castro’s total control over Cuba’s media and its unrelenting anti-American propaganda, many Cubans — even some who dislike Castro’s regime — believe that this invasion is nonsense.

Yet Eloy Gutiérrez Menoyo, who last August returned from exile in the United States but has not been bothered by the Cuban authorities, echoes Castro. According to Menoyo, Bush’s initiative could result in “a massive exodus and conflict with the consequent loss of lives of U.S. soldiers and destabilization of the Caribbean basin region.”

If Castro’s response was predictable, Bush’s response does not have to be. Bush could turn the tables on Castro. He could order the immediate deployment of U.S. aircraft to the Florida Straits to televise assurances that no invasion is under consideration and that Washington poses no obstacle to Cubans’ deciding their own destiny. In fact, the obstacle is found in Havana — Castro and his undisguised effort to impose a Castro-family dynasty.
For more than 40 years, Castro has been misrepresenting U.S. policies. Even if most of the Cubans who are forced to march in his rallies do not believe everything he says, the event itself serves an important purpose: It reminds Cubans that Castro is still in charge.

When TV Martí went on the air in 1990 challenging Castro’s information monopoly, Castro called it ”electronic warfare” and immediately began blocking the signal. A year ago, however, an American aircraft successfully beamed TV Martí into Cuba. Having proved that it can be done, Bush is now ordering it to be done. That will give Cubans the option of changing the channel.

Castro fears the day when all Cubans — including the military, the bureaucracy and even Communist Party cadres — might watch programs that point out that the answer to Cuba’s suffering could be a plebiscite like the one Augusto Pinochet permitted in Chile or a national roundtable like the one in Poland when Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelski brought together the bishops, army, government and opposition.

Castro’s hysterics deserve a response. Bush should order U.S. aircraft into international airspace to get TV Martí broadcasts into Cuba — now.■

Frank Calzón is executive director of the Center for a Free Cuba.

El Nuevo Herald| 24 de Mayo del 2004

Por Frank Calzon

El presidente George W. Bush actuó prudentemente al tomar medidas que impidan que los dólares americanos sigan llenando las arcas de Fidel Castro. Como respuesta a las recomendaciones formuladas por la Comisión de Ayuda para una Cuba Libre de hacer cumplir las leyes existentes, el Presidente ordeno la implementación de controles mas estrictos en materia de viajes ”educacionales” y visitas ”familiares” a Cuba, suprimiendo aquellos viajes que solo son turismo y vacaciones. El Presidente ordeno además la compra –al fin– de la plataforma aérea que permitirá que TV Martí se vea en Cuba.

Lo que el Presidente no ordeno también es importante. Por ejemplo, no redujo las remesas que los cubanoamericanos envían a sus familiares en la isla: $100 mensuales.

Las decisiones del Presidente son lógicas, compasivas, y totalmente congruentes con la ley norteamericana que le niega a Castro los dólares que necesita para financiar actividades antiamericanas alrededor del mundo y para mantener el control asfixiante que ejerce sobre el pueblo cubano.

El Presidente dejo claro que Estados Unidos se opone a la sucesión que convertiría al general Raúl Castro en el próximo tirano.

Pero aun antes de que el informe de la Comisión fuese a imprenta, o que llegara a la Casa Blanca, los apologistas de Castro y los adversarios de la administración ya criticaban al Presidente. La revista The Economist dijo que las remesas de los cubanoamericanos se verían reducidas ”a la mitad”. El Instituto Lexington condenó la supuesta reducción de las remesas a $50 mensuales.

Basta leer el informe para ver que esas acusaciones son falsas: ni se recomendó un recorte en las remesas, ni el Presidente lo ordeno. Muchos de los que han criticado al Presidente no han leído el informe. Y aparentemente, por incomprensibles demoras burocráticas, el documento aun no esta disponible en español.

Como era de esperar, Castro culpo a los Estados Unidos y a la ”mafia de Miami”, obligando a miles de cubanos a participar en otra manifestación antiamericana. De nuevo el ”presidente vitalicio” de Cuba evoca el fantasma de una invasión yanki. Dado el control que Castro ejerce sobre la prensa cubana y la implacable propaganda antiamericana que por ella se destila, muchos cubanos –aun aquellos que aborrecen el régimen de Castro– se creen el cuento de la inminente invasion.

Por otro lado, Eloy Gutiérrez Menoyo, que en agosto ”regreso de su exilio en Estados Unidos –y a quien las autoridades no han molestado para nada”, dijo que la iniciativa del presidente Bush podría causar ”un éxodo masivo y por consiguiente un conflicto… con la consabida muerte de soldados norteamericanos y la desestabilización de la cuenca del Caribe”.

Si bien la reacción de Castro es predecible, la respuesta del presidente Bush no tiene por que serlo. El Presidente debe quitarle la iniciativa a Castro enviando aviones norteamericanos al Estrecho de la Florida para televisar hacia Cuba un mensaje que le asegure al pueblo cubano que no habrá tal invasión, y que no es Washington, sino el dictador, el obstaculo que enfrentan los cubanos para decidir su propio destino. De hecho, el mensaje no podría ser mas claro: es Fidel Castro y su deseo de imponerles a los cubanos (como Somoza y Duvalier) la dinastía de la familia Castro.

Por mas de cuarenta anos, Castro ha tergiversado la política de Estados Unidos. Y aunque la mayoría de los cubanos obligados a desfilar en las manifestaciones no crean todo lo que el dice, el evento en si cumple una misión importante: recordarles a los cubanos que Castro es quien manda en Cuba.

Cuando TV Martí salio al aire en 1990 y reto el monopolio informático del dictador, el la bautizo de ”guerra electrónica” y se dio a la tarea inmediata de interferirla. Sin embargo, hace un ano TV Martí logro llegar al pueblo cubano gracias a una transmisión aérea. El Presidente demostró que la señal podía llegar, y ahora ha dado la orden para hacerla llegar regularmente. Al fin el cubano de a pie podrá cambiar de canal. Castro teme que los cubanos –incluyendo a los militares, la burocracia y hasta los cuadros del Partido Comunista– vean un programa que les indique que la solución de la tragedia nacional podría ser un plebiscito como el que Augusto Pinochet realizo en Chile, o una mesa redonda nacional al estilo polaco, donde el General Jaruzelski convoco a los obispos, al ejercito, al gobierno y a la oposición.

La histeria de Castro merece una respuesta. El Presidente debe ordenar que se transmita inmediatamente TV Martí desde aviones norteamericanos en espacio aéreo internacional. Para luego es tarde.■

Director Ejecutivo del Centro para una Cuba Libre.

The International Herald Tribute| Friday, May 7, 2004

By Frank Calzon

What a shame that after 12 years of stultifying UN meetings Alan Sternberg (“The knockout punch that woke up the UN,” Meanwhile, April 28) did not actually witness the unprovoked attack by a member of the Cuban delegation to the United Nations that left me unconscious after the UN Commission on Human Rights voted to condemn Cuba for its abuse of human rights.

Because he didn’t see the attack, Sternberg could only recount hearing shrieks that a “Cuban diplomat just slugged the American diplomat” and learn of colleagues happily shadow-boxing their way down UN halls. This led Sternberg to conclude that the attack was “another indication of how roundly disliked the United States has become in many parts of the world.”

For the record: I was hit from behind and knocked out, but I am not an American diplomat, as Sternberg said. I defend the victims of Fidel Castro’s repression as the executive director of the Center for a Free Cuba

What much of the world and commission members saw when I was attacked was a demonstration of the Cuban government’s utter disdain for human rights and the rule of law – in any setting.

It was not unlike what occurs daily in Cuba where “rapid deployment brigades” are let loose to beat up dissidents and quell any protest. What breaks up a “dull day” in Geneva is routine in Cuba.

To understand what happened that day at the United Nations, it also helps to put the internal dynamics of the UN Human Rights Commission in a meaningful context.

The commission is an international body monitoring human rights worldwide. But almost half of the members are dictatorships working strenuously together to oppose effective human rights resolutions.

Given these dynamics, the condemnation of Cuba by the rights commission was extraordinary. To suggest it was “orchestrated by the Americans,” as the Cubans have, ignores facts. Twenty-five countries – including some who do not sit on the commission – sponsored the resolution on Cuba.

If one can ignore the catalogue of torture, abuse and murder by the Castro regime laid out at meetings of the Human Rights Commission, then one can agree with Sternberg’s assessment that “staring at a bucket of sand for six hours is generally a lot more interesting than anything that happens at the standard UN meeting.” I don’t ignore the substance and can’t agree with the assessment.

Boredom at the commission is a matter of perspective. From my point of view the hours spent at commission meetings are the lifelines of hope for oppressed people.

The hours spent put the world’s despots on notice: They can be held accountable. And the resolutions that emerge provide the protection of international attention to those pushing to extend the reach of human rights. In some instances, it ensures they survive. If entertainment is all Sternberg lacks in life, he should try the movies.□

Frank Calzon, Washington

Sun Sentinel| April 26, 2004

By Frank Calzon

While waiting to address the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, I read your April 17 editorial, “U.N. Vote Lost on Cuba.” I agree that the commission “did the right thing” in condemning Cuba for jailing 75 dissidents who had advocated civil rights and economic reforms. I also agree with your conclusion that “Cuba remains among the worst civil rights abusers.”

Much of the rest of the editorial and its “blame America first” tone, however, is simply wrong. To say the vote generated “so much division and bitterness … that it blunts the impact” is wrong. It ignores the courage of the relatives of Cuba’s dissidents and human-rights activists who spoke out and provided supporting evidence for the resolution and ignores the resolution’s impact on Castro’s political captives who are often reminded by their jailers that no one cares for them. Foreign press accounts out of Cuba indicate that human-rights activists there applauded the vote and were heartened that the United Nations recognized the truth. They did not feel the impact “was blunted,” and they continue to urge the international community to call for the release of dissidents and monitoring of human rights in Cuba.

Don’t pretend that the one-vote margin detracts from the victory. Several of the despotic regimes that now sit on the commission worked tirelessly to block condemnations. China and Zimbabwe did escape.

I also want to point out that there was no “fistfight between an anti-Castro activist and a member of Cuba’s delegation.” I know because I was the anti-Castro activist who was struck from behind and knocked unconscious. I didn’t even see the Cuban diplomat who hit me. The U.S. Ambassador Kevin Moley was among the diplomats witnessing it, and the State Department has called it an “unprovoked attack.” U.N. security guards subdued him and, as I lay unconscious, I am told that other representatives of the Castro government were trying to kick me.

Lastly I find the suggestion that the U.S. engage in “serious consultations” with the abstaining governments of Brazil and Argentina to be off the mark. When it comes to taking the next step, I think it more effective to engage with the seven Latin American governments that voted for condemnation: Chile, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico and Peru. Why not also listen to former Czech President Vaclav Havel and former Polish President Lech Walesa, who just before the vote were urging the international community to support Cuba’s “beleaguered opposition”?

The real question to be confronted is: How much influence does any single government have with Fidel Castro? Spain, Italy, the Czech Republic, Mexico and the European Union have all attempted dialogues with Cuba, only to be insulted. When Mikhail Gorbachev headed the Soviet Union and was providing Cuba with a lifeline — buying sugar at higher than world-market prices and selling oil for less than world-market value — he tried to encourage reforms in Cuba. Despite that huge economic and political leverage, he too was unsuccessful.

The notion that if Washington were now less outspoken, the United States would gain more influence with Castro harkens back to the Cold War era when the “blame America first” school of foreign policy routinely decried the divisiveness of speaking candidly and truthfully to the Soviet Union. No one can bear witness to injustice without courting “division and bitterness” from despots.

When I did get my opportunity to testify, I warned the commission: “The Cuban regime is orchestrating a campaign to dehumanize its opposition” and denounces dissident reformers “as traitors, lackeys of foreign powers, agents of the CIA and terrorists. But this is the language of Cuba’s totalitarian past. Cuba’s jailed human rights activists, who have worked for tolerance and reconciliation, speak to Cuba’s future. They need and deserve this commission’s support.”

These activists seeking change within Cuba also need the support of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel and its readers.

Frank Calzon is the executive director of the Washington-based Center for a Free Cuba, an independent human-rights organization.
Copyright © 2004, South Florida Sun-Sentinel

The Miami Herald April 16, 2004

By FRANK CALZON

If there were one thing at which opponents of the Cuban government would prefer to see the government succeed, it would be ensuring the well-being and rights of Cuba’s children. Unfortunately, the absence of civil society on the island — as demonstrated by the government’s censorship of the press, denial of free association and assembly, harassment and imprisonment of dissidents — forces Cubans of goodwill to raise abroad the issue of children’s rights and to seek help from the international community.

If Havana would allow the U.N. Commission on Human Rights’ representative to visit the island, the following would be verified:

* While Cuban authorities invite thousands of foreign tourists to the island, providing them plenty of food and conveniences, Cuban children on their seventh birthday are no longer entitled to receive milk rations.

* With great pride Cuba’s government reports very low infant-mortality statistics, but authorities also acknowledge a very high abortion rate. Cuba’s health polices strongly encourage women with ”problem pregnancies” to abort.

* Years after the pastoral visit by Pope John Paul II, the government remains unmoved by his plea to close the infamous escuelas en el campo (schools in the countryside). Cuba’s teens are assigned to these schools, which are often far from home. Once there, the teens spend long hours working in the fields. Housing is poor. Adult supervision is inadequate, and there is a climate of great promiscuity. Given the conditions and mandatory labor, Cuba cannot rightly claim to provide free, public education.

* Cuba’s schools are designed to produce Leninist ”new men and women” — obedient individuals. Cuba’s children are taught to accept their leaders’ edicts unquestioningly and uncritically. Children stand at attention, raise one hand and chant an oath reminiscent of Stalin’s Russia or Franco’s Spain: !Comandante en jefe, ordene!(Commander-in-chief, at your orders!).

* Cuba’s health system is no example of Utopian, egalitarian socialism; rather it is an example of the worst 19th century exploitive capitalism. Despite the best intentions of Cuban physicians, the care rendered children in Cuban hospitals is frequently characterized by poor hygiene, poor diet and severe shortages of medicine. Foreigners traveling to the island under ”Servimed,” Cuba’s health-tourism agency, are treated in the best of facilities, where there is no shortage of medicines, diagnostic tests or equipment. Indeed, there is a well-stocked ”international pharmacy” in Miramar. It will not sell medications to Cubans. Occasionally tourists take pity on Cubans and purchase pharmaceuticals for them.

* Child prostitution is also a problem. A March 2002 released by Johns Hopkins University states: ”Cuba is increasingly reported to be a major destination for sex tourists from North America and Europe. Tourists have contributed to a sharp increase in child prostitution and exploitation of women in Cuba.”

These facts account for why Havana refuses to allow visits by a representative of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the PARLATINO, Latin America’s Parliament. Even the International Committee of the Red Cross continues to wait for permission to visit Cuba’s political prisons.

The European Union was shocked last year to hear Cuba’s leader reject its humanitarian assistance because EU authorities, too, were raising human-rights issues.

Jose Marti wrote, ”Children are the hope of the world.” I am sure that within the Cuban government there are men and women who recognize the absurdity of this continuing tragedy. I pray that they will join with other Cubans on the island and in the diaspora to build a happier country, one in which children are the hope of the world and the hope of all Cubans for a better future.

Frank Calzon is executive director of the Center for a Free Cuba. This article is adapted from his recent address before the U.N. Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, where he was knocked unconscious yesterday by a Cuban diplomat.

El Nuevo Herald| 16 de Abril del 2004

Por Frank Calzón

Las siguientes palabras fueron pronunciadas ante la Comision de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas en Ginebra. Tras celebrarse la votacion, uno de los miembros de la delegacion del regimen de Cuba agredio al autor.

Gracias, senor presidente. Me complace comparecer una vez mas ante esta Comision y hoy vengo a nombre de la Internacional Liberal, una organizacion no gubernamental dedicada a la defensa de la libertad. Me limitare al inciso 13: los derechos del nino.

Yo soy cubano. Siendo aun un adolescente presencie el renacimiento de la esperanza en los cubanos con la derrota de la dictadura de Batista. Desde entonces he presenciado el ocaso de esa esperanza bajo la dictadura de Castro.

Sin embargo, hay un area en que tanto yo como otros opositores del gobierno cubano quisieramos ver a ese gobierno triunfar: es en lo que respecta al bienestar y los derechos de los ninos y ninas cubanos. Desgraciadamente, la ausencia de una sociedad civil en la isla –evidente en la censura de prensa, la violacion de los derechos de asociacion y asamblea, y el hostigamiento y encarcelamiento de la disidencia– obliga a los cubanos de buena voluntad a alzar sus voces en el exterior y solicitar ayuda de la comunidad internacional a favor de los derechos del nino.

Si el gobierno de La Habana le permitiera a la representante de esta Comision visitar la isla, se verificarian las siguientes circunstancias:

Mientras que las autoridades cubanas invitan a miles de turistas a la isla y se aseguran de que a los extranjeros no les falte ni comida ni comodidades, a los ninos cubanos se le suspende su cuota de leche al cumplir los siete anos.

El gobierno cubano informa al mundo con orgullo sobre la baja tasa de mortalidad infantil, pero las autoridades admiten que existe en la isla una altisima tasa de aborto. La politica de salud publica de Cuba insta a las mujeres a que se sometan al aborto ante un embarazo potencialmente problematico.

Han pasado varios anos desde la visita de Su Santidad Juan Pablo II a Cuba y el gobierno no ha tomado en cuenta su peticion respecto al cierre de las horrendas escuelas al campo. A los adolescentes cubanos se les envia a estas escuelas, a grandes distancias del hogar. Alli le dedican largas horas al trabajo agricola. La vivienda es pesima, tampoco es adecuada la supervision adulta, y es rampante la promiscuidad. Dadas las condiciones en estos centros, y el trabajo obligatorio, Cuba no puede seguir afirmando que la educacion es publica y gratuita.

Las escuelas cubanas estan disenadas para producir ”hombres y mujeres nuevos” de ideologia leninista. O sea, seres obedientes. A los ninos cubanos se les ensena que hay que acatar las orientaciones del gobierno sin cuestionarlas o criticarlas. Los ninos tienen que pararse en atencion, levantar su mano y repetir un juramento que recuerda la Rusia de Stalino la Espana de Franco: ”Comandante en jefe, ordene”.

El sistema de salud publica cubano no es un ejemplo del socialismo equitativo y utopico. Por el contrario, se asemeja a los peores ejemplos del capitalismo explotador del siglo XIX. A pesar de las mejores intenciones de los medicos cubanos, la atencion medica que reciben los ninos se caracteriza por higiene pobre, dieta inadecuada y grave escasez de medicamentos. Sin embargo, a los extranjeros que viajan a Cuba a recibir los servicios medicos de SERVIMED, la agencia promotora del turismo de salud de Cuba, se les trata en los mejores hospitales y centros, donde no hay escasez de medicinas, examenes diagnosticos o equipos medicos. Es mas, en Miramar existe una ”farmacia internacional” plenamente abastecida. En esa farmacia no se atiende a los cubanos. De vez en cuando los turistas se apiadan de alguien y le compran alli los medicamentos que en las farmacias del pueblo no se consiguen.

La prostitucion de menores tambien constituye un problema. Quiero citar un informe de marzo de 2002 publicado por la Universidad Johns Hopkins: ”Se informa que Cuba ya representa un destino importante para el turismo sexual que proviene de Norteamerica y Europa… Los turistas han contribuido al rapido aumento de la prostitucion de menores y la explotacion de la mujer en Cuba”.

Estos hechos explican el porque La Habana se niega a permitir la visita de la representante de esta Comision, al igual que de Amnistia Internacional, Human Rights Watch y hasta del PARLATINO.

La Cruz Roja Internacional tambien lleva anos esperando que Cuba le de permiso para visitar las carceles politicas del pais. Y para la Union Europea fue una gran sorpresa que el lider cubano rechazara la ayuda humanitaria del viejo continente por el solo hecho de que Europa tambien indagara sobre las violaciones de derechos humanos en Cuba.

Jose Marti, el mas cubano de los cubanos, escribio hace mas de un siglo: ”Los ninos son la esperanza del mundo”.

Yo estoy seguro de que en las filas del gobierno cubano hay hombres y mujeres que reconocen cuan absurda es esta tragedia interminable. Rezo por que esos cubanos de buena voluntad logren unirse a sus demas compatriotas en la isla y en la diaspora para que juntos puedan construir un pais mas feliz, un pais cuyos ninos y ninas puedan ser la esperanza de un futuro mejor para el mundo y para todos los cubanos.

Muchas gracias.