[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 86 (Tuesday, May 23, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S7267]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


           THE ADMINISTRATION'S MIGRATION AGREEMENT WITH CUBA

 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, a couple of weeks ago, the 
administration concluded a migration agreement with Cuba that I hope 
will be the first step in the direction of a rational policy toward 
Cuba.
  Under this agreement, most of the 15-20 thousand Cubans that have 
been housed in Guantanamo Bay for the past several months will be 
paroled into the United States, with those paroles to count, on a 3-
year prorated basis, against the 20,000 minimum Cuba-to-America 
immigration numbers agreed upon by the Cuban and American governments 
last fall. Cuba has also agreed to accept back those Cubans at 
Guantanamo who are excludable under U.S. law because of criminal 
histories, infectious diseases, etc. Thus, within the limits set out in 
last fall's agreement between Cuba and the United States, this 
agreement has solved the costly and potentially explosive detention of 
the Cubans at Guantanamo.
  As part of this new policy, the Attorney General has also announced 
that those attempting in the future to emigrate to the United States 
from Cuba illegally--rather than through the process agreed upon last 
year--would be subject to interdiction and forced repatriation to Cuba, 
from where they could apply for asylum at the Cuban Interests Section 
in Havana.
  Although I have some concerns about the second half of this new 
approach--in particular, the policy of interdiction and repatriation of 
future migrants from Cuba--and urge the Attorney General to implement 
sufficient procedural protections for those Cubans with valid asylum 
claims, in general I view this agreement as a significant step forward 
in our relations with Cuba.
  Unlike our policies toward Cuba over the past 35 years, the agreement 
represents a rational and cooperative response to a U.S.-Cuba 
immigration problem that has caused this Nation nothing but headaches 
in the past. If our government could approach every U.S.-Cuba issue 
with the pragmatism that is reflected in this agreement, I believe that 
our long-sought goal of democratization of Cuba would be much closer to 
our grasp than this goal is now.
  I ask to have printed in the Record a May 4 editorial on the 
agreement with Cuba from the Chicago Tribune. This editorial ends with 
a call to President Clinton to apply the tools of constructive 
engagement in our relations with Cuba, and recognizes that these tools, 
not a doctrinaire and obsolete policy of Castro-baiting, hold the keys 
to a successful Cuba policy.
  The editorial follows:
                [From the Chicago Tribune, May 4, 1995]

                    A Welcome Change in Cuba Policy

       Ever since 1959, when Fidel Castro descended from the 
     Sierra Maestra to enter Havana spewing Marxism like cigar 
     smoke, Cuba has been a misplaced comma that jumbled an 
     otherwise cogent political essay called the Monroe Doctrine.
       In a commendable turn of direction. President Clinton 
     reinjected logic into U.S.-Cuba relations by ending 35 years 
     of preferential treatment for Cuban refugees. Clinton ruled 
     Tuesday that Cubans will no longer receive automatic asylum 
     but must pass the same hurdles as any other refugee reaching 
     our shores.
       Although Clinton's decision will be analyzed in terms of 
     the Cuban-American vote and hemispheric diplomacy, its 
     inspiration was purely practical.
       At present, 20,000 Cuban refugees are stuck in tents at the 
     Guantanamo Bay Naval Station; their $1 million-a-day tab for 
     room and board comes from the Pentagon budget, which means 
     the taxpayers' pockets.
       The refugees are getting restless. Clinton wants to avoid 
     ugly riots, so a final exemption will be granted to accept 
     that group. Any other ``raft people'' will be turned back to 
     Cuba.
       Clinton has firmly announced that this nation, not Castro, 
     controls America's borders. In addition, Clinton has denied 
     Castro the foreign policy weapon of ``boatlift diplomacy,'' 
     which capitalizes on the pitiful sight of refugees foundering 
     abroad unseaworthy craft en route to the promise of Florida's 
     beaches.
       There are two glaring holes in the president's program, 
     however.
       First is a threat that anyone among the Guantanamo refugees 
     with a criminal record will be denied entry. What's this? 
     Clinton thinks Castro is going to open up his secret police 
     files for perusal by Immigration and Naturalization Service 
     officers? Doubtful.
       And second is the quid pro quo from Castro, who has 
     promised to allow his people free access to the American 
     interest section in Havana. There they may file a formal 
     request for U.S. entry, which will be weighed by the INS like 
     those of potential immigrants worldwide. But Catro's promise 
     may be meaningless. In Cuba, one of the last remaining 
     communist states on Earth, pressures both subtle and overt 
     can be applied to frighten away potential applicants.
       By ending three decades of automatic asylum for Cubans, 
     Clinton has demoted Castro from top devil of the Caribbean, 
     much to the heartfelt anguish of expatriate Cubans and Cuban-
     Americans.
       If that is to be Clinton's new policy, then it is time to 
     apply the tools of constructive engagement--as with China, a 
     few steps at a time--using the full range of American 
     diplomacy, trade and culture to push Cuba toward democracy 
     and a rational relationship with its giant northern neighbor.
     

                          ____________________