[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 48 (Thursday, March 25, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3380-S3383]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          HUMAN RIGHTS IN CUBA

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A resolution (S. Res. 57) expressing the sense of the 
     Senate regarding the human rights situation in Cuba.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 5 minutes.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, have the proponents spoken on the 
resolution, I inquire of my colleague from Florida?
  Mr. MACK. Not yet. We have not used our time yet.
  Mr. DODD. How much time is there on the resolution?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Five minutes apiece.
  Mr. DODD. Fine. Mr. President, if I may, let me, first of all, say I 
intend to support and vote for this resolution. But in doing so, I want 
to express some deep concerns. Many of my colleagues know we have what 
is now just about a 40-year-old problem that has not been even remotely 
close to resolution and that is, of course, United States-Cuban 
relations.
  We know why we are going to be asked to consider this resolution this 
week, and I suspect it will be passed overwhelmingly. The real question 
is, does it do anything to influence the policies of the Cuban 
Government or garner the support of our allies? On that issue, I have 
to answer resoundingly no. It may make us feel good, it will express 
our views, but in terms of these resolutions having some influence on 
the very events which provoked the resolution, I think the answer has 
to be we can probably anticipate the same response as we have had

[[Page S3381]]

with a collective set of resolutions over the years.
  I have criticized the recent crackdowns on dissidents, as many have 
here, including the sentencing of the ``Group of Four,'' which is 
terribly wrong and totally counterproductive and, in my view, a 
violation of human rights of these individuals. It is also very 
inconsistent with the Cuban Government's efforts in the past to gain 
the international respectability they have been trying to garner. For 
the life of me, from their standpoint, I don't see why this benefits 
them or assists them.
  Our passing of these kinds of resolutions on Cuba, year after year, 
year after year, unfortunately, has not prevented the Cuban authorities 
from dealing harshly with dissidents. Depending upon the ebb and flow 
of the Cuban political dynamic, the human rights situation gets a 
little better or a little worse or a little better or a little worse, 
but nothing significant or permanent seems to happen or change.
  We need to engage, in my view, the Cuban Government on this and other 
issues, as we have done with other nations with whom we have 
significant disagreements, if we are going to create any kind of 
environment for some change. That engagement, which we traditionally 
call diplomacy, has been totally absent in the conduct of relations 
between these two nations, the Cuban Government and our own. Perhaps 
that is why, I suggest, the record is so dismal. It is action-reaction, 
action-reaction, and a total absence of any diplomacy.
  Let's not fool ourselves. This resolution is not going to help the 
people of Cuba. Is it not time to change our view of what should be the 
dynamics of United States-Cuban relations--to start a new conversation 
with Cuba, rather than simply act and react to unfolding events in 
Havana? I believe it is time to begin such a new conversation in this 
body and in the United States.
  We in this country make the mistake, in my view, of overreacting to 
these ebbs and flows, rather than keeping to the steady and consistent 
policy to bring Cuba into the world community of democratic nations. 
All we do, by passing resolutions of this kind which are not accurate 
in all respects, is to fuel nationalist sentiments in Havana and 
elsewhere in this hemisphere and around the globe.
  The resolution authoritatively cites human rights organizations as 
critical of human rights practices of Cuban authorities. However, it 
does not mention these very same organizations also criticize U.S. 
policies with respect to Cuba. The 1999 Human Rights Watch World Report 
states:

       The (U.S.) embargo had not only failed to bring about human 
rights improvements in Cuba but had become counterproductive.

  It goes on to conclude that:

       The embargo continued to restrict the rights of freedom of 
     expression and association and the freedom to travel between 
     the United States and Cuba, thus violating Article 19 of the 
     International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a 
     treaty [I might add] ratified by [our Government.]

  This resolution further, and our policy generally, allows all of 
Cuba's problems, and there are many, to be blamed on the United States 
in too many international circles. While we are not responsible for the 
state of the Cuban economy, the Cuban people are extremely 
nationalistic and will rally behind their government against foreign 
threats. This is true elsewhere in the hemisphere.
  What we need to do, in my view, is to move forward to implement Pope 
John Paul II's call that Cuba open up to the world and the world open 
up to Cuba. More constructive measures such as the upcoming baseball 
game and concert are more effective ways of communicating U.S. values 
to the Cuban people, particularly as a part of a broader effort to 
pursue increasing contacts between the American and Cuban people.
  Love of baseball and music are just two examples of the many things 
the American and the Cuban people have in common. We have much more in 
common than that. The best way to communicate that is by lifting 
restrictions on U.S. citizens' rights to travel to Cuba or anywhere 
else. Frankly, such restrictions, in my view, are un-American. We can 
travel to virtually any other nation in the world--North Korea, Iraq, 
Iran. The only restrictions are what those nations place on us. The 
only place I know of where we restrict Americans from going is a 
country 90 miles off our shore. If they want to place restrictions on 
our travel there, I would object. But we should not restrict Americans' 
travel.
  We need to make other fundamental changes in our policy. Our guiding 
principle in doing that should be that these changes are in our, the 
Americans', best interests. With respect to Cuba, an island of 11 
million people 90 miles off our shore, America's interest is that there 
be a peaceful transition to a post-Castro era, whenever that time 
comes.
  Mr. President, I ask just for 1 additional minute, if I can, and I 
will give 1 additional minute to my colleague from Florida.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Smith of Oregon). Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, it is not in America's interest to have an 
armed insurrection occurring in that country or to see living 
conditions become so onerous that everyone takes to the boats and finds 
themselves at sea, seeking safe harbor in this country or elsewhere.
  With respect to policy, I suggest the lifting of restrictions on food 
and medicine. These restrictions border on immoral, in my view. I also 
recommend lifting restrictions on travel. Under certain circumstances, 
U.S. companies should also be permitted to invest in Cuba, provided 
American-style workplace conditions prevail in U.S.-owned investments. 
I also encourage contacts between United States and Cuban diplomats, 
including inviting Cuban diplomats to the United States, discussing 
issues of huge concern including regional terrorism, drug trafficking, 
and the preservation of the environment.
  If we really want to see the peaceful transition to democracy in 
Cuba, then it is about time, after 40 years, the end of the cold war 
and the falling of the Berlin Wall, to break out of the policy 
straitjacket that has prevented meaningful change from taking place in 
Cuba-United States relationships. Passing resolutions of this kind, 
year after year, year after year, do nothing to help change what is a 
situation that demands, in my view, some new thinking, a new 
conversation.
  With that, I thank my colleague for providing the additional minute.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I understand I have now 6 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 6 minutes.
  Mr. MACK. It is my intention then to use 3 of those minutes and then 
to yield to my colleague, Senator Graham, for the balance of the 3 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. MACK. Mr. President, let me, first of all, thank Senator Dodd for 
his vote for this resolution. I respect immensely his viewpoint and 
what he has stated over all these years, but I respectfully disagree 
with him. Again, I will just point out, all we are suggesting here is 
that the least America can do is to say we ought to ask the United 
Nations to condemn Fidel Castro for his human rights violations. That 
is not an extreme position to take, to ask the world body to condemn 
Fidel Castro for human rights violations.
  The reason we are doing this is because I think it is appropriate to 
respond to the impression that has been created over these last several 
months after the Pope visited Cuba. There has been this kind of love 
affair that Cuba has changed, that the world is now going to open up. 
The Senator said a moment ago, if Cuba would open up, if we would open 
up, we could come together.
  Clearly, what has happened since the Pope's visit, Fidel Castro has 
arrested more dissidents than he has released following the Pope's 
visit. He has instituted new laws which restrict the freedom of speech, 
even more restrictive than in previous years. He arrested 15 people 
trying to celebrate the birthday of Martin Luther King this year, and 
just this month he arrested and sentenced four prominent activists for 
writing about the basic rights of the Cuban people.

[[Page S3382]]

  Mr. President, it seems to me that this country, a country that has 
been willing to stand up in defense of human rights, basic human rights 
all over the globe, is doing the right thing. I ask my colleagues in 
the Senate to support this resolution.
  I yield back my time and yield the floor to Senator Graham.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I, too, appreciate the vote of the Senator 
from Connecticut in favor of this, I think, quite moderate but 
extremely important and timely resolution.
  Today in Geneva the United Nations Human Rights Commission commenced 
its annual meetings. One of the issues that will be before the 
Commission will be whether a resolution condemning human rights in Cuba 
and appointing a special rapporteur to review those conditions should 
pass. Unfortunately, last year a similar resolution for the first time 
in many years failed to pass.
  The question is, How has Cuba reacted to the fact that for 12 months 
it has not had the international condemnation of its human rights 
record, which has been the case for many of the years of the Castro 
regime? What in fact has happened is that we have seen a significant, 
almost inexplicable increase in the denial of fundamental rights, 
political rights, human rights, civil rights, to the people of Cuba 
and, as my colleague has just indicated, the examples of the loss of 
fundamental human dignity.
  Why are we passing this resolution? We are passing this resolution 
not only to express our outrage at this condition but also to urge the 
international community to join us, the international community which 
has so recently been populated by new democracies, for those new 
democracies to step forward and express their condemnation for one of 
the few remaining dictatorial regimes in the world.
  This recent crackdown by the Cuban Government has already drawn the 
condemnation of the international community, including some of Cuba's 
staunchest friends, such as Canada. A resolution is now being 
circulated in Geneva by several Eastern European states condemning the 
Cuban Government for its human rights record and calling for the 
appointment of a special rapporteur.
  Mr. President, I think it is significant that these Eastern European 
states, which suffered under the tyranny of Nazi Germany and Stalinist 
Russia, are leading the effort to highlight the repression and terror 
that accompanies everyday life in Cuba.
  This resolution calls on the U.S. Government to take all measures to 
support this resolution so that the international community, including 
the international community with the United States of America, can 
shine the light of freedom on Castro's brutal repressive regime.
  I urge my colleagues to strongly support this resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the resolution.
  The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, has all time expired on the Cuba 
resolution?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.


                           Order Of Procedure

  Mr. DOMENICI. May I make a further announcement? A while ago I listed 
the amendments as we are going to consider them, starting with Senator 
Santorum, Senator Reed. We had two Republican amendments listed, 
Ashcroft-Gorton 242. That is an error. We had already accepted that 
amendment. So what we would like to do is put, in lieu of Ashcroft-
Gorton, which had been accepted, it was already adopted, Fitzgerald 
217. Then if we go down on our list, Dorgan is next. Then Grams-Roth, 
we had also accepted that, and somebody on our staff put it on here. So 
we are going to substitute Ashcroft 240. So everybody should be on 
notice, including the proponents of those amendments, when they come 
up. I will try to announce the list just before the vote as to who is 
next, maybe two in advance, so everyone will know. I think we are 
prepared.
  Have the yeas and nays been ordered?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield for a 
question, please; that is, how many votes do we have bracketed right 
now that we are certain of?
  Mr. DOMENICI. Fifteen.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. So is it fair to say that 15 votes, 10 minutes 
apiece, 150 minutes, 2 minutes for debate, another 30 minutes, we are 
looking at a few hours, wouldn't you say?
  Mr. DOMENICI. Yes.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. But if we can get the cooperation of the Members, we 
can finish this tonight. If we can't, we will be here tomorrow. I think 
I speak for the chairman; we will find out immediately, when I say that 
I am willing to be here as late as it takes, if we can finish tonight.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Senator, we are going to be as cooperative as we can 
and beyond this in agreeing to accept amendments. We are working with 
you to do the same, which means we can take many more later and accept 
them as we work our way through this part.
  Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the 
resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to 
be.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the resolution 
(S. Res. 57).
  The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) is 
necessarily absent.
  I also announce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Lugar) is absent 
because of a death in the family.
  The result was announced--yeas 98, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 67 Leg.]

                                YEAS--98

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bryan
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Gorton
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Mack
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Lugar
     McCain
       
  The Resolution was agreed to.


                           amendment no. 245

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Amendment No. 245 to the preamble is agreed 
to.
  The amendment (No. 245) to the preamble was agreed to as follows:

       On page 2 strike lines 9 on 10 and insert whereas such 
     abuses violate internationally accepted norms of conduct 
     enshrined by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

  The preamble, as amended, was agreed to.
  The resolution, with is preamble, as amended, reads as follows:

                               S. Res. 57

       Whereas, the annual meeting of the United National 
     Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, Switzerland, provides a 
     forum for discussing human rights and expressing 
     international support for improved human rights performance;
       Whereas, according to the United States Department of State 
     and international human rights organizations, the Government 
     of Cuba continues to commit widespread and well documented 
     human rights abuses in Cuba;
       Whereas such abuses stem from a complete intolerance of 
     dissent and the totalitarian nature of the regime controlled 
     by Fidel Castro;
       Whereas such abuses violate internationally accepted norms 
     of conduct;
       Whereas the Government of Cuba routinely restricts worker's 
     rights, including the right to form independent unions, and 
     employs forced labor, including that by children;
       Whereas such abuses violate internationally accepted norms 
     of conduct enshrined by the Universal Declaration of Human 
     Rights;
       Whereas the Government of Cuba has detained scores of 
     citizens associated with attempts to discuss human rights, 
     advocate for free and fair elections, freedom of the press,

[[Page S3383]]

     and others who petitioned the government to release those 
     arbitrarily arrested;
       Whereas the Government of Cuba has recently escalated 
     efforts to extinguish expressions of protest or criticism by 
     passing state measures criminalizing peaceful pro-democratic 
     activities and independent journalism;
       Whereas the recent trial of peaceful dissidents Vladimiro 
     Roca, Marta Beatriz Roque, Felix Bonne, and Rene Gomez 
     Manzano, charged with sedition for publishing a proposal for 
     democratic reform, is indicative of the increased efforts by 
     the Government of Cuba to detain citizens and extinguish 
     expressions of support for the accused; and
       Whereas these efforts underscore that the Government of 
     Cuba has continued relentlessly its longstanding pattern of 
     human rights abuses and demonstrate that it continues to 
     systemically deny universally recognized human rights: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that at the 
     55th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Commission in 
     Geneva, Switzerland, the United States should make all 
     efforts necessary to pass a resolution, including introducing 
     such a resolution, criticizing Cuba for its human rights 
     abuses in Cuba, and to secure the appointment of a Special 
     Rapporteur for Cuba.

  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. GRAMM. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.