[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 19]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 26321-26322]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



     A WIDENING WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY FOR WASHINGTON AND HAVANA TO 
                         CONSTRUCTIVELY ENGAGE

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. CHARLES B. RANGEL

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, December 13, 2001

  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker. With the bipartisan momentum for the 
abrogation of the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba gaining steam, along 
with the recent courteous diplomatic exchange between the State 
Department and Havana and the subsequent trade initiative that was 
struck between U.S. agricultural groups and Cuba's Foreign Trade 
Ministry, such development should be of great interest to those in this 
country who have long been concerned with the course of U.S.-Cuba 
relations. These two long time foes seem to be exercising a newfound 
flexibility that could evolve into normalized relations between 
Washington and Havana.
  Michael Marx McCarthy, Research Associate at the Washington-based 
Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA), has recently authored an article 
of considerable importance entitled, A Widening Window of Opportunity 
for Washington and Havana to Constructively Engage, some of which 
appeared in a recent issue of the organization's estimable biweekly 
publication, the Washington Report on the Hemisphere. McCarthy's 
article examines the polite exchange that transpired after Hurricane 
Michelle rained hundreds of millions of dollars of destruction on Cuba, 
and closely analyzes how the White House's expediting of Havana's cash 
purchase of U.S. foodstuffs could establish a diplomatic framework and 
a new mood which could lead to the restoration of regular political and 
economic ties. There is some possibility that, if we are lucky, this 
development could engender further constructive discussion and 
congressional action on the status of the archaic U.S. trade embargo 
that Washington slapped on Havana in 1962.
  Additionally, considering the UN General Assembly's 10th consecutive 
overwhelming vote in favor of ending the U.S. trade embargo, and the 
mounting pressure from agricultural and business groups in this country 
to open the Cuban market to U.S. farm and industry products, now may be 
the time for some of my colleagues to harmonize with the rest of the 
world's public opinion and join with me in revising a failed policy 
that already has cost us dearly in reputation and in economic 
opportunities.
  Furthermore, as the Castro government is reaching its natural end, 
the U.S. should want to build upon the recent discussions to bring 
about a watershed in these two neighbors' ties. To allow this positive 
momentum to relapse would be a grievous error. The Cuban government and 
people are aware that a majority of U.S. legislators and citizens 
desire friendly relations. To ensure that a peaceful transition of 
power follows the Castro government's end, U.S. officials should not 
relent on efforts to engage Cuba now. ln fact, U.S. officials need to 
consider widening their humanitarian initiative by addressing basic 
bilateral issues, such as drug interdiction, laws of the sea, refugee 
and air space questions, as well as a broad range of economic, 
terrorism, trade, human rights observance and democratization concerns. 
Action on these issues will provide the foundation necessary for a 
natural evolution in the development of constructive relations. As 
such, COHA researcher McCarthy's article is of great relevance since 
the effort to constructively engage Cuba is likely to grow in 
importance in the coming months.

     A Widening Window of Opportunity for Washington and Havana to 
                         Constructively Engage

       Possibly marking a watershed moment in U.S.-Cuban 
     relations, Washington broke its four decade-long history of 
     obdurately naysaying any move in favor of a constructive 
     relationship with Havana--even if that means denying 
     assistance to Cuban civilians caught up in heart-wrenching 
     natural calamities--when a U.S. administration, for the first 
     time, decided to facilitate Havana's multimillion dollar 
     purchase of lumber, corn, wheat, rice, soy and medical 
     products to help Cuba restock its reserves of essentials 
     seriously depleted by hurricane Michelle. The hurricane was 
     the worst storm to hit the island in a half a century, 
     causing millions of dollars in damage to Cuba's sugar and 
     citrus crops, as well as infrastructure losses and adverse 
     effects to its tourist industry.
       The delivery of such goods, initially called for by Castro 
     to take place aboard Cuban vessels, will instead be carried 
     out by U.S. or third-country vessels, marking a major 
     concession on Havana's part. This unfolding scenario might 
     provide the basis for how a newfound flexibility can build 
     significant momentum in favor of a constructive engagement.
       Because the unprecedented agreement falls within the 
     existing parameters of the U.S. embargo, the arrangement 
     presented a delicate political issue for Havana to 
     rationalize. Last year, the Cuban president swore to never 
     purchase American goods under the White House's terms, after 
     legislation to ostensibly liberalize the embargo was hijacked 
     by ultra conservative members of congress intent on 
     eliminating any U.S. financing of exports to the island. 
     Despite its heated disagreement with the embargo, Havana's 
     decision to live with the formula for the present purchase 
     indicates the gravity of the economic situation and Castro's 
     ability to learn new tricks by accepting Washington's 
     goodwill gesture at face value. What remains to be seen, 
     however, is whether this episode will morph into a more 
     substantive and broadened diplomatic discussion on such 
     bilateral issues as navigation, air space, refugees and drug 
     interdiction, or if it is merely a one-shot arrangement which 
     will go nowhere.


                           The Good Samaritan

       The White House, acting out of a ``humanitarian need 
     context,'' played an active role in clearing a major hurdle 
     to the deal by expediting the Commerce Department's issuance 
     of the licenses necessary for American companies to sell and 
     deliver to Havana. This was done after Havana had, with 
     respect, turned down an earlier offer of assistance which 
     would have to go through intermediaries and not involve any 
     Cuban government agency. On the surface, the significance of 
     the initiative is a more modest version of Nixon's opening to 
     China in 1973, but presents a widening window of opportunity 
     that could initiate a deepening and broadening of a dialogue 
     between the two long-time foes. Conceivably, the process 
     could spur preliminary discussions that could end up phasing 
     out the outmoded 40 year-old U.S. economic embargo against 
     the island, something that a majority of Americans appear to 
     want.
       In fact, in this latest round of hurricane diplomacy, 
     Cuba's foreign minister expressed optimism regarding recent 
     developments, calling for the U.S. to terminate its stepped-
     up restrictions on travel to the island and pronouncing 
     Havana ready for normalized relations with Washington. As of 
     now, according to the State Department, the diplomatic 
     exchange associated with the sale (which was in cash, with 
     the purchaser being the Cuban Foreign Trade Ministry) is over 
     and it is up to U.S. companies and Havana to seal the deal. 
     Cuban authorities already are in contact with 15 agro-
     industrial companies and 15 firms that produce medical 
     supplies or pharmaceuticals. The first actual deal between 
     U.S. food companies and Cuba was completed on November 22 in 
     Havana and was emotionally hailed as an extraordinary 
     historical moment by an official from Riceland Foods. The 
     rice will be picked up by Cuban vessels flying third country 
     flags from the port of New Orleans in December and January. 
     Cuba, for the record, stated that the purchase is a one-time 
     arrangement that does not alter its fundamental opposition to 
     the terms of the U.S. trade embargo.


                Polite exchange sets tone for agreement

       The genesis of the truly important agreement can be 
     attributed to the natural calamity that ravaged 45,000 homes 
     on the island nation, attracted international attention to

[[Page 26322]]

     Cuba's pressing need for humanitarian assistance and helped 
     produce an unusually civil diplomatic exchange between 
     Washington and Havana. The State Department, in a dramatic 
     shift from its past policy of total intransigence on the 
     issue of Cuba qualifying for U.S. disaster relief, initiated 
     the discussions by publicly offering hurricane relief aid to 
     Cuba. Shortly thereafter, Havana responded to the U.S. tender 
     in a manner devoid of its usual bitter bite, thanking 
     Washington for its kind gesture, but requesting that the 
     Cuban government be allowed to have direct access for 
     purchasing U.S. medical supplies and food and arranging for 
     its delivery.


                           Political fallout

       The surprisingly new, almost amicable, tone in their 
     discussions suggests that the beginning of a detente might be 
     possible down the road. Such a development could prove to be 
     politically beneficial for both Washington and Havana. Bona 
     fide dialogue, beginning at a relatively low diplomatic 
     level, which would focus on chipping away at the four decade-
     old and anachronistic trade embargo, rather than seeking its 
     abrogation in one major step, would follow a realistic 
     scenario. The fact is that aside from the more ultra right-
     wing members of the Miami Cuban-American community, and a 
     handful of highly conservative legislators, support for the 
     embargo rapidly has been withering away. Many in the U.S. 
     business, religious, academic and agricultural sectors, as 
     well as some of the most prominent cold war policy makers 
     from the Reagan era, oppose the outdated embargo. In fact, 
     advocates of the embargo have been overtaken by the recent 
     hurricane food aid purchase and are now on the fringe of the 
     U.S. political process.
       Miami's Cuban exile leadership, now politically facing a 
     dead end, would do well to assess the changing dynamics of 
     U.S.-Cuban relations. In reality, the agreement on the 
     purchase of essentials gives a marginal boost for the Castro 
     government just when it was going through hard times due to 
     the worldwide economic slowdown. The Cuban economy, already 
     weakened by the recent region-wide reduction in tourism from 
     EU and Canada, particularly resulting from the repercussions 
     of September 11, faced the prospect of a major financial 
     crisis considering the magnitude of Michelle's destruction. 
     The American supplies should help in short-term relief 
     efforts. More importantly, however, the arrangement could set 
     an important precedent for future trade, as Havana would 
     prefer to reduce shipping costs on imported goods, which in 
     some cases have had to travel from as far as Vietnam, by 
     instead purchasing from a neighbor only 90 miles away. It is 
     estimated that Cuba now spends between $700 million and $1 
     billion on purchasing foodstuffs from U.S. competitors in 
     Asia, Argentina and France, among others. Much of that 
     amount, U.S. suppliers passionately believe, could be in 
     their hands if regular sales between the two nations were 
     permitted.
       Castro derided the embargo as an act of economic 
     imperialism, unjustly denying Cubans vital food and medical 
     imports. While Washington's present move could prove to be a 
     powerful political tonic for Castro and almost inevitably 
     will lift his prestige, the delivery of U.S. goods (possibly 
     even on U.S. vessels) to Cuban docks will attract positive 
     international press coverage for the White House. The Bush 
     administration will at least be an equal beneficiary of 
     worldwide praise since it has been U.S. policy towards Cuba, 
     and not the Castro regime, which has been discredited and 
     isolated.
       For Washington, the political motivation for its change of 
     policy on hurricane relief is difficult to precisely track. 
     Previously, the Bush administration sent Havana an 
     inflammatory signal by nominating Otto Reich--an anti-Castro 
     Cold War extremist who was tenaciously supported by the far 
     right leadership of the Miami Cuban-American community--to 
     the State Department's top Latin American policymaking post. 
     The food and medicine deal, however, sends a constructive 
     message to Cuba. Although the move has not been explained 
     beyond its obvious humanitarian purpose, it is without 
     question that the recent sale is in the interest of Cuban 
     democratization and could signify that Secretary of State 
     Powell desires to generate a constructive dialogue with 
     Havana.
       Until the State Department made its surprising move on 
     hurricane relief, the decades-long schism between the two 
     nations had been, if anything, worsening. Formulating a new, 
     positive diplomatic posture could prove useful to the two 
     nations as the Castro era approaches its natural end. To 
     ensure that a peaceful transition of power will be the 
     paramount goal of U.S. policy makers, Washington must not go 
     back on its constructive posture. Even the most basic 
     diplomatic ties will prove helpful in avoiding a bellicose 
     struggle over the succession of leadership on the island that 
     would inevitably affect the U.S. mainland. In fact, the two 
     nations would be wise to widen the agenda of issues to be 
     discussed to include the establishment of cooperative 
     initiatives on drug interdiction, laws of the sea, refugee 
     and air space jurisdiction as well as a broad range of 
     economic, terrorism, trade, human rights observance and 
     democratization concerns.


   Move consonant with recent trend to liberalize and dispense with 
                                embargo

       The humanitarian food and medicine relief agreement comes 
     at an interesting time in the ongoing congressional debate on 
     Cuba. For the past two years the Florida delegation on the 
     Hill has lost much of its influence on issues pertaining to 
     Cuba. The House voted to repeal the travel ban and measures 
     to abrogate the entire embargo failed by relatively small 
     margins. Several weeks ago, however, the Senate decided not 
     to act on the controversial Cuba travel ban repeal, a move 
     which was perceived to have pleased a White House loath to 
     appear soft on Cuba.
       Of greatest importance in the present trend towards more 
     normalized relations, however, is the rising profile of the 
     anti-embargo campaign by various U.S. farm interest groups as 
     well as a broad range of multinationals and the legislators 
     representing them, who are insisting that trade links with 
     Cuba be extended in order to facilitate American exports to 
     the island. On November 15, the Senate Agricultural Committee 
     passed its funding measure, which permits federal financing 
     of agricultural exports to Cuba, a bill that would establish 
     a direct ongoing economic link between Washington and Havana. 
     In the absence of such permissive legislation, there was no 
     such financing involved in the Hurricane Michelle sale to 
     Cuba. A delegation from the USA Rice Federation, which 
     represents a majority of the nation's rice farmers, recently 
     returned from a Havana International Trade Fair, marking the 
     first official visit of a U.S. trade group to such an event 
     in nearly four decades. Upon their return from Havana, USA 
     Rice officials announced their support of the State 
     Department's hurricane relief effort and the Agricultural 
     Committee's vote on federal financing, as well as their 
     serious interest in gaining access for U.S. rice farmers to 
     Cuba's billion dollar produce purchasing market.


                      The lesson of Hurricane Lili

       In the past, Washington has been unyielding when it came to 
     providing any form of disaster relief to Cuba if it was 
     assaulted by a natural calamity. In 1996, when Hurricane Lili 
     leveled thousands of structures on the island, the only U.S. 
     relief effort came from one Miami-based Catholic Charities 
     group. Historically, Miami exile polemics shaped the debate 
     over Cuba, automatically ruling the country out from 
     receiving any U.S. assistance. This obstacle still plagues 
     efforts at constructively engaging Cuba today.
       In 1996, militant anti-Castro forces argued once again that 
     assistance sent to the island would never reach those most in 
     need and would end up in the hands of Castro officials, where 
     the goods would be used to strengthen a despised 
     dictatorship. Some Cuban-Americans fear that sending aid 
     would signify an ideological decision, not a humanitarian 
     gesture. In the absence of such assistance, aid sent family-
     to-family as a permitted remittance would have to do the job, 
     but it would not be sufficient in terms of total volume. That 
     is why skeptics on this issue should reconsider and view 
     Washington's recent step as an astute decision that shuns the 
     sterile responses inexorably made by all White Houses dating 
     back to the Kennedy era.
       Furthermore, the State Department's monitoring of the 1996 
     church donation to Caritas, the Cuban equivalent of Catholic 
     Charities, concluded that such aid had in fact reached its 
     intended destination. Ironically, this little-recalled 
     episode might have established a platform of trust between 
     the State Department and Havana and encouraged U.S. officials 
     to immediately intercede after Michelle rained its 
     destruction.


                         Towards restored ties

       Despite the deep-rooted prevailing mistrust between the two 
     capitals, Washington would be wise to follow Havana's lead in 
     expressing its interest in expanding its present minimal 
     ties. Washington should view the successful 1996 shipment of 
     aid, the Senate Agricultural Committee's recent key vote, USA 
     Rice's scouting of trade opportunities on the island, the 
     Bush administration's intervention on behalf of the cash 
     purchase, Havana's decision to let the goods be delivered by 
     U.S. or third-country vessels, and the positive tone of the 
     recent diplomatic exchanges between the two nations as the 
     foundation for initiating talks that could produce the 
     critical mass necessary for the development of positive 
     relations in the coming months.

     

                          ____________________