By Charles F. Moreira
The Republic of Cuba submitted a resolution entitled “Necessity of Ending the Economic, Commercial and Financial Blockade Imposed by the United States of America Against Cuba” before the United Nations General Assembly on 26 th of October, 2016.
This is the 25 th consecutive time Cuba has submitted such resolution before the U.N. General Assembly and most often, the vast majority of U.N. General Assembly member countries, including Malaysia have voted in support of the resolutions, with the only exceptions being the United States of America and Israel voting against.
When Cuba submitted a similar resolution last year it was supported by 191 member countries, with only the United States and Israel against.
However, news agency Reuters reports that the United States for the very first time abstained in its vote on 26 October 2016 and so did Israel.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- cuba-un- idUSKCN12Q259
Whilst U.N. General Assembly resolutions are non-binding, hopefully, this should be an encouraging development in the process of normalisation of U.S. – Cuba relations, since the United States imposed this embargo against Cuba on 19 th October 1960, two years after the victory of the Cuban Revolution which deposed the dictatorial, pro-U.S. Batista regime and nationalised U.S.- owned oil refineries, which is Cuba’s right as a sovereign nation.
This comes after the United States and Cuba restored diplomatic relations on 20 July 2015 and after U.S. President Barack Obama’s official visit to Cuba where on 22 nd March 2016 Obama acknowledged that this embargo is obsolete, harms rather than helps the Cuban people and called upon the U.S. Congress to end this embargo.
No real change yet
However, despite all that rhetoric, this economic, commercial and financial embargo against Cuba continues with continued debilitating effects to Cuba’ s economy, despite several minor amendments to regulations related to this embargo in 2015 and 2016.
Also, despite what he said in his speech in Cuba, on 11 th of September 2015, President Obama again renewed sanctions against Cuba under the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, which constitutes the laws and regulations that make up the embargo, alleging foreign policy interests.
At a media presentation on the 25 th of September 2016, Her Excellency Ibete Fernandez Hernandez, Ambassador of the Republic of Cuba to Malaysia said that the U.S. continues to ban exports to Cuba of products and equipment important to key sectors of the Cuban economy, whilst at the same time, the continuation of the embargo prevents Cuba from freely exporting her products and services to the U.S. and cannot have direct banking relations with the U.S. Also, except of U.S. investments in Cuba’s telecommunications sector, Cuba cannot receive U.S. investments in other sectors of her economy.
Cuban Ambassador Ibete briefs Malaysian journalists on Cuba’s U.N. resolution and on the embago on 2016-09- 27
Also, Cuba is banned from opening corresponding accounts in U.S. banks and has been unable to make either cash deposits or payments in U.S. dollars in third countries and this hampers trade, since most international payments for goods and services are denominated in U.S. dollars.
Up until the conclusion of the writing of the resolution which was submitted to the U.N. General Assembly, the United States' announced authorisation of Cuba’s use of U.S. dollars in international transactions has not materialised, nor the possibility for U.S. banks to provide loans to Cuban
importers of authorised U.S. products. Furthermore, finnacial institutions and U.S. suppliers of such products continue to fear being fined for having transactions with Cuba.
Stiff penalties
Worse still, the risk of heavy fines by the U.S. has deterred many non-U.S. banks opening accounts for Cuban companies and handling trade-related financial transactions with Cuba, even in non-U.S. currencies.
The list is long, so only some examples of penalties, blocked or refused transactions since 17 th December 2014 are listed below:-
On 6 August 2016, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) levied a fine of U.S.$ 271,815 on U.S. maritime insurance company – Navigators Insurance Company for violating the embargo by paying U.S.$21,736 in interest for a Cuban national.
On 18 and 23 September 2015, an Australian bank refused to make two transfers in Australian dollars to the Cubatur travel agency for for payment of services for a group of 19 travelling to Cuba.
In November 2015, the U.S.-based PayPal online financial payments company blocked the account of German company Proticket, used by its customers to pay for tickets for the musical comedy Soy Cubano and a concert by Cuban singer Addys Mercedes on grounds that it violated the U.S. embargo. Proticket sued PayPal and on 19 April 2016 a court in Dormund, Germany ruled against PayPal, forcing it to unblock Proticket’s account, failing which PayPal had to pay Proticket 250,000 euros compensation.
On 12 February 2016 a branch of Standard Chartered Bank in Uganda informed Cuban doctors working at Mbarara University that they had until 15 th February to withdraw their money from their accounts with the bank, since as Cubans theye were not allowed to have accounts with the bank. The doctors tried to open an account with the British Barclays Bank but after doing so were informed that they could not make transactions to or from Cuba.
On 18 March 2016, it became known that Japanese bank Mitsui Sumitomo SMBC Trust refused a funds transfer by a Japanese citizen to pay for a tourist card fom the Cuban consulate in Japan.
On 3 May 2016, it became known that funds collected by the Asociacion de Cubanos in the United Kingdom had been retained by the bank of U.S. company Eventbrite because it had sold tickets for a classic music concert organised by the Association whose funds would go towards the purchase and donation of a piano for the Amadeo Roldan Music Conservatory in Cuba.
Cuba is developing her petroleum industry and on 25 February 2016, OFAC fined CGG Services S. A. of France U.S.$614,250 for having supplied spare parts and equipment originating from the U.S. for gas and oil exploration to ships operating in Cuban territorial waters. Furthermore, the Venezuelan subsidiary of CGG Services S.A. had carried out five transactions related the processing of information for seismic research conducted by a Cuban entity in Cuba’s Exclusive Economic Zone.
Free medical care for all
As a socialist country, Cuba provides free medical care for all her citizens and this care is said to be the best in Latin America and Cuba is also noted for her internationally respected biotechnology and biomedical industries.
As a result of this embargo, Cuba’s public health services have been unable to obtain from the U.S. the required medicines, reagents, spar parts for diagnostic and treatment equipment, medical instruments and supplies necessary for these services to function.
For example in February 2016, the U.S. company General Electric would not sell medical equipment for the study of the peripheral nervous system to Cuba, citing the embargo
Also, the Farmacuba company requested four U.S. suppliers of protection means and chemical and biotechnological products to manufacture medicines in Cuba and amongst the four, the multi- national company Sigma-Andrich refused to entertain the request due to complications arising from this embargo.
This has forced Cuba to source these through intermediaries from further afield which results in higher costs.
Altogether, this since 1960, this embargo has cost Cuba’s public health services over U.S.$2.6 billion and over U.S.$82.7 million over the 2014 – 2015 period, an increase of about U.S.$5 million over the 2013 – 2014 period.
Poaching talent as a weapon
Besides these high costs, since 2006, the United States has been waging an aggressive campaign through the “Parole for Cuban Medical Professionals” programme aimed at inciting Cuban medical professionals working at an international mission outside Cuba to defect. Not only does resulted in a brain drain which adversely affects Cuba’s medical services but also denies patients in these thir countries from benefiting from their services, and this still goes on despite supposedly improved bi-lateral relations between the U.S. and Cuba.
Biotechnology
In biotechnology, the National Products Centre which comes under the National Centre for Scientific Research was unable to two chromatographs by U.S. company Agilent used for quality control of products being researched and developed at the Centre.
AICA Laboratories Enterprise faced difficulties obtaining spar parts and technical assistance to repair a machine from Bosch Pharmaceuticals Company in the U.S. used fo rthe production of carpules – i.e. injectable vials with an open bottom used in odontology (dentistry and craniofacial research) or for insulin doses. This has had financial repercussions worth close to U.S.$1.76 million.
Impact on food, education and national culture
Repercussion so fthis embargo has cost Cuba’s food production sector U.S.$605.7 million in the 2014 – 2015 period due to increase price of seeds, fertiliser, spare parts for agricultural equipment and other consumables due to Cuba having to acquire these items through intermediaries in third countries. In some cases, the longer lead times between order placed and fulfilment has resulted in substantial repercussions on Cuba’s food production.
Free education is a right of Cuba’s citizens and with not being able to acquire essential educational equipment from the U.S., Cuba has had to sources these from further afield, resulting in losses for Cuba’s Minsitry of Education of close to U.S.$ 1.25 million in 2014 – 2015.
The difficulty in obtaining the required equipment for professional sports has adversely impacted Cuba’s sports sector and the embargo has cost Cuba’s culture sector close to U.S.$29.5 million in the 2014 – 2015 period.
A major aspect of the embargo which seriously affects Cuba’s foreign trade is the prohibition of ships from docking at U.S. ports within 180 days of having docked at a Cuban port.
This has been a major deterrent to ships docking in Cuba to deliver or take on cargo, since it is not cost effective for a to carry only one set of cargo types for Cuba, since they will also carry cargo for other destinations in the region, including the United States.
This forces Cuba to resort on trans-shipment through neighbouring countries, which introduces delays and adds to cost.
Since 1960, the embargo has cost Cuba the equivalent of close to U.S.$125.9 trillion and between March 2015 and March 2016, it has cost Cuba U.S.$4.68 million.
Opposition to the embargo
A hopeful sign for Cuba is growing pressure from U.S. corporations, industry associations, chambers of commerce, businessmen of Cuban origin in the United States, respective state governments, groups of legislators, religious leaders, non-governmental bodies, Republican and Democrat politicians and others, for the U.S. to end its embargo against Cuba.
According to polls of U.S. society conducted by CBS News, AP-GfK, the PEW Research Centre, the Engage Cuba lobbying group, the Atlantic Council think-tank and others, on average 70% of U.S. citizens support the lifting of the embargo against Cuba, with the majority of Democrats supporting President Obama’s policy towards Cuba.
Whilst the ending of this embargo and its associated legislation such as the Torricelli Act, the Helms-Burton Act, the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 which prevents U.S. citizens from travelling to Cuba as tourists and the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 which the financing for sales of U.S. agricultural products to Cuba and these can only be repealed by Congress.
Whilst the U.S. President cannot repeal these acts, he however has the executive power to modify the implementation of aspects of the embargo against Cuba, to allow Cuban banks, companies and so forth to open accounts with U.S. banks; end the financial persecution of Cuba; authorise exports of U.S. products to Cuban companies; permit the import into the U.S. of Cuban products and services such as tobacco, rum, biotechnology products, as well as products manufactured in third countries which contain raw materials from Cuba such as nickle or sugar; authorise U.S. companies to invest in Cuba; authorise U.S. citizens to to receive medical treatment in Cuba and end the 180 days prohibition of ships which have docked in Cuba from docking in the U.S.
However, despite the promises to mitigate the effects of the embargo in his speeches, President Obama has done very little in this regard and Cuba believes that he can do more.
However, with Obama coming close to the end of his two terms as President very soon, Ambassador Ibete believes that if Hillary Clinton is elected the next President, she will continue with Obama’s legacy, though quite probably at a slower pace.
On the other hand, Ambassador Ibete is less certain of Donald Trump’s policy towards Cuba should he be elected as president, since during his election campaigning, Trump’s has flip-flopped between saying that he will reconcile relations with Cuba and at other times saying that he break relations.
In a post on Twitter dated 28 November 2016, President-elect Donald Trump wrote, “If Cuba is unwilling to make a better deal for the Cuban people, the Cuban/American people and the U.S. as a whole, I will terminate the deal.
During his election campaign, Trump said he planned to reverse Obama’s executive orders on Cuba. These include allowing direct flights between the two countries and lifting limits on the amount of cigars and rum that American travelers can bring back to the U.S. for personal consumption, unless the Cuban government grants more political freedom to Cuba’s people, including allowing them religious and political freedom and the freeing of political prisoners.
As President, Trump could order the State Department to place Cuba back on the list of “state sponsors of terrorism” and break off diplomatic relations with Cuba but such measures could well come against objections from industries which have already begun to take advantage of the business and trade opportunities with Cuba, such as the restoration of direct flights between the US and Cuba.
According to John Kavulich, the president of the US-Cuba Trade and Economic Council, the Trump administration could well face opposition, including lawsuits from the airline industry if Trump were to do what he threatens, since airlines have already made substantial financial investments based upon the new regulations from the Obama administration.
For instance, American Airlines and JetBlue have already begun flights between the U.S. and Cuba, so stand to lose such business.
Also, tour and travel companies such as Airbnb, Carnival Cruise Line, and Starwood Hotels have also begun to expand into Cuba, hoping to take advantage of what promises to eventually become a booming new tourist destination. Trump could also come up against objections to such reversal from fellow Republicans in the Congress.
So it’s left to be seen if a President Trump will actually implement such measures which would amount to bullying and a continuation of American hegemonic attempts to undermine Cuba sovereignty and interfere in Cuba’s internal affairs.
However, if Trump indeed carries out its threats, Cuba will continue to have the support of the freedom and peace loving people and countries of the world, who have helped Cuba to survive the difficulties imposed upon her during the 50 or so years of this cruel and unjust embargo, whilst U.S. imperialism and hegemony will continue to be condemned.
A legacy of the Cold War
The embargo against Cuba is a legacy of the Cold War and unlike heavily armed Russia, China and North Korea today, as well as the various terrorist groups, Cuba in no way threatens the existence of the United States.
It’s known that the continuation of this embargo is very much influenced by pressure from Cubans loyal to the deposed dictator Batista who fled Cuba to the U.S. and they constitute a considerable electoral vote base which U.S. politicians feel they must please, however it is also known that more amongst the descendants of these exiles favour ending the embargo and reconcilliation between the U.S. and Cuba.
So what does the U.S. have to fear from normalising relations with Cuba, unless it fears that with Cuba’s determination to continue along its socialist path and its fierce sense of national independence and sovereignty; if the embargo is lifted, one wonders wther the U.S. fears that Cuba’s resultant progress and prosperity will serve as an inspiration to other Latin American countries resulting in the U.S. losing its geo-strategic dominance of the people’s of this sub- continent south of the United States, many of whom would like to get the Yanquis of their backs.
Malaysia maintains close relations with Cuba and many Malaysian students have studied or are studying in Cuba.
Charles F. Moreira is a JUST member.
30 November 2016