At the annual summer party of a DC-based translators
and interpreters’ organization (see above), I gave a talk and a reading
from my Cuba book, two copies of which were given away as raffle prizes. I met
a Honduran woman at the gathering, someone who may want to help us as a
volunteer interpreter with our IHS (ihsmn.org) medical brigades, and who also
is considering an interpreting career.
I received a complaint
about a too-small font on the last blog post, so am trying to make it
bigger before posting again, so see if that makes a difference.
A Honduran friend,
nicknamed Betio, whom I had once helped obtain asylum in the US and bring
his wife and 9 children here, has now moved with his 2 oldest sons to Texas
where construction work is more plentiful and better paid. Whew! What a brave family. First, they all moved
here from Honduras after Betio’s life as an environmental activist was
threatened, which was quite an undertaking. Then they bought a house, enrolled
the kids in school where they learned English and have been doing very well. I
thought that was an achievement in itself. But now the parents are planning to
move the whole gang to Texas before school starts. I raised 4 kids myself, and
a Cuban foster son for part of that time, much of it as a single parent, but If
I had had 9 kids and had to move them fifteen hundred miles, I’m not sure I
would have had the strength. But Betio and his family seem up to it, despite
shaky English on the parents’ part. Betio must be close to 50 now, so needs to
make the most of his working years.
It’s a real
dilemma what the US should do about the kids arriving at our national doorstep.
Conditions are fairly dire in their home countries (as in many other nations
around the world). Probably children under 12 are not a particular danger to us
here, but they would be a burden, at least initially. Some fear a disruption in
our “American way of life,” though accepting immigrants has always been part of
that way. Furthermore, since the European-descended population in this country
is not reproducing itself, maybe we need them. The dilemma is that if some were
allowed to stay, more would come. We seem to be torn between a hospitality tradition
of the “Golden Door” variety and incapacity to actually deal with the current
influx. As on other questions, the electorate and its representatives appear sharply
divided.
In an effort
organized by a Nigerian member, my
Communitas Catholic community has been collecting donations of money and medical supplies to send to West Africa to help
with the Ebola outbreak.
Former USAID
contractor Alan Gross, in his 5th year of imprisonment in Cuba for bringing
in cell and satellite phones destined for Havana’s dwindling Jewish community, has hinted at taking his own life. Neither
the US or Cuban government would want that to happen. The Cuban regime wants
its three convicted spies returned in exchange for Gross’s freedom. They were
involved in the killing of 4 Brothers-to-the-Rescue operatives shot down and
killed while flying two small planes picking up Cuban rafters at sea. Even so, maybe
they could now be released? Two of their members are already back in Cuba and
Gross was probably seized by the Cuban government precisely as a bargaining
chip for the release of those men, touted as heroes in billboards all over Cuba.
However, it’s hard to imagine Obama exchanging them before the November
elections—on the other hand, if Gross should die in prison, both Obama and Raul
Castro would be blamed. Is Gross really going to try to kill or starve himself,
or is he simply expressing a desperate plea for freedom? He and his family cite
the case of Sgt. Bergdahl being exchanged for 5 G’tmo prisoners.
For USAID to
engage in or fund activities in Cuba considered hostile by the regime carries a
big PR risk. Even though such activities would be considered benign
elsewhere—like encouraging youth to think for themselves, financing twitter, or
supplying communications equipment—the fact that in Cuba these activities must
be kept secret and are not permitted by the authorities undermines the
reputation of USAID worldwide. Already, in the Peace Corps in Honduras and
other countries, some local people suspect volunteers are CIA operatives (why
else would they leave to US to help perfect strangers?). President Morales of
Bolivia ousted both USAID and the Peace Corps because of suspicions that they
were undermining his government. Since I volunteer annually with US-based
medical brigades in Honduras, I’ve heard through them that US-based brigades
are not welcome any more in Bolivia either because of the same suspicions, although
some folks are now participating with Canadian medical brigades, which are
still allowed. So the revelation of secret USAID activities has unfortunate ripple
effects.
The Peace Corps bends over backwards to avoid any CIA
taint, refusing to accept any applicant who ever worked in intelligence in any
context, however briefly or long ago. I’ve talked with very capable people with
language and cultural skills who would love to be PC volunteers, but are
barred, for example, a young man who had been in the military and was assigned
for a few months to an intelligence unit. Nonetheless, the taint of USAID still
falls onto the Peace Corps, even though the two are completely separate and
PCVs are forbidden to engage in local politics.
Most Cubans seem
to be waiting for something to happen--they are not accustomed to being
pro-active, as that can be dangerous. One of my readers who visited Cuba not
long ago, has suggested that the US might send in the marines. Not only would
that be violating the pact made with the then-USSR when they took their
missiles out of Cuba, but the world would be up-in-arms about an attack on a
poor, defenseless country. And now that Putin has visited Cuba, forgiven its
debt, and offered aid, maybe the Russians would rush in to help. So I don't see
that in the cards. But when the Castro brothers have passed on, maybe some
changes are possible because at least some of those even among the Communist
elite want change, while others who have been wholesale human rights violators
will fight to maintain status quo for self-protection.
From what I know
about USAID’s efforts in Cuba, there was no attempt to impose an ideology or
even to advocate a change of government. Rather, all the attempts, from
Twitter to Alan Gross bringing in phones to the sending of Latin American
youths, seemed aimed at facilitating communication and independent thinking.
Yet another human rights volunteer colleague, born in Latin America, opined
that if Cubans wanted to rise up and oppose their government, they would do so
without prompting from the US. That shows considerable naiveté about the severe
restrictions imposed by the Cuban regime for generations and the punishment by
death or imprisonment for those “rising up.” Another human rights activist
pointed to a critique characterizing USAID in Cuba as a “Maxwell Smart” effort,
referring to a bumbling well-meaning comical British detective who leaves chaos
in his wake. Certainly these revelations of secret programs (secret because in
Cuba, they must be) don’t enhance the reputation of USAID; maybe the CIA, which
has more experience covering its tracks, should have been in charge. But what
was being done was not hostile in any way to the Cuban people, their interests,
their nationalism, or their patriotism.
I don’t think
USAID deserves a bad rap everywhere. For example, when I served 3 ½ years
as a health volunteer in Honduras, we
collaborated usefully with USAID, although they were totally separate. Both
USAID and Peace Corps in Honduras always endeavored to see solutions to local
problems coming from the people actually living there—we bent over backwards
not dictate solutions, but to act as advisors in helping Hondurans achieve
their own goals. Much of the inertia displayed by ordinary people derives from
their feelings of helplessness, whether in Cuba, Honduras, or elsewhere. We
tried to help Hondurans overcome those attitudes and USAID, operating on a much
larger scale and with more resources than PC, seemed to be doing the same. We
knew that as Peace Corps volunteers, we would be leaving and that local folks
would have to carry on by themselves. Little did we know then that the Peace
Corps would pull out of Honduras altogether, a real tragedy, but since I still travel
there yearly, I’ve seen the security situation getting progressively worse and
realize that the decision was probably justified. Obviously neither USAID nor
the Peace Corps did enough in Honduras to help improve life there or so many
people would not now be arriving at the US border.
However, in thinking more about USAID in Cuba, if it were
to work there at all, it would necessarily have to do so without the approval
of the Cuban government and would need to operate in secret, hence the appearance
of subterfuge and clumsiness when such secret operations are later revealed. When the recent USAID program of infiltrating,
if that’s the right word, Latin American young people into Cuba was revealed, I
thought, as did many others, “Not again!” From
the Bay of Pigs to exploding cigars, the US has often screwed up in Cuba. Yet,
the fact remains that USAID’s actual recent activities in Cuba have not been propagandistic
or ideological per se, nor was an overthrow of the current government actually being
promoted. As far as I know, the now-defunct Twitter program did not influence what
Cubans had to say on Twitter. When the unfortunate Alan Gross brought communications
equipment into Cuba—passing it openly through Cuban customs, I’ve heard—he was
not decreeing what the content of the communications should be. And now, the
revelation that Latin American youth were being sent into Cuba to get young
people there thinking and talking among themselves does not amount to a crime. Cubans
do need to be preparing themselves for when Cuba is no longer a dictatorship. It
seems that the Castro government, which absolutely squelches any sort of
independent expression or assembly, has characterized USAID as part of an American
plot to dominate Cuba and many observers have bought into that characterization.
We could rightly characterize USAID efforts in Cuba as bungled,
since they neither opened up much independent space for Cubans, did not remain
secret, and, in fact, may have led to even greater harassment and control of
activists, yet we still need to question the Castro government’s narrative that
those activities were explicitly designed to overthrow a legitimate government
that most Cubans actually support, a very questionable conclusion. If, indeed, a
majority supports the current government, it would not so consistently engage
in draconian measures to prevent any free expression or assembly. Is citizen government support in Cuba so fragile
that the slightest whiff from the USA would upset it? Would our own or world
opinion be so condemnatory of USAID-type activities being carried out in North
Korea, Iran, or Russia, for example? Weren’t Americans and other westerners active
internally in South Africa against apartheid and didn’t they support an embargo
against that country? Certainly Cuba is not the only country subject to a US
embargo—the US is supporting a partial embargo against Russia right now. Arguably,
the US embargo has not led to any more freedom for ordinary Cubans—quite to the
contrary, it’s used as a convenient excuse for abridging their freedom. I’m just asking whether or not world opinion is
being influenced by the Cuban government’s own “spin” more than under similar
circumstances elsewhere and whether, perhaps, this is due in to a very
successful propaganda campaign by the Cuban regime itself? If so, we need to
guard against applying a more lenient double standard to that government. We should hold the Cuban government to universal
standards.
I doubt that most observers would condemn European
embassies for allowing dissidents to use their internet facilities or would denounce
European civil society groups that bring in communications equipment, but when Americans
do it, the Cuban government cries “imperialism” and many people around the world
believe it. So I don’t believe that USAID efforts in Cuba deserve to be
condemned outright. Their execution was not optimal to say the least, but their
intent was to help Cubans open up a little more civil space.
On a related matter, a translation of an article by a French physician praising the Cuban medical
system, has appeared in the Huffington
Post. Interested parties can search for it; I don’t want to give it more
publicity than it already has by citing the author and title. Those who do find
it, to get a first-hand contrasting view, should read my book, Confessions of a Secret Latina: How I Fell
Out of Love with Castro & In Love with the Cuban People.
No comments:
Post a Comment