The Christian Liberation Movement's statement on US Cuba Policy

 Declaration of the Christian Liberation Movement
 
Today the government of the United States in the person of its President Barack Obama and the Cuban regime, represented by General Raúl Castro, made statements announcing several steps for the normalization of relations between the two governments.

Given the importance of the subject, the Christian Liberation Movement wants to express:

1- We understand the discretion that diplomacy requires on the issue of release or exchange of prisoners, but regret the secrecy achieved in core subjects for all Cubans as is the recognition of a over half a century long tyranny by one country, that embodies democratic values as foundational to that nation. We remind the United States that it should maintain consistency between these principles and the actions of their political representatives.
 
2- The Christian Liberation Movement does not advocate isolating Cuba and this means that any attempt at rapprochement and cooperation on the part of any foreign nation in favor of the freedom and the rights of the Cuban people, should consider all Cubans as equal. The power which holds the Cuban military junta has been sustained with repression, death and the exile of thousands of Cubans. Recognizing this political oligarchy as the sole interlocutor, is to accept and fall into the exclusionary logic that for 57 years has suffered the Cuban Nation.
 
3- Sovereignty is the ability of a people to decide on their present and future, this translates democratically into free and pluralistic elections. To carry out these elections in an atmosphere of absolute respect for the liberties and political rights is the only interpretable signal of real change towards democracy. Neither the influx of capital, or tourism, or any economic concessions are sources of political freedoms. The examples of China and Vietnam make this clear. 

4- The Christian Liberation Movement was born from the need for the people to regain their power of decision-making. Our proposed solution has been since 1988 to hold a referendum. Our reference remains and will continue to be the legitimate right of the Cuban people to lead through the ballot box any expectation of change. Neither the US policy or the policy of any country or institution in the world has been part of our strategy. The rescue of the rights of the people of Cuba is our aim. We call that more than change, Liberation.
 
Let no one speak for Cuba, authentic solidarity is expressed recognizing and supporting that all Cubans are consulted in a free referendum that returns the sovereignty to the people.
 
Tony Diaz
Secretary General

Regis Iglesias
Spokesman

Eduardo Cardet
National Coordinator

In name of the Coordinating Council of the Christian Liberation Movment

December 17, 2014

Original text in Spanish

Declaration of the Cuban Resistance on US Cuba Policy Shift

December 18, 2014

UNITY DECLARATION OF THE CUBAN RESISTANCE

The Assembly of the Cuban Resistance and the National Civic Resistance Front "Orlando Zapata Tamayo" declare:

1. We welcome the release of Alan Gross, as we also clarify that the end of his kidnapping constitutes the exchange of an innocent American citizen for three convicted criminals imprisoned in the United States, for among other things: espionage against the US and acts of terrorism against its citizens. This was not a humanitarian measure on the part of the Castro dictatorship.

2. The Cuban resistance affirms that freedom, respect for human rights and the establishment of democracy in Cuba are not negotiable.

3. While the Castro brothers remain in power in Cuba, there will be no real change. To achieve the end of the unjust kidnapping of Alan Gross did not necessitate making concessions to the Castro dictatorship or release spies jailed in the United States for participating in the murder of Brothers to the Rescue activists.

4. We confirm once again that despite the appeasement and submissiveness of this administration, Cuba will be free due to the effort of the Cubans.

With, by and for the Homeland,

WE ARE ALL RESISTANCE!

ASSEMBLY OF THE CUBAN RESISTANCE

NATIONAL CIVIC RESISTANCE FRONT “ORLANDO ZAPATA TAMAYO”

Signers in solidarity with the Declaration inside of Cuba:

1. Raúl Luis Risco Pérez Nuevo Partido Revolucionario Cubano Pinar del Río
2. José Díaz Silva, Opositores por una Nueva Republica
3. Juan Francisco Sigler Amaya Movimiento Independiente Opción Alternativa
4. Damaris Moya Portieles, Coalición Central Opositora
5. Juan Carlos González Leiva, Consejo de Relatores de Derechos Humanos
6. Segundo Rey Cabrera González, Comité Cubano pro Derechos Humanos de Cuba
7. Rolando Rodríguez Lobaina Alianza Democrática Oriental
8. Yris Tamara Pérez Aguilera, Movimiento Femenino por los Derechos Civiles Rosa Parks
9. Jorge Luis García Pérez Antunez, Frente Nacional de Resistencia Cívica “Orlando Zapata Tamayo”
10. Egberto Ángel Escobedo Morales, Frente Nacional de Resistencia Cívica “Orlando Zapata Tamayo”

Original document in Spanish

Obama's Legacy: Normalizing relations with an Abnormal Regime

Barack Obama and Raul Castro

Listening to President Obama today after learning the good news that, after more than five years unjustly held hostage, Alan Gross was finally free, and that some Cuban political prisoners were to be freed was nevertheless a sobering and worrisome exercise for a number of reasons.

First the news that three spies who had spied on military installations and congressmen on American soil, that had plotted terrorist acts in the United States, and were implicated in the February 24, 1996 murder of three American citizens and one American resident were freed in a swap to return to Cuba sends a terrible message.

Regime hardliners have won, thanks to the Obama Administration's actions today. Kidnapping an American and holding him for ransom for five years has paid off.  Moderate elements within the dictatorship, seeking to transition Cuba into a responsible member of the family of nations, will have to continue to remain silent and wait.

Secondly, despite smuggling arms to North Korea in violation of international sanctions in 2013; murdering opposition leaders, organizing a Stalinist show trial to cover it up; and projecting itself into the internal affairs of Venezuela did not negatively impact the desire of the Obama Administration to "normalize" relations with this rogue regime.

Third, President Obama in his address gave the impression that the economic embargo had been completely lifted and that is not the case. However, he did make the case against the policy of sanctions on Cuba and for "normalized" relations.

The president makes the argument that the goal of the embargo was the "enduring objective of promoting the emergence of a democratic, prosperous, and stable Cuba." However that was never the case. The economic embargo from the beginning was to contain the Castro regime and prevent it expanding through the rest of the hemisphere while at the same time increasing the cost for the Soviet Union during the Cold War to maintain it.

Over the past 55 years that policy succeeded with two exceptions: the Sandinista victory in Nicaragua in 1979 and the arrival of Hugo Chavez to power in Venezuela in 1999. Both exceptions occurred under Administrations that carried out policies in order to end the isolation of Cuba, normalize relations and end the embargo. Both the Carter Administration (1977 - 1981) and the Clinton Administration (1993 - 2001) gave openings to the Castro dictatorship that it was able to exploit to the detriment of the national interests of the United States.

The Obama Administration will be the third presidency to follow down this road. That the White House has stated that it will cooperate with the Castro regime in areas of counter-terrorism and drug trafficking is extremely troubling.

First, the Castro regime has a long track record in sponsoring, promoting and carrying out acts of terrorism. It published a manual that views terrorism as a legitimate form of struggle.

Secondly, the Castro regime has a record going back decades of being deeply involved with international drug traffickers. Sharing intelligence with them is not recommended.

Thirdly, the Administration has indicated that it will review the designation of Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism. One hopes that the mistakes made by the Bush Administration in taking North Korea off the list are not repeated with Cuba. The belief that removing North Korea from the terror sponsor list would improve its behavior did not manifest itself after the fact. Rewarding the hardline and rogue elements in the Castro regime is unlikely to improve the dictatorship's behavior to the contrary it may worsen.

On February 24, 1996 Fidel and Raul Castro gave the orders to shoot down two planes of Brothers to the Rescue in international airspace and murdered four who were on board the two planes. This was an act of state terrorism that had been planned out in a conspiracy that included members of the WASP spy network of which three were released back to the Castro regime yesterday.

My prayers tonight go out to the families of Mario de la Peña, Carlos Costa, Pablo Morales, and Armando Alejandre Jr. who saw Gerardo Hernandez, the one man brought to justice for their murdered loved ones and sentenced to life imprisonment, freed in a political maneuver of the Obama Administration today. Meanwhile their continuing demands for justice have gone unheeded.

Norway's solidarity with Cuba's persecuted human rights defenders

Received a response to the December 15th post on Norwegian solidarity with Chinese dissidents that claimed that Norway "refused support to [Cuba's] persecuted human rights defenders." Jan Tore Sanner, currently the Minister of Local Government in the Conservative government of Norway is a long time supporter of Cuban freedom. Jan Tore visited the offices of the Cuban Democratic Directorate in 2008 and at the time explained the purpose of his visit "“I’m here to show my solidarity with the people of Cuba, and those who are imprisoned for their beliefs. I am also here to have a dialogue with the people who care about Cuba, and the people of Cuba." On January 22, 2010 in Oslo, Norway over 25 members of the Norwegian Parliament from five major political parties organized a committee to support Cuban prisoner of conscience Normando Hernández González and demand his freedom. On May 24, 2010 when the daughter of a Cuban exile was bitten by a Cuban diplomat Norwegians were outraged and denounced it. On May 3, 2013 which also happens to be World Press Freedom Day, in Norway, the party of Norwegian Conservatives (Høyre) awarded Yoani Sanchez a prize for human rights and democracy named after one of the founding fathers of Høyre. 

Norwegian members of parliament nominated Oswaldo Payá for Nobel Peace Prize

 Below is the text from 2011 when 7 Norwegian members of parliament nominated Oswaldo Payá for the Nobel Peace Prize.( Václav Havel had also twice nominated Oswaldo Payá ).

Norwegian MPs nominate Oswaldo Payá for the Nobel Peace Prize

A group of 7 Norwegian Members of Parliament has nominated the Cuban Oswaldo Payá for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize. – The Nobel Prize to Cuba’s most important oppositional leader would be an important contribution to peace and democracy for a people who have been denied their fundamental human rights for far too long, the MPs write in their nomination letter.

Through nearly two decades Oswaldo Payá has been the leading figure in a peaceful struggle for basic human rights in Cuba. Oswaldo Payá represents all Cubans who want a peaceful change based on reconciliation and dialogue.

– We believe the Nobel Peace Prize would send a strong signal to the Cuban government that it is time for change, says Dagrun Eriksen, MP, deputy leader of the Christian Democratic Party and one of the signatories.

Oswaldo Payá has built his work on the conviction that all human beings have inviolable rights. He believes that the right to freedom of speech is the basis on which to solve all other problems in society. Only when the people themselves can express their concerns, Cuba will be able to find its own way out of the country’s challenges.

- Oswaldo Payá recognizes that freedom of speech and respect for fundamental human rights is a precondition for a peaceful development, says Jan Tore Sanner, MP, deputy leader of the Conservative Party and one of the other signatories.

Oswaldo Payá has consistently tried to work within the frames of Cuban law, through petitions calling for the respect for basic human rights. When the Varela project succeeded in collecting enough signatures to set of a referendum in 2002, the Cuban regime’s response, however, was to arrest 75 oppositional leaders, in what became known as the Black Spring.

Last spring, Mr Sanner and Mrs Eriksen took the initiative to form a support group for Cuban political prisoners in the Norwegian Parliament, including MPs from all the Norwegian parties. Following the release of more than 40 prisoners into forced exile last summer, 19 of them wrote a letter to the group, proposing that they nominate Oswaldo Payá for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize.

- The support from the former prisoners of conscience shows how Oswaldo Payá has succeeded in gathering different groups of dissidents in dialogue and peaceful resistance, says Dagrun Eriksen.

Jan Tore Sanner was one of the nominators behind last year’s winner Liu Xiabo.

- Oswaldo Payá represents the same peaceful struggle for human rights as Liu Xiabo, says Mr Sanner.

Payá has continued to call for unity and dialogue between all Cubans, in and outside the country. His National Dialogue program and All Cubans Forum, have involved thousands of Cubans in discussions on proposals for a peaceful change towards democracy. Payá is now again calling for a referendum on basic human rights.

- Oswaldo Payá would be a worthy winner of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, say Dagrun Eriksen and Jan Tore Sanner.

Original link

Liu Xioabo, Brave Norway and the Price of Solidarity

"It's up to all of us to try, and those that say that individuals are not capable of changing anything are only looking for excuses." - Vaclav Havel, Interview with Amnesty International in 2011

Nobel ceremony for prisoner of conscience Liu Xiaobo in 2010

 The Nobel Committee has refused to appease the Peoples Republic of China on two occasions awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to worthy recipients from Tibet and China. The Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of Tibet, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 and  in 2010 the Chinese dissident and prisoner of conscience Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. In both cases the dictatorship in Beijing threatened both the Nobel Committee and Norwegian government that there would be serious repercussions. Liu Xiaobo's wife was placed under house arrest and was unable to attend the ceremony. The Nobel Committee held the ceremony with an empty chair.

Norway is a small country with a population of around 5 million.  The Chinese communists have canceled meetings with representatives of the Norwegian government and frozen diplomatic relations since 2010.

Four years later and top-level contacts between Beijing and the Norwegian government remain cut off, even though the government has no control over the decisions of the Nobel Committee. Both the Social Democratic government and its Conservative 2013 successor have tried to mend ties but what would require to appease the Chinese runs afoul of Norwegian principles and policies.

Contrast the behavior Norway with that of the United Nations Human Rights Council and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay.

Part of propaganda exhibit for the PRC at UN on Human Rights day

 On the same day that the imprisoned Chinese dissident was being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in absentia the United Nations European headquarters where the Human Rights Council is seated hosted a massive exhibit celebrating China's human rights record next to the UN event observing International Human Rights Day. In the days leading up to December 10th Amnesty International protested that a human rights crackdown was underway in China. Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch placed this act of moral appeasement in the context of the day:

"At a time when the Nobel Peace Prize is being awarded to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo, it is an outrage that the U.N. is hosting and co-sponsoring -- with China's Communist regime -- a massive propaganda display designed to cover up the government's systematic abuses of universal human rights."

 To add insult to injury on International Human Rights day when the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony was being held in Oslo and the pro-PRC regime propaganda farce was being held in Geneva the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights snubbed the event in Oslo refusing to attend while disingenuously claiming to not have been invited the day before.

The fact of the matter is that the representative of the laureate approached Ms. Pillay and that the standard procedure of the Nobel Committee, according to Hillel Neuer is that "it won't invite any of the laureate's 50 invitees until they have confirmed with the laureate's representative that they have agreed to attend. So when Pillay and her spokesman Rupert Colville say she wasn't invited, they are being disingenuous and misrepresenting the truth."

An international coalition of 38 nongovernmental organizations appealed to the U.N. rights chief to reverse her decision and attend the Nobel award ceremony for the imprisoned Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo.  In the end the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights skipped the award ceremony.

2014 marks the 25th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square uprising and massacre, and it is important to also remember that in 1989 many powerful nations preferred to maintain their "normalized" relations with the Peoples Republic of China at the expense of their solidarity with the victims of repression.

Liu Xiaobo has no guns, bombs, or weapons and he does not recognize the Chinese regime as an enemy but nevertheless the Chinese communist leadership fears him. They have sentenced him to 11 years in prison because of his writings in favor of democratic reforms within the system and are now expending both economic and political capital in an effort to diminish this Chinese dissident’s international stature. He was imprisoned in December 2008 and tried and condemned on Christmas day in 2009. This December marks six years in prison for nonviolently exercising his fundamental human rights in defense of the rights of the Chinese citizenry.

Fortunately, the snub by the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the propaganda show at the United Nations headquarters in Geneva do not diminish the greatness of this Chinese human rights defender, but unfortunately exposes the smallness and moral cowardice of the United Nations Human Rights Council.

Many remain silent about the human rights situation in China because of its economic might and claim that nothing can be done, but Vaclav Havel never held that view. In fact, he protested Western silence. Just days following Liu Xiaobo's trial verdict on January 7, 2010, Vaclav Havel walked over to the Chinese Embassy in Prague and rang the doorbell on three occasions before posting his protest letter through the outdoor embassy mail slot. The former Czech president turned to reporters present and explained what he was doing:

“We are here now because we are asking the Chinese president and Chinese government not to repeat what happened to us 33 years ago, where fighters for freedom were pursued and persecuted.”

What price is one willing to pay for having normal relations with a totalitarian regime? Does it include making a sham out of human rights standards and abandoning victims of repression?

Thank you Norway and thank you Vaclav Havel for showing the world that there are those not willing to pay the price.

[This is the third of three essays on China and "normal" relations: the first gives an overview of Clinton's China policy and its devastating effect on the United States and the second offers details on how U.S. national security was compromised and are available via hyperlink.]