|
|
|
N A
T I O N A L |
Havana.
September 27, 2005 |
|
|
|
- Pressure, threats,
sanctions against individuals, institutions and NGOs
6 July 2004 the OFAC warned those taking part
in the US organization Pastors for Peace’s
solidarity Caravan that anyone who traveled to
Cuba without the appropriate US Treasury
Department license would be subject to the
penalties set forth in the regulations. Pastors
for the Peace is an ecumenical project of the
Inter-Religious Foundation for the Community
Organization, which between 1992 and 2004 has
brought second-hand computers, medication, food,
toys, books, etc, to Cuba as a way of giving
supportive aid to the Cuban people, without a
license from the US Treasury Department.
On 9 November 2004, the company Xael Charters,
received a visit from OFAC officials, who
requested information on operations to Cuba, in
the framework of the intensification of
persecution measures.
12 November 2004, the president of the Cuban-American
Alliance for Educational Funds (CAAEF) received
a letter form the OFAC asking for a list of all
the people and institutions who had made use of
their travel license in the last five years.
13 November 2004, the ‘Brigada Venceremos’
issued a letter of protest in which it announced
that it had received a letter from OFAC
requesting information on trips organized to
Cuba.
23 November 2004, Washington’s Corcoran Art
gallery, following pressure from the OFAC and
the State Department, cancelled a cultural
evening sponsored by the Cuban Interests Section.
30 March 2005 the OFAC sent a letter to the
US-Cuba Labor Exchange insisting that it "cease
and desist" from promoting and organizing a trip
for a delegation to attend the 4th Hemispheric
Meeting of Struggle against the FTAA and the May
Day celebrations in Cuba. The OFAC also demanded
that it send them a detailed list, within 20
working days, with information about the members
of the aforementioned delegation.
In April 2004, invitations were sent to Mr.
Christopher Schenk, American citizen and
geologist of the US Geologist Service, member of
the Department of the Interior, and to Mr.
Richard T. Buffler, American geophysicist of the
University of Austin, Texas, to take part in the
Convention of Land Sciences.
Mr. Buffler wrote back straight away to say
that, despite being interested in the Convention,
it would be impossible for him to attend due to
other prior commitments. With regard to Mr.
Schenk – who attended the Conference and Annual
Exhibition of the American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, which took place in Cancun
in November 2004, an evaluation of the
predictable reserves of petrol in the deep
waters to the north of Cuba -, it was made known
by way of a e-mail from Mr. Buffler that ‘(…..)
when the US Government found out that he had
carried out an evaluation of Cuban waters, they
fiercely humiliated him and told him that he
could not have contact with Cuba, and they
threatened to fine him if he did so. (…)
American experts apologized for not being able
to attend the event.
In April 2005, the OFAC sent a circular
letter to organizations that have licenses for
trips to Cuba for religious reasons, informing
them that they were being investigated for
alleged "abuses of religious licenses" which
could lead to the suspension or revocation of
their licenses and administrative fines or
penalties. The missive insisted that only
members of the organization in question that
were involved in religious activities could
travel to Cuba. The letter also made a point of
telling them that donation to Cuba by religious
organizations or by individuals or groups need
authorization from the Department of Commerce.
In 2004, the OFAC imposed fines on 316 US
citizens and residents for violation of various
of the blockade’s provisions. In the first
quarter of 2005, 307 fines have been handed out,
almost the same amount as in the all of the
previous year. As part of the intensification of
the restrictions imposed on trips to Cuba, a
change to the former policy, which on occasions
delayed, sometimes for years, the notification
of the violation and application of penalties to
individuals, has been made.
Although the new restrictions on travel only
began to be applied in the second half of 2004,
trips by Americans to Cuba decreased by 40.5
percent, with 51 thousand 27 tourists traveling
to Cuba, compared to 85 thousand 809 in 2003.
The trips by Cubans resident in the United
States suffered a 50.3% drop in the same period,
with 57 thousand 145 visiting Cuba compared to
115 thousand 50 in the previous year.
- Growing opposition to
the blockade within the United States
The US government continues to ignore the public’s
opposition to the blockade in its own country. This
has been made evident by many speeches and a lot of
action in Congress and in state government bodies
and by well-known political and intellectual
figures, non-governmental organizations and business
sectors. Some of the most important of these are:
In 2004, the Chamber of Representatives
passed four amendments proposing the revocation
of regulations concerning sending of packages to
Cuba, the emanation of restrictions on family
visits by Cuban émigrés to the Island, the
suspension of measures that impede American
student programs in Cuba and the cancellation of
restrictions on the exportation of food and
medicine, including those concerning access to
private credit. However, as a result of the
pressure by the Republican leaders and the
president’s threat to veto, all these amendments
were eliminated from the final text of the laws
in which they were included.
In 2005, despite the fact that in the Chamber
of representatives amendments were presented
aimed at eliminating the restrictions imposed on
academic exchanges, family visits, religious
trips and the sending of packages to Cuba, these
were overthrown as a result of the pressure
exercised by the administration and the
Republican leaders, as also because of the
financial contributions of the Cuban American
far right to political campaigns of a
considerable number of representatives, made on
the condition that they oppose any measures to
relax the blockade imposed on Cuba.
In spite of the fact that the majority of the
members of Senate were in favor of eliminating
the travel restrictions to Cuba imposed on
American citizens and Cuban residents in the
United States, the defenders in organ of the
anti-Cuban policy of the current Administration
have resorted to procedural maneuvers in order
to prevent initiatives aimed at encouraging
changes to it from prospering in the legislative
debate.
From 9 – 12 January 2005 the Annual
Convention of the American Farmers’ Federation (AFBF)
passed a resolution asking that President George
W. Bush’s administration immediately normalize
trade with Cuba.
10 February, the State Senate of Alabama
passed the joint resolution SRJ.26, in order to
‘demand that US Congress eliminate restrictions
concerning commerce, finance and trips to Cuba’.
3 March, the Representatives of the American
ports of the Mexican Gulf passed a resolution in
which they expressed their support of the
lifting of the blockade for the sale of medicine
and food to Cuba. They also requested that
congress reestablish the conditions that existed
with regards payment in cash and in advance
before the new OFAC measures on this issue were
published.
16 March 2005, The US Rice Federation urged
Congress to overturn the regulation concerning
payments for food purchases by Cuba and to allow
existing agreements to be performed as per the
Reform of Sanctions Act of 2000.
26 April 2005 the formation of the Cuba-US
Trade Association was officially announced. More
than 30 companies, state agencies and
organizations from 19 US states are members and
its purpose is to work for the elimination of
restrictions on trade with Cuba. The members
include the large companies ADM, Caterpillar,
and Cargill. The board of directors is headed by
the former Secretary of Commerce, Bill Reinsch.
The Association is presided over by Kirby Jones
and its board members include Deputy secretary
of State, William D. Rogers, David Rockefeller;
the former Commercial Representative, Carla
Hills; the former Secretary of Defense, Frank
Carlucci and the former Press Secretary and
former Director of the CIA, James Schlesinger,
among others.
8 June of last year the state Assembly of New
York adopted without votes a legislative
resolution, presented by a large group of
members which called for the president of the
United States to encourage exchanges between the
residents of New York and Cuba. The text was
initially presented by a big group of assembly
members, an initiative of José Rivera, among
others.
1. EXTRATERRITORIAL
ASPECTS OF BLOCKADE POLICY
The falsity of the US government’s efforts to
present the blockade on Cuba as an exclusively
bilateral affair has been clearly demonstrated by
the impact on numerous countries and on the citizens
and companies of third states of the
extraterritorial provisions of the blockade; not
even international organizations of the United
Nations system have been able to avoid this.
It is worth remembering some of the
extraterritorial provisions of the blockade, which
are still in force and continue to cause a large
amount of damage and detrimental effects, both to
Cuba and to third countries, whose right to gain
full benefit from the opportunities generated by the
Cuban economy is restricted. Some examples of this
are:
Subsidiaries of American companies based in
third countries are forbidden from carry out any
kind of transaction with Cuban companies, or
acquire goods that have been made using any
Cuban product.
Companies from third countries are forbidden
from exporting any product to the United States
if it contains Cuban raw material.
Companies from third countries are forbidden
from selling goods or services to Cuba which use
US technology or which are made using products
from this country which exceeds 10% of their
value, even when the proprietors of these
products are from third countries.
Ships that have transported merchandise to or
from Cuba are prohibited from entering US ports.
Banks in third countries are prohibited from
opening accounts in US dollars to Cuban
juridical or natural persons or to anyone who
carry out any financial transaction in this
currency with Cuban entities or individuals, and
if they do the accounts shall be confiscated.
Businessmen from third countries are
prohibited from making investments or during
business in Cuba, under the supposition that
these transactions are related to properties
subject to retrieval by the United States. The
businessmen who do not honor this ban will be
the target of sanctions and reprisals.
1.1 Increasing impact of
the blockade brought about by the United States’
growing involvement in the international economy.
The damage caused by the extraterritorial nature
of the blockade is compounded by the significant
involvement of the United States and its companies
in transnational trade and investments. The United
States controls 45% of the biggest transnational
companies in the world, including 8 of the very
biggest. It is also the main sources of investment
in the world. It went from investing US$125,000
million overseas in 2002 to investing US$152, 000
million in 2003. In this period, its share of total
world direct foreign investment grew from 19% to
25%. The United States is the biggest importer of
goods internationally (21% of the total) and is in
first place in trade in services.
With regard to technology, the United States is
one of the five top countries developing and
applying information technology and communications,
and boasts global leadership with regards business
potential. Furthermore, it owns 11 of the 14 biggest
transnational companies in this sector and takes in
around 80% of all electronic commerce.
Of the 50 biggest pharmaceutical companies in the
world, 20 are from the US. Only 10 transnational
companies (5 of which are American) make almost half
of all sales of drugs made worldwide, some of them
by these alone. The United States holds around 75%
of the world market of recombinant products (the
majority are biopharmaceutical products) and
generate 31% of the world pharmaceutical production
value, with a tendency to keep on growing.
Both investment by companies from third countries
in the United States and those of US companies
abroad which are basically in the form of total or
partial mergers and take-over of other companies
worsen the extraterritorial effects of the blockade
by reducing Cuba’s economic space and by making it
more difficult, at times impossible for Cuba to find
partners and suppliers to get round the ironclad US
blockade.
Below we give some examples:
A large part of the technology, equipment,
and inputs of the Centre for Molecular
Immunology which develops and manufactures
diagnostic and therapeutic equipment, such as
anti-cancer vaccines, came from the Swedish
company Pharmacia, which was taken over by
Amersham and then by the US company General
Electric. The latter, once it took possession,
gave Amersham a week to close its office in Cuba
and end all of its contacts with the Island.
Under the auspices of the World Fund for the
Fight against AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculosis,
run by the UNDP, US$50,400’s worth of tinned
meat for those living with AIDS was bought from
the Brazilian company Oro Rojo. Later, this
company informed Cuba that the factory had been
bought by a US firm and that one of the first
instructions they had received was to cancel all
business with Cuba.
Aware of the importance of the US market and the
US’s level of technological development, many
company’s in various parts of the world, even when
they have no share capital from or in the United
States nor any significant presence in the US market,
refrain from doing business with Cuba or break off
their relations with her in order not to jeopardize
any possible future tie with capital from the
superpower:
The First Caribbean International Bank of the
Bahamas sent a letter to the HAVANTUR company
saying that as from 7 February 2005 they would
be terminating their banking relations because "they
didn’t want to have problems with the Americans".
The British bank Barclays recently said to
executives of the CUBANIQUEL company in London
that they were considering not doing business
with the latter since their manager was an
American and that US government laws apply not
only to companies but also to individuals.
1.2 Civil sanctions
imposed on various bodies (companies, banking
institutions and NGOs) by the OFAC.
In 2004 a total of 77 companies, banking
institutions and NGOs from all over the world were
fined for actions considered to have violated
blockade regulations. The total amount of fines
imposed for the violation of the blockade against
Cuba alone amounted to 1 million 262 thousand
dollars.
Of them 11 are foreign or subsidiaries of US
companies located in third countries such as the
Mexico, Canada, Panama, Italy, the United Kingdom,
Uruguay, Bahamas, the British West Indies (Anguila)
Another seven such as Iberia, Alitalia, Air Jamaica,
Daewoo and the Bank of China were penalized
allegedly because their subsidiaries in the United
States violated certain provisions of the blockade
on Cuba. Eight of them paid fines of more than US$50,000.
Some of the most noteworthy fines imposed in 2004
are:
Alpha Pharmaceutical Inc.; ICN Farmaceutica
S.A. de C.V.; Laboratorios Grossman, S.A. based
in Panama and Mexico DF — US$198711.73 for
importing and exporting goods to and from Cuba
between 1998 and 2003.
Trinity Industries of Mexico, S.A. de C.V.,
based in Mexico City, Mexico — US$55,000 for
selling goods destined for Cuba and for
financing their carriage in 2001.
Chiron Corporation Ltd., in name of Chiron
S.p.A. and Chiron Behring GmbH, located in
Emerville, California, USA – 168 thousand 500
dollars for the exportation of vaccines to Cuba
between 1999-2002.
Daewoo Heavy Industries America Corp., with
offices in Suwanee, Georgia, USA – 55 thousand
dollars, for the exportation of merchandise to
Cuba in 1999.
In the first four months of 2005 five
organizations were penalized by the OFAC with fines
(I bank, 3 companies and an NGO) They included the
Martinair Company Holland N.V.dba, Martinair US
authorities, which has its headquarters in the
Netherlands and which was given a fine of US$6,300
for having provided travel services without having a
license and for transferring funds in 2003.
The decrease in fines given by the OFAC to
institutions in the first four months of this year,
compared with the 42 civilly sanctioned in the same
period in 2004, is not the result of the
applications of the blockade being relaxed, but is
rather a result of terror and therefore of the lack
of encouragement brought about in the activities of
the business sector with regard to Cuba.
1.3 How the
extraterritorial nature of the blockade affects
foreign trade and Investment.
Estimates say that in 2004 the negative effects
of the blockade on Cuban foreign trade reached
US$822.6 million, a figure which is US$52.7 million
higher than the previous year’s.
The highest amount lost was a result of the
implementation of the blockade’s extraterritorial
regulations; it is estimated to be US$380 million,
nevertheless the impossibility of selling on the US
market continues to be significant as can be seen in
the following graph.
The impossibility of gaining access to what
should be a natural market for Cuba — the estimated
losses from this are US$305.2 million— has made it
necessary to situate our imports and exports in
third countries, with the consequent increase of
insurance and freightage.
Additionally, the limited purchases of food and
medicines from the United States involve economic
costs of US$23.7 million which result from the
restrictions under which these are made. These are
extra expenses that arise from having to change
currencies when the transaction are made through
intermediary banks, from hold-ups in unloading the
ships because of delays in the receiving payments
and because of freightage since the ships have to
return to the United States empty.
Cuban exports of reviews, magazines and
newspapers which, as an exception, could be made to
the United States have to be made through third
countries and thus the price of these transactions
increases by 40%. Some US institutions, therefore,
have ceased purchasing Cuban publications and thus
Cuba loses potential income.
From a financial point of view, the blockade has
had a marked impact on the high Country Risk
assigned to Cuba. Economic losses of US$72.2 million
have been attributed to this because it makes it
difficult to find foreign financing.
- Impact on the expansion
of foreign investment and economic cooperation.
Cuba cannot obtain US investment nor credit for
development from the main US and international
financial or monetary institutions.
In 2004 the World Bank assigned US$5,300 million
to Latin America and the Caribbean and the IDB
handed out US$4,232 million for development programs
in the region. Not one penny of this money went to
Cuba. If we take the case of the IDB and use an
economy similar to the Cuban economy in terms of
Gross Domestic Product and population — such as
Ecuador— as a reference point, then Cuba could have
had access to approximately US$48.8 million in
financing, were it not for the blockade.
In 2003 the United States donated US$1,818
million Official Development Aid to Latin America
and the Caribbean . Cuba received none of this money.
The US government fraudulently manipulates
information about the resources Cuba receives from
the United States, suggesting that these amount to
more than one thousand million dollars annually in
donations authorised by the departments of treasury
and trade. In 2004 Cuba only received US$4368279 in
US government authorised donations from NGOs.
(Continued... 1, 2,
3,
4,
5,
6)
|
|
|
|
|
