FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Planning for the Re-Colonization of Cuba

The Bush Administration’s “Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba,” co-chaired by the Secretaries of State and Commerce, has presented a new report to our President this week. Copies are on the Internet. It’s a lengthy and comprehensive Plan, detailing all the steps which US government and other “vital actors” will be taking to bring Cuba back into the family of overt US colonies, which now include some of the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, Haiti, Kabul, and the Green Zone in Baghdad.

The Administration was roundly criticized for not having such a plan for Iraq after its conquests there. Some even claimed it was the reason for the failure of the occupation. One of the purposes of this Plan may be to forestall such criticism in Cuba’s case.

Nevertheless this Plan is much the same as the one for Iraq (which was not publicly articulated beforehand.) By privatizing what used to be done publicly, it will bring Cuba into the modern, civilized world by creating a capitalist utopia where private entrepreneurs from the “international community” (mostly US corporations) and the “Cuban community abroad” (mostly US citizens), unencumbered by societal restraint, will unleash their full creative powers to save the long-suffering Cuban people from continuing poverty and tyranny ­ while incidentally benefiting themselves.

The recommendation for Cuba destabilization activities going on now is to continue or increase everything, especially the radio-TV projects illegally being forced on Cubans by US airplanes, denying hard currency to Cuba by tightening the blockade, i.e., fining foreign banks which deal in Cuba transactions, punishing and rewarding foreign governments which increase or decrease Cuba trade, and tightening and increasing punishment for the travel restrictions, the cost of which already triples what we spend trying to trace Al Qaeda funds.

The funding for all this will be a new US slush fund of $80 m increased by $20 m per year, plus all the dirty destabilization money (unknown multimillions per year) now being funneled through AID, NED, the so-called Noggins in Florida, and the US Interests Section in Havana.

Under the Plan, in the future all Cuban communication, transport, mining, industry, agriculture, medical, and other productive enterprise will be privatized and the vital actors (US and its entrepreneurs) will build and create for Cuba a water and sanitation system, a health care system, an education system, a transportation system, a communication system, a shelter system (homes for everyone), a food security system (a chicken in every pot), all presumably similar to what we are doing for or to the Iraqi people. Much more, in fact, than we are willing to do for the people of New Orleans.

Our generosity to the Cubans is conditioned however on their acceptance of a new political economy which is similar to our own. There’s very little said in the Plan about what already exists in Cuba, and nothing is said about the effects of our blockade and terrorism against Cubans. It’s as if the institutions, infrastructure and protective capabilities which have been created in 45 years of independence are so insignificant they’re not worth mentioning.

Not surprisingly, this plan is rife with the usual code words this Administration uses to manipulate public opinion, such as “democracy” (commercial oligarchy), “freedom” (of the big fish to eat the little ones), “dissenters” (the few hundred Cubans, US paid mercenaries, on the island). The Plan is also full of statements about what changes the Cuban people want (with no supporting evidence), but says little about any role for them in pursuing their supposed desires. Indeed, they are treated overall as the objects, not subjects, of a transformation to be carried out by others. They are seen as helpless and ignorant, in desperate need of education and training in the complexities of modern consumer society. Somewhat similar in tone but much more intense, than the 19th century French idea of “noblesse oblige” (the noble obligation) or Kipling’s idea of “the white man’s burden.”

The Plan is to rebuild the Cuban nation from the bottom up, from scratch to a capitalist neo-colony similar to those which now exist in Central America and the Caribbean. Nothing is said, however, about how we get from present reality to “scratch.” The first six months are said to be crucial. This is when the Cuban Transition Government (CTG) will be set up. Clearly this means a puppet government such as was created for Afghanistan and Iraq. Most of the nation building will be done on request of these puppets. Funding will consist of an imposed IMF structural adjustment loan, other International bank loans, international investment, especially by the “Cuban community abroad,” and some direct US taxpayer help where deemed appropriate.

2. Cuban Constitution.

Much concern is expressed in the Plan about Fidel Castro’s “strategy” for succession. Cuba has a constitution, but no mention of it is made in the Plan. Nor, seemingly, is one to be written for them, as was done in Afghanistan and Iraq. Apparently constitutions are no longer considered necessary. The Plan says that Castro’s strategy is that his brother becomes president when he leaves office, which the Plan’s vital actors (US and its entrepreneurs) will not allow to happen.

The Cuban Constitution was developed at local and provincial levels in the early 1970’s, and was approved by 97% of eligible Cuban voters in 1976. Following the “rectification” period in the late 1980’s, it was substantially amended in 1992 by the same process and a more than 2/3 vote in the National Assembly as required. In 2002, in response to the “Varela Project,” it was reaffirmed by a vote of over 8 m Cubans, 95% of the adult population.

This constitution establishes a nonpartisan participatory/representative electoral system, which is not similar to ours, but in some respects is more accountable and democratic. At the local and provincial levels there must be two or more candidates for each office, at the national level it’s a parliamentary type system where any candidate for the 619, five-year National Assembly seats must receive at least 50% of the vote to win office. The executive (called the Council of State, analogous to our president and cabinet) consists of 24 elected members of the Assembly headed by a president and vice president, which presently are the duly elected Castro brothers.

The Constitution provides that if the president is unable to continue or leaves for any reason, the Vice President will take his place until the National Assembly elects a new President. The Assembly and the Castro brothers have frequently said the succession will occur per the Constitution. The only way it could be stopped or changed is by a US military intervention. Thus, this Plan is in effect, as Cuba’s Assembly President Richard Alarcon has stated, a declaration of war. It’s a combination of unsupported, vague generalities, gross exaggeration, insults, hypocrisy and outright falsehoods. It’s a tunnel-visioned ultimatum which acknowledges no possibility that there may be other views and perspectives about Cuba. It eliminates the likelihood of public discussion of such in the US before our superior military power is introduced to settle the matter. It bears no relation to the reality of Cuba or the century and half struggle of its people for autonomy. It’s another blast in the relentless Cuba propaganda campaign which our government has been conducting for years.

Many Americans are becoming aware of how unreliable our media is and how we are being manipulated through it by our government. After all, for most of us, everything we know about foreign countries comes from the media. Historically, by exercising our constitutional right to travel to other countries at peace with us, we were able to see and learn the truth ourselves or from reports by honest people. In the case of Cuba, however, the effects of the false propaganda are multiplied exponentially by prohibiting travel there. Our government knows that if we were able to learn the reality of Cuba, its entire re-colonization effort would quickly disappear in ridicule.

3. The Plan in its larger context.

It’s unusual to publicly issue beforehand a plan for the subjugation of a sovereign nation. The last historical example which comes to mind is the 1924 publication of Adolph Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” (My Plan), which outlined his proposed steps in the upcoming takeover of Germany by the Nazi Party. Unfortunately, no one in Europe paid much attention to it. Americans should ask themselves why our government is issuing a Plan like this at this time.

Clearly, pander is an important factor. The South Florida business community, which consists of people with all kinds of ancestry, including American, Latin, Cuban, tends to see Cuba as its competitor in the main industry, tourism. It funds most of our national and Florida anti-Cuba politicians and receives from them in return a brutal blockade, a vicious anti-Cuba policy, and even more taxpayer money in return.

Many of these people see the present Administration as their last chance to retake power in Cuba. At this point the overbuilt South Florida real estate market is looking like a lead balloon and things are getting a little “iffy” in the construction, mortgage, banking, tourism, stock markets and other areas. As suggested in the Plan, business conferences are being held frequently in Miami to plan the takeover of Cuba, and they are already arguing among themselves about the spoils. The picture is one of a pack of drooling hounds looking south across the Florida Straits to an island with 11 m workers/consumers to be exploited.

The Plan alleges that Cuba and Venezuela are “intermeddling” in other Latin countries’ internal affairs, which is something the US would never do. No Latin country has complained of such and no evidence has ever been produced to support such a charge. It’s true that Cuba sends physicians, nurses and teachers to help poor people in Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa, but only on request of their governments. The truth is that after a century of US corporate exploitation, some countries in South America are becoming independent nations. The Cuban Revolution stands as a shining example that such can be done.

The Plan says it was written and assembled by over 100 experts from various government agencies, but CIA is not among these. There are plenty of good reasons to believe that CIA, at least the agents who know something about Cuba, agree with previous onsite Pentagon investigations of Cuban military installations that Cuba constitutes no risk to our national security. Nevertheless part of the Plan is being kept secret on national security grounds.

We know now that our government has been at least allowing anti-Cuba terrorist groups like Alpha 66 to conduct weekly arms training sessions in and near the Everglades National Park and elsewhere. In recent months local authorities in Ft. Lauderdale and Los Angeles have happened upon large arms caches which are intended for another Cuba invasion. The weapons include rocket launchers, bazookas, Uzis, all kinds of grenades and machine guns. The possessors have been charged locally but it’s very unlikely they’ll ever be tried publicly. In the Los Angeles case the defense of the Alpha 66 member with over 1500 war weapons in his home is that they were provided by our government.

There are several possible scenarios which could be used to publicly justify another military intervention in Cuba. One of the most unfounded, pernicious, dangerous aspects of the US propaganda campaign is the assertion that the Cuban Revolution has been the work of one man (“the tyrant”) and the people on the island are desperate to return to corporate rule. Several years ago a poll indicate that 25% of Miamians of Cuban ancestry want to return to Cuba when the leadership changes.

Thus, there’s a distinct possibility of a boat exodus from South Florida to Cuba when this happens, possibly tens or hundreds of thousands of people. In the Clinton years Washington, Florida and Miami had contingency plans to prevent this by using the Coast Guard and various agencies. This is nowhere mentioned in the Plan but it can be inferred that such contingency plans no longer exist or will not be used. Most of these boat people will be law abiding, but some of them will be US citizens who could cause trouble in Cuba and seek US government intervention for help.

Americans would be wise, in their own self interest, to try to reign in this Administration before it further executes this Plan. Any intervention in Cuba will lead to a brutal war and a long, harsh and bloody occupation/insurgency, which will end only when the Americans withdraw completely and the US empire ceases to exist.

TOM CRUMPACKER is a lawyer who works with the Miami Coalition to End the US Embargo of Cuba. He can be reached at: Crump8@aol.com

 

 

More articles by:
September 24, 2018
Jonathan Cook
Hiding in Plain Sight: Why We Cannot See the System Destroying Us
Gary Leupp
All the Good News (Ignored by the Trump-Obsessed Media)
Robert Fisk
I Don’t See How a Palestinian State Can Ever Happen
Barry Brown
Pot as Political Speech
Lara Merling
Puerto Rico’s Colonial Legacy and Its Continuing Economic Troubles
Patrick Cockburn
Iraq’s Prime Ministers Come and Go, But the Stalemate Remains
William Blum
The New Iraq WMD: Russian Interference in US Elections
Julian Vigo
The UK’s Snoopers’ Charter Has Been Dealt a Serious Blow
Joseph Matten
Why Did Global Economic Performance Deteriorate in the 1970s?
Zhivko Illeieff
The Millennial Label: Distinguishing Facts from Fiction
Thomas Hon Wing Polin – Gerry Brown
Xinjiang : The New Great Game
Binoy Kampmark
Casting Kavanaugh: The Trump Supreme Court Drama
Max Wilbert
Blue Angels: the Naked Face of Empire
Weekend Edition
September 21, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Hurricane Florence and 9.7 Million Pigs
Andrew Levine
Israel’s Anti-Semitism Smear Campaign
Paul Street
Laquan McDonald is Being Tried for His Own Racist Murder
Brad Evans
What Does It Mean to Celebrate International Peace Day?
Nick Pemberton
With or Without Kavanaugh, The United States Is Anti-Choice
Jim Kavanagh
“Taxpayer Money” Threatens Medicare-for-All (And Every Other Social Program)
Jonathan Cook
Palestine: The Testbed for Trump’s Plan to Tear up the Rules-Based International Order
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Chickenhawks Have Finally Come Back Home to Roost!
David Rosen
As the Capitalist World Turns: From Empire to Imperialism to Globalization?
Jonah Raskin
Green Capitalism Rears Its Head at Global Climate Action Summit
James Munson
On Climate, the Centrists are the Deplorables
Robert Hunziker
Is Paris 2015 Already Underwater?
Arshad Khan
Will Their Ever be Justice for Rohingya Muslims?
Jill Richardson
Why Women Don’t Report Sexual Assault
Dave Clennon
A Victory for Historical Accuracy and the Peace Movement: Not One Emmy for Ken Burns and “The Vietnam War”
W. T. Whitney
US Harasses Cuba Amid Mysterious Circumstances
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
Things That Make Sports Fans Uncomfortable
George Capaccio
Iran: “Snapping Back” Sanctions and the Threat of War
Kenneth Surin
Brexit is Coming, But Which Will It Be?
Louis Proyect
Moore’s “Fahrenheit 11/9”: Entertaining Film, Crappy Politics
Ramzy Baroud
Why Israel Demolishes: Khan Al-Ahmar as Representation of Greater Genocide
Ben Dangl
The Zapatistas’ Dignified Rage: Revolutionary Theories and Anticapitalist Dreams of Subcommandante Marcos
Ron Jacobs
Faith, Madness, or Death
Bill Glahn
Crime Comes Knocking
Terry Heaton
Pat Robertson’s Hurricane “Miracle”
Dave Lindorff
In Montgomery County PA, It’s Often a Jury of White People
Louis Yako
From Citizens to Customers: the Corporate Customer Service Culture in America 
William Boardman
The Shame of Dianne Feinstein, the Courage of Christine Blasey Ford 
Ernie Niemi
Logging and Climate Change: Oregon is Appalachia and Timber is Our Coal
Jessicah Pierre
Nike Says “Believe in Something,” But Can It Sacrifice Something, Too?
Paul Fitzgerald - Elizabeth Gould
Weaponized Dreams? The Curious Case of Robert Moss
Olivia Alperstein
An Environmental 9/11: the EPA’s Gutting of Methane Regulations
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail