(212) 760-9903 fax (212) 760-9906 director@ffrd.org www.ffrd.org
May
23, 2003
Chief
of Records
ATTN
Request for Comments
Office
of Foreign Assets Control
Department
of the Treasury
Washington,
DC 20220
To
Whom It May Concern:
I
am writing regarding the interim final rule and amendments to the Cuban Assets
Control Regulations. I represent an
eighteen year old not-for-profit organization which was one of the few groups
licensed by OFAC to organize travel for academics and professionals to Vietnam
and Cambodia during the period of US embargo.
Since
1996 we have held a license to organize travel to Cuba under the category of
“activities of private foundations or research or educational institutes that
have an established interest in international relations.” Our most recent license expired on January
20, 2003. I requested renewal on
October 18, 2002, but only received a letter two weeks ago informing me that I
had “not addressed a significant portion of the relevant criteria.” Obviously, that presumably was just as true
in October and could have been indicated to me then or on the two other
occasions I wrote to inquire the status of my application (December 3, 2002;
January 3, 2003).
I
review that history not only to establish our own credible involvement with the
licensing process, but also to emphasize that the process itself badly requires
reform in order to responsibly fulfill the function given to it by the Congress
and the Secretary of the Treasury.
With
regard to the proposed new regulations, it is deeply distressing that they have
eliminated an essential category of people-to-people exchange that will
contribute to peaceful democratic change in both Cuba and the United
States. I say both because all of
history suggests that the only way to bring about peaceful internal
transformation is to develop mutual reconciliation between hostile neighbors
and greater personal knowledge and understanding of each other’s society. Ignorance and suspicion lead to and are used
to justify control and repression in any country that feels itself threatened
by outside forces.
Ending
people-to-people educational exchanges that are not part of a formal degree
granting academic programs will have two direct impacts:
First,
many students now travel to Cuba through other educational institutions during a
holiday break to study Spanish or to participate in a program that is not
recognized as part of their own academic coursework. They will lose this opportunity for a less formal educational
experience that is not offered by their own school and that is at least as
enlightening as the normal curriculum.
Second,
older persons who travel through non-academic educational programs will be denied this possibility both to learn
about Cuba and to communicate to Cubans from the perspective of greater
personal and professional experience and positions of influence in their home
communities.
One
concern of critics has been that trips by alumni groups or museums or
people-to-people exchange organizations can be used as cover for holiday
travel. However, I have never
encountered this personally and would suspect that the complication of making
arrangements, the costs and the inherent inconveniences of group travel would
not tempt the average tourist.
Another
concern is that participants seldom see “real” Cubans and spend the bulk of
their time in structured encounters with the Cuba that the host government
wants them to see. There is some
legitimacy to this criticism of any formal exchange program. However, it discounts how much Americans
will stray outside of official programs and will make use of their free time
for personal exploration.
Ironically,
OFAC’s pressure to have full and detailed itineraries contributes substantially
to this problem. In my experience,
while the Cubans want a chance to present their society’s strengths and values,
they are quite content to incorporate substantial free time that visitors spend
on their own, walking around neighborhoods, making friends, visiting in homes,
etc.
Paradoxically,
the greatest amount of people-to-people contact takes place by the estimated
30,000 Americans who completely disregard travel restrictions and travel
illegally to Cuba each year. They
obtain a Cuban tourist card at the airport in a third country. Many rent a car and go virtually anywhere
they want on the island, picking up the omnipresent hitch hikers, chatting with
small business entrepreneurs, staying at the privately run casas particulares, eating at private paladares, etc.
The
only visitors who really isolate themselves from two way contact with Cubans,
and serve only to provide dollars to the state economy, are those who go to self-contained
resorts. I doubt that many Americans do
this when it is so much easier to enjoy an equally isolated equally beautiful
resort on a cheaper package deal elsewhere in the Caribbean without violating
the law.
My
recommendation is not that you simply restore the previous system of specific
licenses for people-to-people exchange.
Even with the best of intentions, the past procedure was cumbersome,
bureaucratic and demeaning to OFAC, to the organizers, and to the participants,
requiring advance itineraries and lists of travelers. By trying to assure the non-touristic seriousness of the programs
vetted, OFAC diminished their spontaneity and opportunity for unfettered people
to people contact. Instead of showing
commitment to and faith in democracy and freedom and the capacity and integrity
of the American people, OFAC acted in an authoritarian controlling fashion not
dissimilar to the behavior for which the Cubans are criticized.
Instead
the Fund for Reconciliation and Development recommends you adopt a radically
different approach far more consistent with the values and goals of the United
States. OFAC should establish a
general license category in which the sole criteria is that the organization
that sponsors the trip and takes responsibility for the program be an IRS
recognized 501 (c) (3) not for profit institution.
For
purposes of record keeping, OFAC may require organizations wishing to make use
of this general license to file a declaration of intent, provide appropriate
letters of sponsorship to all persons traveling to Cuba under its auspices, and
send an annual report to OFAC, consisting only of the date of each trip and the
number of participants. Each
organization could use its EIN number for identification purposes on the
declaration of intent, letters of sponsorship and annual report. No follow-up would be necessary by OFAC
except acknowledgement of receipt of the letter of intent and a reminder of the
need to produce an annual report within one month of the anniversary of
submission.
I
know that a small group of Americans will feel passionately that the above
recommendation is a betrayal of their interests and political goals, but
two-thirds of our citizens and a bipartisan majority in both houses of Congress
oppose all travel restrictions. In that
context, this proposed general license reform is a modest step. The policy of the US government and of OFAC
must reflect a broad and deep understanding of American national interests and
of appropriate and effective ways to influence developments within a proud
sovereign country that will always be a close neighbor.
Sincerely,
John
McAuliff
Executive
Director