February 9, 2004

Dear friends and colleagues,

I am catching up after a visit to Cuba, and wanted to comment on the following article summarizing candidates' positions which has been widely circulated among those interested in US policy toward Cuba.

The Kucinich and Sharpton positions are most likely to be greeted with enthusiasm among those who advocate straightforward reconciliation and normal relations between the US and Cuba. However the nuances are vital among those with a better prospect to receive the nomination, and I explore them below. The crucial point is that this is the moment of greatest accessibility, when candidates are most open to hearing from constituencies whose commitment to particular issues can actually affect their votes in primaries.

At the moment, it appears that John Kerry is well on his way to winning the Democratic nomination. That makes him less subject to pressure from issue groups, either ourselves or the hard liners in Florida and New Jersey, and more prone to consider the impact of positions on his eventual contest with George Bush. In this situation, I think it is incumbent upon us to find every channel possible to the Kerry campaign (including his advisers, prominent supporters and donors) urging that he resist all pressure to back away from his previous principled positions. It is especially important to convey this message before the Florida primary on March 9th.

Our colleagues in Washington had been informed that Kerry would have voted for the language in the Senate version of theTreasury Appropriations bill to end enforcement of the travel ban had he not been away from Washington campaigning. (Edwards was reported to hold the opposite position.) Kerry also is on record in favor of S950 to directly end travel restrictions (through a proxy vote at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee}.

It should be noted that the question asked by AP was on ending the embargo as a whole. AP did not ask specifically about ending travel restrictions which has far greater Congressional and popular support.

In the following answers both Clark and Kerry put the making of a new policy towards Cuba in the context of the views of "the leaders of the region" (Clark) and "with other countries in the region" (Kerry). Needless to say all of them oppose the US embargo (and probably think it is rather juvenile and counterproductive).

In addition Kerry calls for consulting with,"those in Cuba who are fighting for greater political liberties". While Cuban authorities may consider his stance to be interventionist by involving internal opponents in an issue of bilateral government relations, most of these persons also favor ending travel restrictions and the embargo.

It also seems a foregone conclusion that the "Cuban Americans" Kerry pledges to consult would be a far broader spectrum than the Bush administration listens to.

In other words, Kerry has intelligently defined the process of review in such a way as to provide the space, one might even argue the mandate, for a very different US relationship with Cuba.

An important point to raise with Kerry now are the steps that he could take as President using his executive authority and prior to a "major review" of US policy. Under current law, he cannot end travel restrictions but he could certainly restore the people-to-people category established by President Clinton. He could also direct OFAC to establish a general license for people-to-people travel, in particular travel organized by IRS recognized not-for-profit organizations (501c3, 501c4), rather than the cumbersome, costly, arbitrary and potentially abusive requirement for approval of a specific license.

Both Edwards and Dean are still ensnared by the presumptive logic of conditionality, that change in US policy should be held hostage to changes in Cuba.

Some concern has been stated that pressing for strong positions against travel restrictions by Democratic candidates could turn a successful bipartisan movement in Congress to change policy into a partisan issue, pitting Democrats against Republicans. Such a perspective has merit, and certainly public discussion must emphasize the isolation of the Administration from the majority will manifested by leaders on both sides of the aisle. However, it is the Bush Administration which has politicized an important foreign policy debate by pandering without embarrassment to hard liners in Miami not only with regressive policy initiatives but also through bureaucratic harassment of travelers.

At the end of the day, the practical decisions that most effect Americans' freedom to travel are largely controlled by the Executive and the principle current field of intellectual and political battle are the positions of candidates for the Presidency.

John McAuliff

Candidates on the issues: Cuba

The Associated Press

Thursday, January 29, 2004

Š2004 Associated Press

URL: http://web1.wsvn.com/news/articles/election_2004/C34811/

(01-29) 11:16 PST (AP) --

The Associated Press chooses an issue three times a week and asks the presidential candidates a question about it. Today's question and responses:

CUBA: What conditions, if any, would Cuba have to meet for you to favor dropping the embargo?

Democrats:

Wesley Clark: "I want to help bring democracy to the Cuban people, the only people in the Western Hemisphere who don't have democratic freedoms. That said, I will not take steps that reward Fidel Castro. In general, embargoes have not succeeded in bringing democracy. It was engagement and penetration that helped the peoples of Eastern Europe gain their freedom. If elected, I would work this problem with the leaders of the region, work it hard. As president, I would look at the circumstances at the time and then act."

Howard Dean: "The U.S. should move toward the eventual lifting of the trade embargo with Cuba. But Castro must not be rewarded for continued human rights violations. Before I will consider lifting the embargo, Castro must demonstrate a firmer commitment to human rights and take steps that promote the freedom that Cubans have so long been denied."

Sen. John Edwards: "The goal of our policy in Cuba must be the promotion of democracy and human rights. I support sanctions that target Fidel Castro's regime but help the innocent Cuban people, allowing trade for food and medical supplies that help ease the horrible burdens they suffer. Full sanctions should not be lifted until Castro and his brutal regime are gone. At the same time, along with our allies, we must increase our support and assistance for dissidents and democracy advocates inside Cuba who are struggling to be free."

Sen. John Kerry: "I am not prepared to lay down conditions at this time for lifting the embargo, because I believe that we need a major review of U.S. policy toward Cuba. That review must be conducted with other countries in the region, with Cuban Americans, and, to the best of our abilities, those in Cuba who are fighting for greater political liberties."

Rep. Dennis Kucinich: "I strongly favor ending the embargo on Cuba. Our policy toward Cuba has created misery for the Cuban people and has harmed our own national interests. My administration will work to normalize relations with Cuba. This will include normal bilateral trade with Cuba. Farm communities throughout the U.S. are being denied a natural market in Cuba, and Americans are being denied products from Cuba. It will also restore the freedom to travel to Cuba. Our government's travel ban violates our own Constitution, which guarantees freedom of movement. As president I will work to repeal the Cuban Adjustment Act, which has encouraged smuggling and put lives at risk and has reinforced arbitrary and unequal immigration policies. I will pursue national security cooperation, rather than confrontation, with our Caribbean neighbor to the south. Lincoln said, 'The only way to eliminate an enemy is to make him your friend."'

Sen. Joe Lieberman: "I would drop the embargo if Castro steps down and a democratic government, selected by the people of Cuba, is allowed to rise. Fidel Castro's regime is unmatched in its oppression and implacable in opposing any hint of freedom and democracy."

Al Sharpton: "If we can trade with China and Russia and others, what is the difference in terms of policies in dealing with these countries?"

Republican:

The Bush-Cheney campaign says President Bush will begin participating in the weekly issues survey in February.