>from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >ECONOMIC WARFARE AGAINST CUBA > >The most scandalous political failure of the century > >* Presentation of evidence begins regarding the lawsuit against the > U.S. government for economic damages >* The blockade has cost the island $67 billion USD > >BY MARELYS VALENCIA AND RAISA PAGES (Granma International staff >writers) > >THE first session of the presentation of evidence in the civil >lawsuit against the U.S. government for economic damages to the >island exposed the U.S. economic war against Cuba as one of the most >blatant and scandalous failures, and in violation of international >law. > >Confessions, statements from more than 100 witnesses, 33 reports by >experts and 100 declassified documents will be presented over a >period of two weeks in the former Supreme Court of Justice, now the >Palace of the Revolution. > >The suit was lodged on January 3 in the civil and administrative >section of City of Havana People's Provincial Court, by social and >popular organizations representing virtually the entire Cuban >population. > >Dr. Olga Miranda, legal director at the Cuban Ministry of Foreign >Affairs, who was the first expert witness to take the stand and >present evidence, providing explanations of a prolific report, stated >that there are no principles within international law justifying the >so-called "peaceful blockade" which was practiced by the colonial >powers in the 19th century and early 20th century. > >However, it would seem that U.S. leaders have a poor memory, she >affirmed ironically, as they fail to remember that in 1916, that >nation's authorities warned France that the United States would not >accept the right of any foreign power to block the exercise of the >trading rights of third countries, by having recourse to a blockade >when a state of war does not exist. > >The 1909 London Naval Conference confirmed the international legal >principle that blockades are acts of war and are not applicable in >peacetime excepting between warring nations. > >The 8th consultation meeting of the Organization of American States >(OAS) adopted a resolution sanctioning Cuba for being "a pawn of the >Chinese-Soviet axis," a charge which was not accepted by Mexico, the >Caribbean states or the Chilean government of Salvador Allende. > >In September 1962, Section 620-A of the U.S. Foreign Aid Act gave the >president of that nation authority to decree a total blockade, >authorized by John F. Kennedy in Presidential Executive Order Number >3447, on February 7, 1962. > >The International Pact on Civil and Political Rights (adopted by a UN >General Assembly resolution on December 16, 1966) states that all >peoples have the right to determine their political status and freely >dispose of their wealth and natural resources, in order to >guarantee their economic, social and cultural development. > >Based on similar principles, the Economic, Social and Cultural Rights >Pact was signed in the UN General Assembly in 1966. These two pacts >complement the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. > >Four UN resolutions, adopted between 1952 and 1974, establish >adequate compensation for the owners of nationalized properties, and >Cuban compensation offers were made within that framework. > >"Instead of applying the 1961 Cuban legislation, persons who had >property expropriated went to the U.S. courts and were thus subject >to negotiations between the governments," legal expert Olga Miranda >explained. > >"Cuba continues to recognize their rights, contemplated in Decree-Law >80 of December 1996, called the Reaffirmation of Cuban Sovereignty >Act, but these rights are linked to our compensation for economic and >human damages caused by the blockade over more than 40 years." > >Presiding Judge Rafael Enrique Dujarric, master of law, asked Olga >Miranda for further details related to the validity of the >compensation claims against Cuba. > >She stated that a U.S. commission presented 8,816 claims from >expropriated citizens up until 1964; 2,905 were rejected and 5,911 >were recognized. > >THE UNITED STATES DENIES ITS OWN PRINCIPLES > >In their desperate actions against the Cuban economy with the >objective of destroying the Revolution, successive U.S. >administrations have been in contradiction with the principles laid >down by countries and international financial mechanisms as the >"divine steps" for the "functioning" of the world economy. > >This affirmation was expressed by Osvaldo Martínez, president of the >National Assembly's Economic Commission, who gave the court a >profound analysis of the causes and scope of the economic war against >Cuba. > >The opening up of trade and the free movement of capital are being >held back by the very same persons who are promoting neoliberal >globalization. The international financial agencies have predicted >that nations which fail to fulfill these principles will fall >behind; nevertheless, the United States is contradicting its own >principles by establishing legislation like the Helms-Burton Act, >which obstructs the free flow of capital. > >As Martínez explained, the U.S. government intentionally uses the >term "embargo" to describe its policy in relation to the island, >which has a population 23 times smaller and a gross domestic product >600 times lower that the United States. The attacks, which later took >the legal and practical form of a blockade, have cost Cuba $67 >billion USD in direct and indirect losses, an overwhelming figure for >any economy. > >The term "embargo" has been exposed as a lie by the extraterritorial >nature of the Torricelli and Helms-Burton Acts, which dictate >sanctions for countries, persons and companies trading with the >island, and even prohibit entry into the United States to such >citizens and their families. > >The obstinacy shown by successive U.S. administrations has led them >to act against their own interests, one example being the rejection >of the Cuban formula to compensate expropriations through the 1960 >Nationalization Act. Under that formula, Cuba would pay those >compensations in sugar, which is a high-cost production sector in the >United States and is partially funded by high prices on the domestic >market. Current subsidies for sugar production in the United States >cost consumers approximately two billion dollars per year. > >The specialist recalled that limits on land ownership established by >the Agrarian Reform Act, promulgated on May 17, 1959, oscillated >between 402.9 hectares and 1,343 hectares. "In spite of not being too >radical," Martínez noted, "that act gave rise to a singular reaction >in the U.S. government, which demanded rapid, adequate and effective >compensation." > >The terms of compensation offered by Cuba were very generous compared >to those defended by the United States during its military occupation >of Japan. > >There were no negotiations with Cuba, despite the fact that it was a >weak economy, weighed down by various decades of U.S. neocolonialism. >It had seen its national coffers virtually emptied in January '59, >when Batista's acolytes fled to the United States, taking with >them $424 million USD of the gold and dollar reserves supporting the >Cuban peso. Those funds ended up in banks in that country, and not a >single cent was returned. > >In addition, the country's technological base experienced a traumatic >period. The blockade prevented the acquisition of technology and >spare parts from the United States, and the island had to transform >part of its system of production and build new factories >with technology from its new trading partners, the socialist bloc >countries. During the '90s it faced a similar situation once again, >with the disappearance of that market, but this time it was alone, >facing adverse world economic conditions and a blockade impeding its >every move. > >The longest blockade to which a country has been subjected in >peacetime, but with bellicose measures, Martínez pointed out, has not >gained its objective. The economy began to recover from 1996 onward, >and the Helms-Burton Act has not been able to prevent >increased negotiations with international companies. Through their >heroism and resistance, the Cubans have been able to mock that U.S. >economic war during these 40 years, he concluded. > >Documents declassified during the last nine years reveal that, even >prior to 1959, a conspiracy against the revolutionary movement was >being hatched in the highest U.S. political circles. > >In his statement, Tomás Diez Acosta, a researcher at the Cuban >History Institute, offered a selection of examples from three volumes >published by the U.S. State Department covering January 1958 to >September 1963. > >Details of a covert operation against the Revolution were presented >to the U.S. National Security Council before 1959, at the request of >President Eisenhower. > >"Economic aggression was the method most frequently employed," the >expert witness maintained during a reading of the principal >operations organized by the highest U.S. authorities. > >CUBANS' FOOD SUPPLY AFFECTED > >Damages valued at $542 million USD have been occasioned by the U.S. >blockade of Cuba in terms of imported foodstuffs, apart from the >enormous difficulties it causes in terms of ensuring that the >components of the basic ration, available to the entire population at >a subsidized price, actually reach the population, according to >expert witnesses from the Ministry of Foreign Trade (MINCEX) giving >evidence before the court. > >Among other reasons, this is due to the island being forced to >purchase those items in distant countries, with excessive >transportation costs and instability of supplies; as well as the need >to maintain large inventories, having few alternatives in terms of >price, and other financial problems resulting from U.S. pressures. > >Orlando Hernández Guillén, deputy minister of MINCEX, was one of the >witnesses. He detailed the activities of the blockade against Cuba >over these 40 years, involving successive U.S. administrations as >accomplices and promoters. This is a form of economic warfare which >has been intensified and increased in recent years, he affirmed. > >One example of that continued aggression was the grotesque blacklist >on which the United States places every ship from anywhere in the >world which touches Cuban ports, and which grew to include more than >900 vessels between 1960 and 1970; this measure was revived in the >mid-90s. >For his part, Colonel José María Pérez, from the Ministry of the >Interior's Center for Historical Research, demonstrated how the >economic aggression was the complement to a bloody armed aggression, >and detailed hundreds of incidents in which damages to human life >were associated with material and economic destruction. > >Armando Valdés Mercadé, a State Security agent who infiltrated the >Miami counterrevolutionary organizations, also appeared before the >court and recounted how the U.S. authorities turn a blind eye to the >activities of these terrorist groups. > >On the second day of the hearings, a further dozen or so witnesses >and experts gave evidence, among them officials from banking agencies >and the Ministry of Foreign Investment and Economic Cooperation. > > ************* >© Copyright GRANMA INTERNATIONAL DIGITAL EDITION. La Havana. Cuba > Another Miami judge steps down due to conflict of interests > >WASHINGTON (PL).- The presiding judge in the Miami court dealing with >Elián González's custody, lacking jurisdiction according to U.S. >federal law, has resigned from the case, press sources reported on >February 29. >The case arose out of an appeal made by Elián's distant relatives to >a Florida family court and has continued to be debated, despite the >fact that it conflicts with federal immigration law. > >The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) ruled last >January that Elián should be returned to his father in Cuba and >refused jurisdiction in this regard to any Florida state court. >Nevertheless, the INS accepted other proceedings, currently underway >in a federal court, that still have to decide whether the fate of the >child will depend on a prolonged case in that court. > >According to the newspaper El Nuevo Herald, Miami Judge Michael >Chavies "withdrew" from the case in order to avoid accusations of a >"conflict of interest," as he was linked to sections of the >counterrevolutionary mafia in that city. > >Chavies declared to the press that he was withdrawing to avoid the >appearance of impropriety, after it became known that he had >employed, as a political adviser, someone linked to the campaign to >keep Elián in the United States. This adviser is precisely >Armando Gutiérrez, self-proclaimed spokesperson for the distant >relatives who are retaining the child in Miami. >Gutiérrez handled the successful campaign within the Hispanic >community for Chavies' candidacy in 1994, according to the newspaper. > >The first judge assigned to the case, Rosa González, had interests in >common with powerful anti-Cuba organizations in the United States. > >Rodríguez immediately ruled in favor of granting custody of Elián to >the boy's great-uncle, Lázaro González, who lives in Miami and has a >history of alcoholism. >El Nuevo Herald admitted that Rodríguez had paid Gutiérrez and his >wife Maritza's publicity agency more than $60,000 USD to manage the >electoral campaign during his candidacy for circuit judge in 1998. > >When Chavies withdrew, after having replaced Rodríguez, District >Judge Jennifer Bailey was assigned to the case." JC > > > __________________________________ KOMINFORM P.O. Box 66 00841 Helsinki - Finland +358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081 e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kominf.pp.fi ___________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/unsubscribe messages mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________
