Cuba, according to the U.S. State Department, is among the worst terrorists nations in the world, China is not; although I would neither not put my trust in them.
Senator Helms debunked all that B.S. about China and Cuba.
On Trade, Cuba is Not China"
Senator Jesse Helms The New York Times June 24, 2000
Some lawmakers, including a number of Republicans, have argued in recent weeks that if Congress believes trade will promote democratic change in China, then why not adopt the same policy for Cuba? Here is why: Cuba is not China. The argument that American investment will democratize China has itself been wildly oversold. Beijing is doing everything in its power to dampen the impact of private investment: placing stringent control on the Internet (all users must register with the Public Security Bureau), and most recently declaring that it will insert "party cells" into every private business that operates in China.
But regardless of how one feels about permanent normalized trade with China, there is simply no case to be made that investment would democratize Cuba.
Cuba has undertaken none of the market reforms that China has in recent years; there is no private property, and there are no entrepreneurs with whom to do business. The Fidel Castro regime maintains power by controlling every single aspect of Cuban life: access to food, access to education, access to health care, access to work. This permits Castro to stifle any and all dissent. Any Cuban daring to say the wrong thing, by Castro's standards, loses his or her job. Anyone refusing to spy on a neighbor is denied a university education. Anyone daring to organize an opposition group goes to jail.
American investment cannot and will not change any of this. It cannot empower individual Cubans, or give them independence from the regime, because foreign investors in Cuba cannot do business with private citizens. They can do business only with Fidel Castro.
It is illegal in Cuba for anyone except the regime to employ workers. That means that foreign investors cannot hire or pay workers directly. They must go to the Cuban government employment agency, which picks the workers. The investors then pay Castro in hard currency for the workers, and Castro pays the workers in worthless pesos.
Here is a real-life example: Sherritt International of Canada, the largest foreign investor in Cuba, operates a nickel mine in Moa Bay (a mine, incidentally, which Cuba stole from an American company). Roughly 1,500 Cubans work there as virtual slave laborers. Sherritt pays Castro approximately $10,000 a year for each of these Cuban workers. Castro gives the workers about $18 a month in pesos, then pockets the difference.
The net result is a subsidy of nearly $15 million in hard currency each year that Castro then uses to pay for the security apparatus that keeps the Cubans enslaved. Those who advocate lifting the embargo speak in broad terms about using investment to promote democracy in Cuba. But I challenge them to explain exactly how, under this system, investment can do anything to help the Cuban people. The anti-embargo crowd should drop its rhetoric about promoting democracy and be honest: the one reason for their push to lift sanctions on Cuba is to pander to well-intentioned American farmers, who have been misled by the agribusiness giants into believing that going into business with a bankrupt Communist island is a solution to the farm crisis in America.
Whoever has convinced farmers that their salvation lies in trade with Cuba has sold them a bill of goods. Cuba is desperately poor, barely able to feed its own people, much less save the American farmer.
Castro wants the American embargo lifted because he is desperate for hard currency. After the Soviet Union collapsed and Moscow's subsidies ended, Castro turned to European and Canadian investors to keep his Communist system afloat. Now he wants American investors to do the same. We must not allow that to happen.
Unfortunately, some in Washington are all too willing to give Castro what he wants. At the least they should stop pretending that they are doing this to promote Cuban democracy and American values.
National Journal's CongressDaily April 3, 2002
Cuba has signed contracts totaling $73 million to import foods from the United States since November 2001 — including $37 million since Feb. 20 — but further sales may be "endangered" because the Bush administration has revoked visas for several Cuban officials, the newsletter of the New York-based U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council reported. Cuba purchased the food for cash under the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000.
At least 15 U.S.-based exporters, most prominently Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, Louis Dreyfus, Riceland Foods, Tyson Foods and Northwest Fruit Exporters in Washington state, have been involved in shipping the goods through the ports of New Orleans, Gulfport and Pascagoula, Miss., and Galveston, Texas. Producers from a total of 25 states have sold foods to Cuba, according to the newsletter. The U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council is a privately financed group that serves as an information clearinghouse for companies interested in doing business in Cuba.
The newsletter Economic Eye on Cuba said Otto Reich, assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs, "directed that visas for travel to the United States, previously approved and delivered, be revoked" for Pedro Alvarez Borrego, the president of Alimport, the Cuban food import agency, and several other Cuban officials and technicians. Some of the technicians were to inspect turkey plants; Cuba has not yet imported turkey from the United States. The newsletter said the United States granted visas for Alvarez Borrego in 2000 and 2001. A State Department spokesman today said the department merely exercised its authority under U.S. law to deny visas to Cuban officials, but that future applications by individuals working for the Cuban government would be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Senior executives of U.S. companies declined to speak on the record about the decision to revoke the visas, according to the newsletter, but one executive said: "Our company was one of the 15 that have already sold products to Alimport. The [U.S.] Department of State just created a privileged class, or monopoly, for us because the Cubans have visited our facilities, completed inspections."
Another executive said, "With reasoning like this from the State Department, why should anyone be surprised that the agricultural community in the U.S. seeks price supports. Our own government does not want us to find new markets, and this particular market, I might add, requires cash transactions." The Senate version of the pending farm bill contains a provision to allow U.S. financial institutions to finance exports to Cuba for the first time. — by Jerry Hagstrom
#########################################################
GOOD FOR OTTO REICH! DO NOT GRANT CREDITS TO CROOKS!
"The Senate version of the pending farm bill contains a provision to allow U.S. financial institutions to finance exports to Cuba for the first time."
For those blinded by the propaganda and disinformation campaign propagated by Castro's lobbyists, some who also happen to be members of the U.S. Senate, the Congress and even governors, there should be no doubt left that they want American taxpayers' money to prop up Castro's regime. This is absolutely preposterous. As Senator Helms stated: “Unfortunately, some in Washington are all too willing to give Castro what he wants. At the least they should stop pretending that they are doing this to promote Cuban democracy and American values.”