Menu

02/10/13 - Miami Herald - Defending US democracy program for Cuba


José R. Cárdenas

Towards the end of the recent Senate confirmation hearing of the newly
minted Secretary of State John Kerry, presiding Sen. Bob Menendez, D-NJ,
made a point to secure his former colleague's public support for official
U.S. programs that support democratic development abroad.

It was a shrewd move by Menendez, since he knew that during Sen. Kerry's
tenure as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, his staff was
openly hostile to democracy funding for Cuba and worked to obstruct its
implementation.

The Cuba Democracy Program, which is administered by both the State
Department and U.S. Agency for International Development, is what is known
within the bureaucracy as a "cross-border program" into a non-presence
country - meaning we are trying to help support people living in repressive
states in which we have no local development office.

There is nothing about it that is unique or unprecedented. There are, or
have been, at least six other countries in which the U.S. government runs
similar cross-border programs. But what is indeed unique about the program
is the level of scrutiny and criticism it has been subjected to - which has
only intensified since the Castro regime's 2009 arrest of U.S. development
worker Alan Gross for bringing Internet equipment to a small Cuban Jewish
group.

The Cuba program, as with the other cross-border programs, is designed to
support civil societies under repressive governments by delivering anything
from humanitarian aid to material assistance. In more than a decade's
operation, the Cuba program has helped to promote the free flow of
information to, from, and within Cuba, through printed, electronic, and
social media; trained hundreds of independent journalists whose reports
today appear in major international news outlets; trained human rights
groups to document abuses for submission to international organizations;
worked with Cuban youth to encourage them to freely express themselves
through rap and other musical forms; and provided critical humanitarian
aid, including food and medicine, to political prisoners and their
families, among many other initiatives.

Yet, in trying to discredit the program, critics have fundamentally
mischaracterized it, many times at the expense of Gross. Due to their
operation in difficult environments, cross-border programs are inherently
risky, which is understood by all involved. Because these unelected regimes
routinely arrest citizens trying to exercise their human rights, the
programs are carried out discretely, with the goal solely of trying to
protect people's safety.

The programs are hardly fool-proof; they are rife with trial-and-error
approaches, and, given the risks of secret police infiltration and
confiscation of materials, there is a measure of tolerance for losses and
failed initiatives.

Of course, critics of the Cuba programs will not be satisfied with such
context. They claim the program is "illegal" and an unwarranted
interference in Cuba's internal affairs. Well, that may be true if you do
not believe the legitimacy of a government and its laws rest on consent of
the governed and that people's rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness are inalienable.

But for those who do believe so, such cross-border programs are an
essential (and relatively inexpensive) instrument in the U.S. foreign
policy toolkit. They signal U.S. solidarity with captive nations and seek
to exact a cost from tyrannical governments, because they are the right
things to do.

Frankly, singling out one program over any of the others betrays a
political motivation that undercuts the critics' arguments. The only
conclusion one can draw is that their opposition is based merely on the
fact that it is viewed as an impediment to U.S.-Cuba rapprochement, because
the Castro regime vehemently opposes it.

What happened to Gross is a tragedy, but the morally correct position is to
focus blame directly where it belongs: on a repressive, out-dated
dictatorship that continues to keep its people in ideological bondage in
violation of every single human rights convention signed by civilized
nations.

The United States has made a commitment to the Cuban people through its
democracy support. And the fact that the biggest challenge to the program,
other than the difficult environment, is that Cubans continue to request
more and more material support to expand their independence is the best
testimony to keep the program alive.

José R. Cárdenas is a director at VisionAmericas, a Washington, D.C.-based
consultancy that represents foreign and domestic clients. He served
2004-2009 in the George W. Bush administration, including as acting
assistant administrator for Latin America at the U.S. Agency for
International Development.


Original Source / Fuente Original:
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/02/10/3224339/defending-us-democracy-program.html