Storm in a Cuban coffee cup

For those who think the US embargo on Cuba has no effect should take a look at this news story from the town of Poppleton in Yorkshire, UK. The extra-territorial reach and the absurdity of the embargo are highlighted here by the fact that a family run coffee selling business has had its PayPal account frozen because it sells, from time to time, Cuban coffee beans.
As a consequence, the company has ceased to sell the coffee. The owner, Laurence Beardmoore, says: “It’s incredible that we in the UK don’t have an embargo, we’re being dictated to by an American company that’s supposed to be servicing the world.”
Quite so Sir. The UK government should act on this and demand that US companies operating in the UK comply with UK and EU law and allow Mr Beardmore, and whoever else may wish to do so, to trade with Cuba.

Venezuela in danger

 
Henrique Capriles, the defeated opposition candidate in the Venezuelan presidential elections, is persisting with his challenge to the results and has now withdrawn from the audit of ballots to which he had agreed just a few days ago. His actions, as the cartoon image (right) suggests, are in danger of setting Venezuela aflame.

With the arrest of a US citizen suspected of inciting violence and destablizing the country, the matter becoming very serious and the situation is one in which Washington has a big responsibility. Without the support of Washington, it is impossible to imagine that Capriles would have sided with the hard-line elements within his coalition and called the elections fraudulent. It is also the first time ever that Washington has refused to recognise the result of a Venezuelan election and it flies in the face of the facts and the opinion of the rest of the world. 

Among Washington's allies, Spain, France and the UK have all recognised Maduro as the Venezuelan president. Within the region, after Maduro's victory, Unasur, the association of South American countries, held an emergency meeting in Lima and agreed to accept the result. Most Unasur member countries sent their presidents to Maduro’s inauguration. The issue is therefore now turning into a struggle between the US and the increasingly confident alliance of South American nations.

Many international observers, including the UN and the Organisation of American States, the OAS, agreed that, despite a few blips, the elections had been fair. Venezuela has an electronic voting system, one of the most advanced in Latin America. My fellow academic Julia Buxton, a seasoned international observer, was in Venezuela, spent election day at a polling station in Barinas and gives a vivid account for the UK's Latin American Bureau of what she saw (Read More).

The United States has shown a very aggressive approach towards Hugo Chávez’s successor and this hostility has been particularly intense in the mainstream US media, which portrays his victory as some kind of “sinister plot”. Larry Birns and Frederick B. Mills, from the US-based think-tank Council of Hemispheric Affairs, report that The Washington Post accused Maduro of ‘killing his way into power.’ The White House, they argue, seems to be more prepared to cater to the rightist predilections of some hard-line members of the U.S. Congress, rather than hammer out a coherent post-Cold War policy for the Americas (Read More).

It is really time for the US to man up and accept that they just can't push the countries of Latin American around any more. The consequences of failing to do so could be dire indeed.

The dirty tricks continue in Venezuela

 This video is from CNN otherwise known as Credible? Never! News 

The dirty tricks continue in Venezuela and the evidence is beginning to appear.  

On Thursday it was announced that the Venezuelan authorities have arrested a U.S. national whom it has accused of being an intelligence agent tasked with sowing chaos and civil unrest throughout the country.

The man, Timothy Hallet Tracy, was detained on Wednesday at Caracas airport as he tried to leave the country.

Interior Minister Miguel Rodriguez Torres told reporters: "Judging from the way this gentleman behaved, we presume that he belongs to some intelligence organization, because he is trained and he knows how to infiltrate, and how to handle sources and security information," 

Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro has already accused the United States of inciting the violence that occurred in the wake of the country’s contested elections.

All this comes on top of the release by WikiLeaks of a 2006 U.S. State Department cable detailing the Bush administration's strategy for undermining Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez by supporting opposition groups.

The cable, signed by then-Ambassador William Brownfield, outlines a five-point strategy that includes “penetrating Chavez's political base,” “dividing Chavismo,” “protecting vital U.S. business” and “isolating Chavez internationally.” Those goals are to be obtained by strengthening “democratic institutions.”

You can have any President you like so long as he's ours

Just as I feared, the dirty tricks in Venezuela have started. Even as Nicolas Maduro was being sworn in as the new President of the Bolivarian Republic (right), the opposition, with the clear backing of the White House, were still crying foul and refusing to accept the result.

It is clear that the fact that Nicolas Maduro's victory was narrower than expected  has given the opposition and the United States the excuse to destabilize the country.

No matter that the election result was clear, with about the same margin of victory as many elections in the US and Britain (which were never contested) the US government is now playing politics with the outcome, emboldening Venezuela's opposition by refusing to accept the results obviously intending to discredit Maduro's mandate.

Maduro's 1.8% winning margin is no smaller than the general elections in the UK of 1951, 1964, and 1974. In the US in 1960 John F. Kennedy, won by just 0.17% of popular vote. Nixon in 1968 also had a margin below Maduro's in Venezuela and Carter's victory in 1976 was just a fraction above.

Latin American governments, including Brazil and Argentina, Mexico and Colombia, have recognized Maduro as Venezuela's legitimate President. The Union of South American Nations (UNASUR),  as well as regional trade bloc Mercosur have backed the outcome.

In Europe: France, Portugal and Spain have recognised President Maduro. The Spanish government's statement explained that "as all constitutional and legal procedures have been carried out, the Government of Spain respects the proclamation by the National Electoral Council of Nicolas Maduro as the elected President of Venezuela."

Yet US Secretary of State John Kerry has refused any recognition of the outcome, demanding a recount of all 15 million votes,  precisely the demand of Venezuela's losing  candidate, Henrique Capriles.

Kerry has questioned "the viability of that government," and has asked if there were "irregularities." This gives rise to the fear that the US is not going to recognise Maduro as President.

As I blogged before the election, even prior to the vote taking place, the US had made up its mind up about the result. US Assistant Secretary of State, Roberta Jackson, claimed that it would be "difficult" to have "open, fair and transparent elections" in Venezuela.

This is quite simply rubbish. The US government has no better information than the Latin American or European governments who have accepted the results.

This is yet another attempt to undermine a democratic government of the left in Latin America as it has done previously in Paraguay and Honduras. Unsuprisingly, Brazil's former president Lula has criticized the US's approach.

The latest cable released by Wikileaks about Venezuela sheds light on the US's real intentions. The cable reveals a plan from former US Ambassador Brownfield to destabilize Hugo Chavez' government at the 2006 Presidential election. A core aim was "isolating Chavez internationally". It is clearly now Nicolas Maduro who is being targetted.

The US government is stirring up trouble in Venezuela. Not only does this heighten the risk of  violence, it also undermines Venezuela's democracy, which, like all democarcies, requires all parties to accept fair results, whether they win or lose.

Henry Ford used to say of his Model Ts: "You can have any colour you like as long as it's black." The US government is saying the same to the Venezuelans: "You can have any result you like so long as it's one we agree with!"

Washington Post is wrong on Paya

Carromero arriving for his trial in Bayamo last year

It is one of the guaranteed characteristics of the kind of politics that surrounds Cuba in the United States that whatever the facts might be, there are still those who will be gullible enough to believe anything that delegitimises the Cuban government. So it is that the Washington Post has swallowed hook, line and sinker the notion that the Cuban authorities might have had something to do with the tragic death of the Cuban dissident Oswaldo Paya in a car accident last year..
At the time of the accident, when I was asked by the BBC if I thought the death might have been caused by Cuban security agents, I said immediately then that I thought it would be extremely unlikely given the fact that it is not only completely out of character for Cuban security to assassinate anyone, but that it would also be utterly counterproductive. How would killing Paya, a person whose political impact in Cuba was inconsequential, be of any use to the Cuban government other than to provide ammunition for its enemies to use against it?
The idea that the Cuban government might have something to do with the accident that killed Paya circulated for a while shortly after his death but then quickly disappeared under the weight of evidence and the fact that the driver of the car, Spanish rightwinger, Angel Carromero, admitted to dangerous driving, and his surviving passenger, a Swedish political activist, made a statement saying there were no suspicious circumstances. The Cuban police produced a copious report on the incident and Carromero was tried and convicted of dangerous driving in a court on Bayamo, eastern Cuba where the accident occured. The BBC's Fernando Ravsberg reported on the court case at the time that even the Spanish Consul thought the trial was fair:
The Consul of Spain in Cuba, Tomas Rodriguez, described the trial of his countryman Angel Carromero as “clean, open and procedurally flawless,” one that had ensured the defendant received a fair deal and in which “the defense was very good.”
At the trial, Carromero denied that there were any other cars involved. However, now, since he has been repatriated to Spain, Carromero has changed his story by claiming that he was rammed from behind. The family of Paya are parading themselves around Miami saying that the death was suspicious and that there has been a cover up, and a rightwng bandwagon has begun which the Washington Post has climbed aboard.
While it might be understandable for the family of Paya not to be able to accept his death was an accident, it is clearly implausible and they should not be believed. They, and the right wing Miami crowd are the only ones who might gain anything from perpetuating this lie and the Washington Post is wrong to give them support.

To Cuba, Beyonce and beyond

Who would have thought that a simple wedding anniversary holiday could cause such uproar? US diva Beyonce's trip to Havana with her husband Jay Z has caused members of the US Congress to call for an investigation into their activities. It seems that the pair might have contravened the travel restrictions placed upon US citizens' visiting the island. The public outcry and subsequent media frenzy has even wiped out coverage of the visit by the alleged blogger dissident Yoai Sánchez to the US, much to the chagrin of the right wing crowd in Miami, some of whom have even accused the Cuban government of having arranged Beyonce's trip deliberately!
It would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic. As if a trip to Cuba could possibly more important than the threat to world peace and ecology posed by a nuclear war over Korea? You would be forgiven for thinking that this is the case given the hysterical tone of some of the coverage. Remarkably, had Beyonce decided to celebrate her fifth wedding anniversary in Pyongyang instead of Havana, then nothing of the sort would have happened.
Believe it or not US citizens are free to travel to North Korea - even at a time when the North Korean government considers itself to be at war with Washington. The matter is worse than ironic, it is absurd and must be embarrassing for the average US citizen. 
As my colleague Arturo Lopez Levy writes in the Huffington Post:
"It is difficult to defend a policy that stomps on the same rights it preaches. Since the migratory reforms made by Cuba in January, that eliminated most of the restrictions on travel from the totalitarian period, Cubans, under a communist regime have fewer legal impediments to visiting the U.S. than U.S. citizens have to visiting Cuba."
If Beyonce's trip results in her being fined for having a holiday in Havana, then I hope she refuses to pay it. So far the diva hasn't said anything about her trip, but I hope she does and says what any US citizen with any sense would say - the right to travel should not be infringed- and that's in the Constitution.

Fidel: The duty to avoid war

By Fidel Castro

April 4, 2013 -- Granma International -- A few days ago I mentioned the great challenges humanity is currently facing. Intelligent life emerged on our planet approximately 200,000 years ago, although new discoveries demonstrate something else.

This is not to confuse intelligent life with the existence of life which, from its elemental forms in our solar system, emerged millions of years ago.

A virtually infinite number of life forms exist. In the sophisticated work of the world’s most eminent scientists the idea has already been conceived of reproducing the sounds which followed the Big Bang, the great explosion which took place more than 13.7 billion years ago.

This introduction would be too extensive if it was not to explain the gravity of an event as unbelievable and absurd as the situation created in the Korean Peninsula, within a geographic area containing close to 5 billion of the 7 billion persons currently inhabiting the planet.

This is about one of the most serious dangers of nuclear war since the October Crisis around Cuba in 1962, 50 years ago.

In 1950, a war was unleashed [on the Korean Peninsula] which cost millions of lives. It came barely five years after two atomic bombs were exploded over the defenceless cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which, in a matter of seconds, killed and irradiated hundreds of thousands of people.

US General Douglas MacArthur wanted to utilise atomic weapons against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Not even US President Harry Truman allowed that.

It has been affirmed that the People’s Republic of China lost 1 million valiant soldiers in order to prevent the installation of an enemy army on that country’s border with its homeland. For its part, the Soviet army provided weapons, air support, technological and economic aid.

I had the honour of meeting Kim Il Sung, a historic figure, notably courageous and revolutionary.

If war breaks out there, the peoples of both parts of the peninsula will be terribly sacrificed, without benefit to all or either of them. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was always friendly with Cuba, as Cuba has always been and will continue to be with her.

Now that the country has demonstrated its technical and scientific achievements, we remind her of her duties to the countries which have been her great friends, and it would be unjust to forget that such a war would particularly affect more than 70% of the population of the planet.

If a conflict of that nature should break out there, the government of US President Barack Obama in his second mandate would be buried in a deluge of images which would present him as the most sinister character in the history of the United States. The duty of avoiding war is also his and that of the people of the United States.

Fidel Castro Ruz
April 4, 2013

Watch out for the dirty tricks after Venezuelan election

 

With ten days to go to the Venezuelan elections the polls are showing a huge lead for the socialist acting president Nicolas Maduro (his columns are in red above for every province). This is unsuprising given that his millionaire opponent Henrique Capriles Radonski has been linked to the coup against Hugo Chavez in 2002 and has openly said that he will reverse the social policies that Chavez introduced.

However, the bad news is that staring defeat in the face, Capriles and his supporters have been hinting darkly that they will not recognise the election as being fair. Ominously a spokespersopn for the US State Department has also suggested that the White House may not reconginse the process either, thus paving the way for a dirty tricks campaign aimedvat destabilizing  Maduro once he has been elected. Sensing this, already some of more moderate of Maduro's opponents have left the coalition supporting Capriles because they do no like the idea of polarising Venezuelean society still further. It sure looks as though Maduro is going to win the election but it is also likely that the Venezuelan people will need to actively defend him in power.   

Yoani receives her true colours?

If there is one image from her so-called 'world tour' that will seal alleged 'dissident' blogger Yoani Sanchez's fate as the most universally reviled creature in Cuba, it is this one from Miami a couple of days ago when she delighted  in receiving a gift of the US flag from veteran Castro baiter Florida Senator Bill Nelson.
At the event, which took place in the 'Freedom Tower' in Miami, Yoani said she was working for the unity of all Cubans inside and outside the island, but quite how she hopes to attain such a goal by receiving gifts such as this from sworn enemies of the Cuban government, she did not explain.

The dangerous choice facing Venezuelans

When Venezuelans vote on 14 April they will have a choice between Nicolas Maduro, a socialist who is committed to the continuation of the work of Hugo Chávez, and Henrique Capriles Radonski a violent servant of the United States who, it seems, may have fallen out with his friends in Washington.

Two weeks ago, acting President, Nicolas Maduro announced that the security forces had uncovered a plot to assassinate Capriles, apparently involving  the former Bush officials Roger Noriega and Otto Reich.

The Voice of Russia reports here that while both these guys deny the accusation, revelations by Wikileaks leave no doubt that Capriles has been a very close collaborator with Washington, so much so that he is in fact a creation of the US.

The article speculates that the assassination plot is an indication that Capriles has fallen out with his friends in Washington and that he now must be silenced because he 'knows too much' about dirty dealings in Caracas - including the possible poisoning of Chávez with radiation, as many suspect.

Be that as it may, what is very clear is the stark choice now facing Venezuelans, for Henrique Capriles Radonski is not only ideologically right-wing, he is also a violent activist who is not averse to using terrorist methods, if this article by the Cuban-based French journalist Jean Guy-Allard is accurate.

According to Guy-Allard, during the coup d’etat against President Hugo Chavez in April 2002, Capriles led an assault on the Cuban Embassy in Caracas with  a group Cuban-Venezuelans (see film above).

In reports by the US State Department on Venezuela and published by Wikileaks, Capriles was linked to the assault on the Cuban Embassy in Caracas, and as a suspect in the assassination of the Venezuelan Prosecutor, Danilo Anderson, who had him imprisoned awaiting trial for his part in the coup.

According to polls, Capriles is trailing in the election race - one can only hope that he loses.