Cuba Acuses the USA of Subversion

November 2, 2012 | Print Print |

By Circles Robinson

The US Interests Section occupies a five-story building along the Havana Malecon seawall. Photo: Caridad

HAVANA TIMES — Cuba accused the United States and its US Interests Section in Havana on Thursday of actively working to promote a “regime change” in Cuba.

While the charges are not new, they come less than a week before the US presidential elections and on the heels of Hurricane Sandy which caused major damage in both countries.

The Foreign Ministry statement indicates that Cuba “will use all legal means available to defend the nation’s sovereignty and make the Cuban people and their laws be respected,” but it did not go so far as to suggest any plans to close the diplomatic mission.

Cuba accuses the Obama administration – as it had the Bush government – of numerous illegal activities “to promote, advise, instruct, train, finance and supply with diverse equipment and technologies its mercenaries in Cuba.”

Note: The following is the translation of the Cuban Foreign Ministry statement published by Granma International online.

MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS STATEMENT

The U.S. Interests Section in Havana continues to function as the general staff in charge of implementing the government’s policy of subversion toward Cuba, which has as one of its principal goals the fabrication of an opposition movement challenging the legitimate Cuban government and fomenting internal destabilization, in order to provoke a ‘regime change’ in the country.

As has been previously denounced, over the last years, the Interests Section has continued to carry out illegal activities, which are far removed from the accepted functions of a diplomatic mission. Its personnel are promoting, advising, instructing, training, financing and supplying their mercenaries with technology. Diplomats from this office continually incite these individuals, who respond to the interests of the U.S. government against Cuba in exchange for monetary compensation, to carry out provocative activities, mount media campaigns distorting the country’s reality and to challenge Cuba’s constitutional order.

In its attempt to play a decisive role in the impossible task of turning these mercenaries into a credible internal opposition movement, the Interests Section channels funds from the U.S. budget and government financed material aid to support the internal subversion business.

In its efforts to interfere in Cuba’s internal affairs, the Interests section has gone so far as to assume training tasks, establishing illegal internet connections and networks to provide training and offer courses to people, with the objective of their acting against the interests of the Cuban state in a flagrant violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Cuban law and the very agreement which led to the establishment of the Interests Sections.

In Cuba, as in many countries, the agreement of the Cuban state and the approval of the Ministry of Higher Education are required to impart educational programs or offer courses. Authorization and an operating license from the Ministry of Information, Technology and Communications are also needed to provide Internet service. The Interests Section has no such permission to provide these services, which it does without the consent of Cuban authorities, making them illegal.

It is unacceptable and cynical that the type of programs promoted by the Interest Section, which are moreover incompatible with the purpose of a diplomatic mission, are undertaken by the country which by law, and according to decisions made by its government, maintain an openly hostile policy and blockade meant to defeat and destroy the Revolution, which, among other effects, restricts educational, cultural, academic, scientific and sporting exchanges between the two countries and prevents Cuba from accessing the dozens of underwater Internet cables which surround the island.

There is undisputable evidence that the illegal activities undertaken by the Interest Section are financed by official U.S. government funds, millions of dollars of which are allocated annually by the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development, in virtue of section 109 of the Helms-Burton Act, which has as its explicit objective a change in Cuba’s political, economic and social system.

These subversive actions, in addition to the tightening of the economic, commercial and financial blockade, the increasingly vindictive attacks on Cuban financial transactions, and the utilization of new pretexts to avoid Cuba’s proposal to hold a serious, respectful dialogue between the two countries based on equal terms, which Cuba has reiterated, demonstrate that the current U.S. administration is not truly committed to moving beyond the worst Cold War practices and policies, nor has it curtailed efforts to force our country to submit to its demands.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs denounces the illegal, interventionist, offensive and provocative actions of the U.S. Interests Section and demands an end to its continual incitement of actions intended to subvert the constitutional order which the Cuban people have legitimately and freely chosen.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs reiterates that Cuba will not leave itself open to intervention and will use all legal means available to defend the sovereignty it has won and ensure that the people and laws of Cuba are respected.

Havana, November 1, 2012

 


What's your opinion?

  • Moses

    No news here. These ¨violations¨ have been the norm for some time. Sounds like Cuba is looking for the usual boogeyman to rally the people after the disaster caused by Sandy. When all else fails (and in Cuba, that is usually the case) blame the US.

    • Lawrence W

      It’s a rather disgusting list of violations that your country is committing that you casually accept as “the norm for some time” – fabricating and funding opposition movements “challenging the legitimate Cuban government”, “fomenting internal destabilization in order to provoke a ‘regime change’ in the country,” maintaining “an openly hostile policy and blockade meant to defeat and destroy the Revolution” that “restricts educational, cultural, academic, scientific and sporting exchanges” and “prevents Cuba from accessing the dozens of underwater Internet cables which surround the island”.

      And it’s getting worse – “tightening of the economic, commercial and financial blockade, the increasingly vindictive attacks on Cuban financial transactions, and the utilization of new pretexts to avoid Cuba’s proposal to hold a serious, respectful dialogue between the two countries based on equal terms, which Cuba has reiterated, demonstrate that the current U.S. administration is not truly committed to moving beyond the worst Cold War practices and policies, nor has it curtailed efforts to force our country to submit to its demands.”

      You have to accept all of this because it’s blatantly obvious to the most casual observer that it’s true. Under the circumstances, however, you cannot legitimately characterise it as Cuba “looking for the usual boogeyman”, blaming the US “when all else fails”.

      A bogeyman is an imaginary monster. The US is a real one.

  • Moses

    Cuba understands the terms set forth to initiate dialogue between the two countries. Release Alan Gross. There is no avoidance there. Cuba understands the terms to effect Congress lifting the embargo. Again, nothing new. Accessing US underwater cables would be a violation of current US law. Even simpletons can understand that. Besides, Cuba has the cable from Venezuela…or do they?

    • Lawrence W

      RE: “Cuba understands the terms set forth” by the US.”

      A better illustration of Yankee imperialism cannot be found. The US sets the terms and the rest of the world is expected to come to heel.

      RE: “Release Alan Gross. There is no avoidance there.”

      Another demand. No negotiation. No mention of the Cuban Five and Cuba’s willingness to negotiate. An illustration of what is contained in the statement: “the utilization [by the US] of new pretexts to avoid Cuba’s proposal to hold a serious, respectful dialogue between the two countries based on equal terms.”

      RE: “Again, nothing new.”

      Another illustration of the statement: “the current U.S. administration is not truly committed to moving beyond the worst Cold War practices and policies, nor has it curtailed efforts to force our country to submit to its demands.”

      RE: “Cuba has the cable from Venezuela”.

      Requiring a thousands of miles long cable rather than being able to use what’s just offshore, made necessary by the US blockade. It’s an illustration of US hypocrisy – decrying Cuba’s reduced Internet services whilst blockading access to it.

      As you write, “Even simpletons can understand that.”

  • Mark G

    From the above statement: “In Cuba, as in many countries, the agreement of the Cuban state and the approval of the Ministry of Higher Education are required to impart educational programs or offer courses. Authorization and an operating license from the Ministry of Information, Technology and Communications are also needed to provide Internet service.”

    Only in dictatorships is permission from the government required to access the internet. In democracies we enjoy full internet access in our homes, businesses and many public places (free to anyone with Wi-Fi on their computer, tablet, or smartphone) with no permission from the government required.

  • Lawrence W

    You made a mistake. The statement contains, “Authorization and an operating license are also needed to PROVIDE Internet service.” You refer to “permission from the government required TO ACCESS the internet”. Providers vs users.

    All providers are subjected to government regulation. In your country there is an ongoing fight to ward off attempts to ‘overregulate’ the net – clear-cut attempts at censorship. It is a fight for ‘net neutrality’.

    The US government has also demanded the right to monitor all Internet traffic. Skype, for instance, required users to ‘update’ their Skype software to allow government monitoring of Skype conversations.

    And in the capitalist world, in addition to government interference, we have corporate censorship. Credit card companies and Pay Pal cut off accepting donations for Wiki Leaks.

    You seem to be unaware of the curtailment of your freedoms – or do you just choose to erroneously highlight those in Cuba?

    • Mark G

      In my country Canada no authorization or permission is required from the government to either provide or access the internet. There is no censorship of political opinions on the internet. Law enforcement agencies do attempt to monitor and if possible shut down criminal activities on the internet (e.g. child pornography, terrrorist fundraising and recruitment, etc.). Even here, this is challenging because servers can be located anywhere in the world.

      To equate this to the denial of the rights of Cubans to freely access the internet is ridiculous.

      • Lawrence W

        RE: Internet required permissions and authorizations required in Cuba and Canada.

        You wrote that permission from the Cuban government is required to access the Internet. I pointed out you were mistaken. You wrote something that was false about Cuba and you refuse to acknowledge the misinformation you are responsible for.

        RE: “there is no censorship of political opinions on the internet [in Canada]” except for “law enforcement agencies” who “monitor and if possible shut down criminal activities on the internet (e.g. child pornography, terrorist fundraising and recruitment, etc.)”.

        As a Canadian, you should be aware of the controversial bill Canada’s government introduced this year that gives police new powers to access information on Canadians’ telecommunications and Internet use. Similar bills, commonly called “lawful access legislation”, have been introduced in previous Parliaments by both Conservatives and Liberals

        Ostensibly intended to address the “proliferation of pedophilia and child pornography online,” the bill includes no mention of children or predators.

        Among the bill’s measures is a requirement for telecommunications service providers to provide basic subscriber information to police and intelligence agencies when they ask for it and without a warrant. The information could include a person’s name, address, phone number, email address, IP address and the name of their service provider. The bill also includes other measures related to the disclosure of information, according to the CBC.

        Google documents requests it receives by governments to censor information it provides. It’s useful to have a look at it – http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/government/ .

        Last year, Google received 19 requests from the Canadian government to censor 162 items. It complied with 63% of the requests. The largest category of requests were to remove what bloggers wrote – 136 – for “defamation”.

        There were 15 requests to remove Youtube videos mostly, again, for “defamation”.

        Two requests for censorship were to suppress what is returned in web searches.

        Without knowing the nature of the 162 items, including 151 censorship requests for “defamation”, you cannot legitimately state that “there is no censorship of political opinions on the internet” by the Canadian government. This is a government making these requests, not individuals.

        RE: “the denial of the rights of Cubans to freely access the internet”.

        Cubans have the same rights of access to the Internet that Canadians have, based on being able to afford it. If the US dropped its blockade and allowed the use of nearby undersea communication cables that ring the island, instead of expensive satellite communications, more Cubans would be have affordable Internet.

  • Griffin

    The unspoken assumption in the complaint by the Cuban regime against the US Interest Section providing internet access to Cuban’s is that the Cuban people are as naive children who need to be protected from the free exchange of information. The people of all other countries (with the notable exception of North Korea) seem to be able to handle open communication. But Cubans cannot. There must be something wrong or undeveloped with their brains, and the Cuban dictatorship is wise to keep them cut off from the dangers of free speech.

    • Lawrence W

      RE: “the unspoken assumption in the complaint by the Cuban [government] against the US Interest Section” where you offer us YOUR assumption that the government is treating its citizens as children.

      It’s better to be treated as a child rather than as a nincompoop as is common in capitalist countries.

      RE: people in other countries “able to handle open communication” and the Cuban government cutting its citizens “from the dangers of free speech”.

      Read my comment above for valuable information about how other countries, including yours, protect their citizens “from the dangers of free speech”. The unspoken assumption, by myself, is you are more constrained that Cubans are when it comes to the net.

  • http://www.wteague.com Walter Teague

    Wow! Don’t know who Lawrence W is, but he wins all the rounds in this bout of facts vs propaganda, both on logic and empathy. Like so many Comments Sections on US web publications, here too on Havana Times, the level of discourse sometimes degenerates into cliches and unsubstantiated beliefs.

    Cuba is far from perfect, but if one is not an imperialist and not out to see the Cuban experiment fail, then you could not nor would you want to ignore the impact of the many efforts of the US giant to crush Cuba. Given the years of imperial infection before the revolution and the constant barrage of sabotage efforts of all kinds ever since, it is amazing Cuba is still even semi-successful.

    Those who think for a second that if only Cuba would be more “like America,” all would be a happy Disney film with freedom and prosperity for all, are themselves either admirers of corporate power or hiding pathological tendencies from themselves.

    I seldom get so critical, but stop and ask yourself who invade whom, who is spending millions to subvert, who is the bully in this case? Cuba? As the kids say “get real!”