UN Vote on Cuba Blockade Tuesday

November 12, 2012 | Print Print |

HAVANA TIMES — The document entitled “The necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba,” will be voted on again on Tuesday morning at the headquarters of the UN General Assembly.

UN General Secretary Ban Ki-moon has provided the Assembly a report that includes the documentation submitted by 170 countries to support the opposition to the US embargo of Cuba.

In Tuesday’s session, when Washington’s half-a-century old measure against the island is expected to be repudiated for the twenty-first consecutive year, Cuban Minister of Foreign Affairs Bruno Rodriguez will be present.

Last year the text was approved by 186 of the 193 member countries of the world body. The only votes against the resolution were cast by the US and Israel, while abstentions were indicated by the Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau.

Just last month, fifty world leaders spoke from the podium of the General Assembly demanding the lifting of the US blockade against Cuba.


What's your opinion?

  • Moses

    ¨This UN vote has become such a circle jerk that it hardly makes the news afterwards, except in Cuba and the other few like-minded countries. Sadly, ( I really mean this), the world is focused on the fiscal cliff crisis, the war in Syria, the Chinese government changes and the nuclear threat posed by Iran among a few other world-changing issues. The blockade against Cuba, for all of its many detractors, is just not an issue that has got the world holding its breath. Few Americans even know it exists. Here is one very simple reason why no one cares: If it really was the genocidal, cataclysmic event that it will no doubt be described as on Tuesday, why hasn´t it worked? Anti-blockade voices will then argue that if it isn´t working after 53 years why doesn´t the US lift it? That is like the murderer who claims being incarcerated after 53 years has not reformed his murderous ways so you might as well let him go. Nice try.

    • Luis

      Now it’s the fallacy of ‘there are more important things in international politics than that’ to minimize the problem and, ultimately, justify it. If it was so unimportant you wouldn’t defend this shameful US policy as you do here.

      The blockade works because the US needs a crippled Nemesis to easily spread propaganda of its both national and international politics and the idealized way-of-life of its citizens. Lesson learned from the Cold War.

      • Moses

        Trust me, the US does not need the embargo to help spread what you call US propaganda. Hollywood and the video game industry are much more efficient and effective in selling our story¨. I hope you do not really believe that I am trying to defend the embargo. Embargos and sanctions are like turniquets. You should only apply them as a last resort and once you do, you must leave them on until the patient is out of danger. The Cuban embargo is codified US law. It must stay in place until changes in Cuba trigger its lifting. I don´t defend the embargo. I do¨, however, counter the often-made arguments here that Obama should ¨just lift the embargo¨ as if it were possible simply by the stroke of a pen. Thankfully, we do not have a dictatorship such as existed in your country or currently exists in Cuba. As a result, as a nation of laws, we must initiate a deliberation with arguments for and against the embargo before the law can be changed. For the record, I believe embargos and sanctions, like torture, rarely work. Instead, as is the case in Cuba, the people are the ones who suffer while the Castros continue to maintain their suffocationg control. Worse yet, they can use the embargo as the excuse for their failures as opposed to the fallacy of socialism. As an African-american, there is no one more acutely aware of the imperialist nature of my government. Still, there exists no where else on the planet, that I am aware of, where the possibility of change exists to any greater degree. One final point, US policy toward China and Vietnam includes constant criticisms of their human rights violations and lack of western-style democracy. That said, our economic interests now and in the past trump our social interests. Americans believe that if a people can thrive economically, they will ultimately seek their democractic interests. Conversely, totalitarian regimes have historically denied economic freedom as a means to maintain electoral control. BTW, I never called you a loonie.